Loading...
05-09-11 CC Reg Mtg Agenda C. B. A. CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING COUNCIL CHAMBERS MONDAY, MAY 9, 2011 7:00 P.M. AGENDA Attachments 1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL MEETING A. Roll Call Mayor Lizée ___ Hotvet ___ Siakel ___ Woodruff ___ Zerby ___ B. Review Agenda 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. City Council Work Session Minutes, April 25, 2011 Minutes B. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes, April 25, 2011 Minutes 3. CONSENT AGENDA - Motion to approve items on Consent Agenda & Adopt Resolutions Therein: NOTE: Give the public an opportunity to request an item be removed from the Consent Agenda. Comments can be taken or questions asked following removal from Consent Agenda A. Approval of the Verified Claims List Claims List B. Christmas Lake Boat Inspections Pilot Program Administrator’s memo, Resolution C. Approval of an Agreement with Minnetonka Community Education for Administrator’s Lifeguard Services for Crescent Beach memo D. Accept Quote for Purchase of Seal Coat Rock, City Project 11-07 Engineer’s memo E. Safety Training Proposal – Safe Assure Director of Public Works’ memo 4. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR (No Council action will be taken) 5. PUBLIC HEARING A. 7:15 p.m. – Consider a request to vacate a portion of Echo Road right-of-way Planning Director’s adjacent to 5685 and 5690 Echo Road memo, Resolution CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA – May 9, 2011 Page 2 of 2 Attachments B. 7:25 p.m. – Consider a request to vacate a portion of Galpin Lake Road right-Planning Director’s of-way that is adjacent to properties at 712 and 734 Galpin Lake Road in memo, Resolution Excelsior 6. REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS A. Terrance Haines, Eagle Scout Project and Request 7. PARKS 8. PLANNING - Report by Representative 9. ENGINEERING/PUBLIC WORKS A. Smithtown Way Storm Pipe Replacement Project Engineer’s memo, Resolution 10. GENERAL/NEW BUSINESS A. Yard Waste Collection Administrator’s memo B. Tobacco Ordinance Amendment Deputy Clerk’s memo, Ordinance, Resolution C. SLMPD Agreement with City of Excelsior for Seasonal Dock and Park Administrator’s Patrol Services memo D. Request for Reduction of Water Connection Fee Engineer’s memo 11. OLD BUSINESS A. Carver County Open Fiber Initiative Administrator’s memo 12. STAFF AND COUNCIL REPORTS A. Administrator and Staff B. Mayor and City Council 13. ADJOURN CITY OF SHOREWOOD  5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, Minnesota 55331 952-960-7900  Fax: 952-474-0128 www.ci.shorewood.mn.us cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us Executive Summary Shorewood City Council Regular Meeting Monday, 9 May, 2011 7:00 p.m. A 6:00 p.m. Council Work Session is scheduled this evening An Executive Session will follow the Regular Council meeting Agenda Item #3A: Enclosed is the Verified Claims List for Council approval. Agenda Item #3B: This item is a request for support of a pilot boat inspection program at Christmas Lake. Agenda Item #3C: This is the annual agreement with Minnetonka Community Education for lifeguard services at Crescent Beach. Agenda Item #3D: The City of Shorewood encumbered $233,000 of the operating budget for sealcoat road maintenance within the City. Staff recommends that the proposal for furnishing sealcoat rock be awarded to the low quoter Martin Marrieta Materials, Inc., with a quote of $28,600.00 plus tax. Agenda Item #3E: This item considers acceptance of the proposal from Safe Assure Consultants, Inc. for annual safety training that is mandated by the Occupational Health and Safety Administration for all employees. Agenda Item #5A: William Waples and Marilyn Lindquist have requested the vacation of portions of an old cul-de-sac on Echo Road. They propose to straighten out the right-of- way in front of their homes, making it possible to make improvements to their respective properties without the need for variances. Staff has reviewed the request and recommends approval of the vacation, subject to conditions. Agenda Item #5B: Odd – two right-of-way vacation requests at the same time. Joe and Pam Mueller are trying to develop a property in Excelsior that happens to abut the northerly extension of Galpin Lake Road (aka Galpin Lake Boulevard). Half of the R.O.W. in question lies in the City of Shorewood. Staff has reviewed the request and raises no objection to the vacation. Approval is recommended, subject to Excelsior’s approval of the vacation of their portion of the street. Agenda Item #6A: Terrance Haines, an Eagle Scout, will be present to discuss his Eagle Scout Project and make a request for support. Agenda Item #7A: No Park Commission report or items. Executive Summary – City Council Meeting of May 9, 2011 Page 2 of 2 Agenda Item #8: A Planning Commission representative will report on the recent Planning Commission meeting. Agenda Item #9A: Smithtown Way road surface is heaving above the storm pipe. Staff recommends approving the advertisement of bids for this storm sewer replacement project. If approved, bids will be opened on Wednesday, June 8 at 10:00 a.m. Agenda Item #10A: Discussion on the topic of yard waste and brush collection. Agenda Item #10B: Updates to the City Code Chapter 302 – Sale of Tobacco – as it relates to changes in the state law regarding the sale of tobacco products. The majority of the focused on updating the definitions of tobacco, tobacco products and tobacco related devices. Agenda Item #10C: This is the annual agreement between the SLMPD and the City of Excelsior for the provision of summer dock and park patrol services. Agenda Item #10D: A resident wrote a letter requesting the water connection fee be reconsidered to a lower amount. Staff is passing along the request to begin discussion. Agenda Item #11A: Review and discussion about the possible connection to the Carver County Open Fiber Initiative. #2A CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION COUNCIL CHAMBERS MONDAY, APRIL 25, 2011 6:00 P.M. MINUTES 1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION Mayor Lizée called the meeting to order at 6:01 P.M. A. Roll Call Present. Mayor Lizée; Councilmembers Hotvet, Siakel, Woodruff and Zerby; Administrator Heck; Finance Director DeJong; Planning Director Nielsen; Director of Public Works Brown; and Engineer Landini Absent: None B. Review Agenda Zerby moved, Siakel seconded, approving the agenda as presented. Motion passed 5/0. 2. DISCUSSION ON THE AGENDA FOR THE MAY 3, 2011, JOINT COUNCIL, PARK AND PLANNING COMMISSIONS MEETING Administrator Heck stated Council has scheduled a joint meeting of the Council and Park and Planning Commissions for May 3, 2011, from 6:00 P.M. – 8:00 P.M. Mayor Lizée and Councilmember Siakel have both asked what the Council wants to accomplished during the meeting. The Planning Commission has been discussing sustainability and the Smithtown Crossing redevelopment study area and it wants to have further discussion with Council and the Park Commission. He noted that Staff will email the Commissions a copy of the strategic planning report that was a byproduct of the Council and staff retreat held in February 2011. Mayor Lizée stated Council and the Commissions need to reach agreement on what sustainability means to the City and what elements of sustainability are important to the City. She asked the other Councilmembers what they would like the goals of the meeting to be. Councilmember Siakel stated she thought both Commissions put in a fair amount of time on projects specific to their areas. The joint meeting could promote more of a shared focus on projects that impact both parks and planning. She requested an agenda for the meeting be published well in advance. She suggested Council agree to what it would like to accomplish during the meeting. She recommended Council and the Commissions reach agreement on what the definition of sustainability is from the City’s perspective as well as what components are important to the City. She stated the Planning Commission has done a great deal of work on the Smithtown Crossing study. She suggested feedback on that study be solicited from Council and the Park Commission during the meeting. She also suggested that the Commissions be provided with information about the strategic planning discussion, facilitated by Sharon Klumpp with Springsted Incorporated, which took place during the retreat. She stated the County Road 19 corridor could also be an agenda topic. She clarified she is not criticizing what’s been done to date. Director Nielsen stated the Planning Commission has prepared a draft report for the Smithtown Crossing study area. The Commission wants to ensure Council supports the Commission’s recommendations before it shares the draft report with the neighborhoods. It had not been the Planning Commission’s intent to ask for the Park Commission’s input about the study, but the Park Commissioners are more than welcome to be CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES April 25, 2011 Page 2 of 4 involved in the discussion because a park is part of the study area. He noted that Council and the Park Commission will be provided with a copy of the draft report this week. He stated the Planning Commission wants to know if Council thinks it’s on the right track. Councilmember Hotvet stated she is pleased that Council and the two Commissions are going to meet. She noted she has served as the Council Liaison to the Park Commission the last few months. She suggested the various events and projects for the year be reviewed and shared with neighboring cities to see where efforts cam be coordinated if at all possible. Director Nielsen stated the Planning Commission has sustainability on its 2011 work program and some of the Commissioners have been doing some research on their own. He noted that sustainability is an enormous undertaking; it affects everything. Prior to the joint meeting Council and the Commissions will be provide links to 4 – 5 websites that have a tremendous amount of information about sustainability. The Planning Commission has primarily been using the definition of the League of Minnesota Cities. Nielsen then stated that Staff has recommended to the Commission that it follow the Minnesota GreenSteps Cities Program (MnGSCP) to provide structure to the sustainability conversation. The MnGSCP has identified a list of 28 best practices. One of the ways to view sustainability is to ask the question of what is the impact of doing something 20 years from now. For example, will the large houses currently in the City still be occupied by single families many years from now? He explained the Commission is working on drafting a resolution for Council’s future consideration asking for Council’s support in joining the rd MnGSCP. For the May 3 meeting Council will be provided with a list of the 28 best practices. The list could be divided into smaller groups with some of them being more parks related. He noted the City is already doing some of the best practices and others will take a drastic change in thinking. Some of them may never be accomplished. He explained most of the sustainability plans want much higher density than the City has and he doubts the City will want to change that. Councilmember Siakel requested the materials for the meeting be sent out as soon as possible. Mayor Lizée stated all the items tie into the strategic plan. Councilmember Hotvet stated it’s important to assign a timeline and measurements to the elements of sustainability Council wants the City to pursue. She then stated residents want to know when things will get done and how they can get involved. Councilmember Siakel stated the above topics fit in with some of the strategic planning goals identified during the Council and staff retreat. She stated her goal is to have people working off of the same page and not independently. Councilmember Hotvet asked Director Nielsen when he and the Planning Commission want to have Council’s feedback on the draft report on the Smithtown Crossing study area. Nielsen stated during the rd May 3 meeting. Administrator Heck asked Council what other items in addition to sustainability and the Smithtown rd Crossing study report it wants on the May 3 meeting agenda and what additional background information it would like for the meeting. The MnGSCP was mentioned by Director Nielsen. Heck then asked if Council wants to identify specific objects for the two Commissions for discussion during the meeting. Mayor Lizée stated both Commissions have, or should be considering, a work program for 2011 and that should be shared with Council. The Commissions should also do that for 2012. She stated the Smithtown Crossing study should also factor into the County Road 19 corridor study. A Trail Planning Committee has CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES April 25, 2011 Page 3 of 4 recently been formed and that Committee should be involved when appropriate. She commented that there has been discussion about the Excelsior Parkland area. She stated she thought it prudent for the City’s Park and Planning Commissions to work with the City of Excelsior’s and the City of Tonka Bay’s Commissions about improvements to the County Road 19 corridor, and to reinitiate the discussion about a trail along County Road 19 with Tonka Bay and the City of Orono. Councilmember Hotvet suggested the City have its own strategic plan. She stated some elements of the plan could be done with a coordinated effort between the City and neighboring cities. She recommended that agendas be shared well in advance of meetings between the various cities about potential joint efforts. Councilmember Siakel proposed a draft agenda for the meeting. It is as follows: Introduction of Councilmembers and Commissioners  Present findings of the strategic planning discussions that occurred during the Council and  staff retreat and identify the top four priorities Provide an overview of the Minnesota GreenSteps Cities Program and its 28 best practices  and how an item such as the Smithtown Crossing redevelopment study area ties into it – consider using the document as a reference and guide for future planning and projects Develop a high level plan of action for a couple of the top strategic plan priorities. Three  priorities could be the Smithtown Crossing redevelopment study, trails and the MnGSCP. Siakel stated she thought Staff and the Planning Commission should assess the City Code to ensure it’s in compliance with State Statutes and identify how to make the City’s Ordinances somewhat consistent with Excelsior’s and Tonka Bay’s. This may have to be discussed at a future meeting because of time constraints. Administrator Heck stated he will work with Director Nielsen to create an agenda and Staff will forward the strategic planning documentation to the Commissions. 3. STRATEGIC PLAN MEETING SCHEDULE Administrator Heck stated during the Council and staff retreat held in February 2011 a high-level, initial draft of a strategic plan was generated. Additional work is needed to improve upon that plan. That work should be a priority so efforts expended to date are not wasted, noting the Commissions should be part of the efforts as appropriate. Once a strategic plan is agreed upon it should be revisited and revised if needed annually. Heck asked Council how frequently it would like to meet to discuss strategic planning and what days of the week and time of the days would work best. He also asked Council to identify who should participate in that planning process. Councilmember Hotvet stated she has a flexible schedule. She then stated she anticipated the initial strategic planning effort (an outcome of it being a solid template) would involve more work upfront. She conveyed she thought important for staff to be involved in the effort. Councilmember Siakel requested the meetings be scheduled far enough in advance. If staff is going to be involved, she suggested the work sessions be scheduled during regular work-day hours. The initial meetings could be four hours long with two meetings being scheduled for May. Mayor Lizée asked what Councilmembers’ travel plans were. She stated the Council and staff retreat was in part successful because it was done during the regular work day. She suggested the work sessions be CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES April 25, 2011 Page 4 of 4 held during the regular business day. Key staff can be involved regularly and more staff can be brought into the process as appropriate. Councilmember Zerby stated it would be challenging for him to devote four hours during a business day toward this effort. He suggested the meetings be two hours long. He stated he has three trips planned during the next 60 days. He asked if the agenda would be to discuss the plan generated during the retreat item by item. Councilmember Hotvet proposed focusing on one strategic goal during each meeting. Councilmember Zerby stated that may vary by goal. Administrator Heck stated there are a few key attributes that need to be defined better, and that could be done relatively quickly. He then stated some of the goals and objectives in the current plan have similar components and he attempted to group them together. The items in the plan need to be reviewed and duplicate items eliminated. He suggested that first the larger goals be discussed so Council and staff can reach consensus on a clear high level definition of what the goals mean. After that more detailed elements of the goal can be identified. After that consensus has to be achieved on how progress and success will be measured. Heck commented that if at some point in the planning process Council and staff cannot continue to make progress he expressed confidence that Ms. Klumpp could provide feedback on how to continue to move the process forward. Councilmember Woodruff suggested that during the first few meeting attendance be limited to Council and department heads. Department heads can bring additional staff when they think it would be beneficial. He noted that he cannot meet on Wednesdays and Fridays before 1:00 P.M. There was ensuing discussion about when to schedule the first meeting. th There was consensus to schedule a strategic planning work session for May 11 from 1:00– 3:00 P.M. 4. ADJOURN Woodruff moved, Siakel seconded, Adjourning the City Council Work Session of April 25, 2011, at 6:40 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, APRIL 25, 2011 7:00 P.M. MINUTES 1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING Mayor Lizée called the meeting to order at 7:00 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 Zerby moved, Siakel seconded, approving the agenda as presented. Motion passed 5/0. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. City Council Work Session Minutes, March 28, 2011 Zerby moved, Hotvet seconded, Approving the City Council Work Session Minutes of March 28, 2011, as presented. Motion passed 5/0. B. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes, March 28, 2011 Woodruff moved, Siakel seconded, Approving the City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of March 28, 2011, as presented. Motion passed 5/0. C. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes, April 11, 2011 Woodruff moved, Zerby seconded, Approving the City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of April 11, 2011, as amended in Item 10.B, Page 6, Paragraph 4, Sentence 3 change “He stated he will not recuse himself this year.” to “He stated he will not recuse himself this year because the funds the City will contribute in 2011 will go toward the treatment Phelps Bay as well Gideon Bay.”. Motion passed 5/0. 3. CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Lizée reviewed the items on the Consent Agenda. Woodruff moved, Siakel seconded, Approving the Motions Contained on the Consent Agenda and Adopting the Resolutions Therein. A. Approval of the Verified Claims List CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES April 25, 2011 Page 2 of 13 B. Shorewood Yacht Club Multiple Dock Facility License C. Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 11-012, “A Resolution Approving a Temporary 3.2 Percent ‘On-Sale’ Malt Liquor License issued to the Excelsior Firefighters Relief Association.” D. Authorizing Advertisement for Bids for Vine Hill Road Mill & Overlay, City Project 11-02 E. Bill Erickson Addition – Request for Extension to File Final Plat F. Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 11-013, “A Resolution Approving Intoxicating Liquor License On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor and Special Sunday Sales, for the Minnetonka Country Club”; RESOLUTION NO. 11-014, “A Resolution Approving Intoxicating Liquor License On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor and Special Sunday Sales, for American Legion Post #259”; RESOLUTION NO. 11-015, “A Resolution Approving a 3.2 Percent ‘Off-Sale’ Malt Liquor License, for Shorewood 2001 LLC, dba Cub Foods”; RESOLUTION NO. 11-016, “A Resolution Approving an Off-Sale Intoxicating Liquor License, for Park Square Subway, Inc., dba Shorewood Liquor”; and, RESOLUTION NO. 11-017, “A Resolution Approving an Off-Sale Intoxicating Liquor License, for The Cellars Wines & Spirits of Shorewood, Inc.” G. Public Works Capital Improvement Equipment Purchases – Vehicle Lift and Tractor Backhoe H. Authorization to Apply for an Organics Collection Grant (This was moved to Item 10.A under General/New Business.) 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. Park and Planning Commissioner Recognitions On behalf of the Council and the residents of Shorewood, Mayor Lizée thanked Jeremy Norman for his five years of service as a Park Commissioner and presented him with a plaque of appreciation and recognition. She noted Mr. Norman was Chair of the Commission from October 2008 through February 2011. She also noted that Mr. Norman continues to be committed to working on different projects for the City. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES April 25, 2011 Page 3 of 13 On behalf of the Council and the residents of Shorewood, Mayor Lizée thanked William Ruoff for his four years of service as a Planning Commissioner and presented him with a plaque of appreciation and recognition. Missy Vilett was not present at the meeting to receive a plaque of appreciation and recognition for her three years of service as a Planning Commissioner. On behalf of the Council and the residents of Shorewood, Mayor Lizée thanked Planning Commissioner Vilett for her service. Suzanne Gaidos was not present at the meeting to receive a plaque of appreciation and recognition for her almost one year of service as a Park Commissioner. On behalf of the Council and the residents of Shorewood, Mayor Lizée thanked former Park Commissioner Suzanne Gaidos for her service. B. Lake Minnetonka Communications Commission Report by Representative Ken Hendrickson Mayor Lizée stated Ken Hendrickson, the City’s Representative on the Lake Minnetonka Communications Commission (LMCC), is present to give an update on LMCC activities. Mr. Hendrickson stated the LMCC has started its 2012 budget process, noting he was elected chair of the Budget Committee. The budget will be presented to Council in August. He noted the LMCC received a check for $128,260 from Mediacom following an audit. Mr. Hendrickson stated the meeting packet contains copies of a cover letter from Henry Pryor giving an overview of the fiber to the premise (FTTP) residential survey the LMCC commissioned, the survey results for the Group 1 including the Cities of Deephaven, Greenwood, Shorewood and Woodland, and a summary of the results. He then stated he was going to tell what he thought the LMCC learned from the survey and what the next steps are. The highlights of the results for Group 1 are as follows. The survey cost about $20,000, it was paid for by the LMCC and it was budgeted for in 2011.  The survey results are consistent across the four survey groups as well as the survey results for  the City of Mound. The survey results were average or slightly more positive when compared to similar surveys  conducted for communities that eventually installed FTTP. The LMCC contracted with CCG Consulting LLC (CCG) to conduct the survey. The results of  the survey and the results of the effort are very consistent; based on history that the survey is a good indicator of success. Survey results indicate there is support for a new company (for purposes of this discussion called  NewCo) to provide government owned competitive services for FTTP and they are the highest CCG has ever seen. It doesn’t mean it was fantastically high. Sixty-nine percent of the respondents said the LMCC and local governments should provide a  locally-owned, competitive choice of television, internet, and telephone services to homes, businesses, schools, governmental businesses and so forth; 11 percent said they should not. Forty-nine percent of the respondents that said they would buy internet service from NewCo if  the price is slightly less than what they are currently paying for the service, 30 percent said they would if the price is the same, and 11 percent said they would if the price is slightly more (assuming significantly faster upload and download speeds and better customer service). Forty-nine percent of the respondents that said they would buy cable television service from  NewCo if the price is slightly less than what they are currently paying for the service, 30 percent CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES April 25, 2011 Page 4 of 13 said they would if the price is the same, and 6 percent said they would if the price is slightly more (assuming better picture quality and customer service). Fifty-seven percent of the respondents said they would buy telephone service from NewCo if the  price is slightly less than what they are currently paying for the service, 31 percent said they would if the price is the same, and 2 percent said they would if the price is slightly more (assuming the service would include many features in the basic price). A successful business plan will require a discount to the cost of what respondents are currently  paying services. The results indicate the respondents want competition.  Fifty percent of the respondents said they were extremely or somewhat satisfied with their  internet service provider, 31 percent were neutral, and 19 percent were somewhat or extremely dissatisfied. Fifty-three percent of the respondents said they were extremely or somewhat satisfied with the  speed of their internet service, 33 percent were neutral, and 14 percent were somewhat or extremely dissatisfied. Fifty-one percent of the respondents said they were extremely or somewhat satisfied with the  reliability of their internet service, 31 percent were neutral, and 18 percent were somewhat or extremely dissatisfied. Thirty-seven percent of the respondents said they were extremely or somewhat satisfied with the  value they receive from their internet service when compared to the price they pay, 37 percent were neutral, and 26 percent were somewhat or extremely dissatisfied. Mr. Hendrickson concluded by stating the survey results indicate demand is there and from his vantage point the technology is there. The question to answer is whether or not the LMCC can come up with a successful business plan. The LMCC and the FTTP Committee need to explore the financing options for the future and develop a business plan. He then stated he could not say that a successful business plan can be developed. He expressed he does believe the effort to try to develop one will be diligent. Councilmember Woodruff stated he agreed with Mr. Hendrickson’s comments. He explained that 1,774 surveys were conducted throughout the entire LMCC community. He noted the survey asked for feedback about service providers in addition to Mediacom. Councilmember Siakel stated the topic of FTTP is going to require much more in-depth discussions. She asked if the same questions were asked during all of the surveys conducted to which Mr. Hendrickson responded yes. Councilmember Woodruff commented that at the beginning of each survey the surveyor read an opening preamble about the LMCC and the FTTP effort. He noted there is a spreadsheet containing every respondents answer to every question. Councilmember Siakel stated the way she interprets the survey results is that in general people are satisfied with the services they receive and with their service providers. Mr. Hendrickson stated that about 50 percent of the respondents are pretty satisfied and it is his impression that respondents have not had trouble with their service so it is not high on their list. Some of the respondents have had problems based on how they answered the survey questions. He then stated that respondents who don’t have sufficient band width for downloading things understand that if they have FTTP that problem will go away. Councilmember Siakel then stated that from her perspective the survey lacked fair balance. The questions were primarily about respondents existing services. Most responses fell in the middle. She commented CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES April 25, 2011 Page 5 of 13 that if someone asked her if she would like FTTP she would respond she would if it would faster, better, cost less and so forth. She stated there is a lot more behind this than was asked. Mr. Hendrickson explained an attempt was made to synchronize the LMCC’s survey with other surveys CCG has conducted so the LMCC could learn from the communities that had conducted surveys and installed FTTP systems. CCG provided some guidance in selecting survey questions. He stated how FTTP would be paid for is up in the air in part because of the current economic climate. Councilmember Siakel stated the LMCC can’t levy anything; it has to come to the cities for funding. Mr. Hendrickson stated a joint powers, non-profit organization would have to be set up, noting the LMCC would likely give a new organization some guidance. Mr. Hendrickson stated the LMCC has established there is a need for FTTP, the responders want competition, 50 percent of the responders are neutral or dissatisfied with their current services and service providers they have, and that there is good correlation between surveys and future performance. In response to a question from Councilmember Zerby, Mr. Hendrickson stated the LMCC’s franchise with Mediacom is coming up for renewal. Mr. Hendrickson then stated that having an alternative to Mediacom puts the LMCC in a somewhat better negotiating position. This process keeps LMCC abreast of technologies, it puts the LMCC in a better negotiating position, and it could well lead to FTTP being a solution for the LMCC member cities. Mayor Lizée stated she will have more questions when there is more detailed discussion about FTTP. She asked if FTTP is a service the residents want local government to provide. Mr. Hendrickson stated the survey results indicated the responders don’t object to local government providing it and if local government is the only organization that is willing to provide it people will sign up for it. Mr. Hendrickson stated the LMCC did survey some other companies that provide the same services as Mediacom. The results were not encouraging. He then stated it’s his opinion that there appears to be somewhat of an unwritten law in the industry that if a company’s franchise comes up for renewal no other company is going to bid on it. The City of Monticello created a company that successfully competed with the incumbent. It was a long, hard battle with the end result being better services for subscribers. In response to a comment from Councilmember Siakel, Mr. Hendrickson stated he did not think that Monticello received troubled asset relief program (TARP) funds. Mr. Hendrickson stated there are communities that received funding but they are more rural. Councilmember Woodruff stated Monticello in very many ways did something similar to what the LMCC is considering doing. Monticello issued nonrecourse revenue bonds. No federal funds, no state funds, no county money was used to create the system. A small amount of city funding was used to jumpstart the project. The biggest problem Monticello has is it can’t keep up with demand. Mr. Hendrickson stated customers are happy with the new system, and he noted the entire system fits in a room about one-half the size of the Council Chambers. Administrator Heck asked what the LMCC will do next with the results of the survey. Mr. Hendrickson responded the LMCC is kicking off a funding exercise, which will help identify the various funding possibilities for FTTP and develop a business plan for each of the options. Mayor Lizée stated she looks forward to receiving more information. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES April 25, 2011 Page 6 of 13 7. PARKS Commissioner Swaggert reported on matters considered and actions taken at the April 12, 2011, Park Commission meeting (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting). Mayor Lizée noted there is a joint Council, Park Commission and Planning Commission meeting scheduled for Mary 3, 2011, at 6:00 P.M. 8. PLANNING No report was given because there had not been a Planning Commission meeting since the last City Council regular meeting. The next meeting is scheduled for May 3, 2011. It will be held after the joint Council, Park Commission and Planning Commission meeting and it will start at 8:00 P.M. 9. ENGINEERING/PUBLIC WORKS A. Accepting Plans and Specification and Authorizing Advertisement for Bids for 2011 Seal Coating of Streets Engineer Landini explained that each year the City budgets for the bituminous seal coating of some of the City’s roadways. The meeting packet contains a list of the 39 roadways proposed to be seal coated and a map depicting the location of the roadways. The 2011 Capital Improvement Program budget allocates $223,000 for the seal coating effort. If Council authorizes the project, the bids for the project will be th opened on May 18 at 10:00 A.M. He noted that historically the roadways have been seal coated during the first two weeks in August, but the timeline depends on when Public Works can have the roadways patched. Councilmember Zerby asked if there will again be a conflict between the seal coating effort and the Tour de Tonka event. Director Brown stated the event coordinators typically ask the City to hold off on seal coating, but that is not possible if the City wants to stay current with its street maintenance program. Brown noted the City has worked effectively with the coordinators in the past. The contractor has been required to sweep the streets after they have been seal coated. If that’s not possible Public Works staff will do the necessary sweeping and assess the roadways to try and minimize accidents. Brown then stated unless Council tells Staff to do something different, Staff will not delay the seal coating effort. Mayor Lizée stated it appears as if the section of Minnetonka Boulevard between the Cities of Deephaven and Greenwood proposed for seal coating would be the only project area that’ll be part of the event route. Councilmember Zerby asked that Staff error on the side of over communicating to residents about the project areas. Woodruff moved, Zerby seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 11-018, “A Resolution Approving Specifications and Estimate and Authorizing Advertisements for Bide for Bituminous Seal Coat Project 2011”. Motion passed 5/0. 10. GENERAL/NEW BUSINESS A. Authorization to Apply for an Organics Collection Grant This was removed from the consent agenda at Councilmember Woodruff’s request. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES April 25, 2011 Page 7 of 13 Councilmember Woodruff explained that one of the reasons he asked for this item to be removed from the consent agenda is that he had never before seen the information included in the meeting packet about an organics waste collection grant application until he received the meeting packet. He stated he thought some of the material included policy type information that needs to be discussed. He expressed disappointment that Council is being forced to take action on this item this evening because the application has to be submitted by April 29, 2011, at 5:00 P.M. He noted the then Council talked about an organics waste collection grant application about 1.5 years ago. He stated he doesn’t know how the two programs compare, noting he did not think the 2010 program was very well defined. Woodruff then explained that Staff proposes contracting with Organics Disposal to provide organics waste collection services for a pilot program. The cost per participating household would be $8.00 for household organics waste or $11.00 for a mixture of yard waste and household organics waste. Staff proposes going with the organics household waste only option and he questioned if that is the correct option. He asked how Staff arrived at recommending Organics Disposal. Council has not been provided with any contract to review. He stated on the Hennepin County website he found out that a limited number of cities, he thought eight, have an organics waste collection program. Also, Organics Disposal is one of five organics collection companies listed on that website. He asked Staff why this is being sole sourced and why there has not been any discussion about the other companies. Woodruff went on to explain the pilot program proposal is for up to 500 participants located in the west end of the City. He asked why the proposed pilot area is not the east end of the City or the entire City. He asked what happens when the year-long pilot program ends. Does the City continue with a city-wide organics waster collection program? What would the per participant cost be? Will participation be optional? Will participants be billed directly? Woodruff stated there is a lot of Council policy discussion that has not taken place. He noted he thinks the organics recycling idea is a good one. He stated that from his vantage point it appears as if the City is jumping off a bridge and he’s not sure anyone has identified who might have a parachute. Administrator Heck explained Organics Disposal is recommended because it’s based out of the City of Chaska; it’s close to the recommended pilot area. Staff has spoken with a few other companies and they were not interested in separate organics waste collection. He noted the City currently has single source collection for recycling and Staff believes having single source collection for organics waste would be better for the City’s roadways and the residents. He stated he will have to get back to Council on why the west side of the City was chosen, but it may be because it’s close to Organics Disposal basic route. Staff does recommend a small concentrated area for the pilot program. He explained one of the objectives of an organics waste collection program is to remove waste from the waste stream that would otherwise go to the waste burner or to the landfill. Staff has to try and estimate how much organics waste is being collected with other refuse and also track how much of that would be removed through the organics waste collection program. Heck stated that if the results of the program confirm that organics waste collection is a beneficial service to offer to the community then Council would need to discuss offering a city-wide program. He explained Staff recommends having participation in a potential city-wide program voluntary, having a single source organics waste collection vendor that the City contracts with, and having participants subscribe to and pay for the program directly with the vendor [like they do for refuse collection]. The City would not have any billing obligations. He commented the City of Plymouth is re-evaluating its refuse and recycling program and it’s considering including organics waste collection as a mandatory service. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES April 25, 2011 Page 8 of 13 Councilmember Woodruff stated the City has only asked for a bid from Organics Disposal. He noted he does agree with having a single source organics collection vendor. He stated the City solicited bids for providing recycling services. He again asked what happens when the pilot program concludes. Administrator Heck explained that a portion of the pilot program participants’ cost will be subsidized by the City through grant funds. If the pilot program is successful Council has to decide if it wants to offer the service city wide and it will need to find a single source organics waste collection vendor. In response to a comment from Councilmember Woodruff, Administrator Heck explained this evening Staff is asking for authorization to apply for the grant. If the City is not awarded a grant an organics waste collection program will not move forward at this time. If the City is awarded a grant Staff will work out the contract details with Organics Disposal. In response to another comment from Woodruff, Heck explained the grant application does not commit the City to providing long-term organics waste collection services. Councilmember Woodruff stated if the City is awarded a grant he asked that Council have the opportunity to discuss any proposed contract with a collection services provider for a pilot program. Administrator Heck stated that is how the process would work. Woodruff moved, authorizing Staff to submit a grant application to Hennepin County for its Waste Abatement Incentive Fund Program to help fund a pilot an organics waste collection program subject to not selecting an organics waste collection vendor or approving any contract with a vendor until the City is awarded a grant at this time. Motion died for lack of a second. Councilmember Siakel clarified that the only thing Council is considering this evening is giving staff the authority to submit a grant application. Grant funds would be used to help subsidize a pilot program for organics waste collection. At a future date Council can discuss the specifics of the pilot program. Organics recycling gives Council and Staff an opportunity to re-evaluate its refuse, yard waste and recycling programs. She expressed her support for submitting the grant application and moving forward with a pilot program if the City is awarded a grant. Councilmember Zerby stated he supports authorizing submittal of the grant application. He then stated that he believes that the vendor Staff proposes using, Organics Disposal, for the pilot program is one Staff believes would be a good fit for the City. Councilmember Hotvet explained when an application is made for a grant the application includes a broad overview of how the grant funds would be used. Once a grant is awarded a project plan is developed and the details are worked out. She stated she thought the pilot program would be a benefit for the community. Mayor Lizée stated she viewed this as a continuation of the Hennepin County organics recycling grant program the County had in 2010 that Council considered and turned down. She stated this is an opportunity for the City to gain a greater understanding of the benefits of organics waste collection. Zerby moved, Hotvet seconded, authoring Staff to submit a grant application to Hennepin County for its Waste Abatement Incentive Fund Program to help fund a pilot organics waste collection program. Motion passed 5/0. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES April 25, 2011 Page 9 of 13 11. OLD BUSINESS A. Continuation of Zoning Violation Appeal Applicant: Ron Johnson Location: 5490 Vine Hill Road Mayor Lizée explained Ron Johnson appealed a zoning violation notice he received for property he owns at 5490 Vine Hill Road. During Council’s March 28, 2011, meeting Mr. Johnson was provided an opportunity to address the Council on his notice of appeal. Mr. Johnson chose not to come to that meeting. During that meeting Council discussed the violations and what the next steps should be (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting). Council decided to continue the zoning violation appeal to this meeting because it did not want a technicality to interfere with resolving this to the City’s satisfaction. She noted Mr. Johnson is not present again this evening. Mayor Lizée asked Administrator Heck to give a brief recap of what’s occurred to date. Administrator Heck explained Mr. Johnson, who lives at 5355 Shady Hills Circle, received a zoning violation notice dated March 18, 2011, for a property he owns located at 5490 Vine Hill Road. Jerry Eastman, the occupant of the subject property, also received a copy of the notice. The violation is for having storage containers located on the property in question. Mr. Johnson was given until April 1, 2011, to bring his property into compliance. Via an email on March 19, 2011, Mr. Johnson sent the City a notice of appeal. Staff scheduled March 28, 2011, as the date Mr. Johnson could address Council on his notice th of appeal; that was the date of the next regular City Council meeting. During the March 28 meeting some Councilmembers expressed concern that the zoning violation notice dated March 18, 2011, that Mr. Johnson received from the City stated he would have an opportunity to appeal to the City Council on th April 25, 2011, yet his opportunity to appeal was scheduled for March 28. Council gave Mr. Johnson th until the end of April 26 to remove the containers. If they are not removed by then Council has directed Staff to issue a citation to Mr. Johnson through the City’s administrative penalty provision in the City th Ordinance. He noted that since the March 28 meeting Mr. Johnson has sent numerous pieces of correspondence to the City. Director Nielsen noted the property in question is about 20 acres in size and it’s located between Waterford Circle and Shady Hills Circle. He explained that originally there were at least six containers placed across the front of the property in question along Vine Hill Road. The City received a complaint about the containers and in response the City sent a zoning violation notice to Mr. Johnson and Mr. Eastman stating the containers were not a permitted use in a residential district. He reiterated much of what Mr. Heck just explained. He related the Mr. Johnson has told the City the property in question is a farm and is not subject to R1-C zoning which is how the property is currently zoned. Mr. Johnson has also stated the City allows containers in certain parts of the City; the containers are not an allowable use in residential parts of the City. Mr. Johnson has been questioning the City’s Ordinance relative to accessory structures. Nielsen displayed photographs of the 5490 Vine Hill Road property that were taken earlier in the day, noting Staff has not gone on to the property to take the photos. They show the containers are located in various places on the property and there are more than five or six of them. Most of the containers have been painted. Nielsen explained the City Ordinance allows for a single family residential property to have up to three accessory structures and that includes an attached garage. There is an existing garage on the house. Two of the containers could theoretically be kept on the property as an outbuilding or shed. All of them cannot CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES April 25, 2011 Page 10 of 13 remain on the property without being granted a conditional use permit (CUP). The Ordinance through the CUP process does allow for more than three accessory structures. There is a list of criterion for which that can happen with one of them being they have to match the house’s building materials and architecture. He th noted Staff continues to belief the property is in violation. Staff will check the property out on April 27 and if the violations have not been removed a citation will be issued. He displayed a picture of the current zoning map which indicates the property in question is zoned R1-C, single family residential. Jerry Kenline, 5535 Waterford Circle, stated he and his wife Linda have lived in their home for 25 years and they love it there. He stated they, like many property owners in that area, take pride in their homes and properties. They keep them up. He expressed his respect for what Council does on behalf of the residents of Shorewood. He stated that for him this issue is all about who has to play by the rules and who doesn’t. He then stated the storage shed violations on the property in question have gone on way to long, noting they are just one of the issues. He commented that Council will see him a lot more in the future because he’s interested in maintaining the quality of the neighborhood in his area and the immediate area outside of the Waterford development. He encouraged Council to enforce the current zoning violations. He stated no property owner should receive preferential treatment. Kurt Niederluecke, 5565 Waterford Circle, stated he has lived on Waterford Circle for 10 years. Since he has moved in to his current home and also based on comments from the previous owner of his property, Mr. Johnson historically has not played by the rules. He also knows that Mr. Johnson tends to act out in ways by using litigation as his tactic, noting that is difficult for a small city to deal with. He noted that he is an attorney and litigator himself. He stated he did watch the video recording of this topic during the March 28, 2011, Council meeting on television. He expressed he agreed with Director Nielsen’s recommendation. He stated that he believes that Mr. Johnson needs to abide by the same rules as other residents and property owners. He encouraged Council to make that happen. He stated his looked at the property in question from his property earlier in the day and what he saw is consistent with the photos Director Nielsen displayed. Mayor Lizée thanked the residents for showing their support this evening. Councilmember Zerby stated he continues to agree with the direction Council gave Staff during its March th 28 meeting. He asked if Council needs to approve a motion stating that. Attorney Keane stated Council th provided direction during its March 28 meeting. Zerby stated Council has given Mr. Johnson two opportunities to appeal before it. Councilmember Woodruff recapped that the City is going to follow its administrative citation process and that Mr. Johnson can choose if he wants to participate in that process. He noted the administrative process is not a legal / civil process. The City can go through that process after the administrative process has run its course. Woodruff stated in one or some of the emails from Mr. Johnson he stated that he has brought some sort of federal action. He asked if that is correct. Attorney Keane stated he is not aware of a federal action. Administrator Heck explained that Mr. Johnson electronically filed a motion to remove the district court action for sanctions. Mr. Johnson named the City the plaintiff and himself the defendant. The City has not taken any action in court except to defend itself against the actions of Mr. Johnson. The only thing the City has done in this case is receive an email and letter from Mr. Johnson with his motion. The past week the firm of Kennedy and Graven noticed the federal court it will represent the City should hearings be held. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES April 25, 2011 Page 11 of 13 Mayor Lizée expressed hope that Mr. Johnson will comply with the violation. She stated if he doesn’t the City will follow through on filing a citation. Mr. Kenline asked what the amount of the zoning violation fine is. Director Nielsen responded the amount is $300. Nielsen stated the question is how many times the City should cite Mr. Johnson. He explained that based on his experience judges tend to not like to like multiple citations for the same violation (i.e., issuing a new citation each day). He stated Administrator Heck and he spoke earlier in the day about issuing a new citation every 10 days. What hasn’t been agreed to is how many times another citation will be issued. B. Excelsior Fire District Budget Administrator Heck stated the Excelsior Fire District (EFD) Board held a second work session on April 20, 2011, to continue discussing the proposed EFD 2012 Operating Budget and 2012 – 2032 Capital Improvement Program (CIP). The proposed budget includes an anticipated $80,000 mandatory contribution to the Excelsior Firefighters Relief Association (EFRA) fund for pensions. The pension fund lost approximately $1.2 million in value during the market crash a few years ago. As a result, the fund became under funded; there are not sufficient funds to cover all of the EFRA’s pension liabilities. State Statute requires municipalities/organizations to make mandatory contributions to the fund, which can be amortized over ten years, when it’s under funded. The 2010 budget anticipated a $120,000 mandatory payment. That was funded by using of $40,000 of General Fund balance; $40,000 of Fire Facilities Fund balance; and about $34,000 in operating cuts. The actual 2010 contribution ended up being close to $59,000. The 2011 budget anticipated a mandatory contribution of $80,000. The approximate $62,000 remaining from the $120,000 was used to help fund the $80,000. General Fund balance was again used to help reduce the amount of increase in the 2011 municipal contribution (what the member cities collectively pay). The actual 2011 contribution ended up being over $88,000. Heck stated the question for the EFD Board and member city councils is how to fund the 2012 mandatory contribution. It can be funded totally through member city contributions, through the use of fund balances or some combination of things. The anticipated approximate $40,000 surplus in the EFD Fire Facilities Fund at the end of 2011 could also be used to help fund the anticipated 2012 contribution. Councilmember Zerby, the City’s representative on the EFD Board, explained firefighters are paid a minimal hourly call rate to respond to calls. Firefighters also earn a per-year-of-service pension benefit and they are partially vested after 10years of active service. A firefighter has to respond to 33.33 percents of calls every six month to have that 6 months count toward active service. The EFRA has been in existence for about 105 years. The EFRA fund for pensions has not been able to self fund the pension fund through investment earnings (as well as state fire aid) the past few years because of market conditions. He commented that former Councilmember Bailey (who was the City’s representative on the EFD Board for a while) worked with EFRA President Duncan and the EFRA Board to update the EFRA’s investment policy. Zerby then explained the proposed 2012 combined increase for operating expenses and capital outlay is 1.28 percent, not including the anticipated mandatory contribution. The overall increase including the pension is 1.22 percent. The increase in the municipal contribution is 6.16 percent assuming no fund balances are used. The EFD Board is considering options for funding the mandatory contribution. The surplus is the result of using about $40,000 in unspent construction funds for part of the EFD’s bonded debt payment for the facilities due February 1, 2011. This Council passed a motion earlier this year recommending that surplus remain with the EFD to be used for some EFD capital purpose. Two member city councils asked to have their portion of those surplus funds returned to them. General Fund reserves CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES April 25, 2011 Page 12 of 13 could also be used. He noted that he does not recommend doing that because the level of General Fund reserves is marginal. He stated the entire mandatory contribution could be funded out of levy. The EFD Boardmembers were asked to ask their respective City Council about using the projected $40,000 surplus there will be in the Fire Facilities Fund at the end of 2011 to help fund the anticipated 2012 mandatory contribution and to talk about other options. Councilmember Siakel stated she could support using the $40,000 surplus to help fund the contribution. She then stated it would cost the member cities more if they were served by a full-time fire department. Councilmember Woodruff stated the City’s portion of the 6.16 percent increase in the municipal contribution is about 0.7 percent of the City’s levy. At this time he is unwilling to do that. He suggested using the $40,000 surplus and taking $40,000 out of General Fund reserves. Mayor Lizée stated it’s up to the EFD Board to decide how the mandatory contribution should be funded. She thanked the Board for soliciting input. She noted the General Fund reserves have been used the last two years. She stated reserves are needed to safeguard the level of services the cities receive. She then stated she is not going to tell the EFD Board what to do. She explained she attended the first EFD Board work session to discuss the budget in place of Councilmember Zerby. The budget EFD Chief Gerber proposed is very lean and responsible. She stated she wants to make sure the EFD has a sufficient training budget for its volunteer firefighters. She noted the cities couldn’t afford a full-time fire department. She suggested the mandatory contribution be partially funded with the $40,000 surplus and the rest through the municipal contribution, noting she thought that is the responsible thing to do. She stated she does not recommend cutting the proposed 2012 EFD budget. Councilmember Woodruff stated there seems to be an inconsistency between two documents for this item in the meeting packet. It deals with the 2011 municipal contribution amount. Administrator Heck stated he would talk to Chief Gerber about it. Councilmember Zerby stated he thought he understood Council’s desire. Planning Commissioner Hasek stated he would much rather spend an additional $8.00 on fire service than on organics waste collection. 12. STAFF AND COUNCIL REPORTS A. Administrator and Staff Administrator Heck stated Staff is close to having the information on license and permit evaluations ready for Council review and discussion. He then stated the City received a letter from CenterPoint Energy indicating it’s going to replace its pipe line identification posts. Director Brown stated Public Works has commenced with the watermain flushing. He encouraged the City’s residents to log on to the City’s website to find the schedule for when their area will be flushed. He congratulated Engineer Landini for all of his efforts to date in getting authorization to advertise for bids for the Vine Hill Road project. He stated the City received a copy of the Consumer Confidence Report from the Minnesota Department of Health which indicates the City is in conformance with the Clean Water Act and Drinking Water Standards, noting that information will be published and it will be accessible from a link on the City’s website. He noted that Public Works staff had patched Vine Hill Road again earlier in the day. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES April 25, 2011 Page 13 of 13 Mayor Lizée stated she has received a few calls from residents over the weekend who wondered when the bidding process for the Vine Hill Road project is going occur. 1. Monthly Budget Report Director DeJong stated the meeting packet contains a copy of the March 2011 General Fund Monthly Budget Report. The budget to date appears to be in reasonable shape. He noted he is not willing to project any of the individual line items very far out because it’s so early in the budget year. He stated he will be meeting with department heads to verify things are on track for staying within budget. 2. Quarterly Investment Report Director DeJong stated the meeting packet contains a copy of the March 2011 Quarterly Investment Report. He explained the City has a significant investment portfolio. The City is limited to what it can earn on those investments because the City is fairly restricted by State Statute and by the City’s Investment Policy. The returns on short-term money going up to one year out are generally well under 1 percent. Investment strategists at the firms the City invests with believe interest rates will start to go up in 2012. He noted that interest rates and investment values go in opposite directions. He stated the City doesn’t want to get stuck with a long-term, low interest rate investment as the market starts to move up. He explained under the City’s investment policy the City is reaching the end of its ability to make much more in the way of investments. The Investment Policy has a restriction that 30 percent of investments must be liquid. B. Mayor and City Council None. 13. ADJOURN Woodruff moved, Zerby seconded, Adjourning the City Council Regular Meeting of April 25, 2011, at 8:34 P.M. Motion passed 5/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Christine Freeman, Recorder ATTEST: Christine Lizée, Mayor Brian Heck, City Administrator/Clerk COUNCIL ACTION FORM Department Council Meeting Item Number Finance May 9, 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 51666 through 51705 totaling $185,412.58. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the claims list. 5/05/2011 4:01 PM A/P HISTORY CHECK REPORT PAGE: 2 VENDOR SET: 01 City of Shorewood BANK: 1 BEACON BANK DATE RANGE: 4/26/2011 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 4/26/2011 000000 11,805.91 00092 MN DEPT OF REVENUE D 4/26/2011 000000 2,115.25 20005 WELLS FARGO HEALTH BENEFIT SVC D 4/26/2011 000000 1,092.39 17400 CITY OF MINNETONKA R 4/26/2011 051657 287.12 00053 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST-302131-4 R 4/26/2011 051658 1,411.00 00052 PERA R 4/26/2011 051659 7,084.15 01400 ALL STEEL PRODUCTS CO. R 5/09/2011 051661 509.90 29306 ALLIED WASTE SERVICES #894 R 5/09/2011 051662 13,840.20 01790 AMERICAN LEGAL PUBL CORP R 5/09/2011 051663 1,371.00 16275 AMERICAN MESSAGING R 5/09/2011 051664 17.99 01977 ANDERSON, KRISTI B. R 5/09/2011 051665 6.40 17300 CENTERPOINT ENERGY R 5/09/2011 051666 1,026.99 04500 CITY OF CHANHASSEN R 5/09/2011 051667 1,875.75 29363 DeJONG, BRUCE R 5/09/2011 051668 384.40 26110 DEX ONE R 5/09/2011 051669 8.86 07270 ESS BROTHERS & SONS INC R 5/09/2011 051670 324.90 07870 FASCHING, PATRICIA R 5/09/2011 051671 29.58 08712 G & K SERVICES R 5/09/2011 051672 1,020.50 27195 GRAINGER, INC R 5/09/2011 051673 595.01 07900 HAWKINS, INC. R 5/09/2011 051674 80.00 10503 HENN CTY TREAS.-TAXPYER SVCS D R 5/09/2011 051675 480.00 11005 ICMA MEMBERSHIP RENEWALS R 5/09/2011 051676 805.00 5/05/2011 4:01 PM A/P HISTORY CHECK REPORT PAGE: 3 VENDOR SET: 01 City of Shorewood BANK: 1 BEACON BANK DATE RANGE: 4/26/2011 THRU 99/99/9999 CHECK INVOICE CHECK CHECK CHECK VENDOR I.D. NAME STATUS DATE AMOUNT DISCOUNT NO STATUS AMOUNT 11650 KENNEDY & GRAVEN, CHARTERED R 5/09/2011 051677 354.75 29390 LAURSEN PIANO SERVICE R 5/09/2011 051678 89.00 13300 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES R 5/09/2011 051679 199.00 1 MICHAEL DODD R 5/09/2011 051680 30.00 15885 MIDWEST MAILING SYSTEMS INC R 5/09/2011 051681 375.87 17049 MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH R 5/09/2011 051682 69.00 18085 MOORE, JULIE R 5/09/2011 051683 200.00 19750 NORTHERN TOOL & EQUIPMENT CO R 5/09/2011 051684 35.37 15900 OFFICE DEPOT R 5/09/2011 051685 36.12 15000 PAETEC R 5/09/2011 051686 527.31 20500 PETTY CASH V 5/09/2011 051687 365.97 20500 PETTY CASH 20500 PETTY CASH C-CHECK PETTY CASH VOIDED V 5/09/2011 051687 365.97 20950 POTTS, KENNETH N. R 5/09/2011 051688 2,291.66 26100 QWEST R 5/09/2011 051689 310.99 22450 SAFETY-KLEEN SYSTEMS, INC. R 5/09/2011 051690 438.49 23527 SOUTH TONKA LITTLE LEAGUE R 5/09/2011 051691 560.00 29392 ST. JOSEPH EQUIPMENT, INC. R 5/09/2011 051692 52,395.47 17050 STATE OF MN-MN DEPT OF HEALTH R 5/09/2011 051693 2,113.00 29101 SUN NEWSPAPERS R 5/09/2011 051694 111.54 17200 SUN PATRIOT NEWSPAPERS R 5/09/2011 051695 135.01 24900 TONKA UNITED SOCCER ASSN R 5/09/2011 051696 1,040.00 5/05/2011 4:01 PM A/P HISTORY CHECK REPORT PAGE: 4 VENDOR SET: 01 City of Shorewood BANK: 1 BEACON BANK DATE RANGE: 4/26/2011 THRU 99/99/9999 CHECK INVOICE CHECK CHECK CHECK VENDOR I.D. NAME STATUS DATE AMOUNT DISCOUNT NO STATUS AMOUNT 25000 TOTAL PRINTING SERVICES R 5/09/2011 051697 1,089.69 25452 TWIN CITY WATER CLINIC R 5/09/2011 051698 100.00 70200 VERIZON WIRELESS R 5/09/2011 051699 214.65 29269 WARNER CONNECT R 5/09/2011 051700 1,039.55 83900 WASTE MANAGEMENT OF WI-MN R 5/09/2011 051701 517.58 19800 XCEL ENERGY R 5/09/2011 051702 11,397.68 28600 ZARNOTH BRUSH WORKS, INC R 5/09/2011 051704 103.29 20500 PETTY CASH R 5/09/2011 051705 365.97 05305 COMMUNITY REC RESOURCES E 5/09/2011 999999 2,222.00 09400 GOPHER STATE ONE CALL E 5/09/2011 999999 318.15 10576 ADVANCED IMAGING SOLUTIONS INC E 5/09/2011 999999 74.00 13070 LANDINI, JAMES E 5/09/2011 999999 232.58 18500 WM. MUELLER & SONS, INC. E 5/09/2011 999999 329.59 19445 NGUYEN, MICHELLE E 5/09/2011 999999 113.22 19500 NIELSEN, BRADLEY E 5/09/2011 999999 1,043.40 23725 SPEEDWAY SUPERAMERICA LLC E 5/09/2011 999999 4,482.16 29232 HECK, BRIAN E 5/09/2011 999999 509.16 * * T O T A L S * * NO CHECK AMOUNT DISCOUNTS TOTAL APPLIED REGULAR CHECKS: 46 107,299.74 0.00 107,299.74 HAND CHECKS: 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 DRAFTS: 3 15,013.55 0.00 15,013.55 EFT: 9 9,324.26 0.00 9,324.26 NON CHECKS: 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 VOID CHECKS: 1 VOID DEBITS 365.97 VOID CREDITS 365.97 0.00 0.00 0.00 TOTAL ERRORS: 0 VENDOR SET: 01 BANK: 1 TOTALS: 59 131,637.55 0.00 131,637.55 BANK: 1 TOTALS: 59 131,637.55 0.00 131,637.55 REPORT TOTALS: 61 131,637.55 0.00 131,637.55 05-05-2011 03:58 PM C O U N C I L REPORT BY VENDOR - MAY 9, 2011 PAGE: 1 VENDOR SORT KEY DATE DESCRIPTION FUND DEPARTMENT AMOUNT_ ADVANCED IMAGING SOLUTIONS INC 5/09/11 MAINT SVC 03/15-04/15 General Fund Municipal Buildings 74.00_ TOTAL: 74.00 ALL STEEL PRODUCTS CO. 5/09/11 PARTS @ DIVISION ST Stormwater Managem STORMWATER MANAGEMENT 509.90_ TOTAL: 509.90 ALLIED WASTE SERVICES #894 5/09/11 RECYCLING Recycling Utility Recycling 13,840.20_ TOTAL: 13,840.20 AMERICAN LEGAL PUBL CORP 5/09/11 2011 S-6 SUPPLEMENT PAGES General Fund General Government 1,168.00 5/09/11 2011 S-6 FOLIO/INTERNET SU General Fund General Government 203.00_ TOTAL: 1,371.00 AMERICAN MESSAGING 5/09/11 MAY PAGERS General Fund Public Works 8.99 5/09/11 MAY PAGERS Water Utility Water 4.50 5/09/11 MAY PAGERS Sanitary Sewer Uti Sewer 4.50_ TOTAL: 17.99 ANDERSON, KRISTI B. 5/09/11 KICK-OFF EVENT-BAGS General Fund Parks & Recreation 6.40_ TOTAL: 6.40 CENTERPOINT ENERGY 5/09/11 SVC 03/21-04/18 General Fund Municipal Buildings 113.28 5/09/11 SVC 03/21-04/18 General Fund Public Works 416.15 5/09/11 SVC 03/21-04/18 General Fund Parks & Recreation 137.57 5/09/11 MANOR WARMING HOUSE General Fund Parks & Recreation 31.87 5/09/11 SSCC 06/17-07/22 Southshore Communi Senior Community Cente 153.16 5/09/11 SVC 03/21-04/18 Water Utility Water 69.13 5/09/11 SVC 03/21-04/18 Water Utility Water 105.83_ TOTAL: 1,026.99 CITY OF CHANHASSEN 5/09/11 018505-000 ACCT SVC ADDRES Water Utility Water 6.99 5/09/11 018505-001 ACCT SVC ADDRES Water Utility Water 1,868.76_ TOTAL: 1,875.75 CITY OF MINNETONKA 4/26/11 5366 VINE HILL RD Water Utility Water 46.60 4/26/11 5350 VINE HILL RD Water Utility Water 10.00 4/26/11 5490 VINE HILL RD Water Utility Water 31.43 4/26/11 5366 VINE HILL RD Water Utility Water 111.30 4/26/11 5350 VINE HILL RD Water Utility Water 54.90 4/26/11 5490 VINE HILL RD Water Utility Water 32.89_ TOTAL: 287.12 COMMUNITY REC RESOURCES 5/09/11 PCS-SVC 04/25-05/06 General Fund Parks & Recreation 1,935.00 5/09/11 SSCC ASSISTANT-SVC 04/25-0 Southshore Communi Senior Community Cente 287.00_ TOTAL: 2,222.00 DEX ONE 5/09/11 APR ADS Southshore Communi Senior Community Cente 8.86_ TOTAL: 8.86 DeJONG, BRUCE 5/09/11 GFOA CONF FLIGHT General Fund Finance 324.40 5/09/11 GFOA MEMBERSHIP General Fund Finance 60.00_ TOTAL: 384.40 EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H 4/26/11 FEDERAL W/H General Fund NON-DEPARTMENTAL 4,938.90 4/26/11 FICA W/H General Fund NON-DEPARTMENTAL 2,168.53 4/26/11 MEDICARE W/H General Fund NON-DEPARTMENTAL 748.65 05-05-2011 03:58 PM C O U N C I L REPORT BY VENDOR - MAY 9, 2011 PAGE: 2 VENDOR SORT KEY DATE DESCRIPTION FUND DEPARTMENT AMOUNT_ 4/26/11 FICA W/H General Fund Council 80.60 4/26/11 MEDICARE W/H General Fund Council 18.87 4/26/11 FICA W/H General Fund Administration 281.59 4/26/11 MEDICARE W/H General Fund Administration 65.85 4/26/11 FICA W/H General Fund General Government 419.14 4/26/11 MEDICARE W/H General Fund General Government 98.02 4/26/11 FICA W/H General Fund Finance 302.36 4/26/11 MEDICARE W/H General Fund Finance 70.71 4/26/11 FICA W/H General Fund Planning 290.72 4/26/11 MEDICARE W/H General Fund Planning 67.99 4/26/11 FICA W/H General Fund Protective Inspections 191.82 4/26/11 MEDICARE W/H General Fund Protective Inspections 44.86 4/26/11 FICA W/H General Fund City Engineer 190.69 4/26/11 MEDICARE W/H General Fund City Engineer 44.60 4/26/11 FICA W/H General Fund Public Works 611.93 4/26/11 MEDICARE W/H General Fund Public Works 143.10 4/26/11 FICA W/H General Fund Streets & Roadways 319.89 4/26/11 MEDICARE W/H General Fund Streets & Roadways 74.82 4/26/11 FICA W/H General Fund Parks & Recreation 126.72 4/26/11 MEDICARE W/H General Fund Parks & Recreation 29.63 4/26/11 FICA W/H Southshore Communi Senior Community Cente 34.99 4/26/11 MEDICARE W/H Southshore Communi Senior Community Cente 8.19 4/26/11 FICA W/H Water Utility Water 172.12 4/26/11 MEDICARE W/H Water Utility Water 40.25 4/26/11 FICA W/H Sanitary Sewer Uti Sewer 118.02 4/26/11 MEDICARE W/H Sanitary Sewer Uti Sewer 27.60 4/26/11 FICA W/H Recycling Utility Recycling 6.36 4/26/11 MEDICARE W/H Recycling Utility Recycling 1.49 4/26/11 FICA W/H Stormwater Managem STORMWATER MANAGEMENT 54.23 4/26/11 MEDICARE W/H Stormwater Managem STORMWATER MANAGEMENT 12.67_ TOTAL: 11,805.91 ESS BROTHERS & SONS INC 5/09/11 GRATE Stormwater Managem STORMWATER MANAGEMENT 324.90_ TOTAL: 324.90 FASCHING, PATRICIA 5/09/11 2011 MUNICI-PAL WORKSHOP General Fund General Government 29.58_ TOTAL: 29.58 G & K SERVICES 5/09/11 CH SVC General Fund Municipal Buildings 119.00 5/09/11 PW SVC General Fund Public Works 850.84 5/09/11 SSCC SVC Southshore Communi Senior Community Cente 50.66_ TOTAL: 1,020.50 GOPHER STATE ONE CALL 5/09/11 APR SVC Water Utility Water 159.07 5/09/11 APR SVC Sanitary Sewer Uti Sewer 159.08_ TOTAL: 318.15 GRAINGER, INC 5/09/11 RELAMP-STREET LIGHTS General Fund Traffic Control/Str Li 179.45 5/09/11 RELAMP General Fund Traffic Control/Str Li 415.56_ TOTAL: 595.01 HAWKINS, INC. 5/09/11 CHLORINE Water Utility Water 80.00_ TOTAL: 80.00 HECK, BRIAN 5/09/11 CELL General Fund Administration 79.99 5/09/11 MILEAGE-DEEPHAVEN & ST PAU General Fund Administration 34.17 05-05-2011 03:58 PM C O U N C I L REPORT BY VENDOR - MAY 9, 2011 PAGE: 3 VENDOR SORT KEY DATE DESCRIPTION FUND DEPARTMENT AMOUNT_ 5/09/11 ICMA WEBINAR FEE General Fund Administration 395.00_ TOTAL: 509.16 HENN CTY TREAS.-TAXPYER SVCS DIVISION 5/09/11 2010 SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS Water Utility Water 136.50 5/09/11 2010 SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS Sanitary Sewer Uti Sewer 114.00 5/09/11 2010 SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS Recycling Utility Recycling 112.50 5/09/11 2010 SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS Stormwater Managem STORMWATER MANAGEMENT 117.00_ TOTAL: 480.00 ICMA MEMBERSHIP RENEWALS 5/09/11 RENEWAL-BRIAN HECK General Fund Administration 805.00_ TOTAL: 805.00 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST-302131-457 4/26/11 P/R DEDUCTS-DEFERRED COM General Fund NON-DEPARTMENTAL 1,075.00 4/26/11 P/R DEDUCTS-DEFERRED COM General Fund NON-DEPARTMENTAL 336.00_ TOTAL: 1,411.00 KENNEDY & GRAVEN, CHARTERED 5/09/11 RON JOHNSON LITIGATION General Fund Professional Svcs 354.75_ TOTAL: 354.75 LANDINI, JAMES 5/09/11 MILEAGE General Fund City Engineer 182.58 5/09/11 WELLNESS General Fund City Engineer 40.00 5/09/11 ST CLOUD LTAP-PARKING General Fund City Engineer 10.00_ TOTAL: 232.58 LAURSEN PIANO SERVICE 5/09/11 PIANO INSPECTION Southshore Communi Senior Community Cente 89.00_ TOTAL: 89.00 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES 5/09/11 2011 ANNUAL CONF-R. WOODRU General Fund Council 199.00_ TOTAL: 199.00 MIDWEST MAILING SYSTEMS INC 5/09/11 MAY NEWSLETTER SVC General Fund General Government 375.87_ TOTAL: 375.87 MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH 5/09/11 CLASS C#10322-CHRIS POUNDE Water Utility Water 23.00 5/09/11 CLASS C #10323-DAN RANDALL Water Utility Water 23.00 5/09/11 CLASS C #8008-BRUCE STARK Water Utility Water 23.00_ TOTAL: 69.00 MISC. VENDOR MICHAEL DODD 5/09/11 COMM GARDEN RETURN General Fund NON-DEPARTMENTAL 30.00_ TOTAL: 30.00 MN DEPT OF REVENUE 4/26/11 STATE W/H General Fund NON-DEPARTMENTAL 2,115.25_ TOTAL: 2,115.25 MOORE, JULIE 5/09/11 JAN-MAY WELLNESS REIM General Fund General Government 200.00_ TOTAL: 200.00 NGUYEN, MICHELLE 5/09/11 APR MILEAGE General Fund Finance 113.22_ TOTAL: 113.22 NIELSEN, BRADLEY 5/09/11 APA CONF EXP-04/09-04/12 General Fund Planning 1,043.40_ TOTAL: 1,043.40 NORTHERN TOOL & EQUIPMENT CO 5/09/11 D-RINGS General Fund Public Works 35.37_ TOTAL: 35.37 05-05-2011 03:58 PM C O U N C I L REPORT BY VENDOR - MAY 9, 2011 PAGE: 4 VENDOR SORT KEY DATE DESCRIPTION FUND DEPARTMENT AMOUNT_ OFFICE DEPOT 5/09/11 GEN SUPPLIES General Fund General Government 36.12_ TOTAL: 36.12 PAETEC 5/09/11 02/26-03/25 SVC General Fund Municipal Buildings 135.86 5/09/11 02/26-03/25 SVC General Fund Public Works 46.90 5/09/11 02/26-03/25 SVC General Fund Parks & Recreation 145.60 5/09/11 02/26-03/25 SVC Water Utility Water 98.70 5/09/11 02/26-03/25 SVC Water Utility Water 100.25_ TOTAL: 527.31 PERA 4/26/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA General Fund NON-DEPARTMENTAL 3,279.70 4/26/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA General Fund Administration 339.41 4/26/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA General Fund General Government 491.15 4/26/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA General Fund Finance 364.29 4/26/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA General Fund Planning 373.54 4/26/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA General Fund Protective Inspections 251.04 4/26/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA General Fund City Engineer 223.71 4/26/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA General Fund Public Works 740.90 4/26/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA General Fund Streets & Roadways 390.67 4/26/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA General Fund Parks & Recreation 155.26 4/26/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA Southshore Communi Senior Community Cente 40.92 4/26/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA Water Utility Water 213.27 4/26/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA Sanitary Sewer Uti Sewer 146.87 4/26/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA Recycling Utility Recycling 7.45 4/26/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA Stormwater Managem STORMWATER MANAGEMENT 65.97_ TOTAL: 7,084.15 PETTY CASH 5/09/11 CASH SHORT General Fund General Government 59.26 5/09/11 CASH SHORT-DEP RECEIPT5017 General Fund General Government 5.00 5/09/11 DRY ICE/HYDRANT General Fund Municipal Buildings 1.71 5/09/11 2011-SPRING CLEAN-UP Recycling Utility NON-DEPARTMENTAL 300.00_ TOTAL: 365.97 POTTS, KENNETH N. 5/09/11 MAR PROSECUTIONS General Fund Professional Svcs 2,291.66_ TOTAL: 2,291.66 QWEST 5/09/11 SVC-04/25-05/25 General Fund Municipal Buildings 120.73 5/09/11 SVC-04/25-05/25 General Fund Public Works 56.98 5/09/11 SVC-04/25-05/25 Water Utility Water 66.64 5/09/11 SVC-04/25-05/25 Water Utility Water 66.64_ TOTAL: 310.99 SAFETY-KLEEN SYSTEMS, INC. 5/09/11 HAZ WASTE DISPOSAL General Fund Public Works 438.49_ TOTAL: 438.49 SOUTH TONKA LITTLE LEAGUE 5/09/11 2011 SUMMER USER REFUND General Fund NON-DEPARTMENTAL 560.00_ TOTAL: 560.00 SPEEDWAY SUPERAMERICA LLC 5/09/11 GAS-03/23-04/12 General Fund Public Works 4,482.16_ TOTAL: 4,482.16 ST. JOSEPH EQUIPMENT, INC. 5/09/11 BACKHOE Equipment Replacem Equipment Replacement 52,395.47_ TOTAL: 52,395.47 STATE OF MN-MN DEPT OF HEALTH 5/09/11 1ST QTR STATE SURCHARGE Water Utility NON-DEPARTMENTAL 2,113.00_ TOTAL: 2,113.00 05-05-2011 03:58 PM C O U N C I L REPORT BY VENDOR - MAY 9, 2011 PAGE: 5 VENDOR SORT KEY DATE DESCRIPTION FUND DEPARTMENT AMOUNT_ SUN NEWSPAPERS 5/09/11 VACATE ECHO RD ROW-04/14 General Fund Planning 55.77 5/09/11 VACATE GALPIN LK RD ROW-04 General Fund Planning 55.77_ TOTAL: 111.54 SUN PATRIOT NEWSPAPERS 5/09/11 PONDS PUD HEARING-04/16 General Fund Planning 33.81 5/09/11 ECHO RD HEARING-04/23 General Fund Planning 50.60 5/09/11 GALPIN VACATION HRG-04/23/ General Fund Planning 50.60_ TOTAL: 135.01 TONKA UNITED SOCCER ASSN 5/09/11 2011 SUMMER USER FEE REFUN General Fund NON-DEPARTMENTAL 1,040.00_ TOTAL: 1,040.00 TOTAL PRINTING SERVICES 5/09/11 MAY NEWSLETTER SVC General Fund General Government 848.48 5/09/11 MAY NEWSLETTER-RECYCLED IN Recycling Utility Recycling 241.21_ TOTAL: 1,089.69 TWIN CITY WATER CLINIC 5/09/11 APR COLIFORM Water Utility Water 100.00_ TOTAL: 100.00 VERIZON WIRELESS 5/09/11 L.S. POHNE-SVC 03/22-04/21 Sanitary Sewer Uti Sewer 214.65_ TOTAL: 214.65 WARNER CONNECT 5/09/11 REPLACEMENT BATTERY General Fund Municipal Buildings 236.43 5/09/11 APC SMART UPS 1500 VA RM General Fund Municipal Buildings 803.12_ TOTAL: 1,039.55 WASTE MANAGEMENT OF WI-MN 5/09/11 MAY SVC General Fund Public Works 363.23 5/09/11 MAY SVC Southshore Communi Senior Community Cente 154.35_ TOTAL: 517.58 WELLS FARGO HEALTH BENEFIT SVCS 4/26/11 P/R DEDUCTS-HSA General Fund NON-DEPARTMENTAL 803.94 4/26/11 P/R DEDUCTS-HSA General Fund General Government 288.45_ TOTAL: 1,092.39 WM. MUELLER & SONS, INC. 5/09/11 BLACKTOP General Fund Streets & Roadways 329.59_ TOTAL: 329.59 XCEL ENERGY 5/09/11 SVC-02/22-04/10 General Fund Municipal Buildings 469.21 5/09/11 SVC-02/22-04/10 General Fund Police Protection 3.77 5/09/11 SVC-02/22-04/10 General Fund Public Works 420.06 5/09/11 SVC-02/22-04/10 General Fund Traffic Control/Str Li 25.58 5/09/11 SVC-02/22-04/10 General Fund Traffic Control/Str Li 3,308.63 5/09/11 5700 CTY RD 19 General Fund Traffic Control/Str Li 32.22 5/09/11 5700 CTY RD 19 UNIT LIGHTS General Fund Traffic Control/Str Li 194.76 5/09/11 SVC-02/22-04/10 General Fund Parks & Recreation 382.09 5/09/11 SSCC- 06/22-07/24 Southshore Communi Senior Community Cente 1,471.81 5/09/11 24253 SMITHTOWN RD-03/23-0 Water Utility Water 1,359.71 5/09/11 SVC-02/22-04/10 Water Utility Water 420.92 5/09/11 SVC-02/22-04/10 Water Utility Water 616.08 5/09/11 SVC-02/22-04/10 Water Utility Water 2,062.29 5/09/11 SVC-02/22-04/10 Sanitary Sewer Uti Sewer 630.55_ TOTAL: 11,397.68 ZARNOTH BRUSH WORKS, INC 5/09/11 SWEEPER PARTS General Fund Public Works 103.29_ TOTAL: 103.29 05-05-2011 03:58 PM C O U N C I L REPORT BY VENDOR - MAY 9, 2011 PAGE: 6 VENDOR SORT KEY DATE DESCRIPTION FUND DEPARTMENT AMOUNT_ **PAYROLL EXPENSES 4/25/2011 - 99/99/9999 General Fund Council 1,300.00 General Fund Administration 4,681.54 General Fund General Government 6,774.58 General Fund Finance 5,024.75 General Fund Planning 5,152.39 General Fund Protective Inspections 3,462.47 General Fund City Engineer 3,085.60 General Fund Public Works 10,219.15 General Fund Streets & Roadways 5,388.62 General Fund Parks & Recreation 2,141.58 Southshore Communi Senior Community Cente 564.40 Water Utility Water 2,941.71 Sanitary Sewer Uti Sewer 2,025.77 Recycling Utility Recycling 102.66 Stormwater Managem STORMWATER MANAGEMENT 909.81_ TOTAL: 53,775.03 =============== FUND TOTALS ================ 101 General Fund 96,947.90 403 Equipment Replacement 52,395.47 490 Southshore Community Ctr. 2,863.34 601 Water Utility 13,158.48 611 Sanitary Sewer Utility 3,441.04 621 Recycling Utility 14,611.87 631 Stormwater ManagementUtil 1,994.48 -------------------------------------------- GRAND TOTAL: 185,412.58 -------------------------------------------- TOTAL PAGES: 6 05-05-2011 03:58 PM C O U N C I L REPORT BY DEPARTMENT - MAY 9, 2011 PAGE: 1 DEPARTMENT FUND VENDOR NAME DATE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT_ NON-DEPARTMENTAL General Fund EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H 4/26/11 FEDERAL W/H 4,938.90 4/26/11 FICA W/H 2,168.53 4/26/11 MEDICARE W/H 748.65 PERA 4/26/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA 3,279.70 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST-302131-457 4/26/11 P/R DEDUCTS-DEFERRED COM 1,075.00 4/26/11 P/R DEDUCTS-DEFERRED COM 336.00 MN DEPT OF REVENUE 4/26/11 STATE W/H 2,115.25 MISC. VENDOR MICHAEL DODD 5/09/11 COMM GARDEN RETURN 30.00 WELLS FARGO HEALTH BENEFIT SVCS 4/26/11 P/R DEDUCTS-HSA 803.94 SOUTH TONKA LITTLE LEAGUE 5/09/11 2011 SUMMER USER REFUND 560.00 TONKA UNITED SOCCER ASSN 5/09/11 2011 SUMMER USER FEE REFUN 1,040.00_ TOTAL: 17,095.97 Council General Fund EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H 4/26/11 FICA W/H 80.60 4/26/11 MEDICARE W/H 18.87 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES 5/09/11 2011 ANNUAL CONF-R. WOODRU 199.00 **PAYROLL EXPENSES 4/25/2011 - 99/99/9999 1,300.00_ TOTAL: 1,598.47 Administration General Fund EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H 4/26/11 FICA W/H 281.59 4/26/11 MEDICARE W/H 65.85 PERA 4/26/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA 339.41 ICMA MEMBERSHIP RENEWALS 5/09/11 RENEWAL-BRIAN HECK 805.00 HECK, BRIAN 5/09/11 CELL 79.99 5/09/11 MILEAGE-DEEPHAVEN & ST PAU 34.17 5/09/11 ICMA WEBINAR FEE 395.00 **PAYROLL EXPENSES 4/25/2011 - 99/99/9999 4,681.54_ TOTAL: 6,682.55 General Government General Fund EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H 4/26/11 FICA W/H 419.14 4/26/11 MEDICARE W/H 98.02 PERA 4/26/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA 491.15 AMERICAN LEGAL PUBL CORP 5/09/11 2011 S-6 SUPPLEMENT PAGES 1,168.00 5/09/11 2011 S-6 FOLIO/INTERNET SU 203.00 FASCHING, PATRICIA 5/09/11 2011 MUNICI-PAL WORKSHOP 29.58 MIDWEST MAILING SYSTEMS INC 5/09/11 MAY NEWSLETTER SVC 375.87 OFFICE DEPOT 5/09/11 GEN SUPPLIES 36.12 MOORE, JULIE 5/09/11 JAN-MAY WELLNESS REIM 200.00 WELLS FARGO HEALTH BENEFIT SVCS 4/26/11 P/R DEDUCTS-HSA 288.45 PETTY CASH 5/09/11 CASH SHORT 59.26 5/09/11 CASH SHORT-DEP RECEIPT5017 5.00 TOTAL PRINTING SERVICES 5/09/11 MAY NEWSLETTER SVC 848.48 **PAYROLL EXPENSES 4/25/2011 - 99/99/9999 6,774.58_ TOTAL: 10,996.65 Finance General Fund EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H 4/26/11 FICA W/H 302.36 4/26/11 MEDICARE W/H 70.71 PERA 4/26/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA 364.29 NGUYEN, MICHELLE 5/09/11 APR MILEAGE 113.22 DeJONG, BRUCE 5/09/11 GFOA CONF FLIGHT 324.40 5/09/11 GFOA MEMBERSHIP 60.00 05-05-2011 03:58 PM C O U N C I L REPORT BY DEPARTMENT - MAY 9, 2011 PAGE: 2 DEPARTMENT FUND VENDOR NAME DATE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT_ **PAYROLL EXPENSES 4/25/2011 - 99/99/9999 5,024.75_ TOTAL: 6,259.73 Professional Svcs General Fund KENNEDY & GRAVEN, CHARTERED 5/09/11 RON JOHNSON LITIGATION 354.75 POTTS, KENNETH N. 5/09/11 MAR PROSECUTIONS 2,291.66_ TOTAL: 2,646.41 Planning General Fund EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H 4/26/11 FICA W/H 290.72 4/26/11 MEDICARE W/H 67.99 PERA 4/26/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA 373.54 SUN PATRIOT NEWSPAPERS 5/09/11 PONDS PUD HEARING-04/16 33.81 5/09/11 ECHO RD HEARING-04/23 50.60 5/09/11 GALPIN VACATION HRG-04/23/ 50.60 NIELSEN, BRADLEY 5/09/11 APA CONF EXP-04/09-04/12 1,043.40 SUN NEWSPAPERS 5/09/11 VACATE ECHO RD ROW-04/14 55.77 5/09/11 VACATE GALPIN LK RD ROW-04 55.77 **PAYROLL EXPENSES 4/25/2011 - 99/99/9999 5,152.39_ TOTAL: 7,174.59 Municipal Buildings General Fund G & K SERVICES 5/09/11 CH SVC 119.00 ADVANCED IMAGING SOLUTIONS INC 5/09/11 MAINT SVC 03/15-04/15 74.00 PAETEC 5/09/11 02/26-03/25 SVC 135.86 CENTERPOINT ENERGY 5/09/11 SVC 03/21-04/18 113.28 XCEL ENERGY 5/09/11 SVC-02/22-04/10 469.21 PETTY CASH 5/09/11 DRY ICE/HYDRANT 1.71 QWEST 5/09/11 SVC-04/25-05/25 120.73 WARNER CONNECT 5/09/11 REPLACEMENT BATTERY 236.43 5/09/11 APC SMART UPS 1500 VA RM 803.12_ TOTAL: 2,073.34 Police Protection General Fund XCEL ENERGY 5/09/11 SVC-02/22-04/10 3.77_ TOTAL: 3.77 Protective Inspections General Fund EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H 4/26/11 FICA W/H 191.82 4/26/11 MEDICARE W/H 44.86 PERA 4/26/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA 251.04 **PAYROLL EXPENSES 4/25/2011 - 99/99/9999 3,462.47_ TOTAL: 3,950.19 City Engineer General Fund EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H 4/26/11 FICA W/H 190.69 4/26/11 MEDICARE W/H 44.60 PERA 4/26/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA 223.71 LANDINI, JAMES 5/09/11 MILEAGE 182.58 5/09/11 WELLNESS 40.00 5/09/11 ST CLOUD LTAP-PARKING 10.00 **PAYROLL EXPENSES 4/25/2011 - 99/99/9999 3,085.60_ TOTAL: 3,777.18 Public Works General Fund EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H 4/26/11 FICA W/H 611.93 4/26/11 MEDICARE W/H 143.10 PERA 4/26/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA 740.90 G & K SERVICES 5/09/11 PW SVC 850.84 PAETEC 5/09/11 02/26-03/25 SVC 46.90 AMERICAN MESSAGING 5/09/11 MAY PAGERS 8.99 CENTERPOINT ENERGY 5/09/11 SVC 03/21-04/18 416.15 NORTHERN TOOL & EQUIPMENT CO 5/09/11 D-RINGS 35.37 05-05-2011 03:58 PM C O U N C I L REPORT BY DEPARTMENT - MAY 9, 2011 PAGE: 3 DEPARTMENT FUND VENDOR NAME DATE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT_ XCEL ENERGY 5/09/11 SVC-02/22-04/10 420.06 SAFETY-KLEEN SYSTEMS, INC. 5/09/11 HAZ WASTE DISPOSAL 438.49 SPEEDWAY SUPERAMERICA LLC 5/09/11 GAS-03/23-04/12 4,482.16 QWEST 5/09/11 SVC-04/25-05/25 56.98 ZARNOTH BRUSH WORKS, INC 5/09/11 SWEEPER PARTS 103.29 WASTE MANAGEMENT OF WI-MN 5/09/11 MAY SVC 363.23 **PAYROLL EXPENSES 4/25/2011 - 99/99/9999 10,219.15_ TOTAL: 18,937.54 Streets & Roadways General Fund EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H 4/26/11 FICA W/H 319.89 4/26/11 MEDICARE W/H 74.82 PERA 4/26/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA 390.67 WM. MUELLER & SONS, INC. 5/09/11 BLACKTOP 329.59 **PAYROLL EXPENSES 4/25/2011 - 99/99/9999 5,388.62_ TOTAL: 6,503.59 Traffic Control/Str Li General Fund XCEL ENERGY 5/09/11 SVC-02/22-04/10 25.58 5/09/11 SVC-02/22-04/10 3,308.63 5/09/11 5700 CTY RD 19 32.22 5/09/11 5700 CTY RD 19 UNIT LIGHTS 194.76 GRAINGER, INC 5/09/11 RELAMP-STREET LIGHTS 179.45 5/09/11 RELAMP 415.56_ TOTAL: 4,156.20 Parks & Recreation General Fund EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H 4/26/11 FICA W/H 126.72 4/26/11 MEDICARE W/H 29.63 PERA 4/26/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA 155.26 ANDERSON, KRISTI B. 5/09/11 KICK-OFF EVENT-BAGS 6.40 COMMUNITY REC RESOURCES 5/09/11 PCS-SVC 04/25-05/06 1,935.00 PAETEC 5/09/11 02/26-03/25 SVC 145.60 CENTERPOINT ENERGY 5/09/11 SVC 03/21-04/18 137.57 5/09/11 MANOR WARMING HOUSE 31.87 XCEL ENERGY 5/09/11 SVC-02/22-04/10 382.09 **PAYROLL EXPENSES 4/25/2011 - 99/99/9999 2,141.58_ TOTAL: 5,091.72 Equipment Replacement Equipment Replacem ST. JOSEPH EQUIPMENT, INC. 5/09/11 BACKHOE 52,395.47_ TOTAL: 52,395.47 Senior Community Cente Southshore Communi EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H 4/26/11 FICA W/H 34.99 4/26/11 MEDICARE W/H 8.19 PERA 4/26/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA 40.92 COMMUNITY REC RESOURCES 5/09/11 SSCC ASSISTANT-SVC 04/25-0 287.00 G & K SERVICES 5/09/11 SSCC SVC 50.66 CENTERPOINT ENERGY 5/09/11 SSCC 06/17-07/22 153.16 XCEL ENERGY 5/09/11 SSCC- 06/22-07/24 1,471.81 DEX ONE 5/09/11 APR ADS 8.86 LAURSEN PIANO SERVICE 5/09/11 PIANO INSPECTION 89.00 WASTE MANAGEMENT OF WI-MN 5/09/11 MAY SVC 154.35 **PAYROLL EXPENSES 4/25/2011 - 99/99/9999 564.40_ TOTAL: 2,863.34 NON-DEPARTMENTAL Water Utility STATE OF MN-MN DEPT OF HEALTH 5/09/11 1ST QTR STATE SURCHARGE 2,113.00_ TOTAL: 2,113.00 Water Water Utility EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H 4/26/11 FICA W/H 172.12 05-05-2011 03:58 PM C O U N C I L REPORT BY DEPARTMENT - MAY 9, 2011 PAGE: 4 DEPARTMENT FUND VENDOR NAME DATE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT_ 4/26/11 MEDICARE W/H 40.25 PERA 4/26/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA 213.27 CITY OF CHANHASSEN 5/09/11 018505-000 ACCT SVC ADDRES 6.99 5/09/11 018505-001 ACCT SVC ADDRES 1,868.76 HAWKINS, INC. 5/09/11 CHLORINE 80.00 GOPHER STATE ONE CALL 5/09/11 APR SVC 159.07 HENN CTY TREAS.-TAXPYER SVCS DIVISION 5/09/11 2010 SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 136.50 PAETEC 5/09/11 02/26-03/25 SVC 98.70 5/09/11 02/26-03/25 SVC 100.25 AMERICAN MESSAGING 5/09/11 MAY PAGERS 4.50 MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH 5/09/11 CLASS C#10322-CHRIS POUNDE 23.00 5/09/11 CLASS C #10323-DAN RANDALL 23.00 5/09/11 CLASS C #8008-BRUCE STARK 23.00 CENTERPOINT ENERGY 5/09/11 SVC 03/21-04/18 69.13 5/09/11 SVC 03/21-04/18 105.83 CITY OF MINNETONKA 4/26/11 5366 VINE HILL RD 46.60 4/26/11 5350 VINE HILL RD 10.00 4/26/11 5490 VINE HILL RD 31.43 4/26/11 5366 VINE HILL RD 111.30 4/26/11 5350 VINE HILL RD 54.90 4/26/11 5490 VINE HILL RD 32.89 XCEL ENERGY 5/09/11 24253 SMITHTOWN RD-03/23-0 1,359.71 5/09/11 SVC-02/22-04/10 420.92 5/09/11 SVC-02/22-04/10 616.08 5/09/11 SVC-02/22-04/10 2,062.29 TWIN CITY WATER CLINIC 5/09/11 APR COLIFORM 100.00 QWEST 5/09/11 SVC-04/25-05/25 66.64 5/09/11 SVC-04/25-05/25 66.64 **PAYROLL EXPENSES 4/25/2011 - 99/99/9999 2,941.71_ TOTAL: 11,045.48 Sewer Sanitary Sewer Uti EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H 4/26/11 FICA W/H 118.02 4/26/11 MEDICARE W/H 27.60 PERA 4/26/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA 146.87 GOPHER STATE ONE CALL 5/09/11 APR SVC 159.08 HENN CTY TREAS.-TAXPYER SVCS DIVISION 5/09/11 2010 SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 114.00 AMERICAN MESSAGING 5/09/11 MAY PAGERS 4.50 XCEL ENERGY 5/09/11 SVC-02/22-04/10 630.55 VERIZON WIRELESS 5/09/11 L.S. POHNE-SVC 03/22-04/21 214.65 **PAYROLL EXPENSES 4/25/2011 - 99/99/9999 2,025.77_ TOTAL: 3,441.04 NON-DEPARTMENTAL Recycling Utility PETTY CASH 5/09/11 2011-SPRING CLEAN-UP 300.00_ TOTAL: 300.00 Recycling Recycling Utility EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H 4/26/11 FICA W/H 6.36 4/26/11 MEDICARE W/H 1.49 PERA 4/26/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA 7.45 HENN CTY TREAS.-TAXPYER SVCS DIVISION 5/09/11 2010 SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 112.50 TOTAL PRINTING SERVICES 5/09/11 MAY NEWSLETTER-RECYCLED IN 241.21 ALLIED WASTE SERVICES #894 5/09/11 RECYCLING 13,840.20 05-05-2011 03:58 PM C O U N C I L REPORT BY DEPARTMENT - MAY 9, 2011 PAGE: 5 DEPARTMENT FUND VENDOR NAME DATE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT_ **PAYROLL EXPENSES 4/25/2011 - 99/99/9999 102.66_ TOTAL: 14,311.87 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT Stormwater Managem EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H 4/26/11 FICA W/H 54.23 4/26/11 MEDICARE W/H 12.67 PERA 4/26/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA 65.97 ALL STEEL PRODUCTS CO. 5/09/11 PARTS @ DIVISION ST 509.90 ESS BROTHERS & SONS INC 5/09/11 GRATE 324.90 HENN CTY TREAS.-TAXPYER SVCS DIVISION 5/09/11 2010 SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 117.00 **PAYROLL EXPENSES 4/25/2011 - 99/99/9999 909.81_ TOTAL: 1,994.48 =============== FUND TOTALS ================ 101 General Fund 96,947.90 403 Equipment Replacement 52,395.47 490 Southshore Community Ctr. 2,863.34 601 Water Utility 13,158.48 611 Sanitary Sewer Utility 3,441.04 621 Recycling Utility 14,611.87 631 Stormwater ManagementUtil 1,994.48 -------------------------------------------- GRAND TOTAL: 185,412.58 -------------------------------------------- TOTAL PAGES: 5 CONSENT MEETING TYPE City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting Title / Subject: adopt a resolution supporting a pilot boat inspection program at Christmas Lake Meeting Date: Monday, May 9, 2011 Prepared by: Brian Heck, City Administrator Reviewed by: Attachments: Resolution Policy Consideration: should the council adopt a resolution supporting the pilot boat inspection program at the Christmas Lake boat launch? Background: Last year Zebra mussels appeared in Lake Minnetonka and the Minnesota DNR classified the lake as infested waters. This designation imposes additional restrictions on watercraft leaving the lake. However, there are many public and private boat launches on Lake Minnetonka and limited resources to ensure each boat leaving the lake receives inspection for aquatic invasive life forms. Christmas Lake is only a few miles from Lake Minnetonka and is a popular lake for scuba divers and anglers. The Christmas Lake Association (CLA) began discussions with the Minnehaha Watershed District and Minnesota Waters on how to prevent the spread of Zebra Mussels to Christmas Lake. In a meeting with the group, we found grant funds through the DNR available to the CLA and to local units of government on behalf of lake associations to implement inspection sites. Minnesota Waters is working with MCWD in drafting the grant, which was submitted around April 18, for funds to pilot an on-site inspection program. This effort will also use funds raised by CLA and possibly the Watershed. The CLA, MCWD, and Minnesota Waters is asking for our support of this pilot program since the launch and parking area belong to the City of Shorewood. Financial or Budget Considerations: there is no financial obligation related to this grant. Options: The Council can approve the resolution or deny the resolution supporting the pilot program. Recommendation / Action Requested: staff recommends council approve the resolution. Next Steps and Timelines: if approved, staff will forward the document to the MCWD, CLA, and Minnesota Waters. Connection to Vision / Mission: Visionary leadership, attractive amenities, and healthy environment. 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 RESOLUTION NO. 11-019 A RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF A PILOT BOAT LAUNCH INSPECTION PROGRAM AT CHRISTMAS LAKE WHEREAS , the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MnDNR) declared Lake Minnetonka an infested water in 2010 following the discovery of Zebra Mussels; and WHEREAS , Christmas Lake is not yet an infested water; and WHEREAS , Christmas Lake is in close proximity to Lake Minnetonka; and WHEREAS , the Christmas Lake Association (CLA) endeavors to prevent the spread of Zebra Mussels to this water body; and WHEREAS , the CLA is working with the Minnehaha Creek Watershed district and Minnesota Waters in seeking grant funds from the MnDNR to operate a pilot inspection program; and WHEREAS , the public boat launch and parking facility is maintained by the City of Shroewood; NOW, THEREFORE, Be It Resolved, by the City Council of the City of Shorewood, that the City supports the efforts of the MCWD and CLA to provide for inspection of boats entering Christmas Lake and supports the grant application. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 9th day of May, 2011. Christine Lizée, Mayor ATTEST: Brian Heck, City Administrator/Clerk 3C Consent MEETING TYPE City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting Title / Subject: Crescent Beach Lifeguard Service Agreement Meeting Date: Monday, May 9, 2011 Prepared by: Brian Heck, City Administrator Reviewed by: Attachments: 2011 Agreement Policy Consideration: Approve the 2011 lifeguard agreement with Minnetonka Community Education Background: the city shares Crescent beach with Tonka Bay and we share the cost of providing lifeguard services. The Cities contract with Minnetonka Community Education to provide Red Cross certified lifeguards for the summer (June 11 – August 14). The services proposed are consistent with prior years, that being seven days a week between the hours of 12:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. Financial or Budget Considerations: Shorewood’s share of the cost is $3,988.00 and is included in the 2011 park budget. Last year the cost was $3,872.00. Options: 1)Approve the agreement 2)Deny the agreement Recommendation / Action Requested: staff recommends approval of the agreement as presented. Next Steps and Timelines: following approval, staff will execute the agreement and forward to MCE for execution. Connection to Vision / Mission: quality public services. 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 #3D MEETING TYPE City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting Title / Subject: Authorization for Expenditure of Funds for Sealcoat Aggregate Engineering File 11-07 Meeting Date: 5/9/11 Prepared by: James Landini Reviewed by: Attachments: Quote Tabulation Policy Consideration: Background: The material used for the aggregate is granite. There are three suppliers within the Midwest area. The first supplier is Martin Marietta Materials, Inc. located in St. Cloud, Minnesota. The second is Dresser Trap Rock, Inc. located in Dresser, Wisconsin. And the third is Kraemer Quarry located in Burnsville, MN. Quotes were obtained and are summarized in Table 1. The lowest quoter for supplying the sealcoat aggregate is Martin Marietta for a total of $57,244 plus tax. Shorewood’s portion of the quote is $28,600 plus tax Financial or Budget Considerations: Each year the City of Shorewood encumbers a portion of the operating budget for the sealcoating of roadways within the City. Year 2011 is no exception by budgeting $223,000. Options: 1.Authorize staff, by motion, to purchase sealcoat rock for Bituminous Seal coating of Streets in 2011. 2.Direct staff to select a different supplier. 3.Do nothing. Recommendation / Action Requested: Staff recommends the City Council authorize staff to purchase sealcoat aggregate for the 2011 Sealcoat project from Martin Marietta Materials, Inc. in the amount of $28,600.00 plus tax. Next Steps and Timelines: Connection to Vision / Mission: Maintaining the roads is an environmental and financial sustainability strategy. Mission Statement: The City of Shorewood is committed to providing residents quality public services, a healthy environment, a variety of attractive amenities, a sustainable tax base, and sound financial management through effective, efficient, and visionary leadership. Page 1 City of Shorewood Quote Tabulation 2011 Furnishing of FA-2 Sealcoat Aggregate City Project No. 11-07 For the City of Shorewood, MN Quotes Opened: Engineer: City of Shorewood 4 May 2011 at 10:00a.m.Eng. & Public Wrks Dept. NoBidderQuote plus tax 1Martin Marietta Aggregates$ 57,244.00 includes tax 2Dresser Trap Rock Inc.$ 117,116.00 plus tax 3Kraemer Quarryna plus tax 4Bryan Rockna 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Table 1 #3E MEETING TYPE City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting Title / Subject: Acceptance of Proposal by Safe Assure for Safety Training Consultation Meeting Date: May 9, 2011 Prepared by: Larry Brown Reviewed by: Jean Panchyshyn Attachments: 1. MSDS Sheet 2. Proposal Policy Consideration: This item considers acceptance of the proposal from Safe Assure Consultants, Inc. for annual safety training that is mandated by the Occupational Health and Safety Administration for all employees. Background: The Occupational Safety and Health Association (OSHA) mandates safety training for all employees. Each year employees must be certified in the following items.  Employee Right to Know  Blood Borne Pathogens  Emergency Action Plan Beyond this training, Public Works Personnel shall also be certified annually in the following areas:  AWAIR Control of Hazardous Energy  Hazard Communications Recording and Reporting of Injuries  Confined Space Entry/Rescue Occupational Noise Exposure  Personal Protective Equipment Respiratory Protection  Excavations/Trench Safety Overhead Cranes  Forklift/Skid-steer Certification Chainsaw Operations  Powered Industrial Trucks General Duty Clause  Defensive Driving Ergonomics  Operation of Mobile Earth Moving Equipment Logging Operations 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 Safe Assure Inc. has provided these services as a joint project with 11 other lake area communities. The ability to train with other municipalities provides the opportunity to train at a cost of approximately one tenth the cost of other programs. Safe Assure also provides an automated Material Data Safety Sheet program. OSHA mandates that every material that an employee comes in contact with must have a Material Data Safety Sheet (MSDS) that outlines health risks, protective equipment to be utilized, and chemical reaction data. Attachment 1 is a sample of an MSDS sheet. This mandate, not only applies to chemicals, but to everyday items such as bolts, wood, and asphalt. The job of keeping MSDS sheets current for every product that is received is an ominous task, at best. Safe Assure’s proposal includes preparation and ongoing maintenance of an MSDS database. Safe Assure will not only keep MSDS files current, but will also provide consultation to any employee(s) about material data, protective equipment and health risks, and will respond to emergency inquiries. Staff is recommending approval of this option. Also included with the services is an annual on site simulated OSHA inspection for Public Works and City Hall. Mr. Chad Petersen of Safe Assure performs these onsite inspections. Mr. Petersen has previously been employed with OSHA. Options: 1.Accept the Proposal 2.Reject the Proposal with direction to Staff Recommendation / Action Requested: Staff is recommending approval of the proposal provided by Safe Assure Consultants for safety services in the amount of $2,775. This amount has been budgeted for in the 2011 Operating Budget for Public Works. Next Steps and Timelines: No further steps are required by the City Council, after approval. Connection to Vision / Mission: Safety Training is not only mandated by OSHA, but is needed to insure that employees are able to carry out their assigned tasks safely. Material Safety Data Sheet Chlorine (Liquid or Gas) 24 Hour Emergency Phone: CHEMTREC 1-800-424-9300 Date of Preparation: 11/26/01 Revision: 4/28/03 Section 1 - Chemical Product and Company Identification CAS No: 7782-50-5 Molecular Weight: 70.91 Chemical Formula: Cl2 Distributed by : Hawkins, Inc. 3100 E. Hennepin Avenue Minneapolis, MN 55413 (612-331-6910) Section 2 - Composition / Information on Ingredients Ingredient CAS No Percent Hazardous --------------------------------------- ------------ ------- --------- Chlorine 7782-50-5 99.5 - 100% Yes Section 3 - Hazards Identification Emergency Overview ------------------ STRONG OXIDIZING AGENT. POISON. HAZARDOUS LIQUID AND GAS UNDER PRESSURE. MAY CAUSE CHEMICAL PNEUMONIA AND EVEN DEATH IN HIGH CONCENTRATIONS. MAY CAUSE SEVERE IRRITATION TO SKIN , EYES, AND RESPIRATORY TRACT. LIQUID MAY BURN EYES AND SKIN. CAN REACT EXPLOSIVELY WITH ORGANIC PRODUCTS. Potential Health Effects ------------------------ Inhalation: Severe irritant. Coughing, burning, chest pain, vomiting, headache, anxiety and feeling of suffocation. Severe exposure may cause pneumonitis and pulmonary edema. Ingestion: Chlorine is a gas at room temperature. Ingested liquid chlorine can cause severe burns of the mouth, esophagus and stomach. Nausea and vomiting are likely to occur. Skin Contact: Corrosive! Contact with skin can cause irritation or severe burns and scarring with greater exposures. Eye Contact: Corrosive! Severe irritant. High concentrations or contact can cause burns. Chronic Exposure: Above established exposure limits may result in reduced breathing capacity. Aggravation of Pre-existing Conditions: Persons with pre-existing impaired respiratory function may be more susceptible to the effects of the substance. Page 1 of 5 Chlorine (Liquid or Gas) revised: 4/28/03 24 Hour Emergency Phone: CHEMTREC 1-800-424-9300 Section 4 - First Aid Measures Inhalation: Remove to fresh air. Get medical attention for any breathing difficulty. Ingestion: If swallowed, DO NOT INDUCE VOMITING. Give large quantities of water. Never give anything by mouth to an unconscious person. Get medical attention immediately. Skin Contact: Immediately flush skin with plenty of water for at least 15 minutes while removing contaminated clothing and shoes. Call a physician, immediately. Wash clothing before reuse. Eye Contact: Immediately flush eyes with plenty of water for at least 15 minutes, lifting lower and upper eyelids occasionally. Get medical attention immediately. Note to Physician: Monitor closely for delayed onset of pulmonary edema and chemical pneumonia. Provide treatment as is medically indicated. Section 5 - Fire-Fighting Measures NFPA Ratings: Health: 4 Flammability: 0 Reactivity: 0 Other: OX Fire: Not considered to be a fire hazard, but does support combustion. Explosion: Reacts explosively or forms explosive compounds, with many chemicals, such as acetylene, turpentine, ether, ammonia gas, hydrogen and finely divided metals. Fire Extinguishing Media: Use any means suitable for extinguishing surrounding fire. Approach fire from upwind. If no chlorine escaping, apply water spray to keep fire-exposed containers cool. DO NOT APPLY WATER TO LEAKING CONTAINERS. Remove chlorine containers from fire zone if possible. Flame impingement on steel chlorine container will result in iron/chlorine fire causing rupture of the container. Special Information: Firefighters should wear self-contained, positive-pressure breathing apparatus, and a one piece, total-encapsulating suit of Butyl coated nylon or equivalent. Section 6 - Accidental Release Measures Evacuate unnecessary personnel. Keep unnecessary and unprotected people upwind from area of spill. Wear appropriate personal protective equipment as specified in Section 8. Contain and recover liquid when possible. Do not flush residues to the sewer. Residues from spills can be absorbed into an alkaline solution such as caustic soda. US Regulations (CERCLA) require reporting spills and releases to soil, water and air in excess of reportable quantities. The toll free number for the US Coast Guard National Response Center is (800) 424-8802. Section 7 - Handling and Storage Keep in a tightly closed container. Protect from physical damage. Store in a cool, dry, ventilated area away from sources of heat, moisture and incompatibilities. Protect from heat.. Containers of this material may be hazardous when empty since they retain product residues (vapors, liquid); observe all warnings and precautions listed for the product. Do not store with aluminum or magnesium. Do not mix with acids or organic materials. Page 2 of 5 Chlorine (Liquid or Gas) revised: 4/28/03 24 Hour Emergency Phone: CHEMTREC 1-800-424-9300 Section 8 - Exposure Controls / Personal Protection Airborne Exposure Limits: Chlorine: -OSHA Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL): 1 ppm Ceiling -ACGIH Threshold Limit Value (TLV): 0.5 ppm (8 hr TWA), 1 ppm STEL Ventilation System: A system of local and/or general exhaust is recommended to keep employee exposures below the Airborne Exposure Limits. Local exhaust ventilation is generally preferred because it can control the emissions of the contaminant at its source, preventing dispersion of it into the general work area. Please refer to the ACGIH document, "Industrial Ventilation, A Manual of Recommended Practices", most recent edition, for details. Personal Respirators (NIOSH Approved): If the exposure limit is exceeded, a half-face dust/mist respirator may be worn for up to ten times the exposure limit or the maximum use concentration specified by the appropriate regulatory agency or respirator supplier, whichever is lowest. A full- face piece dust/mist respirator may be worn up to 50 times the exposure limit, or the maximum use concentration specified by the appropriate regulatory agency, or respirator supplier, whichever is lowest. For emergencies or instances where the exposure levels are not known, use a full-facepiece positive-pressure, air-supplied respirator. WARNING: Air-purifying respirators do not protect workers in oxygen- deficient atmospheres. Skin Protection: Wear impervious protective clothing, including boots, gloves, lab coat, apron or coveralls, as appropriate, to prevent skin contact. Eye Protection: Use chemical safety goggles and/or a full face shield where splashing is possible. Maintain eye wash fountain and quick-drench facilities in work area. Section 9 - Physical and Chemical Properties Appearance: Boiling Point: Greenish-yellow gas, amber liquid -34C (-29.3F) Odor: Melting Point: Pungent odor -101C (-150F) Solubility: Vapor Density (Air=1): Slight. 2.5 Density: Vapor Pressure (mm Hg): 11.7 lbs/gal @15.6C 71 psig @ 60F. % Volatiles by weight: 100%. Page 3 of 5 Chlorine (Liquid or Gas) revised: 4/28/03 24 Hour Emergency Phone: CHEMTREC 1-800-424-9300 Section 10 - Stability and Reactivity Stability: Stable under ordinary conditions of use and storage. Hazardous Decomposition Products: No hazardous decomposition products. Hazardous Polymerization: Will not occur. Incompatibilities: Dry chlorine is highly reactive with titanium and tin. Reacts with most metals at high temperatures. Reacts with water to produce hydrochloric acids, which are corrosive to most metals. Ammonia, elemental metals, certain metal hydrides, carbides, nitrides, oxides, phosphides and sulfides, easily oxidized materials, organic materials (e.g. oil grease) and unstable and reactive compounds. Conditions to Avoid: Heat, moisture, incompatibles. Section 11- Toxicological Information Chlorine: IDLH = 10 ppm --------\Cancer Lists\------------------------------------------------------ ---NTP Carcinogen--- Ingredient Known Anticipated IARC Category ------------------------------------ ----- ----------- ------------- Chlorine (7782-50-5) No No None Section 12 - Ecological Information Environmental Fate: Water: Chlorine is a strong oxidizer and will react rapidly with inorganic compounds. Chlorine will also oxidize organic compounds, but at a slower rate than inorganic compounds. The presence of light accelerates the dissipation of chlorine in water. Environmental Toxicity: Acute LC50 (96 hours) for Fathead Minnow: 0.07 - 0.15 ppm. Acute LC50 (96 hours) for Bluegill: 0.44 mg/l Section 13 - Disposal Considerations Chlorine gas will disperse to the atmosphere leaving no residue. Chlorine may be neutralized by introducing it into caustic soda, soda ash, or hydrated lime. Liquid and/or solid residues from neutralization must be disposed of in a permitted waste management facility. Dispose of container and unused contents in accordance with federal, state and local requirements. Section 14 - Transport Information Domestic (Land, D.O.T.) ----------------------- Proper Shipping Name: CHLORINE Hazard Class: 2.3,8 UN/NA: UN1017 Packing Group: RQ, Poison Inhalation Hazard, Zone B, Marine Pollutant. Page 4 of 5 Chlorine (Liquid or Gas) revised: 4/28/03 24 Hour Emergency Phone: CHEMTREC 1-800-424-9300 Section 15 - Regulatory Information --------\Chemical Inventory Status - Part 1\-------------------------------- Ingredient TSCA EC Japan Australia ----------------------------------------------- ---- --- ----- --------- Chlorine (7782-50-5) Yes Yes Yes Yes --------\Chemical Inventory Status - Part 2\-------------------------------- --Canada-- Ingredient Korea DSL NDSL Phil. ----------------------------------------------- ----- --- ---- ----- Chlorine (7782-50-5) Yes Yes No Yes -------\Federal, State & International Regulations - Part 1\---------------- -SARA 302- ------SARA 313------ Ingredient RQ TPQ List Chemical Catg. ---------------------------------------- --- ----- ---- -------------- Chlorine (7782-50-5) 10 100 Yes No --------\Federal, State & International Regulations - Part 2\--------------- -RCRA- -TSCA- Ingredient CERCLA 261.33 8(d) ----------------------------------------- ------ ------ --- Chlorine (7782-50-5) 10 No No Chemical Weapons Convention: No TSCA 12(b): No CDTA: No SARA 311/312: Acute: Yes Chronic: No Fire: Yes Pressure: Yes Reactivity: No (Pure / Liquid) Section 16 - Other Information Prepared By: Chris W. Gibson Revision Notes: Updated Section 14 Disclaimer: Please be advised that it is your responsibility to inform your employees of the hazards of this substance, to advise them of what these properties mean and be sure they understand exposure information. The information presented herein, while not guaranteed, was prepared by competent technical personnel and is true and accurate to the best of our knowledge. No warranty or guaranty, express or implied, is made regarding performance, stability, or otherwise. This information is not intended to be all-inclusive as to the manner and conditions of use, handling, and storage. Other factors may require additional safety or performance considerations. While our technical personnel will be happy to respond to questions regarding safe handling and use procedures, the handling and use remains the responsibility of the customer. No suggestions are intended as, and should not be construed as, a recommendation to infringe on any existing patents or to violate any Federal, State, or local laws. Page 5 of 5 # M 5A MEETING TYPE City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting Title / Subject: Waples — Request for Partial Right -of -Way Vacation — Echo Road Meeting Date: 9 May 2011 Prepared by: Brad Nielsen Reviewed by: Patti Helgesen Attachments: ExhibitA —Site Location Map Exhibit B —Survey Exhibit C — Draft Resolution Policy Consideration: Should the City vacate a portion of the public right -of -way for Echo Road? Background: Mr. William Waples and Ms. Marilyn Lindquist own the properties at 5685 and 5690 Echo Road, respectively (see Site Location map — Exhibit A, attached). When Echo Hills was originally platted, Echo Road terminated in a cul -de -sac. Later, when Echo Hills Second Addition was platted, Echo Road was extended through to Country Club Road. Although the original turn - around was eliminated, the rather unusual square right -of -way was never vacated. The excess right -of -way places constraints on the two property owners' ability to improve their properties, because building setbacks are measured from the right -of -way. In order to resolve this issue, the property owners have requested that the excess right -of -way to be vacated, lining up the resulting right -of -way with the properties to the north and south of theirs (see Exhibit B, attached). Staff has reviewed the request and raises only one issue with respect to the vacation. There is an existing water main that extends along the south side of the Waples property. It is recommended that Mr. Waples be required, as a condition of approval, to deed back to the City a ten -foot drainage and utility easement along the south end of the vacated property. Similarly, both owners must deed back a ten -foot drainage and utility easement abutting the new right -of -way line. These easements do not affect the buildability of the lots since setbacks are measured from the (new) property line. Financial or Budget Considerations: The value added to the subject properties is somewhat negligible, however, their ability to improve their properties could contribute to the tax base in the long term. Options: Approve the request and adopt the resolution attached hereto as Exhibit C; approve the request without requiring drainage and utility easements; or deny the request. Recommendation / Action Requested: Staff recommends that the attached resolution be adopted and released to the property owners upon their execution of the required drainage and utility easements. The vacation and the easement deeds must be recorded consecutively. Next Steps and Timelines: Staff will prepare the respective drainage and utility easements for execution by the owners. Upon execution, the owners must record the documents with Hennepin County. Connection to Vision / Mission: This falls under the unwritten, but understood, portion of the mission statement — "and other stuff ". 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 WOS2z — d !n S Oz 5'S6f a 8'881 0 J 6 N O — _____ __ ____ ___ ___ ___ 6 N S£Z v s - - r - OOZ SbZ 5Z'lil 3 �: ILI b6 b6 0£I OZI 58 S8 9 77 N N v ^ � 69 56 915 5' `,5'b v c� N� 9J M Lf) W I o �. - - --- d - •_V- a` _:... o : V Vi YR] r• _ 1 O c t N u7 �' f�) i b6 %.. b 6 io ,` N 63 N o r o� v 6� r o °qa. x N N =n o r 22 £6 cl 3 0£ a V M I b6'„. v �: .r.. \r �M� Q a / S Nrn N 6 °£6 v 8£ - 99;. 90 f0 j hL90 ON - O � — m v © N� Z'851 8 v N <; N ��? o - 6 F, m v ° v b6 b6 t6'£ 1 . 9 - - t .:NN nr�O� 961 02/ N as / s 8 9 s / . oi ° o - �✓ Si b L£ "OOZ - 6/ to - ti � N � :' © � 5 821 ' , "„�a• A , L 9 ', s � o .� rn O o i W M i `...� 09 4 rn c �" v y `r o d Ln d w .J ii � c; 091 r ' 6 S 3; 9 m x =n M,bS,LS cD a z- N vi ro S'tll 45 " OSI OS N O S -SO9 OVA OSI - - - -- - - M C C y_ c co C i J N s� LL 0 0 S! h b0,Zb SZb N� OSI C _ o s I o En o f 6 m Q d = C 6 ' 091 �) 3,90,ON Z -^" ° ' Li � W ..r Y 968Z N s M v6i 1.1 - o N M = Q OSI o t SZI `9! 9w3 `9Q • C 'c�6 M O r v \� - M _v` N N =' V co 8b'LiZ bb'ZOZ us e SZI m ££ N Alt � M.61,9b,£N 56'£ \1 3,90 ON 9S "9ZZ 0Z OS trb'6Zi �� - - — — _fi '° — n �S6' � 1 1 m o n ) �' 571 90'8L - - - 3.Itr,9£ ,ON b9'89£ - Ib•60Z Z9'Ob£, 051 b81, o � r— I Nei 051 ___ 'a ro 0 r- 0 tYl N cr ----------- ----- i9 N � v' 0 49 "961 ri 1 I )it A Southeast corner Lot 2 Blk. 1 Echo Hills Lot 3 �l I i Blk. 1 6\ # 5690, , \X Ease Hyd. g � _ - q 5.59 r � T Northwest corner Lot 1 Blk 1 --- - '---- �2 -" Water main -- - Echo Hills 2nd Add. I Southwest corner Lot / Blk.2 Echo Hills / E i, \,Echo��� . �' t� :Ro d to \ ;. \\ . Lot 3 i Blk . 2 m Vacate�c # 5685 �E s men \X Ease Hyd. g � _ - q 5.59 r � T Northwest corner Lot 1 Blk 1 --- - '---- �2 -" Water main -- - Echo Hills 2nd Add. I Northeast corner Lot / Rlk_ ? Fcho Hills 2nd / E CD 5685 Echo Road Shorewood, Minnesota Legal Description: ic) Lot 3, Block 2, Echo Hills, Hennepin County, Minnesota Proposed Legal Description For Street Vacation: That part of Echo Read, as dedicated in Echo Hills, according to the recorded plat thereof, lying southeasterly of a line drawn from the Southwest corner of Lot 2, Bloc: CO Echo Hills, to the Northwest corner of Lot 1, Block 1, Echo Hills 2 Addition, Henn ° County, Minnesota. Subject to a Waterman & Utility & Drainage Easement over the South 10.0 Feet measured at right angles to said South Line thereof. Containing 3300 Sq ft. N Exhibit B 0 CITY OF SHOREWOOD RESOLUTION NO. WHEREAS, Notice of Public Hearing on the proposed vacation of parts of the public right -of -way for Echo Road in the City of Shorewood, Hennepin County, Minnesota, was published in the Excelsior /Shorewood edition of the SUN NEWSPAPER on the 14"' and 21 st days of April 2011, and in the LAKER NEWSPAPER on the 16 and 23` days of April 2011; and WHEREAS, said Notice of Public Hearing was posted in three (3) locations in the City of Shorewood; and WHEREAS, the Council of the City of Shorewood heard all interested parties on the question of vacation at a Public Hearing on the 9th day of May, 2011, in the Council Chambers at the City Hall. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shorewood, Minnesota, that the portions of Echo Road, legally described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part hereof, be and hereby are vacated, subject to the following: 1. The westerly portion of vacated street be legally combined with the following property: "Lot 3, Block 1, Echo Hills, Hennepin County, Minnesota." 2. The easterly portion of vacated street be legally combined with the following property: "Lot 3, Block 2, Echo Hills, Hennepin County, Minnesota." The owners of Lot 3, Block 1 and Lot 3, Block 2, Echo Hills agree to grant drainage and utility easements as set forth in the Shorewood Planning Director's Council Action Form, dated 9 May 2011, on file in the offices of the Shorewood City Hall. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Clerk is directed to notify the County Offices in accordance with Minnesota Statutes. Exhibit C ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHORE WOOD this 9th day of May 2011. Christine Lizee, Mayor ATTEST: Brian Heck, City Administrator /Clerk Legal Description of Public Right -of -Way to be Vacated: (insert legal description) Exhibit A #5B MEETING TYPE City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting Title / Subject: Mueller — Request for Partial Right -of -Way Vacation — Galpin Lake Boulevard Meeting Date: 9 May 2011 Prepared by: Brad Nielsen Reviewed by: Patti Helgesen Attachments: Exhibit A — Site Location Map Exhibit B —Site Plan Exhibit C — Draft Resolution Policy Consideration: Should the City vacate a portion of the public right -of -way for Galpin Lake Boulevard? Background: Joe and Pam Mueller, DBA MN INBOARD, have requested vacation of a portion of Galpin Lake Boulevard (see Site Location map — Exhibit A, attached) that abuts the east side of 712 and 734 Galpin Lake Road (in Excelsior). The property is owned by Frostad Development and the Muellers intend to build a new building on the Excelsior site. Their plans include using the vacated right -of -way for site development. The westerly half of the right -of -way is located in Excelsior and the Muellers have a similar application in to the City of Excelsior. The area in question is quite unusual in that the Shorewood municipal boundary juts north across Highway 7 to include the Hilltop Restaurant property, two other parcels, and the R.O.W. in question. For all practical purposes the area and R.O.W. in question are part of Excelsior. According to the applicant, Excelsior has conducted a sketch plan review of their plans, including R.O.W. vacation, and has viewed the project favorably. Shorewood staff has reviewed the request from a transportation and utility perspective and raises no objection to the vacation. Utilities to the restaurant are located on Water Street, and MNDOT severed the connection of the street in question to Highway 7 several years ago. Financial or Budget Considerations: Vacation of the right -of -way eliminates any maintenance expense or liability to the City of Shorewood. Options: Approve the request and adopt the resolution attached hereto as Exhibit C; or deny the request. Recommendation / Action Requested: Staff recommends that the attached resolution be adopted and released to the applicant, subject to Excelsior's approval of the vacation of the westerly portion of the right -of -way. Next Steps and Timelines: Upon receipt of evidence that Excelsior has approved vacation of the westerly portion of right -of -way, the Shorewood resolution (see Exhibit C) will be released. The applicants must then record the documents with Hennepin County. Connection to Vision / Mission: This item probably falls under Excelsior's mission statement more than ours. 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 NORTH GOVT SOT 5 ' DATk OZ m G clt� (14) A= 24 °46' 201.9 18 (`�~ �- -Q" Q n 1 (n� y "r _2_1.2 3 0 1 �/`' (,� D =121 '�- T =104.8 ,` 6 "'� _ (50) - 1 F- 5yg• (55) 3.5 t= k 9 247.2 7 16.5 ._ a ._ Soo {51);0 � (16) 268 99 �� ,.�� 206.4 , W - (56) 33.5 °Gass' cn, 9? IF, D' ,,(L I 1 @. •� - 256 181 $ (31) S 9 J P 9� ' lJ O (\ Q 66 33 (57) 178.35 35.6. 2G i 40 (30) ��v - �-3 U 138.6 &,: PART OF LOT 301 (60) 40 0 32 165 0 1 in (7)1 'n 19t - . / '(25) 511t, f Y� \,0 - -- ` " 160 10 175 - - - - -- '187 <t 1 /:S 2 *0 188 165 155 �a Q' 13 31 '60 a D 30 3 2077 188 (26) V (58) (57) �� fl (6) _ 133.5 '23.4 s 160 165 o r 29 4 ; 0 26.6 Z O9.8 n 08 1 � O t? (37) ^�< (36) 165 I3o6 _ o ' (5 2 5 Ob 2 2 ' (38) P} OF (39) - �° (4)� 9 `' ° ; b�o� LOT 301 sa 19 " -- i � - -- 27 - - I' 622' ° o QY - - -r -- - ' _ (41) (40) -- - 165 M (1) ; I6� -- 125.58 ; v t (6 (' 5 " s 26 � (3) 0 7 ° ; 82.6 ol a i 30� 39 °---- - - - - -- m o - - 6 (8) _ 165 122.94; O o; II '/ D r (42) 40 25 lo g (9) " (2) IO 7 120.3 - - - - - - - - - -- �o 100 40 165 165 - IIO 1 6 7 20 110 m {— 120 //�� (3�4): (3 �� D� 1 (n ° ( O �3 (2 7) j / % e�-Jum _UV � _!__.__ `�\ 'PT of LOT 193 165 ~ 1(28 165 i 42 185 (62) (10) Q /'• }/ 191 66 ° PT OF LOT 194 9) (68) 58 165 ( 2 9) (16) 43 a 65 165 1) 57 44 €_Lj a ° I/ i m I STS\ "(15) (12) _1 165 165 w I 53 .6/ 1 01.g7 N , (22) ti _n1 2 1 ' _ o ' 165 I 165 r (13) s v I 2 o 165 "i - - - - - I / V Z a 3 f 4 (23) '= (14) 5 5, i 46 / i � i 192 0 q9' 59 (24) 1- 165 1 - - O n., 118 15= - - - -- ° 184.25 T O � � z ...:2\.26 98 91.18 lo - -- ----- T - - - - -- - 250 - - -- \85 4 m O O� / I$z ` N N (25) to 45 �O (2-43 (19) f o 36 3 39.82 - i e / 13 3 --- � - -- 41 ti6• N18 61.14 - - - - - -- o - -- -- -- 300 - -- -- -- - - -- --- 4 / z 8.3 PART OF v mi (2O) S LOT 148 6 i (2) c: ( S r } ------ - -(21) -------- - --4 350 - -_ - - -- --- - - - - -- - - / --- - - - - -- 404.5 - - - - -- i 95 ' 196 ) (3) (33) 177 ^ (,(f ' 1 °� n / a.. 1' (4) M (35) (2) ��' / M ? :(31) (30) \ _ �! 344.$7 p (37) c4u Exhibit A `�. 175 LZ1 V © Vtl ° D uV - �_N�cJ J n e (7oi „o _ (40) 1� r� �u --- � ma S �, -- ° o y �., CITY OF SHOREWOOD RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION VACATING A PORTION OF GALPIN LAKE BOULEVARD WHEREAS, Notice of Public Hearing on the proposed vacation of a portion of the public right -of -way for Galpin Lake Boulevard in the City of Shorewood, Hennepin County, Mimlesota, was published in the Excelsior /Shorewood edition of the SUN NEWSPAPER on the 14 and 21 st days of April 2011, and in the LAKER NEWSPAPER on the 16"' and 23 days of April 2011; and WHEREAS, said Notice of Public Hearing was posted in three (3) locations in the City of Shorewood; and WHEREAS, the Council of the City of Shorewood heard all interested parties on the question of vacation at a Public Hearing on the 9th day of May, 2011, in the Council Chambers at the City Hall. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shorewood, Minnesota, that the portion of Galpin Lake Road, legally described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part hereof, be and hereby is vacated. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Clerk is directed to notify the County Offices in accordance with Minnesota Statutes. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 9th day of May 2011. Christine Lizee, Mayor ATTEST: Brian Heck, City Administrator /Clerk Exhibit C Le6al Description of Public Right -of -Way to be Vacated: (insert legal description) Exhibit A #9A MEETING TYPE City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting Title / Subject: Smithtown Way storm sewer replacement Meeting Date: 5/9/11 Prepared by: James Landini Reviewed by: Attachments: Ad for Bid, Resolution Policy Consideration: None Background: The road surface of Smithtown Way, above the storm sewer pipe, was lifting every year due to frost heave. The road had risen approximately 4” over several years and created localized road drainage issues, drivability concerns and developed a longitudinal crack approximately 400 feet long. Staff enlisted the assistance of HTPO to create plans, specification and an estimate to replace the storm pipe and install additional draintile along the alignment to mitigate the groundwater conditions. Therefore the attached resolution approves the plans and specifications for such services and authorizes the advertisement for bids. If approved, the bid opening for this project is scheduled for 10:00 a.m., Wednesday, June 8, 2011. Financial or Budget Considerations: Maintenance of infrastructure not budgeted for. Estimated project cost of $130,000. The Storm Water Fund has sufficient balance to financially proceed with the project. The fund is forecast to be negative in 2013 with the current list of future projects. Options: 1.Approve the resolution accepting Plans, Specifications and Authorizing Advertisement for Bids for the Smithtown Way storm pipe replacement. 2.Direct staff to select different roads. 3.Do nothing. Recommendation / Action Requested: Staff recommends approval of the attached resolution that approves the plans and specifications for the Smithtown Way Storm sewer replacement project, and authorizes advertisement for bids. Next Steps and Timelines: Connection to Vision / Mission: Maintaining the road and storm sewer is an environmental and financial sustainability strategy. 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 RESOLUTION NO. 11-___ A RESOLUTION APPROVING SPECIFICATIONS AND ESTIMATE AND AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENTS FOR BIDS FOR SSMITHTOWN WAY STORM PIPE REPLACEMENT PROJECT 2011 WHEREAS , the Director of Public Works has identified storm sewer within the City that need replacement; and WHEREAS , HTPO has prepared Plans, Specifications and an Estimate for a project within the City of Shorewood for the Smithtown Way Storm Pipe Replacement Project 2011. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shorewood, Minnesota: 1.The Specifications and Estimate was prepared by the City Engineer for such improvement. Said Specifications and Estimate are hereby approved and shall be filed with the City Clerk. 2. The City Clerk shall prepare and cause to be inserted in the official paper and in Finance - Commerce an advertisement for bids, attached hereto as Exhibit A, upon the making of such improvement under such approved plans and specifications. The advertisement shall be published for 2 weeks, shall specify the work to be done, shall state that bids will be opened and considered by the Council at 10:00 a.m. (CST), on June 8, 2011, in the City Hall Council Chambers, and that no bids will be considered unless sealed and filed with the Clerk and accompanied by a cash deposit, cashier’s check, bid bond, or certified check payable to the Clerk for 5 percent of the amount of each bid. th ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 9 day of May, 2011. ATTEST: Christine Lizée, Mayor Brian Heck, City Administrator/Clerk ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS _______________________________________________________________________________ Smithtown Way City Project No. 11 - 05 City of Shorewood, Minnesota NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that sealed proposals will be received at the City Clerk’s Office in the City of Shorewood, Hennepin County, Minnesota at the Shorewood City Hall, 5755 Country until 10:00 A.M. on Wed., the 8th day of June, 2011 Club Road, Shorewood, Minnesota 55331, and will be publicly opened at said time and place by two or more designated officers or agents of the City of Shorewood. Said proposal to be for the furnishing of all labor and materials for the construction complete in place of the following; 125 TON TYPE SP 9.5 WEARING COURSE MIXTURE 2C 125 TON TYPE SP 9.5 NON-WEARING COURSE MIXTURE 2C 55 GAL BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR TACK COAT 636 TON CLASS 5 AGGREGATE BASE 1000 Cu. Yd. SELECT GRANULAR MATERIAL 902 LIN. FT. SURMOUNTABLE CURB 442 LIN. FT. RCP STORM SEWER 1508 LIN. FT. 4” PERF PE PIPE DRAIN Proposals arriving after the designated time will be returned unopened. The bids must be submitted on the proposal form provided in accordance with the contract documents, plans and specifications as prepared by Hansen Thorp Pellinen Olson, Inc., 7510 Market Place Drive, Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344, which are on file with the City Clerk of the City of Shorewood. Copies of Proposal Form Specifications for use by the contractors submitting a bid may be obtained from City Hall, City of Shorewood, 5755 Country Club Rd, Shorewood, Minnesota 55331, upon a deposit (non-refundable) of Twenty Five Dollars and No Cents ( $ 25.00 ) per set or a PDF file for free by email. BID FOR No Bids will be considered unless sealed and endorsed upon the outside wrapper, “ SMITHTOWN WAY “ and filed with the City Clerk of the City of Shorewood and accompanied by a cashier’s check, payable to the City of Shorewood for 5% of the amount of the bid to be forfeited as liquidated damages in the event the bid is accepted and the bidder should fail to enter promptly into a written contract and furnish the required bonds. The City of Shorewood reserves the right to reject any and all bids. No bids may be withdrawn for a period of ( 30 ) days from the date of opening the bids. Date: May 5th, 2011 BY: ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL Brian Heck, City Administrator thth PUBLISHED IN: The Finance-Commerce May 19 & May 26 ,2011 thth The “ Sun Sailor “ May 19 & May 26 ,2011 ____________________________________________________________________ Smithtown Way AFB #10A MEETING TYPE City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting Title / Subject: Yard waste and brush disposal Meeting Date: May 9, 2011 Prepared by: Brian Heck, City Administrator Reviewed by: Pat Fasching, Administrative Assistant – recycling co-coordinator Attachments: None Policy Consideration: Should the city offer some type of yard waste and brush program? Background: Council member Woodruff contacted staff inquiring about yard waste and brush disposal. He commented that a neighboring community provided a service to the residents where the residents could dispose of their yard waste and brush at a local business without cost. He asked staff to look into this and bring to council for review and consideration. Staff contacted this and other communities regarding their programs for collection and disposal of this material. Many communities offered some type of program. The programs offered at no cost to the residents were operated by the city. Programs that involved a private entity resulted in a charge to the resident on their quarterly utility bill. Below is a sampling of the programs offered in neighboring communities. Orono and Minnetonka accept yard waste (Orono does not accept brush) at their public works facilities. Residents dump their own materials, including “debagging.” The material is composted and residents are allowed to take the compost. Minnetonka also accepts brush that they chip and leave for residents to take. Again, this is at no cost to residents. The City of Minnetonka budgets just over $100,000 to operate their drop-off and chipping program. Tonka Bay’s contract with Allied Waste includes collection of brush and yard waste. The cost of this program is included in the utility bill. Excelsior residents are charged for the fall clean-up program and during the summer if residents want to dispose of brush or yard waste, they must go to city hall and prepay for the collection. Mound contracts with a local business for disposal of yard waste. Brush is charged directly to the resident dropping off the material. The City pays the business an upfront fee of $12,500 per year. This allows residents to drop-off up to 2,500 cubic yards of material. The business tracks the amount residents deliver and, at the end of the year, if less than 2,500 cubic yards is brought in, the business rebates the city. If more is dropped off, the city receives an additional charge for that amount. The City assess residents a fee on their utility bill to cover the cost of this program 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 All of the licensed refuse haulers in Shorewood provide yard waste and brush collection and those residents who wish to have this service can contact their hauler to arrange this collection. Financial or Budget Considerations: The financial impact of implementing such a program is unknown and is contingent on the program components and design, with the exception of residents contracting with their own hauler, in which case, there is no financial impact. Options: Staff is looking for some direction. That being said, there are a few options: 1)Investigate a Mound style program where the city contracts with a business to accept material from residents approximate cost - $13,000; 2)Investigate a program similar to Tonka Bay and Excelsior where a single source hauler is contracted and fees are added to the utility bill or billed directly to the resident by the contracted hauler; 3)Consider allowing residents to drop off material at a city facility. Space and equipment to compost and/or handle brush are considerations as well as ensuring regular solid waste is not deposited; 4)Promote and encourage residents who desire such a collection to contact and work with their current hauler. Recommendation / Action Requested: Staff recommends the city encourage residents who desire the service to contact their hauler while at the same time, incorporate this component in a more complete discussion on solid waste management in the city, which might include a municipal operated yard waste composting operation and brush chipping similar to Orono and Minnetonka. Next Steps and Timelines: Staff will proceed in accordance with council direction. Connection to Vision / Mission: quality public services and promoting a healthy environment #10B MEETING TYPE City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting Title / Subject: Tobacco Ordinance Amendments Meeting Date: May 9, 2011 Prepared by: Jean Panchyshyn, Deputy Clerk Reviewed by: Timothy J. Keane, City Attorney and Brian Heck, City Administrator Attachments: Background materials, Ordinance & Resolution authorizing publication of a summary of the ordinance. Policy Consideration: Updates to City Code Chapter 302 Sale of Tobacco, as it relates to changes in the state law regarding the sale of tobacco products. Background: At its September 27, 2010 work session, council reviewed proposed changes to the city’s tobacco ordinance. The proposed changes are outlined in the attached email from then City Attorney, Mary Tietjen. An excerpt of the September 27, 2010 Work Session minutes is attached. The changes focused on updating the definitions of tobacco, tobacco products and tobacco related devices. Staff provided a 30-day notice to the three licensed establishments that the proposed changes would be considered at the November 8, 2010 council meeting; however, the changes were not considered at that time due to staff oversight. Staff has provided a new 30-day notice to the three licensed establishments regarding the proposed changes to be considered at tonight’s meeting. A copy of that notice, along with the proposed ordinance amendments with new language underlined and deleted language in strikethrough is attached. Also attached is a clean copy of the Ordinance and a Resolution authorizing summary publication of the Ordinance. Staff has not received feedback from the three licensed establishments regarding the proposed changes. Financial or Budget Considerations: There will be a cost for publishing a summary of the proposed ordinance in the legal paper; the amended ordinance will be part of the annual code book recodification expense in 2012. Options: 1)Adopt the Draft Ordinance and Resolution as presented 2)Adopt the Draft Ordinance and Resolution, with additional changes as identified 3)Do not adopt the Draft Ordinance or Resolution Recommendation / Action Requested: Adopt the Draft Ordinance and Resolution as provided. Next Steps and Timelines: Staff will notify the licensed establishments of the Ordinance amendments and publish the summary of the ordinance. Connection to Vision / Mission: Providing 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 CHAPTER 302 SALE OF TOBACCO Section 302.01 Purpose 302.02 Definitions and interpretations 302.03 License 302.04 Fees 302.05 Basis for denial of license 302.06 Prohibited sales 302.07 Vending machines 302.08 Self-service sales 302.09 Responsibility 302.10 Compliance checks and inspections 302.11 Other illegal acts 302.12 Violations and hearing process 302.13 Penalties 302.14 Exceptions and defenses 302.01 PURPOSE . Because the city recognizes that many persons under the age of 18 years purchase or otherwise obtain, possess and use tobacco, tobacco products and tobacco-related devices, and the sales, possession and use are violations of both state and federal laws; and because studies, which are hereby accepted and adopted, have shown that most smokers begin smoking before they have reached the age of 18 years and that those persons who reach the age of 18 years without having started smoking are significantly less likely to begin smoking and because smoking has been shown to be the cause of several serious health problems which subsequently place a financial burden on all levels of government; this chapter shall be intended to regulate the possession and use of tobacco, tobacco products and tobacco-related devices for the purpose of enforcing and furthering existing laws, to protect minors against the serious effects associated with the illegal use of tobacco, tobacco products and tobacco-related devices and to further the official public policy of the State of Minnesota in regard to preventing young people from starting to smoke as stated in M.S. section 144.391. ' 302-1 374931v2 MDT SH230-42 Shorewood - Business Regulations 302.02 302.02 302.02 DEFINITIONS AND INTERPRETATIONS . For the purpose of this chapter, the following definitions shall apply unless the context clearly indicates or requires a different meaning. COMPLIANCE CHECKS . The system the city uses to investigate and ensure that those authorized to sell tobacco, tobacco products and tobacco-related devices are following and COMPLIANCE CHECKS complying with the requirements of this chapter. shall involve the use COMPLIANCE CHECKS of minors as authorized by this chapter. shall also mean the use of minors who attempt to purchase tobacco, tobacco products or tobacco-related devices for educational, research and training purposes as authorized by state and federal laws. COMPLIANCE CHECKS may also be conducted by other units of government for the purpose of enforcing appropriate federal, state or local laws and regulations relating to tobacco, tobacco products and tobacco-related devices. INDIVIDUALLY PACKAGED . The practice of selling any tobacco or tobacco product wrapped individually for sale. Individually wrapped tobacco and tobacco products shall include, but not be limited to, single cigarette packs, single bags or cans of loose tobacco in any form and single cans or other packaging of snuff or chewing tobacco. Cartons or other packaging containing more than a single pack or other container as described in this subdivision shall not be considered individually packaged. LOOSIES . The common term used to refer to a single or individually packaged cigarette. MINOR . Any natural person who has not yet reached the age of 18 years. MOVEABLE PLACE OF BUSINESS . Any form of business operated out of a truck, van, automobile or other type of vehicle or transportable shelter and not a fixed address store front or other permanent type of structure authorized for sales transactions. RETAIL ESTABLISHMENT . Any place of business where tobacco, tobacco products or tobacco-related devices are available for sale to the general public. Retail establishments shall include, but not be limited to, grocery stores, convenience stores and restaurants. SALE . Any transfer of goods for money, trade, barter or other consideration. SELF-SERVICE MERCHANDISING . Open displays of tobacco, tobacco products or tobacco- related devices in any manner where any person shall have access to the tobacco, tobacco products or tobacco-related devices, without the assistance or intervention of the licensee or the licensee=’s employee. The assistance or intervention shall entail the actual physical exchange of the tobacco, tobacco product or tobacco-related device between the customer and the licensee or employee. Self-service merchandising shall not include vending machines. 302-2 374931v2 MDT SH230-42 Sale of Tobacco 302.02 302.03 TOBACCOTOBACCO PRODUCTS or . Any substance or item containing tobacco leaf, including but not limited to cigarettes; cigars; pipe tobacco; snuff; fine cut or other chewing tobacco; cheroots; stogies; perique; granulated, plug cut, crimp cut, ready-rubbed and other smoking tobacco; snuff flowers; cavendish; shorts; plug and twist tobaccos; dipping tobaccos; refuse scraps, clippings, cuttings and sweepings of tobacco; and other kinds and forms of tobacco leaf prepared in the manner as to be suitable for chewing, sniffing or smokingCigarettes and any product containing, made, or derived from tobacco that is intended for human consumption, whether chewed, smoked, absorbed, dissolved, inhaled, snorted, sniffed, or ingested by any other means, or any component, part, or accessory of a tobacco product; cigars; cheroots; stogies; perique; granulated, plug cut, crimp cut, ready rubbed, and other smoking tobacco; snuff; snuff flour; cavendish; plug and twist tobacco; fine cut and other chewing tobaccos; shorts; refuse scraps, clippings, cuttings and sweepings of tobacco; and other kinds and forms of tobacco. Tobacco excludes any tobacco product that has been approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration for sale as a tobacco cessation product, as a tobacco dependence product, or for other medical purposes, and is being marketed and sold solely for such an approved purpose. TOBACCO-RELATED DEVICES . Any tobacco product as well as aA pipe, rolling paper or other device intentionally designed or intended to be used in a manner which enables the chewing, stuffing or smoking of tobacco or tobacco products to be chewed, stuffed, smoked, absorbed, dissolved, inhaled, snorted, sniffed, or ingested. VENDING MACHINE . Any mechanical, electric or electronic, or other type of device which dispenses tobacco, tobacco products or tobacco-related devices upon the insertion of money, tokens or other form of payment directly into the machine by the person seeking to purchase the tobacco, tobacco product or tobacco-related device. (1987 Code, § 302.02) 302.03 LICENSE . No person shall sell or offer to sell any tobacco, tobacco products or tobacco-related device without first having obtained a license to do so from the city. Subd. 1. Application. An application for a license to sell tobacco, tobacco products or tobacco-related devices shall be made on a form provided by the city. The application shall contain the full name of the applicant, the applicant’s residential and business addresses and telephone numbers, the name of the business for which the license is sought and any additional information the city deems necessary. Upon receipt of a completed application, the City Administrator/Clerk shall forward the application to the City Council for action at its next regularly scheduled meeting. If the City Administrator/Clerk shall determine that an application is incomplete, he or she shall return the application to the applicant with notice of the information necessary to make the application complete. 302-3 374931v2 MDT SH230-42 Sale of Tobacco 302.03 302.04 Subd. 2. Action. The city may either approve or deny the license or it may delay action for the reasonable period of time as necessary to complete any investigation of the application or the applicant it deems necessary. If the city shall approve the license, the City Administrator/Clerk shall issue the license to the applicant. If the city denies the license, notice of the denial shall be given to the applicant along with notice of the applicant’s right to appeal the decision. Subd. 3. Term. All licenses issued under this chapter shall expire on the last day of October of each year. Subd. 4. Revocation or suspension. Any license issued under this chapter may be revoked or suspended as provided in 301.12a penalty for a violation. No suspension or revocation ' may take effect until the licensee has received notice, either personally or by mail, of the opportunity for a hearing pursuant to section 302.12 of this chapter. Subd. 5. Transfers. All licenses issued under this chapter shall be valid only on the premises for which the license was issued and only for the person to whom the license was issued. No transfer of any license to another location or person shall be valid without the prior approval of the City Council. Subd. 6. Moveable place of business. No license shall be issued to a moveable place of business. Only fixed location businesses shall be eligible to be licensed under this chapter. Subd. 7. Display. All licenses shall be posted and displayed in plain view of the general public on the licensed premises. Subd. 8. Renewals. The renewal of a license issued under this section shall be handled in the same manner as the original application. The request for a renewal shall be made at least 30 days but no more than 60 days before the expiration of the current license. The issuance of a license issued under this chapter shall be considered a privilege and not an absolute right of the applicant and shall not entitle the holder to an automatic renewal of the license. (1987 Code, § 302.03) 302.04 FEES . No license shall be issued under this chapter until the appropriate license fee shall be paid in full. The fee for a license shall be as provided in section 1301.02 of this code. (1987 Code, § 302.04) 302-4 374931v2 MDT SH230-42 Sale of Tobacco 302.05 302.06 302.05 BASIS FOR DENIAL OF LICENSE . Subd. 1. The following shall be grounds for denying the issuance or renewal of a license under this chapter; however, except as may otherwise be provided by law, the existence of any particular ground for denial does not mean that the city must deny the license. Subd. 2. If a license is mistakenly issued or renewed to a person, it shall be revoked upon the discovery that the person was ineligible for the license under this section. a. The applicant is under the age of 18 years; b. The applicant has been convicted within the past five years of any violation of a federal, state or local law, ordinance provision or other regulation relating to tobacco or tobacco products or tobacco-related devices; c. The applicant has had a license to sell tobacco, tobacco products or tobacco-related devices revoked within the preceding 12 months of the date of the application; d. The applicant fails to provide any information required on the application or provides false or misleading information; e. The applicant is prohibited by federal, state or other local law, ordinance or other regulation from holding a license. Subd. 2. If a license is mistakenly issued or renewed to a person, it shall be revoked upon the discovery that the person was ineligible for the license under this section. (1987 Code, § 302.05) 302.06 PROHIBITED SALES . It shall be a violation of this chapter for any person to sell or offer to sell any tobacco, tobacco product or tobacco-related device: Subd. 1. To any person under the age of 18 years; Subd. 2. By means of any type of vending machine, except as may otherwise be provided in this chapter; Subd. 3. By means of self-service methods whereby the customer does not need to make a verbal or written request to an employee of the licensed premises in order to receive the tobacco, tobacco product or tobacco-related device and whereby there is not a physical exchange of the tobacco, tobacco product or tobacco-related device between the licensee or the licensee’s employee and the customer; 302-5 374931v2 MDT SH230-42 Sale of Tobacco 302.06 302.08 Subd. 4. By means of loosies as defined in this chapter; Subd. 5. Containing opium, morphine, jimson weed, bella donna, strychnos, cocaine, marijuana or other deleterious, hallucinogenic, toxic or controlled substances except nicotine and other substances found naturally in tobacco or added as part of an otherwise lawful manufacturing process; Subd. 6. By any other means, to any other person, on in any other manner or form prohibited by federal, state or other local law, ordinance provision or other regulation. (1987 Code, § 302.06) 302.07 VENDING MACHINES . It shall be unlawful for any person licensed under this chapter to allow the sale of tobacco, tobacco products or tobacco-related devices by the means of a vending machine unless an employee of the licensed establishment at all times is required to activate the machine for each sale. (1987 Code, § 302.07) Penalty, see § 104.01 302.08 SELF-SERVICE SALES . It shall be unlawful for a licensee under this chapter to allow the sale of tobacco, tobacco products or tobacco-related devices by any means whereby the customer may have access to the items without having to request the item from the licensee or the licensee’s employee and whereby there is not a physical exchange of the tobacco, tobacco product or the tobacco-related device between the licensee or his or her clerk and the customer. All tobacco, tobacco products and tobacco-related treated devices shall either be stored behind a counter or other area not freely accessible to customers or in a case or other storage unit not left open and accessible to the general public. Any retailer selling tobacco, tobacco products or tobacco-related devices at the time this chapter is adopted shall comply with this section within five days. (1987 Code, § 302.08) Penalty, see § 104.01 302-6 374931v2 MDT SH230-42 Sale of Tobacco 302.09 302.11 302.09 RESPONSIBILITY . All licensees under this chapter shall be responsible for the actions of their employees in regard to the sale of tobacco, tobacco products or tobacco-related devices on the licensed premises, and the sale of an item by an employee shall be considered a sale by the license holder. Nothing in this section shall be construed as prohibiting the city from also subjecting the clerkan employee of the licensee to whatever penalties are appropriate under this section, state or federal law or other applicable law or regulation. (1987 Code, § 302.09) 302.10 COMPLIANCE CHECKS AND INSPECTIONS . All licensed premises shall be open to inspection by the Police Department or other authorized city official during regular business hours. From time to time, but at least once per year, the city shall conduct compliance checks by engaging, with the written consent of their parents or guardians, minors over the age of 15 years but less than 18 years, to enter the licensed premises to attempt to purchase tobacco, tobacco products or tobacco-related devices. Minors used for the purpose of compliance checks shall be supervised by designated law enforcement officers or other designated city personnel. Minors used for compliance checks shall not be guilty of the unlawful purchase or attempted purchase, nor the unlawful possession of tobacco, tobacco products or tobacco-related devices when the items are obtained or attempted to be obtained as a part of the compliance check. No minor used in compliance checks shall attempt to use a false identification misrepresenting the minor’s age, and all minors lawfully engaged in a compliance check shall answer all questions about the minor’s age asked by the licensee or his or her employee and shall produce any identification, if any exists, for which he or she is asked. Nothing in this section shall prohibit compliance checks authorized by state or federal laws for educational, research or training purposes or required for the enforcement of a particular state or federal law. (1987 Code, § 302.10) 302.11 OTHER ILLEGAL ACTS . Unless otherwise provided, the following acts shall be a violation of this chapter. Subd. 1. Illegal sales to minors. It shall be a violation of this chapter for any person to sell or otherwise provide any tobacco, tobacco product or tobacco-related device to any minor. Subd. 2. Illegal possession. It shall be a violation of this chapter for any minor to have in his or her possession any tobacco, tobacco product or tobacco-related device. This subdivision shall not apply to minors lawfully involved in a compliance check. 302-7 374931v2 MDT SH230-42 Sale of Tobacco 302.11 302.12 Subd. 3. Illegal use. It shall be a violation of this chapter for any minor to smoke, chew, sniff or otherwise use any tobacco, tobacco product or tobacco-related device. Subd. 4. Illegal procurement. It shall be a violation of this chapter for any minor to purchase or attempt to purchase or otherwise obtain any tobacco, tobacco product or tobacco-related device, and it shall be a violation of this chapter for any person to purchase or otherwise obtain the items on behalf of a minor. It shall further be a violation for any person soto coerce or attempt to coerce a minor to illegally purchase or otherwise obtain or use any tobacco, tobacco product or tobacco-related device. This subdivision shall not apply to minors lawfully involved in a compliance check. Subd. 5. Use of false identification. It shall be a violation of this chapter for any minor to attempt to disguise his or her true age by the use of a false form of identification, whether the identification is that of another person or one on which the age of the person has been modified or tampered with to represent an age older than the actual age of the person. Subd. 6. Illegal sales by minors. It shall be a violation of this chapter: a. For anyone under the age of 18 to sell tobacco, tobacco products or tobacco-related devices; b. For a licensee to cause or permit anyone under the age of 18 to sell tobacco, tobacco products or tobacco-related devices. (1987 Code, § 302.11) Penalty, see § 104.01 302.12 VIOLATIONS AND HEARING PROCESS . Subd. 1. Notice. Upon discovery of a suspected violations, the alleged violator shall be issued, either personally or by mail, a citation that sets forth the alleged violation and which shall inform the alleged violator of his or her right to be heard on the accusation. Subd. 2. Hearings. If a person accused of violating this section so requests, a hearing shall be scheduled, the time and place of which shall be published and provided to the accused violator. Subd. 3. Hearing officer. An Administrative Law Judge from the State Office of Hearing Examiners shall serve as the A hearing officer designated by the city shall serve as the hearing officer. 302-8 374931v2 MDT SH230-42 Sale of Tobacco 302.12 302.13 Subd. 4. Decision. If the hearing officer determines that a violation of this chapter did occur, that decision along with the hearing officer’s reasons for finding a violation and the penalty to be imposed under section 302.13 of this chapter shall be recorded in writings, a copy of which shall be provided to the accused violator. Likewise, if the hearing officer finds that no violation occurred or finds grounds for not imposing any penalty, the findings shall be recorded and a copy provided to the acquitted accused violator. Subd. 5. Appeals. Appeals of any decision made by the hearing officer shall be filed in the district court for the jurisdiction of the city in which the alleged violation occurred. Subd. 6. Misdemeanor prosecution. Nothing in this chapter shall prohibit the city from seeking prosecution as a misdemeanor for any alleged violation of this chapter. If the city elects to seek misdemeanor prosecution, no administrative penalty shall be imposed. Subd. 7.Subd. 6. Continued violation. Each violation, and every day in which a violation occurs or continues, shall constitute a separate offense. (1987 Code, § 302.12) Penalty, see § 104.01 302.13 PENALTIES. Subd. 1. Licensees. Any licensee found to have violated this chapter, or whose employee shall have violated this chapter, shall be charged an administrative fine as provided in section 1301.02 of this code. In addition, after the third offense, the license shall be suspended for not less than seven days. Subd. 2. Other individuals. Other individuals, other than minors regulated by subdivision 3 of this section, found to be in violation of this chapter shall be charged an administrative fee as provided in section 1301.02 of this code. Subd. 3. Minors. Minors found in unlawful possession of or who unlawfully purchase or attempt to purchase tobacco, tobacco products or tobacco-related devices shall may be subject to enrollment and evidence of successful completion of a tobacco education course provided by Independent School District (Minnetonka) 276 or Independent School District 277 (Westonka) for the first offense and subject to a fine of $100 for each offense subsequent. 302-9 374931v2 MDT SH230-42 Sale of Tobacco 302.13 302.14 Subd. 4. Misdemeanor. Nothing in this sectionchapter shall prohibit the city from seeking prosecution as a misdemeanor for any violation of this chapter. If the city elects to seek misdemeanor prosecution, no administrative penalty shall be imposed. (1987 Code, § 302.13) Penalty, see § 104.01 302.14 EXCEPTIONS AND DEFENSES . Nothing in this chapter shall prevent the providing of tobacco, tobacco products or tobacco- related devices to a minor as part of a lawfully recognized religious, spiritual or cultural ceremony. It shall be an affirmative defense to the violation of this chapter for a person to have reasonably relied on proof of age as described by state law. (1987 Code, § 302.14) 302-10 374931v2 MDT SH230-42 CITY OF SHOREWOOD ORDINANCE NO. 475 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE SHOREWOOD CITY CODE TO REPLACE EXISTING CHAPTER 302 IN ITS ENTIRETY WITH A REVISED CHAPTER 302 (SALE OF TOBACCO) Section 1 . Chapter 302 (Sale of Tobacco) of the Shorewood City Code is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with: “CHAPTER 302 SALE OF TOBACCO Section 302.01 Purpose 302.02 Definitions 302.03 License 302.04 Fees 302.05 Basis for denial of license 302.06 Prohibited sales 302.07 Vending machines 302.08 Self-service sales 302.09 Responsibility 302.10 Compliance checks and inspections 302.11 Other illegal acts 302.12 Violations and hearing process 302.13 Penalties 302.14 Exceptions and defenses 302.01 PURPOSE . Because the city recognizes that many persons under the age of 18 years purchase or otherwise obtain, possess and use tobacco, and tobacco-related devices, and the sales, possession and use are violations of both state and federal laws; and because studies, which are hereby accepted and adopted, have shown that most smokers begin smoking before they have reached the age of 18 years and that those persons who reach the age of 18 years without having started smoking are significantly less likely to begin smoking and because smoking has been shown to be the cause of several serious health problems which subsequently place a financial burden on all levels of government; this chapter shall be intended to regulate the possession and use of tobacco, and tobacco-related devices for the purpose of enforcing and furthering existing laws, to protect minors against the serious effects associated with the illegal use of tobacco, and tobacco- related devices and to further the official public policy of the State of Minnesota in regard to preventing young people from starting to smoke as stated in M.S. section 144.391. Shorewood - Business Regulations 302.02 302.02 302.02 DEFINITIONS . For the purpose of this chapter, the following definitions shall apply unless the context clearly indicates or requires a different meaning. COMPLIANCE CHECKS . The system the city uses to investigate and ensure that those authorized to sell tobacco, and tobacco-related devices are following and complying with the COMPLIANCE CHECKS requirements of this chapter. shall involve the use of minors as COMPLIANCE CHECKS authorized by this chapter. shall also mean the use of minors who attempt to purchase tobacco, or tobacco-related devices for educational, research and training COMPLIANCE CHECKS purposes as authorized by state and federal laws. may also be conducted by other units of government for the purpose of enforcing appropriate federal, state or local laws and regulations relating to tobacco, and tobacco-related devices. INDIVIDUALLY PACKAGED . The practice of selling any tobacco wrapped individually for sale. Individually wrapped tobacco shall include, but not be limited to, single cigarette packs, single bags or cans of loose tobacco in any form and single cans or other packaging of snuff or chewing tobacco. Cartons or other packaging containing more than a single pack or other container as described in this subdivision shall not be considered individually packaged. LOOSIES . The common term used to refer to a single or individually packaged cigarette. MINOR . Any natural person who has not yet reached the age of 18 years. MOVEABLE PLACE OF BUSINESS . Any form of business operated out of a truck, van, automobile or other type of vehicle or transportable shelter and not a fixed address store front or other permanent type of structure authorized for sales transactions. RETAIL ESTABLISHMENT . Any place of business where tobacco, or tobacco-related devices are available for sale to the general public. Retail establishments shall include, but not be limited to, grocery stores, convenience stores and restaurants. SALE . Any transfer of goods for money, trade, barter or other consideration. SELF-SERVICE MERCHANDISING . Open displays of tobacco, or tobacco-related devices in any manner where any person shall have access to the tobacco, or tobacco-related devices, without the assistance or intervention of the licensee or the licensee’s employee. The assistance or intervention shall entail the actual physical exchange of the tobacco, or tobacco-related device between the customer and the licensee or employee. Self-service merchandising shall not include vending machines. 302-2 Sale of Tobacco 302.02 302.03 TOBACCO . Cigarettes and any product containing, made, or derived from tobacco that is intended for human consumption, whether chewed, smoked, absorbed, dissolved, inhaled, snorted, sniffed, or ingested by any other means, or any component, part, or accessory of a tobacco product; cigars; cheroots; stogies; perique; granulated, plug cut, crimp cut, ready rubbed, and other smoking tobacco; snuff; snuff flour; cavendish; plug and twist tobacco; fine cut and other chewing tobaccos; shorts; refuse scraps, clippings, cuttings and sweepings of tobacco; and other kinds and forms of tobacco. Tobacco excludes any tobacco product that has been approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration for sale as a tobacco cessation product, as a tobacco dependence product, or for other medical purposes, and is being marketed and sold solely for such an approved purpose. TOBACCO-RELATED DEVICES . A pipe, rolling paper or other device intentionally designed or intended to be used in a manner which enables the chewing, tobacco to be chewed, stuffed, smoked, absorbed, dissolved, inhaled, snorted, sniffed, or ingested. VENDING MACHINE . Any mechanical, electric or electronic, or other type of device which dispenses tobacco, or tobacco-related devices upon the insertion of money, tokens or other form of payment directly into the machine by the person seeking to purchase the tobacco, or tobacco- related device. (1987 Code, § 302.02) 302.03 LICENSE . No person shall sell or offer to sell any tobacco, or tobacco-related device without first having obtained a license to do so from the city. Subd. 1. Application. An application for a license to sell tobacco, or tobacco-related devices shall be made on a form provided by the city. The application shall contain the full name of the applicant, the applicant’s residential and business addresses and telephone numbers, the name of the business for which the license is sought and any additional information the city deems necessary. Upon receipt of a completed application, the City Administrator/Clerk shall forward the application to the City Council for action at its next regularly scheduled meeting. If the City Administrator/Clerk shall determine that an application is incomplete, he or she shall return the application to the applicant with notice of the information necessary to make the application complete. 302-3 Sale of Tobacco 302.03 302.04 Subd. 2. Action. The city may either approve or deny the license or it may delay action for the reasonable period of time as necessary to complete any investigation of the application or the applicant it deems necessary. If the city shall approve the license, the City Administrator/Clerk shall issue the license to the applicant. If the city denies the license, notice of the denial shall be given to the applicant along with notice of the applicant’s right to appeal the decision. Subd. 3. Term. All licenses issued under this chapter shall expire on the last day of October of each year. Subd. 4. Revocation or suspension. Any license issued under this chapter may be revoked or suspended as a penalty for a violation. No suspension or revocation may take effect until the licensee has received notice, either personally or by mail, of the opportunity for a hearing pursuant to section 302.12 of this chapter. Subd. 5. Transfers. All licenses issued under this chapter shall be valid only on the premises for which the license was issued and only for the person to whom the license was issued. No transfer of any license to another location or person shall be valid without the prior approval of the City Council. Subd. 6. Moveable place of business. No license shall be issued to a moveable place of business. Only fixed location businesses shall be eligible to be licensed under this chapter. Subd. 7. Display. All licenses shall be posted and displayed in plain view of the general public on the licensed premises. Subd. 8. Renewals. The renewal of a license issued under this section shall be handled in the same manner as the original application. The request for a renewal shall be made at least 30 days but no more than 60 days before the expiration of the current license. The issuance of a license issued under this chapter shall be considered a privilege and not an absolute right of the applicant and shall not entitle the holder to an automatic renewal of the license. (1987 Code, § 302.03) 302.04 FEES . No license shall be issued under this chapter until the appropriate license fee shall be paid in full. The fee for a license shall be as provided in section 1301.02 of this code. (1987 Code, § 302.04) 302-4 Sale of Tobacco 302.05 302.06 302.05 BASIS FOR DENIAL OF LICENSE . Subd. 1. The following shall be grounds for denying the issuance or renewal of a license under this chapter; however, except as may otherwise be provided by law, the existence of any particular ground for denial does not mean that the city must deny the license. a. The applicant is under the age of 18 years; b. The applicant has been convicted within the past five years of any violation of a federal, state or local law, ordinance provision or other regulation relating to tobacco or tobacco- related devices; c. The applicant has had a license to sell tobacco or tobacco-related devices revoked within the preceding 12 months of the date of the application; d. The applicant fails to provide any information required on the application or provides false or misleading information; e. The applicant is prohibited by federal, state or other local law, ordinance or other regulation from holding a license. Subd. 2. If a license is mistakenly issued or renewed to a person, it shall be revoked upon the discovery that the person was ineligible for the license under this section. (1987 Code, § 302.05) 302.06 PROHIBITED SALES . It shall be a violation of this chapter for any person to sell or offer to sell any tobacco, or tobacco- related device: Subd. 1. To any person under the age of 18 years; Subd. 2. By means of any type of vending machine, except as may otherwise be provided in this chapter; Subd. 3. By means of self-service methods whereby the customer does not need to make a verbal or written request to an employee of the licensed premises in order to receive the tobacco, or tobacco-related device and whereby there is not a physical exchange of the tobacco, or tobacco-related device between the licensee or the licensee’s employee and the customer; 302-5 Sale of Tobacco 302.06 302.08 Subd. 4. By means of loosies as defined in this chapter; Subd. 5. Containing opium, morphine, jimson weed, bella donna, strychnos, cocaine, marijuana or other deleterious, hallucinogenic, toxic or controlled substances except nicotine and other substances found naturally in tobacco or added as part of an otherwise lawful manufacturing process; Subd. 6. By any other means, to any other person, on in any other manner or form prohibited by federal, state or other local law, ordinance provision or other regulation. (1987 Code, § 302.06) 302.07 VENDING MACHINES . It shall be unlawful for any person licensed under this chapter to allow the sale of tobacco, or tobacco-related devices by the means of a vending machine unless an employee of the licensed establishment at all times is required to activate the machine for each sale. (1987 Code, § 302.07) Penalty, see § 104.01 302.08 SELF-SERVICE SALES . It shall be unlawful for a licensee under this chapter to allow the sale of tobacco, or tobacco-related devices by any means whereby the customer may have access to the items without having to request the item from the licensee or the licensee’s employee and whereby there is not a physical exchange of the tobacco, or the tobacco-related device between the licensee or his or her clerk and the customer. All tobacco, and tobacco-related devices shall either be stored behind a counter or other area not freely accessible to customers or in a case or other storage unit not left open and accessible to the general public. (1987 Code, § 302.08) Penalty, see § 104.01 302-6 Sale of Tobacco 302.09 302.11 302.09 RESPONSIBILITY . All licensees under this chapter shall be responsible for the actions of their employees in regard to the sale of tobacco, or tobacco-related devices on the licensed premises, and the sale of an item by an employee shall be considered a sale by the license holder. Nothing in this section shall be construed as prohibiting the city from also subjecting an employee of the licensee to whatever penalties are appropriate under this section, state or federal law or other applicable law or regulation. (1987 Code, § 302.09) 302.10 COMPLIANCE CHECKS AND INSPECTIONS . All licensed premises shall be open to inspection by the Police Department or other authorized city official during regular business hours. From time to time, but at least once per year, the city shall conduct compliance checks by engaging, with the written consent of their parents or guardians, minors over the age of 15 years but less than 18 years, to enter the licensed premises to attempt to purchase tobacco, or tobacco-related devices. Minors used for the purpose of compliance checks shall be supervised by designated law enforcement officers or other designated city personnel. Minors used for compliance checks shall not be guilty of the unlawful purchase or attempted purchase, nor the unlawful possession of tobacco, or tobacco-related devices when the items are obtained or attempted to be obtained as a part of the compliance check. No minor used in compliance checks shall attempt to use a false identification misrepresenting the minor’s age, and all minors lawfully engaged in a compliance check shall answer all questions about the minor’s age asked by the licensee or his or her employee and shall produce any identification, if any exists, for which he or she is asked. Nothing in this section shall prohibit compliance checks authorized by state or federal laws for educational, research or training purposes or required for the enforcement of a particular state or federal law. (1987 Code, § 302.10) 302.11 OTHER ILLEGAL ACTS . Unless otherwise provided, the following acts shall be a violation of this chapter. Subd. 1. Illegal sales to minors. It shall be a violation of this chapter for any person to sell or otherwise provide any tobacco, or tobacco-related device to any minor. Subd. 2. Illegal possession. It shall be a violation of this chapter for any minor to have in his or her possession any tobacco, or tobacco-related device. This subdivision shall not apply to minors lawfully involved in a compliance check. 302-7 Sale of Tobacco 302.11 302.12 Subd. 3. Illegal use. It shall be a violation of this chapter for any minor to smoke, chew, sniff or otherwise use any tobacco, or tobacco-related device. Subd. 4. Illegal procurement. It shall be a violation of this chapter for any minor to purchase or attempt to purchase or otherwise obtain any tobacco, or tobacco-related device, and it shall be a violation of this chapter for any person to purchase or otherwise obtain the items on behalf of a minor. It shall further be a violation for any person to coerce or attempt to coerce a minor to illegally purchase or otherwise obtain or use any tobacco, or tobacco-related device. This subdivision shall not apply to minors lawfully involved in a compliance check. Subd. 5. Use of false identification. It shall be a violation of this chapter for any minor to attempt to disguise his or her true age by the use of a false form of identification, whether the identification is that of another person or one on which the age of the person has been modified or tampered with to represent an age older than the actual age of the person. Subd. 6. Illegal sales by minors. It shall be a violation of this chapter: a. For anyone under the age of 18 to sell tobacco, or tobacco-related devices; b. For a licensee to cause or permit anyone under the age of 18 to sell tobacco, or tobacco- related devices. (1987 Code, § 302.11) Penalty, see § 104.01 302.12 VIOLATIONS AND HEARING PROCESS . Subd. 1. Notice. Upon discovery of a suspected violation, the alleged violator shall be issued, either personally or by mail, a citation that sets forth the alleged violation and which shall inform the alleged violator of his or her right to be heard on the accusation. Subd. 2. Hearings. If a person accused of violating this section so requests, a hearing shall be scheduled, the time and place of which shall be provided to the accused violator. Subd. 3. Hearing officer. A hearing officer designated by the city shall serve as the hearing officer. 302-8 Sale of Tobacco 302.12 302.13 Subd. 4. Decision. If the hearing officer determines that a violation of this chapter did occur, that decision along with the hearing officer’s reasons for finding a violation and the penalty to be imposed under section 302.13 of this chapter shall be recorded in writing, a copy of which shall be provided to the accused violator. Likewise, if the hearing officer finds that no violation occurred or finds grounds for not imposing any penalty, the findings shall be recorded and a copy provided to the acquitted accused violator. Subd. 5. Appeals. Appeals of any decision made by the hearing officer shall be filed in the district court for the jurisdiction of the city in which the alleged violation occurred. Subd. 6. Continued violation. Each violation, and every day in which a violation occurs or continues, shall constitute a separate offense. (1987 Code, § 302.12) Penalty, see § 104.01 302.13 PENALTIES. Subd. 1. Licensees. Any licensee found to have violated this chapter, or whose employee shall have violated this chapter, shall be charged an administrative fine as provided in section 1301.02 of this code. In addition, after the third offense, the license shall be suspended for not less than seven days. Subd. 2. Other individuals. Other individuals, other than minors regulated by subdivision 3 of this section, found to be in violation of this chapter shall be charged an administrative fee as provided in section 1301.02 of this code. Subd. 3. Minors. Minors found in unlawful possession of or who unlawfully purchase or attempt to purchase tobacco, tobacco products or tobacco-related devices may be subject to enrollment and evidence of successful completion of a tobacco education course provided by Independent School District (Minnetonka) 276 or Independent School District 277 (Westonka) for the first offense and subject to a fine of $100 for each offense subsequent. 302-9 Sale of Tobacco 302.13 302.14 Subd. 4. Misdemeanor. Nothing in this chapter shall prohibit the city from seeking prosecution as a misdemeanor for any violation of this chapter. If the city elects to seek misdemeanor prosecution, no administrative penalty shall be imposed. (1987 Code, § 302.13) Penalty, see § 104.01 302.14 EXCEPTIONS AND DEFENSES . Nothing in this chapter shall prevent the providing of tobacco, or tobacco-related devices to a minor as part of a lawfully recognized religious, spiritual or cultural ceremony. It shall be an affirmative defense to the violation of this chapter for a person to have reasonably relied on proof of age as described by state law. (1987 Code, § 302.14) Section 2. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon publishing in the Official Newspaper of the City of Shorewood. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 9th day of May 2011. __________________________ Christine Lizée, Mayor ATTEST: ___________________________________ Brian Heck, City Administrator/Clerk 302-10 CITY OF SHOREWOOD RESOLUTION NO. 11-____ A RESOLUTION APPROVING PUBLICATION OF ORDINANCE NO. 475 BY TITLE ANDSUMMARY WHEREAS, on 9 May 2011, the City Council of the City of Shorewood adopted Ordinance No. 475 entitled “An Ordinance Amending the Shorewood City Code to Replace Existing Chapter 302 in Its Entirety With a Revised Chapter 302”; and WHEREAS, the City staff has prepared a summary of Ordinance No. 475 as follows: 1.Chapter 302 of the City Code pertains to the Sale of Tobacco 2. Chapter 302 has been amended to include updates to the definitions of tobacco, tobacco products and tobacco related devices, updates to the hearing process for violations of the chapter, and other minor changes. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD: 1. The City Council finds that the above title and summary of Ordinance No. 475 clearly informs the public of intent and effect of the Ordinance. 2. The City Clerk is directed to publish Ordinance No. 475 by title and summary, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 412.191, subdivision 4. 3.A full copy of the Ordinance is available at Shorewood City Hall. th ADOPTED by the Shorewood City Council on this 9 day of May 2011. Christine Lizée, Mayor ATTEST: Brian Heck, City Administrator/Clerk #10 E MEETING TYPE City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting Title / Subject: Approve additional service agreement between SLMPD and City of Excelsior Meeting Date: Monday, May 9, 2011 Prepared by: Brian Heck, City Administrator Reviewed by: Attachments: 2010 agreement; Chief Litsey Memorandum Policy Consideration: consider approval of the 2011 agreement between the SLMPD and the City of Excelsior for the provision of summer dock and park patrol services Background: each year, the City of Excelsior enters into an agreement with the SLMPD for dock and park patrol services. According to the Joint Powers Agreement, a member community can contract with the SLMPD for additional services as long as these services do not use existing SLMPD staff, all costs are borne by the contracting city, and the other member communities approve the agreement. In communicating with Chief Litsey, the 2011 agreement is to be essentially the same as the 2010 agreement with possible modifications to rates and hours. Financial or Budget Considerations: there are no financial considerations with this item Options: 1)Approve the agreement between Excelsior and SLMPD; 2)Deny approval; 3)Request additional information Recommendation / Action Requested: staff recommends the city council approve an agreement between the SLMPD and Excelsior for summer dock and park patrol. Next Steps and Timelines: following approval, staff will notify the City of Excelsior and SLMPD. Connection to Vision / Mission: 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 #10D MEETING TYPE City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting Title / Subject: Resident request for water connection fee ordinance change Meeting Date: 05/09/11 Prepared by: James Landini Reviewed by: Attachments: Resident letter Policy Consideration: Many Background: Currently the City of Shorewood has a Water Connection Fee of $10,000 for a single family home per municipal code section 1301. (there is variation to the $10,000 fee for commercial and multi family) Mr. Price has written the attached letter requesting the fee be reconsidered to a lower amount. I am passing along his request for consideration. Further discussion on this topic will involve research from many departments. This topic has a lengthy history. Financial or Budget Considerations: Many Options: 1.Accept the resident request. 2.Direct staff to investigate options. 3.Do nothing. Recommendation / Action Requested: Accept the resident request. Direct staff to schedule a work session to further discuss the connection fee. Next Steps and Timelines: Connection to Vision / Mission: Municipal water is a quality public service, is part of a healthy environment and for some is an attractive amenity. 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 May 5, 2011 Dear City of Shorewood, This is a respectful request that the City consider reducing the $10,000 fee for hooking up to the municipal water supply line. My situation is that I would like to hook up to the city water line "tap" in front of my house and discontinue the use of my well, which has a low level of arsenic. The charges for the actual hook -up, meter, permits, etc. are around $3400. But with the $10,000 fee my cost becomes $13,400 plus any unexpected problems that arise during the conversion. My primary alternative is to process my own well water onsite, with all the cost and maintenance that accompanies this option. This cost is expected to be between $2500 and $6200, depending on equipment chosen, plus several hundred dollars per year equipment maintenance. I understand that the City of Shorewood has many factors to consider in making such a change, some much more significant than my immediate water supply problem. Thank you for considering my request. Regards to all, Charles Price 5710 Christopher #11A MEETING TYPE City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting Title / Subject: Carver County Open Fiber Initiative (CCOFI) Meeting Date: Monday, May 9, 2011 Prepared by: Brian Heck, City Administrator Reviewed by: Bruce DeJong, Finance Director Attachments: Policy Consideration: Should the City move ahead with connecting into the Carver County Fiber Ring? Background: Last month, staff brought information to the Council about an initiative in Carver County. The County was awarded a federal grant to construct a fiber optic “ring” connecting all the cities in the county as well as schools, libraries, and other key public facilities. A requirement of the grant is to allow other public entities access to this fiber backbone. Finally, the county partnered with a company, Jaguar Communications, which will lay fiber next to the County fiber and then sell “space” on the fiber. Staff met with Randy Lehs, project manager, to get more information on the status of the program. Mr. Lehs stated the county plans to begin build-out of the system in late July / August. We also learned that Carver County will run a connection into the Scott County ring, which is connected to a McLeod County ring. The Minnetonka School district will be part of the Carver ring as Minnetonka Middle School West is included in the ring because it is located in Carver County. We discussed ways to connect to the Carver ring. The city could splice into the fiber or connect at a terminus such as MMW or the Chanhassen fire station at Hwy 7 and Minnewashta Parkway located in Carver County. The city could potentially splice into the Minnetonka School District fiber that we believe connects Excelsior and Minnewashta elementary schools along Smithtown Road. The City could then run fiber to the Community Center, to the Public Works Facility, and to the Public Safety Facility. Other South Lake communities could also potentially connect to our lateral or the school district. Connecting to this type of network potentially allow the city to reduce costs compared to current line costs, obtain dial tone and other integrated services at a savings, and increase internet bandwidth for data intensive applications. Further, connection to other rings provides additional safeguards against service interruptions. Financial or Budget Considerations: Carver County has given some rough estimates of cost to connect to the spur that comes north on Highway 41 to MMW and then follows Highway 7 west to the Chanhassen Fire Station at Minnewashta Parkway. Their costs estimates for the project are about $50,000 per mile of fiber laid. With a smaller project to run fiber from City Hall to MMW, we may be subject to higher pricing, but staff doesn’t believe it would be more than $60,000 per mile. There are 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 equipment costs necessary to connect into the ring at MMW which would range from $5,000 to $10,000 depending on exactly where and how we could connect. At this point, staff is unsure whether this cost covers just the MMW end or if that is sufficient to light the fiber at both ends of the strand. The cost-benefit analysis of this equation will hinge on whether the data costs from Carver County will be sufficiently low to make it worthwhile for the City to switch away from the two existing T-1’s that serve City Hall and the Public Works building. A rough estimate of the shortest distance to a fiber node is about 1.42 miles which leads to fiber cost of approximately $85,000. The monthly cost of the T-1 and DSL lines servicing the City is about $320 per month. Staff has not yet discussed this with South Lake Minnetonka Police Department or Excelsior Fire District staff. They obviously have their own set of security and access issues that would have to be addressed properly for them to even consider participating. This project may not make financial sense without participation from other agencies, but we are unable to determine that with the limited information available at this time. If they or any other adjoining communities were to connect, we would also have to determine how to equitably apportion the cost of laying the initial fiber and the physical connection. Options: 1)Continue to pursue connection to the Carver County Fiber Ring 2)Hold off on the CCOFI and wait to see about the LMCC fiber plan 3)Do nothing Recommendation / Action Requested: Staff suggests continuing to pursue connecting to the CCOFI. Next Steps and Timelines: Staff will discuss the option with the SLMPD, EFD, and City of Excelsior as well as the Minnetonka School District on connection options. Staff will also obtain information on development of system architecture and design. Connection to Vision / Mission: Visionary leadership, quality public services, and sound financial management.