06-09-14 CC Reg Mtg AgendaCITY OF SHOREWOOD
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
MONDAY, JUNE 9, 2014
AGENDA
1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL MEETING
A. Roll Call
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
7:00 P.M.
Mai or Zerb
Hotvet
Siakel
Sundberg
Woodruff
Attachments
B. Review Agenda
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. City Council/Park Commission Work Session Minutes, Mav 27, 2014 Minutes
B. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes, May 27, 2014 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 remo>>ed from the
Consent Agenda. Comments can be taken or questions asked following remo>>al
from Consent Agenda
A. Approval of the Verified Claims List Claims List
B. Employee Policy on Purchasing Card Use Finance Director's
memo, Resolution
C. Accept Proposal for Materials Testing for Valley -v, ood Lane Reconstruction
Director of Public
Project
Works' memo
4. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR
(No Council action Nvill be taken)
5. PUBLIC HEARING
6. REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS
A. Report on Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD) activities by
Clerk's memo,
Greg Nybeck, LMCD Executive Director and Deborah Zorn, LMCD Board
LMCD Budget and
Representative
AIS Memo
7. PARKS
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA — JUNE 9, 2014
Page 2of2
8. PLANNING
A. Report on the June 3, 2014 Planning Commission meeting
B. Report on Enchanted Island Violation Appeal
9. ENGINEERING /PUBLIC WORKS
A. Public Information Meeting on the Storm Water Pollution Prevention
Program
B. Accept Proposal for Geographic Information Services
C. Approve Change Order No. 1 — Vallevvvood Area Roadway Improvements,
City Project 13 -01
10. GENERAL /NEW BUSINESS
A. Discussion on Prohibiting the Use of Plastic Bags in the City Limits
B. Liquor Ordinance and Fee Schedule Amendment
C. Excelsior Firefighters Relief Association Fundraising Event -July 18, 2014
D. Request to Place Dumpster at Christmas Lake Access
11. OLD BUSINESS
A. Deer Management Program 2014 — Results of Informal Resident Survey
12. STAFF AND COUNCIL REPORTS
A. Administrator and Staff
1. Recap of the Spring Clean Up Event
2. Trail Schedule
B. Mavor and Citv Council
13. ADJOURN
Attachments
Engineer's memo
Director of Public
Works memo
Engineer's memo,
Resolution
Administrator's
memo, Ordinance
Administrator's
memo, Resolution,
Special Event
Permit
Planning Director's
memo
Planning Director's
memo
Adm. Asst's memo
Trail Schedule
CITY OF
SHOREWOOD
5755 Country Club Road • Shorewood, Minnesota 55331 . 952- 960 -7900
Fax: 952- 474 -0128 • -,N-ww.ci.shorewood.mn.us • citchall 'ciici.shorewood.mn.us
Executive Summary
Shorewood City Council Regular Meeting
Monday, June 9, 2014
7:00 p.m.
Agenda Item #3A: Enclosed is the Verified Claims List for Council approval.
Agenda Item 4313: Council authorized staff to implement a purchasing card policy through PFM in
conjunction Nvith the National League of Cities. Staff modified the model policy to fit
Shorewood's needs. A resolution a establishing the purchasing card policy is provided for
Council's consideration.
Agenda Item 43C: Staff recommends acceptance of the proposal from American Engineering and
Testing (AET) for required testing for the Valley -v, ood Lane and Valley -v' ood Circle
Reconstruction project.
Agenda Item 44: Matters from the Floor— members of the public have an opportunity to address
the Council on an issue not on the agenda; no Council action Nvill be taken.
Agenda Item 45: There are no public hearings scheduled this evening.
Agenda Item 46A: Greg Nybeck, LMCD Executive Director and Deborah Zorn, LMCD Board
Representative Nvill be present this evening to provide a report on the LMCD 2015 Budget
Review and Aquatic Invasive Species discussion.
Agenda Item 47: There are no park commission items this evening.
Agenda Item 48A: Planning Commissioner Tom Geng is scheduled to report on the June 3, 2014
Planning Commission meeting.
Agenda Item 48B: Planning Director Nielsen Neill provide a verbal report on this item.
Agenda Item 49A: Jesse Carlson, WSB and Associates, Neill provide the Storm Water Pollution
Prevention Program information presentation.
Agenda Item 4913: Staff is seeking direction from the City Council regarding the GIS proposal
provided.
Agenda Item 49C: Staff recommends approval of a Resolution approving Change Order No. 1 in the
amount of $8,054.45, for the 2013 Street, Drainage, and Utility Improvements project (Valley -wood
Lane and Valley -wood Circle, City Project 13 -01.)
Agenda Item 410A: Councilmember Hotvet asked this be placed on the meeting agenda to discuss
prohibiting the use of plastic bags in city limits.
Executive Summary — City Council Meeting of June 9, 2014
Page 2of2
Agenda Item 41OB: This item is consideration of an amendment to the Liquor Ordinance to allow for
a temporary on -sale intoxicating liquor license, and to set the fee for said license.
Agenda Item 41OC: The Excelsior Firefighters Relief Association (EFRA) is requesting a license to
allow the sale of intoxicating liquor at its annual fundraising event on July 18, 2014. Should Item
41OB be approved, Council may consider this request. If the intoxicating liquor license is not
approved, the EFRA's request for a 3.2 Percent Malt Liquor License is to be considered. Draft
Resolutions are provided for either license. The Special Event Permit is also provided for
approval. The EFRA Nvill be transmitting additional information regarding this request prior to
Monday's meeting.
Agenda Item 41OD: Dave and Peggy Schultz have requested permission to place a dumpster at the
Christmas Lake Access for approximately six hours one day next Nveek. They are trying to
finalize the cleanup and restoration from a fire that destroyed their boathouse last summer. Their
intent is to ferry construction and cleanup debris from their shoreline to the access, Nvhere it
Nvould be loaded into the dumpster and hauled avmy. Staff recommends approval of this request.
Agenda Item 411A: The results of the informal resident survey regarding the Deer Management
Program for 2014 are in. As Nvas reported at the last meeting, a significant number of those
responding to the newsletter /Nvebsite survey favor continuation of the program for 2014. Staff has
included verbatim comments that came N ith the survey responses. Based on the survey, staff
recommends requesting MBRB to conduct the program as they have in the past.
Agenda Item 412.A.1: Administrative Assistant Pat Fasching has provided an update on the amount of
materials collected at the May 17 Spring Clean up event for Council information.
Agenda Item 412.A.2: The Trail Schedule is provided for Council information.
Agenda Items 41213: Mavor and City Council Members may report on recent activities.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
WORK SESSION OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND
PARK COMMISSION
TUESDAY, MAY 27, 2014
MINUTES
1. CONVENE WORK SESSION MEETING
Mayor Zerby called the meeting to order at 5:36 P.M.
A. Roll Call
Present: Mayor Zerby; Councilmembers Hotvet and
Panchyshyn; Finance Director DeJong; PI
Works Brown; and Engineer Hornby
Park Commission Chair Mangold; Pa
Commissioner Sawtell arrived at 6:05 P.M.
Absent: Councilmembers Siakel and
B. Review Agenda
Woodruff moved, Hotvet s
2. DISCUSS
Mayor Zerby welcomed the
Director Ni
proposed Concepts for Badj
Unfortunately, they are cloy
$1,230,000 In today's doll
removal of the tennis courts.
approving
P
as
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
5:30 PM
Ni
Dietz,
Joynes; City Clerk
Director of Public
Motion passed 6/0.
Ische;
Council had directed staff to update and compare the cost estimates for two
Park improvements. The costs for the two Concepts are not that far apart.
to those` estimated for the TKDA plan in 2010 which were approximately
that would be $1.6 million per Engineer Hornby. That plan included the
veral of the costs have basically doubled in five years.
He had originally used the cost estimate included in the Park Improvement Capital Improvement Program
(CIP). For 2014 the CIP has allocated $118,000 for the Park improvements for the creek crossing,
resurfacing the tennis courts and the start of the ball field improvements. For 2015 it allocated $405,000
for continued field improvements, parking and road improvements, and park amenities. Those equate to a
total CIP budget of $523,000. About $80,000 of that is for the shelter. The Concept 1 & 2 cost estimate
for the shelter is $250,000.
The estimated cost for Concept 1 (north/south field orientation) is approximately $1,272,500 million and
the cost for Concept 2 (east/west field orientation) is approximately $1,325,000 million. The Concept 2
estimated cost includes $25,000 for a building that does not need to be in there. Either of the two Concepts
presented are better than the TKDA plan. They end up with additional parking for both the Park and the
Southshore Community Center (SSCC). Neither Concept includes removal of the tennis courts.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND PARK COMMISSION
May 27, 2014
Page 2 of 10
He reviewed three potential options staff had identified relative to the proposed Badger Park improvements.
1. Scale back the project — It would be scaled back to a budget Council and the Park Commission
would be comfortable with.
➢ Eliminate the additional parking. Straighten out the driveway to the SSCC.
➢ Construct a very simple shelter similar to the one in Silverwood Park.
➢ Use portable toilets versus permanent restrooms with sewer and water.
➢ Eliminate trails within the Park.
➢ Eliminate the "village green ".
➢ Eliminate the decorative paving areas.
2. Phase the improvements in — This option would not
period of years. The costs could increase due to lo!
elements that could be phased in are as follows (they'ai
➢ Ball field changes /improvements;
➢ Parking improvements;
➢ Play area;
➢ Shelter;
➢ Overlook:
➢ Loop trail; and,
➢ Additional building — the gazebo in
3. Bond for ii
pay for it. I
be depleted
Administrator Joynes
is moving toward, res
prudent to integrate the SSCC
implications to doing that. 0,
improvements' that have to be in
for improvements for the Park
improvements as
the
economy of scale
not priority order):
spreads it over a
inflation. Various
the City opts to move forward with the project bonding is one way to
;em an opportunity to include money for new trails. That funding will
n Road east trail is built.
[,Council to keep the situation of the SSCC in mind. He explained Council
hat issue. One of the potential outcomes is that the SSCC comes back to
comes,part of the City's park program. If that should happen, it may be
more into the improvements for Badger Park. There are also financial
or the next ten to twenty years there are about $200,000 in capital
de to the SSCC that are not in the CIP. He stated if the City were to bond
then consideration should be given to bonding for the trails and SSCC
Chair Mangold stated all bf the budgeted amounts in the Park Improvement CIP are falling short today.
They cannot be funded with the current level of transfers from the General Fund.
Mayor Zerby noted that he likes to view the improvements from the perspective of needs versus wants. He
stated if the SSCC is integrated into Badger Park then there are bathrooms in the SSCC. Maybe a new door
could be built into the SSCC that would allow timed access to the bathrooms while the rest of the SSCC is
closed. Then a simple shelter structure could be all that is needed. He clarified his comments are free
flowing.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND PARK COMMISSION
May 27, 2014
Page 3 of 10
Zerby stated the estimated costs include play equipment for $130,000. He asked if the current equipment
has reached its end of life. Director Nielsen responded it is probably within three to five years of needing to
be replaced. Chair Mangold stated that play equipment is the worst in all of the parks.
Commissioner Ische stated some of paint finish on the equipment is flaking off and noted that the
equipment is structurally and functionally sound. He asked Director Brown if that could be refinished.
Brown stated he thought the coating is specialized coating and he thought the coating could be reapplied.
Brown also thought that the three to five year remaining lifecycle is accurate.
Councilmember Hotvet asked what the chances are of obtaining grants like the City did for Manor Park.
Director Nielsen noted staff applies for grants for park projects whenever'possible. Nielsen clarified staff
does not count on grants funds when it prepares the budget. Administrator Joynes stated grants are nice
things to have but the City cannot count on them.
Commissioner Ische stated the cost comparison sheets for Concept 1 and Concept 2 each have 20 items
with costs estimates. He assumes that each of those items have, for example, 20 items underneath them. He
asked what is included in the $250,000 cost for a shelter. He questioned if that could possibly be whittled
down to a 5125,000 shelter. He stated Concept 1 includes, $70,000, for ball field work and Concept 2
includes $82,000 for that. The estimates for each Concept identif` $95,000 for two extras. He asked what
is in the numbers for the extras. He then stated if the decision is made to take things out, scale things back
or phase things in he cautioned against taking shortcuts that will that will be costly to improve later (i.e.,
the ball field). He recommended spending the necessary dollars on the ball field to make it as good as
possible the first time. He stated if shortcuts were taken on the ball field upfront and it needed to be fixed
five years down the road it would cost all of what was originally spent plus what was cut out the first time.
He suggested taking things out that could be done without substantial cost implications at a later time. He
stated the administrative ;costs are estimated to be $160,000 to $170,000. He asked what those costs are
for. Engineer Hornby staled they are indirect costs some of which are administrative, permits, engineering
and legal costs.
Engineer Hornby 'clarified that the costs are concept level bid items and there is not a lot of detail
associated with them. ff this were going out for bid there might be 100 bid items. He noted that the cost
estimates,are somewhat conservative.
Councilmember Woodruff stated he agrees with Mayor Zerby's comment about needs versus wants. Some
real needs and, some nice to have things have been identified. He then stated he agrees that the ball field
needs work. He also thinks the parking lot needs to be expanded just to support today's needs. He does not
think the future of the SSCC will have much impact on what needs to be spent to expand the lot. He noted
that the current shelter is about ready to fall down. He suggested the new shelter be similar to the shelter in
Manor Park. He stated that shelter cost about $50,000 to $60,000 to rehabilitate. He thought it would cost
about $150,000 to rebuild it. For Badger Park he envisions a small room with some storage, a couple of
bathrooms and a patio with a shelter roof over it. He stated he could build a nice house for $250,000 if he
already owned the land. Director Nielsen noted that the land the shelter would be built on is former swamp
land and dealing with that adds expense.
Woodruff noted that the sanitary sewer and water improvements add another approximate $30,000 to the
$250,000 cost of the shelter.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND PARK COMMISSION
May 27, 2014
Page 4 of 10
Engineer Hornby stated that a good portion of the shelter's cost is related to the foundation and remediation
of the old swamp land.
Jason Amberg, with WSB & Associates, stated that what is being designed is for a public utility that can
take abuse.
Councilmember Woodruff stated from his perspective the top three things that need to be addressed are the
ball field improvements, the parking lot improvements and the shelter. He then stated Badger Park
improvements have been seriously talked about for two and one half years and less seriously talked about it
for five years. From his vantage point it is time to move forward with things. He asked what the cost would
be to do those three things. He thought it would be close to $500,000 — $660,000. He stated he thought the
City could come up with enough money to do those three things without having to bond for them. He noted
he is not opposed to bonding.
Chair Mangold stated to date the concept of the improvements' has been to move forward with all of them at
one time as one general contracted project. He asked if the Park Commission should look at this as a
normal project and solicit bids on the specific line items.
Councilmember Woodruff stated from his vantage point he, would like to have three packages of
improvements. Council can then determine how to fund each of them, At the completion of each package
there would be usable results. He then stated that maybe the Park Commission just buys into the approach
and Council directs staff to solicit bids.
Chair Mangold asked if a general contractor
Commissioner Ische stated,he thought the City would do better by having separate projects. He asked if the
City would act as the general contractor rather than having an outside entity act as a general contractor.
Mayor Zerby stated he believes Council's interest has been in doing the improvements in phases and noted
that there does need to be a master plan. He then statedthat there had been some discussion about doing the
hockey rink; the shelter and the parking ;lot in 2014 and then moving forward with the ball field.
Zerby asked for clarification about what needs to be done with the play equipment. Councilmember
Woodruff stated he would like to take the approach of refinishing that. Commissioner Hartmann asked how
much that will cost and noted that it will need to be replaced in three years. She asked what value there
would be in spending the money to refinish it just to replace it in three years. Commissioner Ische asked
why it would have to be replaced in three years; what about the equipment warrants that. Zerby asked if the
existing equipment is the right configuration. Does it need to be more handicap accessible? Is there some
type of activity that the equipment does not serve? Is there an activity the equipment serves that is high
risk? He asked if the equipment design is still appropriate. Chair Mangold stated the Park Commission does
not intend to take that same structure and move it to a new location in Badger Park. But, if the equipment
location will stay the same then the life of the equipment can be stretched out. Hartmann stated if the
decision is made to go with Concept 2 the playground will have to be moved. Mangold stated it would have
to be moved for both Concepts.
Councilmember Woodruff explained there had been numerous discussions about the pros and cons of the
leaving the ball field orientation as north/south and or changing it to east/west. He thought Concept 2 with
the east/west orientation would result in a few more parking spaces than Concept 1. Director Nielsen
CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND PARK COMMISSION
May 27, 2014
Page 5 of 10
clarified that Concept 1 would result in a few more parking spaces and noted that Concept 2 connects with
the SSCC better.
Commissioner Ische stated the cost estimates for field related improvements indicate that Concept 2 would
be about $50,000 more expensive that Concept 1. Director Nielsen noted most of that difference is the cost
of having to move the lights.
Councilmember Woodruff stated the cost to replace the play equipment is close to the cost of parking lot
improvements. He asked which is more important: making the parking lot improvements and refinishing the
play equipment with the understanding that it may have to be replaced and moved; or, new play equipment
and no parking lot improvements.
Commissioner Ische stated that Concept 1 would allow the play area to
the time being without endangering children.
Councilmember Woodruff noted that he favors C
Chair Mangold stated the Park Commission favors Concept 1. Be(
connect Badger Park with the SSCC the Commission believes thi
sports. Concept 1 provides village green space that is out in frog
Concept 2 it is more about filling the gap between the tennis courts
Councilmember Woodruff stated that back during discussion
about the green space being a place for events. He then state(
there could be some associated lacrosse event occurring on the
Commissioner Ische stated
tournament for 2015. He not
The village green space woul
Councilmember Hotvet state
the east side she questioned
SSCC. She understands that
with the
that
that
SSCC. In Concept 1 everything
2 attempts to do. Hotvet suggeE
doing what she proposed by pun
the SSCC part of the park,syst
SSCC.
its current location for
's desire to more closely
needs to be space that is not just for
laat can be used with the SSCC. For
the TKDA plan there was discussion
Crosse game was being played maybe
ka Youth Lacrosse Program is considering an end of summer
the field sites there are vendors that put up tents and sell things.
tl-v for that.
1 near the pedestrian connection north of the ball field on
-e is another opportunity to have more green space even closer to the
I take away from the turnaround loop. But, it may make the connection
-re could be a picnic area and a gathering place for individuals at the
)n the west side of the field. Director Nielsen stated that is what Concept
addressing the loss of parking for Concept 1 that would come about by
more parking in another area. Hotvet stated that if the goal is to have
then either Concept could be refined to strengthen the connection to the
Commissioner Ische stated that currently the biggest draw to Badger Park is for athletic games. Concept 1
with parking on the north side of the ball field and in front of the SSCC draws attention to the SSCC when
people are at athletic events. With Concept 2 there really isn't any parking immediately in front of the
SSCC. Director Nielsen clarified the parking around the SSCC does not change with Concept 2. There was
continued discussion if there was more or less parking near the SSCC for each of the Concepts. Mr.
Amberg stated there is gravel parking next to the well house and noted that with Concept 2 some parking in
front of the SSCC was eliminated. Nielsen stated the plan was to take that gravel out. Councilmember
CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND PARK COMMISSION
May 27, 2014
Page 6 of 10
Woodruff stated he does not think there is anything wrong with leaving that gravel parking for overflow
parking.
Commissioner Sawtell asked if the plan is to move forward despite the high cost. Mayor Zerby stated there
has been discussion about phasing in the improvements to try and find a way to make it more affordable.
Councilmember Woodruff stated the City has a certain amount of money that would fund a significant
portion of the improvements but it can't fund all of them anytime soon.
Director Nielsen recommended doing the ball field and parking lot improvements together. If Council wants
to split those then the field improvements should be done first.
Commissioner Hartmann stated that for Concept 2 there needs to be a way to block the ball field so that
children would not get hit by lacrosse balls or footballs when they are on the playground near the end zone
on the west end. Chair Mangold stated Lacrosse has told the Park Commission that the play area for
Concept 2 would not be usable during games because of that. Mayor Zerby asked if driving range nets
could be put up or are they too costly and unsightly. Someone responded both. Commissioner Ische stated
netting would be needed on the north end of the field for. Concept 1 to keep cars from being damaged.
Either way netting will be needed. Ische then stated for Concept, l there is the village green on the west side
of the field and a walking trail on the east side. There needs to be some backstop about 8 — 10 feet high to
protect people from errant lacrosse shots. Director Nielsen stated there has been discussion about having
landscaping to help do that; it is not shown on the drawing. Commissioner. Ische stated the issue with that is
a person thinks they are safe but they are not.
Administrator Joynes stated if Badger Park is going to be a usable park the bathrooms need to be
convenient. In order to not tear things up a second time'to put the infrastructure in for bathrooms that needs
to be done at the time of ball field improvements. From his perspective the SSCC bathrooms would be
inconvenient and he cannot imagine parents letting their children go to those bathrooms by themselves.
Mayor Zerby asked what there is now; are there port a potties. Director Nielsen stated there are bathrooms
in the warming house and port a potties have been put out as well. Director Brown noted that the warming
house is not open during the warm weather months. Commissioner Hartmann stated she does not think a
girl will want, to use an outdoor port a potty. Councilmember Woodruff stated Concept 1 has the bathrooms
on the west side of the field, they are close to the play area and the field. The SSCC bathrooms could be
secondarv.
Commissioner 'Ische stated that based on the estimated costs and the near $600,000 budget the
improvements have to be phased in. He suggested evaluating which Concept would be easier to phase in
and maybe it would be a melding of the two. Neither of them will flow real smoothly. With Concept 1 it
would be easier from the ball field perspective. The field and parking lot improvements could be done but
the shelter could not be done without replacing the play equipment because the shelter would almost be on
top of the equipment. With Concept 2 the field improvements are more expensive but the shelter can be
built without having to redo the play area.
Councilmember Woodruff asked if there is a way to downsize the scope of the shelter to allow for the
replacement of the play equipment.
Councilmember Hotvet asked if there is anything wrong with using temporary buildings during the
construction process. Councilmember Woodruff stated the City does not let residents do that so they City
should not. Hotvet noted they are used at Cathcart Park.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND PARK COMMISSION
May 27, 2014
Page 7 of 10
Mayor Zerby stated he prefers Concept 2. He recommended asking the Park Foundation for a contribution
to build the playground or shelter.
Councilmember Woodruff stated he prefers Concept 1 but can support Concept 2. He then stated everyone
is aware the City does not have enough money to make all of the improvements. If just some of the
improvements were done he suggested doing those that would serve the City's residents for a long time.
Commissioner Dietz stated to him it sounds like the future plans for the SSCC are quite important. If
people don't want people at a wedding to be able to go outside then things are fine. But if the goal is to
have the SSCC be a regular source of income and an event center then it has to be made to look like more
than a parking lot with a house at the end. He asked if bonding is off of the table. He stated without
knowing the future of the SSCC it is difficult to say what the big picture is.
Chair Mangold stated improvements need to be made to
SSCC is. He then stated he is fine with phasing improv
for funding other improvements in all parks for farther o
Councilmember Woodruff stated it is Council's challenge to df
years out. He then stated bonding has to be placed on the ballot.
Director DeJong explained the City could do bd
referendum or the Shorewood Economic Developme
which is what it did for the public safety facilities
asked how the market would view the EDA path v
Woodruff stated for the City Hall- renovation the sec
Hall. DeJong stated there would likely be more c
generally what happens with lease revenue bonds is
interest rate differential. With; bonding that has less
escrow.
Park independent of what the future of the
in. But, there has to be a plan put in place
how to fund park projects 10 — 20
Ling by getting resident authorization through a
Authority (EDA) could issue lease revenue bonds
d City Hall renovation. Councilmember Woodruff
h the security underlying the bonds being a park.
ty was City Hall and right now the EDA owns City
icerns about the security. DeJong explained that
e braid rating goes down one notch and there is an
ecurity the City may be required to have a year's
Councilmember Woodruff explained that for ,every $1 million in bonds the interest cost is $100,000 per
year and that is based on the bonds for City Hall. That $100,000 adds about 1.5 percent to the levy.
Director Nielsen stated that as part of that bonding there would be an opportunity to issue bonds for trails.
Woodruff stated he would like to know what securities firms' thoughts are on this.
Commissioner Dietz ' stated when his children were growing up they used the City's parks. They played
seven sports. He is not convinced there are "X" number of children in the City that use the ball fields a few
times a week. Yet everyone uses the trails. He commented that he does not think it would be an issue to
walk an extra 50 yards or100 yards to get to the ball field although he did not like it when his children were
playing sports. But, parking is a necessity.
Chair Mangold reiterated he would really like Badger Park to have more usable space that is not just for
sports, noting it does not have to be called the village green. He then stated that during peak performance
times at the ball field parking is a big issue. Councilmember Woodruff stated no matter what improvements
are made there will always be instances when parking will be an issue. Commissioner Ische noted that
parking is very difficult during the changeover period when there are back to back games. That can never
be accommodated.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND PARK COMMISSION
May 27, 2014
Page 8 of 10
Chair Mangold stated either Concept is better than the current situation and reiterated that the Park
Commission prefers Concept 1.
Commissioner Ische stated Concept 1 ties things together — the green space, the picnic area, the shelter and
the play grounds. With Concept 2 those four things are spread out. People are not going to run across the
field to go from the picnic area to the village green when there is a game going on. It will be easier to keep
track of children with Concept 1.
Councilmember Hotvet stated that with Concept 1 the driver would have to Poop through under the canopy
for the SSCC. Concept 2 has its own loop.
Commissioner Hartmann stated there is no reason that a few parking spaces can't be given up to create
some green space north of the ball field on the east side closer to the SSCC." She then stated that for
Concept 1 there has not been any discussion about not pushing the field south a little, Engineer Hornby
stated that doing that would result in a loss of a full row of parking just north of the field. '
Chair Mangold noted that Concept 1 and Concept 2 would
amount of parking.
Councilmember Woodruff stated in the scheme of things the $70,000 cost for moving the ball field south a
little is a non - issue. He recommended spending $74,000 on that. Commissioner Hartmann stated if it is not
broke don't fix it; it is working in the current location. The cost benefit of doing that is a few more parking
spaces.
Mayor Zerby asked if the existing play area is for pre-K or elementary. Director Nielsen stated a little of
both. Zerby stated the plan is to replace that with two play areas. Nielsen stated there will be two different
types of equipment.
Mr. Amberg stated the recent trend is to separate play areas by age in part for safety reasons.
Councilmember Woodru''suggested flipping the location of the two play areas around. Councilmember
Hotvet stated Council had discussed bringing the play areas together because if a parent has a three -year
old and a 5ryear old they would want the play areas next to each other. Woodruff stated for Concept 2 the
pre -K area should be closer to the sideline of the ball field.
Mayor Zerby stated the existing play area is already a multi -age play area.
Chair Mangold stated that the Park Commission thinks both Concepts have issues.
Mayor Zerby expressed his desire for staff to come back with a Concept 1.5. Council has not seen anything
that incorporates the alternatives that have been discussed. For example, is there a way to create a
turnaround for vehicles in Concept 1?
Councilmember Hotvet reiterated that she wants the SSCC to be better connected.
Councilmember Woodruff suggested Council work with staff on fine tuning the Concept(s). Then the Park
Commission can get on to something else.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND PARK COMMISSION
May 27, 2014
Page 9 of 10
Chair Mangold stated Council needs to remove the Park Commission from the process for now or it has to
direct the Commission to work on something specific.
Mayor Zerby explained the first time Council saw the Concepts it favored Concept 1. Then parking was
presented as an issue so Council shifted to Concept 2. Now Council is in sticker shock from the price tag
that was presented.
Councilmember Woodruff suggested Council define a phase 1 and ask staff to come back with some costs
for that phase and to explore bonding further. He stated once costs are known Council and staff can
determine if the City can afford to do a phase 1 without bonding. He commented that if Council decides
bonding is the way to go he thought that could happen within 60 days.
Engineer Hornby stated if Council wants to phase the project in the .parking lot should be done last. Any
time a heavy truck is brought on site for grading or building work that will potentially damage the parking
lot. Mayor Zerby clarified the parking lot improvements should be done after the two other major
components. Councilmember Woodruff reiterated his suggestion to do the ball field improvements, build
the shelter and do the parking lot improvements together with parking being done last.
Hornby noted that construction will not start in 2014.
Councilmember Woodruff stated if that is
costs and an overall bonding package.
Commissioner Ische stated he just went through the cc
the items Councilmember Woodruff just mentioned pt
costs and that came to approximately $960,000 as pres,
that can be saved in a number of the items if the associ4
it would be great to do the field work in the fall of this
seeded until Tune 1, 2015, it won't be ready to use until,
and staff talk about trails
estimates for Concept 1 and totaled the costs of
the extras, the contingencies and administrative
-d. He then stated that he believes there is money
1 detail was assessed closely. He went on to state
ar and seed the field by September 1. If it is not
ie 1, 2016.
think there is any obstacle to doing that.
Mr..Amberg stating there needs, to be grading and irrigation design work done. Water and sewer service
needs to be put in. Mayor Zerby asked if doing that would be enough to go the Minnehaha Creek
Watershed District. (MCWD) and talk about a water reclamation project and potential grant funding.
Engineer Hornby-stated the majority of the plan has to be put together before going to the MCWD for
permitting and for possible grants. Mayor Zerby stated that would have to be done anyway for the field
resurfacing. Councilmember Hotvet noted that the MCWD likes to be involved with putting the plan
together.
Commissioner Ische noted that the Minnetonka Lacrosse Program has indicated it will contribute $15,000
toward irrigation. He stated if there is any possibility of doing something this fall Tonka Youth football
needs to be notified tomorrow. He commented that he thought that the Tonka Youth Association may be
willing to contribute funding.
Engineer Hornby noted that the field needs to grow for a full year before playing sports on it.
Commissioner Ische stated that means the field will be unavailable for lacrosse for one season and football
for two seasons.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND PARK COMMISSION
May 27, 2014
Page 10 of 10
Mayor Zerby asked Director Nielsen to come back with a Concept 1.5 for Council and staff discussion
during Council's second meeting in June. Nielsen stated staff will try to do that. Councilmember Woodruff
asked if Council could have some information on bonding by then and asked that Concept 1.5 have a
north/south field orientation. There was indication the bonding research could be done. Administrator
Joynes stated it will be easier to do the bonding than the design. Councilmember Hotvet noted she likes the
idea of a hybrid concept.
Councilmember Woodruff encouraged the Park Commission to think
Mayor Zerby stated he remembers when Woodruff was early in his tenui
Commission to submit a wish list for parks.
3. ADJOURN
Woodruff moved, Hotvet seconded, Adjourning the Work Session of the
Commission of May 27, 2014, at 6:54 P.M. Motion passed 7/0.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
Christine Freeman, Recorder
ATTEST:
Jean Panchyshyn, City
next big park project.
uncil he asked the Park
by, Mayor
and Park
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
MONDAY, MAY 27, 2014
MINUTES
1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
Mayor Zerby called the meeting to order at 7:04 P.M.
A. Roll Call
Present. Mayor Zerby; Councilmembers Hotvet,
Administrator Joynes; City Clerk Panch)
Director Nielsen; Director of Public Works I
Absent: Councilmembers Siakel and Sundberg.
B. Review Agenda
Woodruff moved, Zerby seconded, approving the agenda as
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. City Council Executive Session
Woodruff moved, Hotvet secor
12, 2014, as presented. Motion
B. City Council Rt
Woodruff moved; Zerby seconded, 2
12, 2014; as amended in Item 9.A, Pay
the area beneath them would not be
them would not be drivable street ". A
3. CONSENT AGENDA
)proving the City
3/0.
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
7:00 P.M.
ttorney Keane; City
for DeJong; Planning
City
Motion passed 310.
Executive Session Minutes of May
Aing Minutes, May 12, 2014
roving the City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of May
3, Paragraph 4, Sentence 1 change "... two cul -de -sacs and
viable street" to "... two cul -de -sacs and the area between
on passed 310.
Mayor Zerby reviewedtbe item's on the Consent Agenda.
Woodruff moved, Hotvet seconded, Approving the Motions Contained on the Consent Agenda and
Adopting the Resolutions Therein.
A. Approval of the Verified Claims List
B. Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 14 -034, "A Resolution Approving Intoxicating
Liquor License On -Sale Intoxicating Liquor and Special Sunday Sales, for the
Minnetonka Country Club "; RESOLUTION NO. 14 -035, "A Resolution Approving
Intoxicating Liquor License On -Sale Intoxicating Liquor and Special Sunday Sales,
for American Legion Post #259 "; RESOLUTION NO. 14 -036, "A Resolution
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
May 27, 2014
Page 2 of 9
Approving a 3.2 Percent `Off -Sale' Malt Liquor License, for Shorewood 2001 LLC,
dba Cub Foods "; RESOLUTION NO. 14 -037, "A Resolution Approving an Off -Sale
Intoxicating Liquor License, for Park Square Subway, Inc., dba Shorewood
Liquor "; and, RESOLUTION NO. 14 -038, "A Resolution Approving an Off -Sale
Intoxicating Liquor License, for TL Shorewood Inc. dba Team Liquor Wine &
Spirits."
C. Approve Agreement Between South Lake Minnetonka Police Department and City
of Excelsior for Summer Dock and Park Patrol Services
D. Setting a Date for a Work Session to Discuss Establishing a'Policy on the Use of
Chemicals for Vegetation Management
E. Accept Proposal for Professional Design and Construction Services for Sunnyvale
Lane Improvement Project
F. Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 14 -03�, "A Resolution Establishing the 2015 Budget
Schedule."
Councilmember Woodruff explained that in 2013 the 2014 maximum tax levy was set before the 2014
Capital Improvement Program (CIP) budget was discussed. The,proposed 2015 budget schedule shows
the same thing will happen. He expressed concern that there a few capital items that Council may want to
spend a significant amount of money on in 2015 that would require levy changes. He stated there has to
be some idea of what those items would cost before the maximum tax levy is certified with Hennepin
County. Staff has to give Council either wider, latitude of General Fund options or there has to be
discussion about 2015 capital items before scheduled October 27dscussion.
Director DeJong stated the schedule is consistent with previous years. He noted it affects transfers out of
the General Fund into the capital funds.
Councilmember Woodruff stated some transfer costs have to be built into the 2015 Operating Budget
before the maximum levy is certified. Then if the costs built into the budget are too high the budget can
be reduced before it is adopted in December.
Administrator Joynes stated Council and staff need to discuss what additional capital items Council wants
to be done in 2015. Depending on what happens with the Southshore Community Center there could be
capital needs there in 2015. There are some unknowns. Staff can attempt to estimate what those costs
might be. He requested there be Council input.
Councilmember Woodruff stated Council can decide to change the budget schedule later.
Administrator Joynes stated that staff will compile a list of items it is aware of. He noted there will be
some operational things in the 2015 Operating Budget that will be add -ons that came out of the February
2014 Council and staff retreat that Council will have to decide on.
Councilmember Woodruff clarified that he is looking for a not to exceed capital amount.
Motion passed 310.
4. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
May 27, 2014
Page 3 of 9
There were no matters from the floor presented this evening.
5. PUBLIC HEARING
None.
6. REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS
None.
7. PARKS
A. Report on the May 7, 2014, Park Tours and May 13,''2014, Park Commission
Meeting
Park Commissioner Hartmann reported on matters considered and actions taken at the May 7, 2014, Park
Tours and the May 14, 2014, Park Commission meeting (as 'detailed in the minutes of those meetings).
Councilmember Woodruff stated the Park Tour meeting minutes indicated that balls still roll under the
new ball fence in Freeman Park. It was his recollection that one of the reasons for installing new fence
was to keep that from happening. Commissioner Hartmann stated that is being addressed by the installer.
Woodruff then stated that last year about $20,404 was spent to remove buckthorn in Freeman Park. He
asked if anyone has assessed the success of that"effort. Hartmann noted that effort was driven by Council;
the Park Commission had nothing to do with that. Woodruff"asked for a report on the success of that
effort.
B. Autho
Director Nielsen explained that Eagle Si
a project in Shorewood: On the list of p
there was a project for installing a b
Silverwood Park. Mr. Bushnell made a'
approval 'ofproject and contributing up
Mr. Bushnell is present.
Mr. Bushnell asked Council to
e of Funds in Support of an Eagle Scout Project for a Park
ark
andidate Benjamin Bushnell had asked the City about doing
al Eagle Scout projects developed by the Park Commission,
somewhat in between the play equipment and shelter in
atation to the Commission. The Commission recommended
1200 for the purchase of the bench and materials. He noted
the expenditure of up to $1,200.
Councilmember Hotvet noted that she was the Council liaison at the Park Commission meeting when Mr.
Bushnell made his presentation. She stated the bench would be consistent with things in other parks. She
noted that time is of the essence. Mr. Bushnell noted that his birthday is mid -July. Hotvet explained the
project and Mr. Bushnell's supporting paper work must be done and submitted by his birthday.
In response to a question from Councilmember Woodruff, Director Nielsen explained the bench will cost
about $700 plus tax and shipping. Materials for the base of the bench are also needed.
In response to a question from Mayor Zerby, Director Nielsen explained the base will be concrete and the
bench is made out of recycled resin material.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
May 27, 2014
Page 4 of 9
Hotvet moved, Woodruff seconded, approving the Eagle Scout project that will be done by
Benjamin Bushnell and authorizing the expenditure of up to $1,200 for the purchase of a bench and
related materials. Motion passed 310.
Councilmember Hotvet asked Mr. Bushnell to send the City a picture of the finished product.
8. PLANNING
A. Update on Three Violation Appeals from the May 12, 2014, Regular City Council
Meeting
Director Nielsen explained that during its May 12, 2014, meeting C
violations. All three appellants were given until today, Mary 27, t
The one at 28150 Boulder Bridge Drive has been resolved. The or
resolved but there is some question about where the fish house ended
that property tomorrow. The container in violation on the 4390 En
property owner has not been successful in getting the new owner to
asked for one more week to get the container off of his property. He
gone by then the City will begin assessing the administrative penalt3
property located at 5770 Smithtown Circle were cited for having a vi
their property. They were given until May 15 to take that structure de
Woodruff moved, Zerby seconded, giving the owner of the prop
the container in violation off of his property. Motion passed 310.
9. ENGINEERING /PUBLIC WORKS
10.
A. Fourth of July. Event Request for
mncit heard appeals of three zoning
1ring the violations into compliance.
at 25480 Smithtown Road is also
up. He is meeting with the owner of
;hanted Point has, been sold but the
remove it. That ptoperty owner has
recommended doing that. If it is not
, Early in the year the owners of the
ryl structure that was in violation on
vn and they have done so.
June 2, 2014, to remove
Administrator Joynes staled the Excelsior — Lake Minnetonka Chamber of Commerce has made its annual
request for a contribution, the Fourth of July fireworks event. He noted the 2014 Operating Budget
allocates $5,000 for that purpose.
Mayor Zerby stated he thinks that is a great event and it is a high value to the Shorewood residents.
Zerby moved, Woodruff seconded, authorizing $5,000 of funding to the South Lake — Excelsior
Chamber of Commerce's Lake Minnetonka Fourth of July celebration. Motion passed 310.
B. Resolution Approving the Operations of Dog Breeding at 6065 Lake Linden Drive
Administrator Joynes explained the City received a request from Lindy Forstater, 6065 Lake Linden
Drive, for permission from the City to breed up to two occasional litters of puppies per year similar to
what she has done in the past. Ms. Forstater holds a multiple dog license with the City. There are a
number of state requirements for animal breeders and dealers. All of them require the City to give
approval to those residents who want to do that. It is not clear if she fits into those categories. He noted
the resolution included in the meeting packet would approve the occasional dog breeding and that Ms.
Forstater is responsible to comply with all state and federal regulations related to dog kennels, breeders,
and dealers that are applicable. If she should change how she does things or wants to breed more
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
May 27, 2014
Page 5 of 9
frequently it would be her responsibility to seek that approval from the State. He also noted it complies
with the City's ordinance.
Lindy Forstater, 6065 Lake Linden Drive, stated she has had long history in the community. She clarified
that breeding dogs is her hobby; she is not a kennel or dealer. She explained she raises puppies because of
her passion for the breed. She stated she worked at the Snyder's Pharmacy for ten years and she worked
for three years at a pet clinic. She has medical and handling experience related to caring for dogs. She
graduated from college with an animal science minor. She attends a lot of community education classes
related to dog training and breeding.
Councilmember Woodruff stated it is his recollection that the City's ordinance contains language about
the number of dogs up more than six months old that can live on a property. Administrator Joynes noted
the number is four. Ms. Forstater stated the language used to be up to nine months old and noted she can
live with six months if she has to. She explained it is hard to know how tall the dogs are going to be at six
months.
Mr. Forstater stated she would like to be able to have three litters in a year because she does not get a
litter each time she does a breeding.
Councilmember Woodruff asked if Council is going to
Administrator Joynes responded yes.
Hotvet moved, Woodruff seconded, Ai
Approving the Operation of a Dog Breeder
11. OLD BUSINESS
A. Deer
each resident request individually.
"A Resolution
Drive." Motion passed 310.
Director Nielsen stated during Council's last meeting he indicated he would report on the results of the
survey about whether or not to continue the Deer Management Program in 2014. At that time he did not
know the survey is open through May 31. 'To date the survey responders overwhelmingly voted to
continue the Program for 2014 — the count was 34 yes and 6 no. With regard to reducing the number of
weekends 26 said no. With regard to reducing the number of sites 30 said no. He noted he will have the
final survey results for Council's next meeting.
12. STAFF AND COUNCIL; REPORTS
A. Administrator and Staff
1. Monthly Budget Report
Mayor Zerby noted that the meeting packet contains a copy of the April 2014 monthly budget report.
2. Update on County Club Road Speed Data
Director Brown explained road tubes were placed on Country Club Road to record the frequency and
speed and time of day for travel in each direction. Data was recorded from May 15, 2014, 8:00 A.M.
through May 20, 2014, at 2:00 P.M. The results indicate the 85"' percentile (it is used to judge reasonable
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
May 27, 2014
Page 6 of 9
speed) is 30.3 miles per hour (mph). The posted speed for that roadway is a 30 mph. The meeting packet
includes a copy of the data log from the data collector.
Councilmember Woodruff stated the data included in the packet is very different from the data the last
time the tubes were used which was about three years ago. He noted that he looks speeds of 35 mph or
higher on that roadway as issues; about 14 percent of the traffic traveled at speeds above 35 mph. He had
been pushing to have enhanced speed enforcement during the most problematic hours. The current data
reflects the speeding above 35 mph occurs consistently between 9:00 A.M. and 7:00 — 8:00 P.M. There is
not a concentrated time period that can be targeted. He noted that any enhanced speed enforcement is not
warranted at this time.
3. South Lake Minnetonka Police Departme
Administrator Joynes noted that South Lake Minnetonka
Litsey has informed the SLMPD Coordinating Committee tr
28, 2015. He explained that because of that there has been 9c
the SLMPD. At the same time there has been discussion ab,
both the SLMPD and the Excelsior Fire District
Administrators/Manager will be having a series of meetings
on May 21. The process will take quite a lot of time. Nothing
Mayor Zerby stated that the SLMPD Co
operation and assess other models of op(
4. South Lake
Administrator Joynes noted
process has started. All mate
website.
5. Rep
Mayor Zerby ' explained that
working with the surroundin!
the Shorewood Public Wori
Public Works Departments
agreement to share salt stor
effort for snow plowing beti
use software it had to see if
blades are lifted).
o-int Powers Agreement
artment� (SLMPD) Chief Bryan
s to retire no later than February
on about suecession planning for
at the organizational structure of
member cities' Mavors and
and the first meeting was
decided.
Committee views this as an opportunity to reassess the
nt 2015 Budget Process
Lake Minnetonka Police Department (SLMPD) 2015 budget
to the Coordinating Committee can be found on the SLMPD's
the March 2013 Council and staff retreat there was discussion about
iunitics on a greater basis. He and Director Brown have explored how
rtment could work more closely with the Excelsior and Tonka Bay
of the outcomes was Shorewood and Excelsior entered into an
.ce. The next thing that was discussed was a possible collaborative
two Cities. WSB & Associates was asked to look at the routes and
tes could be optimized to reduce dead -head time (the time when the
Director Brown explained that WSB did perform the analysis. WSB determined an average snowfall
event costs the City approximately $1,900 in labor and equipment under the existing route plan. WSB
also determined that by Shorewood and Excelsior combining routes the total cost for an average event
would be $3,180. That is an overall savings of approximately $340 per event. There has not been
discussion about how that would be split between the two Cities. It is easy for the software to calculate
the cost of plowing Smithtown Road. It is more challenging for Excelsior's downtown area where there
are multiple plowings and the snow has to be hauled away.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
May 27, 2014
Page 7 of 9
Mayor Zerby stated he asked the WSB engineer if it would be fair to say 10 percent would be saved by
the two Cities working together and the engineer told him it would be. He noted he thought 10 percent is
conservative. He stated he thought the savings would be greater once the two Public Works Departments
refined the process and determined which equipment was more effective for which areas. He explained
snow has to be hauled away from Excelsior's downtown area because there is no room to store it along
side of the roadway. He stated he sees the Shorewood plow trucks driving on Water Street downtown
Excelsior quite a bit. Therefore, this makes sense to him. He related that the Excelsior Mayor supports
this effort as well. He would like to formalize such an arrangement.
Councilmember Hotvet stated she thought there would also be intangible benefits such as reduced wear
and tear on equipment. She thought it would be efficient and effective and the right thing to do.
Councilmember Woodruff stated he would like to know how i
Shorewood. He thought it prudent for the agreement between Shores
what the service and quality of work expectations are.
Councilmember Woodruff asked Director Brown how many events t]
typically approximately 26 but this year there were 3,4. Woodruff sta
would save $6,000 a year if it received $200 of the $340.
Councilmember Hotvet stated that maybe this would also
policies and possibly result in similar policies.
Other
$340 savings would be
celsior to clearly specify
are each year, Brown.. responded
that would mean that Shorewood
about snow emergency
Director Brown explained there is a percolation pond for the -Boulder Bridge subdivision which was
developed around 1980. There is no formal outlet for the pond. Over the years the City has had to set up a
City -owned trailer mounted pump with a 350 horsepower engine and run discharge hose all the way down
to Howards Point Road to the storm sewer at the intersection with Smithtown Road to remove water from
the pond. During the day the City received a number of calls from homeowners asking the City to set up
the pumping. That will be done tomorrow. In the past the City received complaints about the noise when
the pump was running. When `speaking with homeowners living near where the pump would be staff
informed them that the fours the pump would be operated would be abbreviated to 7:30 A.M. to 5:00
P.M. The residents near flowards Point Road would prefer that the hose be run closer to the Boulder
Brid -e area but there is not much sewer system in that area.
Mayor Zerby stated that a previous Council had not wanted to spend the money to put a more permanent
solution in place based on the number of residents in the Boulder Bridge development. He asked if the
Homeowners Association has ever been asked to share the cost to do that.
Director Brown stated the last time that pumping had to be done the City attempted to get the Association
to pay for restoration and landscaping costs to no avail. He noted that he would like to again attempt to
get a line installed. Having to depend on Public Works to put up temporary pumping facilities is not the
best solution. It takes a considerable effort to set it up and if there was significant rainfall going on at that
time and debris falling down Public Works would be pulled from those cleanup efforts.
Mayor Zerby stated he is convinced that 100 year events are occurring every ten years now. He offered to
meet with Director Brown and Homeowners Association management to have a discussion. Any other
member of Council could join in on the discussion. Councilmember Woodruff stated that would be a
proactive approach.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
May 27, 2014
Page 8 of 9
Councilmember Woodruff stated Mary Lake is a pond with no outlet as well. He asked if staff has to
pump out that pond. Director Brown stated that pond is okay and noted there is another relatively large
ponding area over near Clover Lane that has had to be pumped out in the past. Woodruff noted that it is
his recollection that the very rough estimate for a permanent solution for Mary Lake was about $500,000.
The then council did not think that would be a good investment being Mary Lake only had to be pumped
out every four or five years.
Director Brown stated that earlier in the day there was a pre - construction conference for the Apple Road
restoration project.
Engineer Hornby stated the residents living in the area where the Smithtown Road west sidewalk is have
been notified that the contractor for that project will start working on the final punch list items in May. He
noted the rainy weather has delayed the contractor.
Director DeJong stated finance staff is continuing to wrap up 'audit related activities and staff is
continuing with training on the web portion of the finance software. He noted that on June 23 finance
software vendor representatives will be on site for the- cutover of the utility billing component.
Mayor Zerby stated that one or two Council meetings ago he as"
included in the meeting packet for information purposes. He ask
trail project and the Smithtown Road east sidewalk/trail project.
the Galpin Lake Road trail project are about 90-''85 percent co
two property owners about temporary construction easements.
one of them. Staff has presented some concepts to the Minnesot
for the part along Highway 7 in order to reduce the review t
:cd that a schedule for the trail projects be
ed for an update on the Galpin Lake Road
Engineer Hornby explained that plans for
nplete. He has asked WSB staff to talk to
It may be possible to avoid the need for
G Department of Transportation (MnDOT)
me. MnDOT's comments were received
about a week ago. Construction in August continues to be the plan. With regard to the Smithtown Road
east project, Engineer Hornby stated that staff will write a professional services agreement for the
feasibility study and present that to Council for approval during its June 9 meeting. After that it will take
30 — 60 days to complete the feasibility, report.
Attorney
Mayor
the property across the road.
Councilmember Woodruff stated, most of Council and some staff received an email from a resident living
along side of Wedgewood Drive' regarding speeding. That has been a continuing issue. He asked if
someone is going to respond to that email. At a minimum the City could put the road tubes out and find
out what is actually going on. He asked for a report on this during Council's next meeting.
Councilmember Hotvet stated she attended a Minnetonka Family Collaborative Council (MFCC) meeting
as the City's liaison. It is a multi - agency (e.g., the ICA food shelf, the Minnetonka School District,
Hennepin County Social Services) support group that serves people in the area in need of support. MFCC
has wrapped up the year. She noted that MFCC is a grant giving entity.
Mayor Zerby stated he attended the South Lake Minnetonka Police Department (SLMPD) Coordinating
Committee regular quarterly meeting on May 14 and a succession planning meeting on May 21.
Councilmember Woodruff stated he will attend the Excelsior Fire District board meeting on May 28
because Councilmember Siakel cannot attend.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
May 27, 2014
Page 9 of 9
13. ADJOURN
Hotvet moved, Woodruff seconded, Adjourning the City Council Regular Meeting of May 27, 2014,
at 8:03 P.M. Motion passed 310.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
Christine Freeman, Recorder
AT]
Jear
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item
Title/ Subject: Verified Claims
Meeting [late: June 9, 2014
Prepared by: Michelle Nguyen, Senior Accountant
Bruce Delong, f=inance Director
Attachments: Claims lists
Policy Consideration:
Should the attached claims against the City of Shorewood be paid?
Background:
Claims for council authorization.
60428 -60429 & ACH 37,593.80
Pending Checks & ACH 162,993.03
Total Claims $200,586.83
We have also included a payroll summary for the payroll period ending June 7, 2014.
43A
MEETING TYPE
Regular Meeting
Financial or Budget Considerations:
These expenditures are reasonable and necessary to provide services to our residents and funds are
budgeted and available for these purposes.
Options:
The City Council is may accept the staff recommendation to pay these claims or may reject any
expenditure it deems not in the best interest of the city.
Recommendation / Action Requested:
Staff recommends approval of the claims list as presented.
Next Steps and Timelines:
Checks will be distributed following approval.
Payroll
G/L Distribution Report
User: bdejong
Batch: 0000 1,06.2014 - PR 060214
CITY OF SHOREWOOD City of
Shorewood
Account Number Debit Amount Credit Amount Description
FUND 101
General Fund
101 -00 -1010 -0000
0.00
47,388.57
CASH AND INVESTMENTS
101 -13- 4101 -0000
7,709.57
0.00
FULL -TIME REGULAR
101 -13 -4121 -0000
490.53
0.00
PERA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE
101 -13- 4122 --0000
517.61
0.00
FICA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE
101 -13 -4151 -0000
20.14
0.00
WORKERS COMPENSATION
101 -15 -4101 -0000
4,646.68
0.00
FULL -TIME REGULAR
101 -15 -4121 -0000
306.26
0.00
PERA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE
101 -15 -4122 -0000
308.75
0.00
FICA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE
101 -15 -4151 -0000
12.35
0.00
WORKERS COMPENSATION
101 -18 -4101 -0000
6,190.31
6.00
FULL -TIME REGULAR
101 -18- 4121 -0000
386.99
0.00
P£RA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE
101 -I8- 4122 -0000
378.33
0.00
FICA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE.
101 -18- 4151.0000
21.41
0.00
'WORKERS COMPENSATION
101 -24 -4101- 0000
4.067.1.6
0.00
FULL -TIME REGULAR
101 -24- 4121 -0000
262.23
0.00
PERA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE
101 -24- 4122 -0000
234.04
0.00
FICA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE
101 -24- 4151 -0000
19.91
0.00
WORKERS COMPENSATION
101 -32- 4101.0000
12,177.32
0.00
FULL -TIME REGULAR
101 -32 -4105 -0000
273.80
0.00
STREET PAGER PAY
101 -32 -4121 -0000
794,36
0.00
PERA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE
101 -32 -4122 -0000
785.17
0,00
FICA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE
101 -32 -4151 -0000
392.11
0.00
WORKERS COMPENSATION
101 -52- 4101 -0000
4,579.63
0.00
FULL-TIME REGULAR
101 -52 -4103 -0000
810.00
0.00
PART -TIME
101 -52 -4121 -0000
250.08
0.00
PERA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE
101 -52- 4122 -0000
354.13
0.00
FICA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE
101 -52- 4151 -0000
154.48
0.00
WORKERS COMPENSATION
101 -53- 4101 -0000
720.07
0.00
FULL -TIME REGULAR
101 -53- 4103 -0000
360.00
0.00
PART -TIME
101 -53- 4121 -0000
52.21
0.00
PERA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE;
I01 -53- 4122 - 0000
81.50
0.00
FICA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE
101 -53 -4151 -0000
1.44
0.00
WORKERS COMPENSATION
FUND Total:
47,388.57
47,388.57
PR - GIL Distribution Report (0610312014 - 12:46 PM) Page 1
Account Number
Debit Amount
Credit Amount
Description
FUND 201
South9hore Center
201 -00- 1.010 -0000
0.00
1,501.59
CASH AND INVESTMENTS
201 -00- 4101 -0000
1,017.90
0.00
FULL -TIME REGULAR
201 -00- 4102 - 0000
61.43
0.00
OVERFIME,
201 -00- 4103 -0000
245.25
0.00
PART -TIME
201 -00- 4121 -0000
78.25
0.00
PERA CONTRIB - CITY STIARE
201 -00 -4122 -0000
97.09
0.00
FICA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE
201 -00 -4151 -0000
1.67
0.00
WORKERS COMPENSATION
FUND Total:
1,501.59
1,501.59
FUND 601
Water Utility
601 -00 -1.010 -0000
0.00
5,613.40
CASH AND INVESTMENTS
601 -00- 4101 -0000
4,603.52
0.00
FULL -TIME REGULAR
601 -00 -4105 -0000
296.00
0.00
WATER PAGER PAY
601-00- 4121 -0000
299.20
0.00
PERA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE
601 -00- 4122 -0000
299.46
0.00
FICA. CONTRIB - CITY SHARE
601 -00 -4151 -0000
115.22
0.00
WORKERS COMPENSATION
FUND Total:
5,613.40
5,613.40
FUND 611
Sanitary Sewer Utility
611 -00 -101.0 -0000
0.00
4,630.58
CASH AND INVESTMENTS
611 -00 -4101 -0000
3,755.97
0.00
FULL -TIME REGULAR
611 -00 -4105 -0000
296.00
0.00
SEWER PAGER PAY
611 -00 -4121 -0000
237.80
0.00
PERA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE
611 -00- 4122 -0000
251.15
0.00
PICA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE
611 - 00.41.51- 0000
89.66
0.00
WORKERS COMPENSATION
FUND Total:
4,630.58
4,630.58
FUND 621
Recycling Utility
621 -00- 1010 -0000
0.00
376.75
CASH AND INVESTMENTS
621 -00- 41.01 -0000
334.02
0.00
FULL -TIME, REGULAR
621 -00 -4121 -0000
21.24
0.00
PERA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE
621 -00- 4122 -0000
21.49
0.00
FICA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE
FUND Total:
376.75
376.75
FUND 631
Storm Water Utility
631 -00 -1010 -0000
0.00
2,6110.63
CASH AND INVESTMENTS
631 -00- 4101 - 0000
2,174.53
0.00
FULL -TIME REGULAR
631 -00- 4102- 0000
85.20
0.00
OVERTIME
631 -00 -4121 -0000
158.09
0.00
PERA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE
PR - GIL Distribution Report (06103/2014 - 1246 PM) Page 2
Account Number Debit Amount Credit Amount Description
631 -00 -4122 -0000 143.07 0.00 FICA CONTRIB - CITY SHARE
631 -00- 4151 -0000 49,74 0.00 WORKERS COMPENSATION
FUND Total:
2,610.63
2,610,63
FUND 700
Payroll Clearing Fund
700 -00 -1010 - 0000
62,019.71
0.00
CASH AND INVESTMENTS
700 -00- 2170 -0000
0.00
31,000.85
GROSS PAYROLL CLfiARING
700-00-2171-0000
0.00
6,396.05
HEALTH INSURANCE PAYABLE
700 -00 -2172 -0000
0.00
4,101,84
FEDERAL WITHHOLDINGPAYABLE.
700 -00 -2173 -0000
0.00
1,850.28
STATE WITHHOLDING PAYABLE
700 -00 -2174 -0000
0.00
6,943.58
FICA/MEDICARE TAX PAYABLE
700 -60 -2175 -0000
0.00
6,270.05
PERA WITHHOLDING PAYABLE
700 -00 -2176 -0000
0.00
1,625.00
DEFERRED COMPENSATION
700 --00 -21.77 -0000
0.00
87813
WORKERS COMPENSATION
700 -00- 2179 -0000
0.00
192.00
SEiC. 125 DEP CARE REIMB PAYABLE
700 -00- 2180 -0000
0.00
406.73
LIFE. INSURANCE.
700 -00- 2181 -0000
0.00
754.83
DISAMLITY INSURANCE
700 -00- 2182 -0000
0.00
312.32
UNION DUES
700 -00- 2183 -0000
0.00
1,288.05
HEAI,.TH SAVINGS ACCOUNT
FUND Total:
62,019.71
62,019.71.
Report Total:
124,141.23
124,141.23
PR - GIL Distribution Report (0610312014 - 12:46 PV) Page 3
Accounts Payable
Computer Check Proof List by Vendor
User: tnnguyen
Printed: 06/04/2014 - 1 1:56AM
Batch: 0 0001.06.2014 - RWROLL- 06042014
Invoice No ;Description
Amount Payment Bate Acct Number
Reference
Vendor: 5
EFTPS - FEDERAL WIH
Check Sequences: 1
ACH Enabled: True
PR Batch 0000 1.06.2014 FICA Employee Portio
2,81174
06/03/2014
700 -00 -2174 -0000
PR Batch 0000 1.06.2014 FICA Employee
PR Batch 0000 1.06.2014 FICA Employer Portio:
2,81174
06/03/2014
700 -00- 2174 -0000
PR Batch 00001.06.2014 FICA Employer I
PR Batch 0000 1.06.2014 Medicare Employee Pc
658.05
06/03/2014
700 -00- 2174 -0000
PR Batch 00001.06.2014 NlediCare Emglol
PR Batch 0000 1.06.2014 Medicare Employer Po
658.05
06!0./2014
700 -00 -2174 -0000
PR Batch 00001.06.2014 Medicare Emplo_
PR Batch 0000 1.06.2014 Federal Income Tax
4,101.84
07610312014
700 -00- 2172 -0000
PR Batch 00001.06.2014 Federal Income I
Check Total:
11,045,42
Vendor: 2
ICMA RETIRE MENT TRUST-302131-45 7
Check Sequence: 2
ACH Enabled: False
PR Batch 00001.06.2014 Deferred Camp Flat At
1,625.00
06/03/2014
700 -00 -2176 -0000
PR Batch 0000 1,06,2014 Deferred Comp f
Check Total_
1,625.00
Vendor: 481
KELLY LAMPE
Check Scquencc: 3
ACH Enabled: False
21360 Christmas
21360 Christmas Lane Escrow Refund
15,615.00
06/04/2014
880 -00- 2200 -0000
Check Total:
15,615.00
Vendor: I1
MN DEPT OF REVENUE
Check Sequence: 4
ACH Enabled: True
PR Batch 0000 1.0&2014 State Income Tax
1,850.28
06/03/2014
700 -00 -2173 -0000
PR Batch 00001.06.2014 State Income Tax
Check Total:
1,850.28
Vendor: 9
PERA
Check Sequence: 5
ACH Fnabled: True
PR Batch 00001.06.2014 MN -PERA Deduction
2,902.5 i
06/03/2014
700 -00- 2175 -0000
PR Batch 00001.06.2014 MN -PERM Dedu
PR Batch 00001.06.2014 MN PERA Benefit Em
3x367.24
06/03/2014
700 -00- 2175 -0000
PR Batch 00001.06.2014 MN PIRA Benei
Check Total:
6,270.05
Vendor: 1
WFUS FARGO HEALTH BENEFIT SVGS
Check Sequence: 6
ACH Enabled: True
PR Batch 00001.06.2014 Health Savings Accour
1,288.05
06/03 %2014
700 -00 -2183 -0000
PR Batch 00001.06.2014 Health Savings A
Check Total:
1,288.05
AP- Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (06/042014 - 11:56 AM) Pave 1.
Invoice No Description Amount Payment Date Aect Number Reference
Total for Check Run_ 37,693.80
Total of Number of Checks: 6
AP- Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (06/04/2014 - 11:56 AM) Page 2
Accounts Payable
Computer Check
Proof List by Vendor
User:
nnmyet
City of
Printed;
06;05/2014- 1:41PM
Shorewood
Batch:
00002.06.2014 - COUNCIL 06092014
Invoice No
Description
Amount
Payment Date Aect Number
Vendor: 123
BLUE-TARP FINANCIAL INC
Check Sequence: 1
4062018855
Safety vests
100.20
06/49/2414 101 -32- 4245 -04170
Check Total:
100.20
Vendor: 134
CARQUEST AUTO PARTS
Check Sequence- 2
6974- 227082
Exhaust Parts
134,89
06/09/2014 101 -32 -4221 -0000
6974 - 227538
Steering Stabilizer
68,87
06/09/2614 101 -32- 4221 -0000
Check Total:
203.76
Vendor: 136
CENiERPOWT EN11-AGY
Check Sequence: 3
79456885 - 052314
20630 Manor Rd - 04122 -45121
9922
46/09/2014 10t-52-4380-0000
86501806 - 052314
5735 Country Club Rd- 04/22 -OS/21
35.58
06 /09 /2014 201 -00- 4380 -0006
Check Total:
134.84
Vendor: 137
CENTURY LINK
Check Sequence: 4
9524702294 -MY14
952 -410- 2294 -PW
59.57
06109!2014 t01 -32 -4321 -0000
9524706340 -MY14
952- 474 - 6340 -CH
123.09
06109/2014 141 -19- 4321 -0000
9524709605 -MY14
952- 474 - 9605 - Amesbury
75.09
06109/2014 601 -00- 4394 -0400
9524709606 -MY14
952 -474- 9606 - Amesbury
75.09
06/0912014 601 -00- 4394 -0000
Check Total:
332.84
Vendor: 138
CERTIFIED APPLIANCE RECYCLING
Check Sequence: 5
39923
Spring Cleanup
6,740!14
06/0912014 621 -00- 3732 -0000
Check Total:
6,740.40
Vendor: 143
CITY OF CHAN-HAS SEN
Check Sequence, 6
05131/2014
018505- 002- Stornmater- PID25- 7700060
39.45
06/09/2014 101 -52 -4380 -0000
Check Total
39.45
Vendor: 158
CUB FOODS - SHOREWOOD
Check Sequence: 7
05/24114 -Park
Park Commission Meeting - 05127
29.78
06109!2014 101 -52- 4245 -0000
Check Total,
29.78
Vendor 166
EARL F ANDERSEN
Check Sequence: 8
0104796 -IN
Traffic Cove
396.00
06/09/2014 101 -32 -4254 -0000
Check Total:
396.00
Vendor: 167
ECM PUBLISHERS INC
Check Sequence: 9
164825
Planning * - PHN - Lehman Variance
82.58
06/09/2014 101 -18 -4351 -0000
104826
Planning- PHN - Xcel Energy CUP
82.58
06/0912014 101-18-435t-0000
Check Total:
16516
Vendor: 483
EDINA COURIER
Check Sequence: 10
44470
Alcohol 8c Ganbling Enforcement Package
75.64
06/09/2014 101 -13- 4208 -6000
Check Total:
75.64
Vendor: 181
EXCELSIOR -LAKE MINNETONKA CHAMBER
Check Sequence: 11
909 -2014
July 4th -2014 Fireworks Sponsorship
5,00600
06!0912014 101 -11- 4433 -0000
Check Total:
5,000.00
Vendor: 184
GREGORY FASCHING
Check Sequence: 12
06!0412414
Child Care Reimbursement- 06104114
1,597.00
06/09/2014 706 -00 -2179 -0004
Check Total:
1,597.00
Vendor: 183
PATRICIA EASCHING
Cheer; Sequence: 13
(35!28114 -Elect
Election Training Mileage & Lunch
1190
06109/2014 101 -13 -4331 -0000
Check Total:
12.90
Fund Dept
General Pub Works
General Pub Works
General Pub Works
Generat Pail: Mann
SSC Non -Dept
Genetnl Pub Works
General Mum Bldg
Water Von -Dept
Water Non -Dept
Recycling Non -Dept
General Park Maint
General Park Maint
General Pub Works
General Planning
General Piannin8
General Adrnin
General Councit
Payroll Non�Dept
General Adrnin
Accounts Payable
a
Completer Check
Proof.List by Vendor
,
User:
muguyer,
M%Shorewood city of
Psinfed:
06/0512014 - 1:41PM
13atcL
00002.062014 - COUNCIL 06092014
Invoice No
Description
Amount
Payment Date Acet Number
Fund
Dept
Vendor: 185
FEDEX KfNKO'S
Check Sequence: 14
077000005293
A nrs Copy - 5830 3rcntridge
22.07
06109/2014 101. 24 -4351 -0000
General
1 €1sp
077000005294
Plans Copy - 5960 Fake Linden Court
53.10
06/09/2014 101- 24 -4351 -0000
General
1€1sp
077000005295
Plans Copy -26820 Marsh Pointe Circle
38.62
06/09/2014 161 -24- 4351 -0000
General
lisp
Check -Total:
103.79
Vendor: 186
FERGUSON WATERWORKS No2516
Check Sequence: 15
(168211)3
Water Meters & Parts
2,021.58
06/09/2014 661 -00 -4265 -0000
Wafer
Non -Dept
Check Total:
2,021.58
Vendor: 192
G & K SERVICES
Check Sequence: 16
M.ay -2014
SSCC - May Svc
51.00
06/09/2014 201 -00 -4400 -0000
SSC
Non -Dept
May -2014
C.H. -May Svc
111.36
06/09/2914 1.01 -19. 4400 -0000
General
Mini Bldg
May -2014
P.W. -.May Svc
961.18
06/0912014 101- 324400 -0000
General
Pub Works
Check Total:
1,123.54
Vendor: 260
GOPHER STATE ONE CALL
Check Sequence: 17
109268
May Svc
171.75
06/09/2014 631 -00 -4400 -0000
Storin Water
Non -Dept
109268
May Svc
171.70
06/09/2014 601 -00- 4400 -0000
Water
Non -Dept
109268
May Svc
171.70
06/09/2014 611 -00- 4400 -0000
Sewer
Non -Dept
Check TotA
51.5.15
Vendor: 206
TWILA GROUT
Check Sequence, I8
0512 8/1 4- F:lect
Lunch for Election Training
4.50
06/0912014 101 -13- 4331 -0004
General
Admin
9 512 9114 - Flower
Flowers for Planters
78.75
06/09/2014 201 -00- 4245 -0000
SSC
Non -Dept
Check Total:
83.25
Vendor: 211
HAWKINS INC
Check Sequence: 19
3598983 -R.1
Chiori€te
105.00
06/09/2014 601-00- 4245 -0000
Water
Non -Dept
Check TotaL
105.00
Vendor: 430
MARK HODGES
Check Sequence: 20
05/27/2014
Video Tape Service- 05/27/14
60.00
06/09/2914 101 -11- 4400 -0000
General
Council
Check Total:
60.00
Vendor: 221
ICS - HEALY -RUFF
Check Sequence: 21
18099
SE Well Coutmmnity Services
415.60
06/09/2014 601 -00- 4400 -0000
Water
Non -I)cpt
18112
Modem & Service - SE Well
723.22
06/09/2014 601 -00- 4400 -0000
Water
Non -Dept
Check Total:
1,138.82
Vendor: 239
KENNEDY & GRAVEN CHARTERED
Check Sequence: 22
120132
Ron Johnson Litigation - Apr Svc
1450
06/09/2014 101 -16 -4304 -0009
General
Prof Svcs
Check Total:
14.54
Vendor: 240
KENNETH N POTTS PA
Check Sequence: 23
May -2014
Prosectution Svc -May
2,500.00
06/09/2014 101 -16- 4304 -0000
General
Prof Svcs
Check l'ota1:
2.500.00
Vendor: 461
KENT HUDSON & ASSOCIATES
Check Sequence: 24
20140218
U13 Data Pull
525.00
06/09/2014 403 -00- 4649 -0004
Equip Rep]
Non -Dept
Check Total,
525.00
Vendor: 247
DREW KRIESEL
Check Sequence: 25
May -2014
May - Rental Services
550.00
06/0.9,12014 201 -06 -4400 -0006
SSC
Non -Dept
May -2014
May- Cleaning Services
361.00
06/09/2014 201 -06 - 4406 -0006
SSC
Non -Dept
May -2014
Sant's Supplies
36.18
06/09/2014 201 -06 -5245 -0006
SSC
Non -Dept
Check Total:
947.18
Accounts Payable
Computer- Check Proof List by Vendor
User,
rnnguyen
UlShorewood
City of
Printed:
06/05/2014 - 1:41PM
Batch:
00002.062014 -COUNCIL 06092014
invoice No
Description
Amount
Payment Date Acct Number
Fund
Dept
Vendor: 482
KUTAK ROCK LLP
Check Sequence: 26
1949569
Personnel - Apr
444.00
06109/2014 101 -16- 4304 -0064
General
Prof Svcs
1949570
Pabiic Improvement Project - Mar
610 50
66/09/2014 101.16 -4304 -0060
General
Prof Svcs
1949571
land Use & Developruent - Apr
1,452,00
06/09/2014 161 -16- 4304 -0000
General
Prof Svcs
1949572
Aquatic Invasive Species Agree - Apr
943 SO
06/09/20 t 4 101 -16- 4304 -0060
General
Prof Svcs
1949573
Smithtown Trail - Mar
55 50
06/09/2014 406 -M- 4620 -0001
Tra j
Non -Dept
1.949574
Solar Devdopment - Mar
37.00
06/09/2014 101 -16- 4304 -0000
General
Prof.sves
Check Total:
3,542.50
Vendor: 285
(MIDWEST GOVERNMENT ADVISOR
Check Sequence: 27
May -2014
Admin Svc - Mav
9,720,00
061091201.4 101 -13- 4400 -0060
General
Admin
Check Total:
9,720.00
Vendor: 289
MINDER CONSTRUCTION INC
Check Sequence: 28
PV117- PrcjI3 -01
PVf11 -Proj 13 -01- 2013 St- Drainage & Utility Impvt
84,720,62
061091201.4 404 -00- 4620 -0003
Street Cap
Non -Dept
Check Total:
84,720.62
Vendor: 306
1U111F MOORF
Check Sequence: 29
02,'19114- Spackl
Spackling for SSCC
4,28
06109!201.4 201 -00- 4246 -0000
SSC
Non -Dept
04121114 -Movie
Foods for Movie
16.56
06109!2014 201 -00 -4246 -0000
SSC
Non -Dept
05127174- Dishes
Dishes for SSCC
27139
06/09/2014 201 -00- 4246 -0000
SSC
Non -Dept
05127114- Mileag
Posts for Park - Mileage to Office Max
5.60
06/09/2014 101 -52 -4331 -0000
Gcncral
Park Maint
05!27114 -Posts
Posts for Park
55.56
06/09/2014 101 -52 -4245 -0000
Gencral
Park Maint
Check Total:
355.39
Vendor: 463
MT] DISTRIBUTING INC.
Check Sequence: 36
9591 52 -00
Mower Deck Parts
24.08
06/09/2014 101 -32- 4221 -0000
General
Pub Works
Check Total',
24,08
Vendor: 3133
MI.CII.E1.LF", N0UY1:?N
Check Sequence: 37
May -2014
Mileage - May
76.16
06109'2014 101 -15- 4331 -0000
General
Fin
Check Total:
76,16
Vendor: 325
ON SITE SANITATION INC
Check Sequence', 32
A- 539176
Badger Park
50.00
06/09/2014 101 - 524410 -0000
General
Park Main[
A- 539177
Cathcart Park
50.00
06/0912014 101 -52- 4410 -0000
General
Park Maint
A- 539178
Freeman Park
150.00
06/49/2014 101- 524410 -0000
General
Park Maint
A- 539179
Silverwood Park
50.00
06/0912014 101 -52- 4410 -0000
General
Park Main(
A- 539180
South Shore Skate
50.00
06/09/2014 101- 524410 -0000
General
Park Maim
A- 539181
Christmas Lk Boat Access
220.00
06/09/2014 101 -52- 4410 -0000
General
Park Maint
A- 541880
Cz'esent Beach
33.93
06/09/2014 101 -52- 4410 -0000
General
Park Maint
Check Total:
603.93
Vendor: 108
REPUBLIC SERVICES No.894
Check Sequence: 33
308944029486
Recycling Svc - run
13,746.20
06/09/2014 621 -00 -4400 -0000
Recycling;
Non -Dept
Check Total:
13,746.20
Vendor: 346
SAFETY SIGNS
Check Sequence: 34
14200813
Spring Cleanup Cones
745.50
06/09/2014 621 -00- 3732 -0000
Recycling
Non -Dept
Check Total:
745.50
Vendor: 484
SEW ON & SO ON
Check Sequence: 35
480B
Digitizing of Logo
30.00
06109/2614 101 -11- 4400 -0000
General
Council
Check Total:
30.00
Vendor: 353
SI IALO LEE BAND
Check Sequence: 36
0 611 311 4 -MIP
Music in the Park Event 06/13/14
1,500.€10
06/09/2014 101 -53- 4247 -0000
General
Recreation
Check Total:
1,500.00
Accounts Payable
Computer CZeck Proof List by Vendor
user:
17111g'nyell
Printed:
06!05!2014 - 1 :41PM
Batch:
00002.06.2014 - COUNCIL 06092014
Invoice No
Description
Vcadar. 354
SHOREWOOD TRUE VA1,13F
119661
Chains, Links Mowers
119662
Bolts, Nuts, Screws
119709
Clean Supplies
119784
Plumbing Water
119882
Stakes
Check Total]
Vendor, 368
STONESCAPE:S
3988
Garden Maint. - May Svc
16,46
Check Total �
Vendor: 378
KENNETH A THIES
06!13/14 -M1P
Trailer to Badger Park -MCP Event 06/13/14
06/09/2014 101 - 324245.0400
Check 'Lol:at:
Vcndor: 384
TOTAI., PRINTING SERVICES
9880
Music in The Park Insert
9880
SSCC Insert - Jun
9860
'Newsletters - Jun
Check Sequence: 38
Check'Total.
Vendor, 392
VALLEY -RICH CO. INC.
20128
Waternlain Break Anlesbuty
General
Check Total:
Vendor: 421
VERI7.Ci'v WIRELESS
9725114242
Brad's Cell - 04/1 3 -051i 2
9725661981
1, S. Phones - 04/22-05/21
Check Total:
Vendor: 398
VOYAGrR FLEET SYS'II;MS INC
869293803421
Closing Dal:e 05124
06/09/2014 101 -53 -4247 -0000
Check Total:
Vendor: 401
WASTE MANAGEMENT OF WNMN
665731115937
5735 County Club Rd - tun
665731215935
24200 Snnthtown Rd -Jun
Check Total:
Vendor. 327
WINDSTREAM
57374439
Parks Service
57374439
CH Service
57374439
PW Service
57374439
West Water Tower Service
57374439
Badger Well Service
57374439
Boulder Bridge Well Svc
663.50
Check Total:
Vendon 408
WM MUELLER & SONS INC
192926
Road Mailnt
Check Total
City of
Shorewood
544.91
Check Sequence: 46
932,64 06/09/2014 101 -32 -4250 -0000 General Pub Works
932.64
Amount
Payment Date Acct Number
Fund
Dept
Check Setuence: 37
18,98
061091207.4 101 -32- 4221 -0000
General
Pub Works
11.60
06/09/2014 101 -32- 4245 -0000
General
Pub Works
24.98
06/09/2014 101 -52- 4245 -0000
General
Park Maint
16,46
06/09/2014 601 -00- 4221 -0000
Water
Not] -Dept
46.51
06/09/2014 101 - 324245.0400
General
Pub Works
118,53
Check Sequence: 38
210.00
06/09/2014 101 -19 -4223 -0000
General
Mun Bldg
210.00
Chcck Setuence, 39
100,00
06/09/2014 101 -53 -4247 -0000
Genera]
Recreation
100.00
Check Sequence: 40
237.00
06/09/2014 101 -53- 4246 -13000
General
Recreation
132.00
06/09/2014 201 -00- 4400 -0000
SSC
Non -Dept
663.50
06/09/2014 101 -13- 4400 -0000
General
Admin
1,032.50
Check Scquencc.41
4,870.06
06/09/2014 601 -00- 4400 -0400
Water
Non -Dept
4,870.06
Check Sequence: 42
56.44
06/09/2014101 -18- 4321-0000
General
Planning
21830
06/09;2014 611 -00- 4321 -0000
Scwer
Non -Dept
275.14
Check Sequence-43
4,580.28
06109/2014 10132 -4212 -0000
General
Pub Works
4,580.28
M1eck Sequence' 44
191.86
0610912614 201 -00 - 4400 -0000
SSC
Non -Dept
449.08
06/0912014 101 -32- 4400 -0000
General
Putt Works
640.94
Check Sequence: 45
159.86
06/09/2014 101 -52- 4321 -OD00
General
ParkNiaint
115.06
06109/2014 101 -19- 4321 -0000
General
MEnt Bldg
51.52
06/09/2014 101 -32- 4321 -0000
General
Pub Works
54.17
06.!09!2014 601 -00- 4321.0000
Water
Non -Dept
110.13
06/09/2014 601 -00- 4395 -0000
Water
Non -Dept
54.17
46/09/2014 601 -40- 4396 -00013
Water
Non -Dept
544.91
Check Sequence: 46
932,64 06/09/2014 101 -32 -4250 -0000 General Pub Works
932.64
Accounts Payable
Completer Check Proof List by Vendor
User: mnguyen
Printed, 06105/2014- 1 AIPM
Batch: 00002.06 2014 - COUNCIL 06092014
Invoice No Description
Vendor: 411
XCGL 13NERGY
Stn &413183827
P.W. Street. Lights Svc -
Sttnt#413183827
Parks
Sttratl,1413183827
P.W. Bldg Svc -
Stci ((13183827
C.H. Svcs -
Stmt#t413183827
Botddcr Bridge Svc -
Stnat »4 1 3 1 83827
S.F:. Area Svc -
Stnwl413183827
Amesbury Svc -
Stnrty413 1 83 827
Street Lights -
Stmt#413870680
24253 Smi€1itown Rd - t)5123-M25
Shnifl4t3886861
5735 Country Club Ra - 04123 -05125
Sint #414190953
5700 County Rd 19 - 04128 -M28
Suot#41419096.3
5700 Conn£y Rd 19 - Unit Light-040M-05/28
Check "Total: I0,(iS7.91
Total for Check Run: 162,993.03
Total of Number oP Checks: 47
CICity of
Shorewood
Amount
Payment Date Acet Number
Fund
Delft
Cluck SCuence: 47
3,440.85
06/09/2014 101 -32- 4399 -0000
General
Pnb Works
340.65
06/09/2014101- 52 -438p -0000
General
Park Maint
510.84
06/09/2014 101 -32- 4380 -0000
General
Pub Works
465.69
06/09/2014 101 -19 -4380 -OOW
General
Mun Bldg
260.44
06/09/2014 601 -00 -4396 -0000
Water
Non -Dept
2,947.58
06/09/2014 601 -00- 4398 -0000
Water
Nnn- 1)epi'
294.05
06/09/2014 601 -00- 4394 -0000
Water
Non -Dept
566.82
06/09/2014 611 -00 -438(1-000)
Sewer
Non -Dept
876.38
06/09/2014 601 -00- 4395 -0000
Water
Non -Dept
735.42
06/09/2014 201 -00- 4380 -0000
SSC
Non -Dept
34.06
06!0912014101 -32- 4399 -0000
General
PnhWorks
194.23
06/09/2014 101 -32- 4399 -0000
General
Nob Works
#3B
MEETING TYPE
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting
Title / Subject: Establishing the Purchase Card Policy
Meeting Date: June 9, 2014
Prepared by: Bruce DeJong, Finance Director
Reviewed by: Bill Joynes, City Administrator
Attachments: Resolution
Purchase Card Policy
Policy Consideration: Does the City Council want to adopt a policy for employee Purchasing Card use?
Background: The City Council authorized staff to implement a purchasing card policy through PFM in
conjunction with the National League of Cities. We have modified the model policy that PFM uses to fit
Shorewood's needs. That policy is attached for your approval.
The authorized dollar amounts may seem large, but it is primarily related to fuel purchases from Public Works
employees. When you fill vehicle tanks on a regular basis, it can bring about high charges, particularly if you are
filling the fuel trailer at around 250 gallons.
Financial or Budget Considerations:
This policy will allow us to use purchasing cards for more convenient purchasing, allow charges to not be placed
on personal credit cards, and reduce the amount of vendors being paid through the accounts payable system.
This should ease administrative burdens while improving employee satisfaction with city practices.
Options:
1. Approve the policy as presented.
2. Modify the schedule to meet Council concerns.
3. Do nothing at this time and allow staff to implement the cards without written guidance.
Recommendation / Action Requested: Adopt the resolution as presented.
Next Steps and Timelines: Order purchasing cards for authorized employees.
Connection to Vision / Mission: This item is connected to providing efficient city 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
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
RESOLUTION NO. 14-
RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING THE PURCHASE CARD POLICY
WHEREAS, the City Council authorized staff to join a purchase card program through the
National League of Cities operated by PFM; and
WHEREAS, the purchasing card use should be covered by a policy governing their use for city
purposes only and ensuring timely reporting processes; and
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to efficiently purchase city services and supplies;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shorewood
authorizes the attached Purchase Card Policy.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 9th day of
June, 2014.
ATTEST:
Jean Panchyshyn, City Clerk
Scott Zerby, Mayor
City of Shorewood
MASTERCARD
PURCHASE CARD POLICY
Procedures Manual for City of Shorewood
Program Card Administration
Name: Bruce DeJong 952 -960 -7903
Name: Bill Joynes 952 -960 -7905
Table of Contents
Introduction
To Obtain a MasterCard Purchase Card
General Information
Acceptable MasterCard Purchase Card Purchases_
Unacceptable MasterCard Purchase Card Purchases
Program Restrictions
Reconciliation and Payment
When Your Records Do Not Agree With Your Monthly Statement
Lost or Stolen Cards
Sales and Use Tax
In Summary
Purchase Card Glossary.
Appendix:
Cardholder Application Form 13
Acknowledgment of Receipt of the MasterCard
Purchase Card 14
Purchase Card Order Log 15
Cardholder Misuse Report 16
Terms of Revocation Form 17
2
3
4
5
6
7
g
9
10
10
11
11
12
Introduction
Welcome to the City of Shorewood MasterCard Purchase Program provided by PFM Financial Services
LLC ( "PFM ") through BMO Harris Bank N.A., IL. The Purchase Card is a simplified and cost - effective
method of purchasing and remitting payment for approved expenditures. The Purchase Card can be used
for retail purchases; i.e. in person or by mail, online, telephone or fax.
The Purchase Card is embraced by public and private organizations as a means to create an easy to use
process perfectly suited for all dollar purchases. In the continuing effort to improve service to our staff,
this is one more opportunity to achieve that goal.
The Purchase Card is to be used in accordance with the guidelines established within this manual. You are
asked to treat this program with the same sense of responsibility and security you would use with you
personal credit cards.
All Purchase Cards are issued at the request of City of Shorewood and card usage will be audited and may
be rescinded at any time. You are the only person authorized to use your card!
This manual provides the guidelines under which you may utilize your Purchase Card. Please read it
carefiilly. Your signature on the Cardholder Authorization Form indicates that you understand the intent
of the program and agree to adhere to the guidelines established for the program. The Program Card
Administrator will receive your Purchase Card approximately 7 -10 business days after submitting your
application to PFM Upon receipt of your card, the Program Card Administrator will schedule you for a
Purchase Card training session. Upon successful completion of your training session, you will receive
your card. At the training session you will fill out the Acknowledgement Form for receipt of your card.
You may then call the Bank activation number (1- 800 - 263 -2263) to activate your purchasing card. Please
contact Brice DeJong, Finance Director if you have any questions.
Record keeping will be essential to ensure the success of this program. This is not an extraordinary
requirement since our standard reimbursement policies require the retention of all receipts.
Finally, remember you are spending on behalf of the City of Shorewood each time you use the Purchase
Card.
3
To Obtain a (Fill in Name of Entity) MasterCard Purchase Card
Please read this manual in its entirety before requesting your MasterCard Purchase Card. The manual will
provide you with a variety of information:
How to apply for a Purchase Card
What type of purchases can and cannot be made on the Purchase Card
What type of merchants will accept the Purchase Card
Record maintenance and monthly statement reconciliation
Other miscellaneous information
Your city must indicate approval by signing the Cardholder Application form before it can be processed.
All requests will be processed through Brice DeJong — 952 - 960 -7903.
After you have read this manual and understand the outlined procedures, please complete the Cardholder
Application Form. You must indicate your City of Shorewood mailing address and
e -mail address to receive statements and correspondence related to the program.
Read carefully and sign the Cardholder Application Form. Your Authorized Supervisor will also be asked
to sign this form.
When you receive your Purchase Card, sign the back of the card and call the Bank to activate the card.
Always keep the card in a safe place! Then, sign the Acknowledgment Form and return it to Purchasing.
Although the card is issued in your name, it is the property of the City of Shorewood and is only to be
used for Shorewood purchases as defined in this manual.
Purchase cards are renewed automatically and new cards are issued by BMO Harris Bank every 36 to 48
months.
You will be assigned a company ID and User ID in the set -up process of accessing BMO details Online
report and card management website, this will occur during training with the Program Card
Administrator.
F!
General Information
The Purchase Card may be used at any merchant that accepts MasterCard credit cards.
The Purchase Card is not to be used for personal purchases.
You are responsible for the security of your card and any transactions made against the card. The
Purchase Card is issued in your name and it will be assumed that any purchases made against the
Purchase Card will have been made by you.
Use of the Purchase Card not in accordance with the guidelines established for this program will result
in revocation of the card.
You will not be charged an annual fee for your card.
BMO Harris Bank will pay merchants within 24 -48 hours of (the merchants') posting of your
transaction to MasterCard.
Your department budget is reduced by each transaction and posted in the following month.
Original receipts and a copy of the Monthly Card Member Activity Report (printed from BMO
details Online Website) should be forwarded to Finance, by the 4th of each month.
5
Acceptable MasterCard Purchase Card Purchases
The following information provides examples of purchases that are appropriate for the Purchase Card:
O Recurring Expenses, i.e. leases, insurance
O Utilities
O Fuel, maintenance equipment
O Approved supplies for your program
O Constriction Materials
O Conference /Seminar registrations
O Travel/Conference expenses
O Bookstores
O Hardware Stores
O Fed Ex/UPS charges
O Other miscellaneous items that apply to your program and budget
Unacceptable MasterCard Purchase Card Purchases
The following items define where the Purchase Card is not an appropriate choice:
O Alcoholic Beverages /tobacco
O Lottery Tickets
O Cash Advances, or ATMS's
O Gift Certificates
This list is not intended to be all - inclusive. If you have specific questions, please call your Purchase Card
Administrator for assistance.
in
Program Restrictions
Each MasterCard Purchase Card will be assigned a monthly credit limit determined by your supervisor.
BMO Harris Bank will only take direction from your authorized program administrator. All requests and
limit changes must be approved and made by your program administrator, or BMO Harris Bank will not
make those changes.
The MasterCard will be accepted for purchases of generally approved City of Shorewood commodities.
Businesses and services determined not to offer products commonly accepted for City of Shorewood use
have been blocked from accepting the Purchase Card. Limiting the acceptable Merchant Category Codes
does this. The Merchant Category Code is a four -digit classification code used in the authorization and
settlement systems to identify the type of merchant (commonly known as Standard Industrial Code
"SIC"
Levels of credit authorization are in place to clearly define the individual purchasing limit controls. We
have chosen to define our control limits by levels. Each designated level can have a transaction limit,
daily limit, and monthly limit and will be set by the Program Administrator.
Transaction Daily Monthly
Level Limit Limit Credit Limit
Reg Employee $1,000 $2,000 $5,000
Dept Head $5,000 $5,000 $10,000
Transactions falling outside the assigned level are designed to be declined at the
point of sale.
If your card is declined by a merchant and you feel the decline should not have occurred, contact Brice
DeJong within 24 hours.
Request for transaction, daily and monthly limit changes are to be made by the Department Director to
the Program Card Administrator.
7
Reconciliation and Payment
The MasterCard Purchase Card program carries corporate, not individual, liability. A single invoice
covering all City of Shorewood purchases will be generated each month. Purchase Cards will be paid
each month by Finance. You will not be required to pay your monthly statement using personal funds.
The Purchase Card does not impact your personal credit rating in any way.
It is required that you retain all original receipts for goods purchased. If you purchase via phone or
mail, require the merchant to include a receipt with the goods when the product is shipped to you. If that
is not possible, you must obtain a packing slip when the shipment is received to document the purchase.
Every cardholder will need to review their statement (at a minimum one time per month and can be
reviewed within details Online within 24 -48 hours) for all transactions made against their MasterCard
Purchase Card during the previous billing cycle. You will be notified by e -mail to review and approve
your transactions on the 28th day of the month. You will have 7 days to complete this task. You have the
option to change (reclassify) default coding, or to split and reclassify between multiple codes. Original
receipts and a copy of your BMO Harris Bank Statement (printed form the website) should be forwarded
to the Program Card Administrator each month, by the 4th of the month.
The cardholder may keep a transaction log of all receipts and statements. The log serves to remind
cardholders of transactions and assists in reconciliation of the monthly statements. A periodic audit will
be conducted of card activity, retention of receipts, reconciled detail and signed monthly statements.
Misuse of the MasterCard Purchase Card includes:
O Using the Purchase Card for personal purchases
O Purchase of unauthorized items
O Use of the Purchase Card by someone other than the cardholder
O Fraudulent or inaccurate record keeping
In the case of misuse, the (fill in) shall document the occurrence on the Cardholder Misuse Report and
forward it to the Program Card Administrator immediately for further action.
8
When Your Records Do Not Agree with Your Monthly Statement
There may be an occasion when you find items on your transaction log that do not correlate with your
retained receipts or monthly cardholder statement. Reconciliation of your monthly statement is very
important to determine if you made a particular transaction, the amount of the transaction is correct, or
you have a quality or service issue.
Your first recourse is to contact the merchant involved to try to resolve the error. If the merchant agrees
that an error has been made, your account will be credited. Highlight the transaction in question on your
statement as a reminder that the item is still pending resolution. Be sure to check that the credit is received
on your next monthly statement.
If you are unable to resolve the issue directly with the merchant, contact the customer service department
at BMO Harris Bank, 1- 888 - 267 -7838. When calling, be sure to have detailed information regarding the
dispute. State that you would like to dispute a charge on your Purchase Card. You are required by law to
submit the information in writing to initiate a claims dispute with BMO Harris Bank. The amount of the
next monthly statement will be reduced by the amount of the disputed item until the question is resolved.
(See Cardholder Dispute Form at the back of the manual.)
Any charge you wish to dispute must be identified in writing within 30 days of the statement date to BMO
Harris Bank.
You are responsible for the transactions identified on your statement. When an audit is conducted on your
account, you must be able to produce receipts that a City of Shorewood approved transaction occurred. If
an error is discovered you are responsible to show that the error or dispute resolution process has been
followed.
Lost or Stolen Cards
The MasterCard Purchase Card is the property of City of Shorewood and should be secured just as you
would secure your personal credit cards. If your card is lost or stolen, contact BMO Harris Bank customer
service number (1- 888 - 267- 7838), immediately then notify the Purchase Card Administrator. When
calling customer service, be prepared to provide your social security number.
Upon notifying BMO Harris Bank, the card will be deactivated immediately. If the card is reported lost or
stolen and is later used, the Merchant will decline it. Prompt action in these circumstances is very
important to reduce City of Shorewood possible liability for fraudulent charges.
9
Sales Tax
Merchants are usually required by taxing authorities to include sales tax when goods are purchased. The
amount is dependent on a variety of factors, including the state and city where you are purchasing the
goods.
Purchases of items by public or non - profit entities are generally exempt from sales tax. The exemption
applies to the public or non - profits, not to the individual.
It is the cardholder's responsibility to notify the merchant that City of Shorewood is Tax Exempt since
the data strip on the card does not carry such information embedded in it. Our Minnesota state tax exempt
number is "8021972" and a copy of the City of Shorewood tax exempt form ST -3 is included in the back
of this manual. You will need to make a copy of the form, insert the vendor name, and then date the form
prior to issuance (i.e., faxing or mailing). Do not distribute this form to any other employee in the
organization. If they need one, they have been provided with a copy.
Should you have additional questions, please contact a Brice DeJong for assistance.
Summary
The City of Shorewood Purchase Card Program is an opportunity to reduce paperwork, expedite the
purchasing process at the department level and reduce administrative expenses.
Historically, City of Shorewood has used numerous other methods to make purchases. The Purchase Card
process will allow us to realize significant savings in administrative processing costs while providing a
customer friendly, efficient and effective method to buy goods and services.
Exercise good judgment and act within your authorized budget when using your card. The Purchase Card
is issued in your name and all activity will be assumed to have been incurred by you. We ask you to
maintain simple but accurate records and receipts for auditing purposes.
The City of Shorewood is working to continually improve the way business is conducted and your
feedback is critical to achieving that goal. Your use of a MasterCard Purchase Card for appropriate
purchases can help us achieve significant savings by decreasing the amount of checks we process each
month.
The purchase card is a program in progress to be utilized as another option to make purchases. The
program will continue to evolve and transform as it best fits the Shorewood's needs.
If you have any questions about the program or need additional information, please contact:
10
Purchase Card Glossary
Retail Face to face transaction Nvhere cardholder presents the
Purchase card to the merchant and the card are physically
swiped through the terminal.
Principal /Department Person authorized to oversee and make decisions
Head regarding expenditures.
Customer The card user and Principal/Department Supervisor.
Vendor /Merchant /Supplier Svnonymous terms, meaning the place Nvhere you make
the purchase.
Program Card Administrator A District employee(s) administering the purchase
Card program. Bruce DeJong — 952 - 960 -7903.
Revocation To nullify by Nvithdrav, ng, recalling or reversing card
privileges.
Receipt Written acknoNvledgement that merchandise or service has
been received.
Invoice An itemized list of goods or services shipped or received Nvith an account
of all costs.
Statement Summary of all sales in a given period (NOT AN INVOICE)
Strategy Operational criteria defining purchasing limit controls Nvhich
are tied to each individual account.
Point of Sale (POS) Terminal A device placed at a vendor /merchant/supplier location
Nvhich is connected to the bank's system via the telephone
lines and is designed to authorize, record, and forward
data by electronic means for each sale.
Cardholder An individual to whom a Harris Bank MasterCard Purchase
Card is issued.
Merchant Category Code (MCC) A four -digit classification code used in the authorization
and settlement systems to identify the type of merchant,
also commonly knoN -,n as, Standard Industrial Code (SIC).
Reconciliation Check to assure receipts match Nvith monthly statements.
11
CARDHOLDER APPLICATION FORM
MasterCard Purchase Card applicants need to acquire authorization from their
Department Head to apply for the Purchase Card.
11 APPLICANT INFORMATION: (Please print clearly) 11
Location Phone Number
Location Address
Applicant's Name.
Applicant's E -Mail address
Transaction Limit: Daily Limit: Monthly Limit:
Approver Name
Approver E -Mail address
II AUTHORIZING INFORMATION II
As the Department Head, I hereby grant the above mentioned Applicant authorization to apply for, and
use, the City of Shorewood MasterCard Purchase Card for the account number listed below. I also agree
to review and sign the monthly MasterCard Purchase Card statements issued to the above applicant. If the
applicant's employment with the City of Shorewood is terminated, I agree to notify the Program Card
Administrator.
Department Head Signature
Default Budget Account Code
12
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF RECEIPT OF THE MASTERCARD
PURCHASE CARD
I acknowledge that, on the date indicated below, I received my Purchase Card. I have previously received
a copy of the procedure manual explaining the use and responsibilities of the Purchase Card.
I understand that:
The Purchase Card is a cost - effective method for the purchase and payment of goods and services for (fill
in name of entity) use and is limited to $
per month.
The Purchase Card is to be used solely for business purchases; not personal purchases.
I am responsible for reconciling monthly statements and maintaining accurate accounting records.
Should my employment with (fill in name of entity) terminate, I am responsible for returning the Purchase
Card to the Program Card Administrator immediately.
Employee Signature
Employee Name
(Please Print)
Date:
13
Please return this form to Bruce DeJong, Finance Director
(Fill in name of entity)
MasterCard Order Log
Cardholder Name:
Department:
Office Location:
For The Period:
Date
Ordered
Date
Delivered
Total $
Amount
Description
Expense Code
1
2
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
18
20
Cardholder Signature:
Date:
14
Authorizing Signature:
Dept /Title:
Date:
Date:
Location:
DESCRIPTION OF
MISUSE:
ACTION
TAKEN:
RECOMMENDATION:
SUBMITTED
BY:
TELEPHONE
NUMBER:
CARDHOLDER MISUSE REPORT
SEND THIS FORM TO THE FINANCE DIRECTOR
IMMEDIATELY FOR REVIEW AND PROCESSING
15
TERMS OF REVOCATION FORM
As an authorized user of the MasterCard Purchase Card, I understand that I am the only person authorized
to make purchases with the Purchase Card issued to me and that such purchases must be in connection
with my employment with, for the benefit of, and authorized by City of Shorewood
I understand that the following items constitute misuse of the MasterCard Purchase Card and that any
misuse will result in the revocation of my privileges to be a MasterCard Purchase Cardholder, and may
result in revocation of all departmental and /or divisional Purchase Card privileges.
Misuse of the MasterCard Purchase Card includes the following:
O Using the MasterCard Purchase Card for personal purchases
O Purchase of unauthorized items
O Use of the Purchase by someone other than the cardholder
O Fraudulent or inaccurate record keeping
If the MasterCard Purchase Card is used for personal purchases, for unauthorized items or by someone
other than myself, I hereby agree to personally pay either City of Shorewood or the vendor for such
purchases and hereby authorize City of Shorewood, if necessary, to withhold from my paycheck any
amount necessary to pay these charges.
Name of Cardholder
(Please Print)
Cardholder's Signature
Date
NOTE: In addition to the above consequences for misuse of the MasterCard Purchase Card, City of Shorewood retains the
right to take further action, whether in the form of disciplinan- action, termination of employment, and /or legal
prosecution, in the event of gross misuse or fraud involving City of Shorewood fiords.
16
MINNESOTA- REVENUE ST3
Certificate of Exemption
Purchaser: Complete this certificate and give it to the seller.
Seller: If this certificate is not fully completed, you must charge sales tax. Keep this certificate as part of your records.
This is a blanket certificate, unless one of the boxes below is checked, and remains in force as long as the purchaser continues making
purchases, or until otherwise cancelled by the purchaser.
Check if this certificate is for a single purchase and enter the related invoice /purchase order #
❑ If you are a contractor and have a purchasing agent agreement with an exempt organization, check the box to make multiple
purchases for a specific job. Enter the exempt entity name and specific project:
Exempt entity name Project description
Name of purchaser
City of Shorewood
Business address city State Zip code
5755 Country Club Rd Shorewood MN 55331
= Purchaser's tax ID number State of issue
8021972 MINI
If no tax ID number, FEIN Driver's license number /State issued ID number
CL A enter one of the following: state of issue number
F
Name of seller from whom you are purchasing, leasing or renting
Seller's address
city
Type of business. Circle the number that describes your business.
01
Accommodation and food services
02
Agricultural, forestry, fishing, hunting
d03
Construction
.y = 04
Finance and insurance
M 05
Information, publishing and communications
w
06
Manufacturing
F 07
Mining
08
Real estate
09
Rental and leasing
10
Retail trade
State Zip code
11 Transportation and warehousing
12 Utilities
13 Wholesale trade
14 Business services
15 Professional services
16 Education and health -care services
17 Nonprofit organization
18 Government
19 Not a business (explain)
20 Other (explain)
Reason for exemption. Circle the letter that identifies the reason for the exemption.
= A
0
a O
E
d
aki C
o� D
o E
N
F
d
d
s
c
uA
N
0
Federal government (department)
Specific government exemption (from list on back)
Local government
Tribal government (name)
Foreign diplomat #
Charitable organization #_
Educational organization #.
Religious organization #
Resale
I
J
K
L
M
N
0
Agricultural production
Industrial production /manufacturing
Direct pay authorization
Multiple points of use (services, digital goods, or computer
software delivered electronically)
Direct mail
Other (enter number from back page)
Percentage exemption
❑ Advertising (enter percentage) %
❑ Utilities (enter percentage) %
❑ Electricity (enter percentage) %
1 declare that the information on this certificate is correct and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief. (PENALTY If you try
to evade paying sales tax by using an exemption certificate for items or services that will be used for purposes other than those being
claimed, you may be fined $100 under Minnesota law for each transaction for which the certificate is used.)
Signature of authorized purchaser
Print name here
Title
Date
Rev. 3/14 Forms and fact sheets are available on our website at www.revenue.state.mn.us
#3C
MEETING TYPE
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting
Title / Subject: Accept Proposal for Material Testing Services, Valleywood Lane
Reconstruction Project.
Meeting Date: June 9, 2014
Prepared by: Larry Brown, Director of Public Works
Reviewed by: Jean Panchyshyn, City Clerk
Attachments Proposal by American Engineering and Testing
Policy Consideration: Should the City of Shorewood enter into a contract with American
Engineering and Testing?
Background: Construction has commenced for the Valleywood Lane and Valleywood Circle
Reconstruction Project. As such, it is necessary to have a material testing firm perform the
necessary testing to insure compliance with design specifications.
Staff has solicited a proposal from American Engineering and Testing (AET) for said services.
AET has routinely provided these services at a very competitive rate with a proven track record.
The proposal outlines the following services:
• Soil observation and testing for pavements
• Concrete testing
• Bituminous testing
• Testing and final project report
Financial Considerations: Costs for this proposal in the amount of $8,949.75 have been
programmed into the Valleywood Lane / Valleywood Circle Reconstruction project budget.
Options:
1. Accept the proposal, as presented.
2. Reject the proposal and provide staff with alternative direction.
Recommendation:
Staff is recommending that a motion that accepts the proposal, as provided be adopted.
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
AMERICAN
ENGINEERING
TESTING, INC.
CONSULTANTS
ENVIRONMENTAL
GEOTECHNICAL
MATERIALS
FORENSICS
PROPOSAL FOR PROJECT TESTING SERVICES
AET PROPOSAL No. 20 -12135
May 29, 2014
City of Shorewood
c/o WSB & Associates
701 Xenia Avenue South — Suite 300
Minneapolis, MN
Attn: Paul Homby, PE
RE: Proposal for Construction and Materials Testing
Valleywood Lane / Valleywood Circle Improvements
Shorewood, MN
Dear Mr. Homby:
Thank you for the opportunity to provide a proposal to perform testing services on the referenced project.
American Engineering Testing, Inc., (AET) is pleased to provide this proposal which presents our
anticipated scope of services, our unit rates, and an estimated total cost to perform these services.
PROJECT INFORMATION
The project will consist of the improvements and resurfacing to the referenced streets. According to the
specs provided, we understand the project will include the following:
Installation of storm sewer, small utilities and other improvements
Excavation, grading and placement of sand subbase and aggregate base
Construction of new concrete curb & gutter and bituminous paving
SCOPE OF SERVICES
AET's anticipated scope of services for WSB will be performed according to the project plans and
specifications provided to us. The services provided by AET will be performed on a will -call basis, when
notified by City of Shorewood field personnel. Our anticipated scope of services will include the
following:
Soil Observations and Testiniz for Pavement Subarades:
• Observations of pavement excavations and subgrade soils (by Senior Engineering Assistant or Staff
Engineer I).
• Perform shallow hand auger borings and hand cone penetrometer probes to evaluate the soils in the
observed excavations.
• Observations of subgrade soils during test roll procedures (by a Senior Engineering Assistant or Staff
Engineer 1).
550 Cleveland Avenue North I Saint Paul, MN 55114
Phone (651) 659-90011(800) 972 -6364 1 Fax (651) 659 -1379' www.amengtest.com ( AA /EEO
This document shall not be reproduced, except in full, without written approval from American Engineering Testing, Inc.
City of Shorewood
AET Proposal No. 20 -12135
May 29, 2014
Page 2 of 3
• Soil compaction tests (or DCP tests) inutility excavations, pavement subgrade soils, and Class 5
aggregate base (by an Engineering Technician II).
• Standard Proctor tests of each different type of soil or Class 5 aggregate base encountered at our test
locations.
• Sieve tests of granular fill and Class 5 aggregate base materials.
Observations and Concrete Testiniz:
• Field testing of concrete placed for the structural elements and other concrete features: including
slump tests, air content tests, and temperature tests (by an Engineering Technician I or II).
• Casting concrete test cylinders for compressive strength testing (1 set of 4 cylinders for the initial 50
yds3 and then for every subsequent 100 yds3 or fraction thereof for each type of concrete placed each
day).
• Pick up cylinders from the jobsite for delivery to AET laboratory.
• Compressive strength testing of concrete test cylinders (1 test at 7 days; 2 tests at 28 days; 1 HOLD
cylinder).
Bituminous Testing:
• Obtain samples of bituminous from the jobsite for lab testing.
• Perform MnDOT gyratory properties tests of each bituminous material; including Rice specific
gravity tests, and Gyratory density test.
• Extract 6 cores from the finished surface.
• Measure the thickness of each layer of the cores.
• Determine the density of each layer of the cores to obtain the "compaction" of the bituminous.
• Evaluate conformance of all tests to project plans and specifications.
Project Management and Coordination:
• Project management and supervision of AET personnel/activities by Principal Engineer (Registered
Professional Engineer).
• Issuing periodic reports presenting the results of our observations and testing, as well as a final
summary report.
FEES
All services will be invoiced on a unit cost basis according to the attached Fee Schedule. Our estimated
total cost is $8,949.75. If our scope of services should change, or additional time or tests are needed to
complete the required testing services, we will contact our client for additional funds.
CONDITIONS
Our services will be perfonned according to the terms and conditions outlined in the attached
Construction Service Agreement.
City of Shorewood
AET Proposal No. 20 -12135
May 29, 2014
Page 3 of 3
ACCEPTANCE
To formally authorize our services, please sign below and return this proposal to us. Retain a copy of the
proposal for your files /records.
REMARKS
The estimated total cost and the terms of this document will be valid for 60 calendar days from the date of
this proposal. After that time, if not authorized, we reserve the right to renegotiate any and all aspects of
this proposal.
Thank you for this opportunity to submit our proposal.
information, please call me at (612) 685 -3311
jmiller °,amen _ est.com.
SIGNATURES
AET REPRESENTATIVE:
James . Miller
S -0g -iel
Date
If you have any questions or need any additional
cell, 651- 659 -1311 office, or email at
CLIENT ACCEPTANCE:
Paul Homby, PE
Date
FEE SCHEDULE
PROJECT TESTING SERVICES
VALLEYWOOD LANE i VALLEYWOOD CIRCLE IMPROVEMENTS
SHOREWOOD,MN
CITY PROJECT 13 -01
AET PROPOSAL No. 20 -12135
AMERICAN
ENGINEERING
TESTING, INC,
SERVICE DESCRIPTION
PROJECT BUDGET
ESTIMATED UNIT BUDGET
UNITS RATE AMOUNT
TOTAL AMOUNTS
INVOICED THROUGH
# Units Amount
Observations and Compaction Testing
1. Staff Engineer I for travel, subgrade test rolls, consultation and reporting
(services provided on a will -call basis - assumes 3 trips to the jobsite).
8 hours
$115.00
$920.00
0.0
$0.00
2. Engineering Technician II travel time for soil compaction testing (services
provided on a will -call basis - assumes 4 trips to the jobsite).
6 hours
$79.00
$474.00
0.0
$0.00
3. Personal or Company vehicle mileage.
350 miles
$0.75
$262.50
0.0
$0.00
4. AET company vehicle rental charge.
0 trips
$15.00
$0.00
0.0
$0.00
5. Soil compaction tests (nuclear gauge, dcp or sand cone).
12 tests
$27.00
$324.00
0.0
$0.00
6. Nuclear gauge rental charge.
3 trips
$10.00
$30.00
0.0
$0.00
7. Standard Proctor tests (Method A).
0 tests
$120.00
$0.00
0.0
$0.00
8. Standard Proctor tests (Methods B or C).
3 tests
$125.00
$375.00
0.0
$0.00
9. Sieve tests of granular fill and Class 5 aggregate base.
4 test
$95.00
$380.00
0.0
$0.00
Concrete Testing
1. Engineering Technician II for testing of concrete (services provided on a will -
call basis - assumes 4 trips to the jobsite).
14 hours
$78.00
$1,092.00
0.0
$0.00
2. Personal or Company vehicle mileage.
200 miles
$0.75
$150.00
0.0
$0.00
3. AET company vehicle rental charge.
0 trips
$15.00
$0.00
0.0
$0.00
4. Curing, handling and compressive strength testing of 4" x 8" or 6" x 12" concrete
test cylinders (includes handling of non - tested cylinders).
16 cyls.
$24.00
$384.00
0.0
$0.00
5. Plastic concrete cylinder molds (4" x 8" or 6" x 12 ").
16 cyls.
$3.00
$48.00
0.0
$0.00
6. Concrete cylinder pick -up service from jobsite.
4 trips
$85.00
$340.00
0.0
$0.00
Bituminous Testing
1. Engineering Technician II travel and obtaining samples for laboratory testing
(services provided on a will -call basis - assumes 2 trips to the jobsite).
6 hours
$79.00
$474.00
0.0
$0.00
2. Topsoil Borrow Tests.
2 tests
$280.00
$560.00
0.0
$0.00
3. Personal or Company vehicle mileage.
100 miles
$0.75
$75.00
0.0
$0.00
4. AET company vehicle rental charge.
0 trips
$15.00
$0.00
0.0
$0.00
5. Removal of cores from finished bituminous surface (includes all personnel,
equipment rental and patching materials).
4 hours
$160.00
$640.00
0.0
$0.00
6. Thickness and density tests of bituminous core samples.
6 tests
$44.00
$264.00
0.0
$0.00
7. Asphalt extraction and aggregate gradation tests of bituminous mixtures.
0 tests
$198.00
$0.00
0.0
$0.00
8. Superpave gyratory.
2 test
$500.00
$1,000.00
0.0
$0.00
Page 1 of 2
FEE SCHEDULE
PROJECT TESTING SERVICES
VALLEYWOOD LANE / VALLEYWOOD CIRCLE IMPROVEMENTS
SHOREWOOD,MN
CITY PROJECT 13 -01
AET PROPOSAL No. 20 -12135
AMERICAN
ENGINEERING
TESTING, INC.
SERVICE DESCRIPTION
PROJECT BUDGET
ESTIMATED UNIT BUDGET
UNITS RATE AMOUNT
TOTAL AMOUNTS
INVOICED THROUGH
# Units Amount
Project Management & Coordination
1. Project Manager for coordination of AET personnel and activities, attending
meetings (if requested), consultation and report preparation.
8 hours $120.00
$960.00
0.0
$0.00
2. Personal or Company vehicle mileage.
55 miles $0.75
$41.25
0.0
$0.00
TOTAL
ESTIMATED BUDGET
$8,949.75
INVOICED
$0.00
THROUGH
Page 2 of 2
CONSTRUCTION SERVICE AGREEMENT - TERMS AND CONDITIONS Page 1 of 3
SECTION 1- RESPONSIBILITIES
1.1 - The party to whom the proposal /contract is addressed is considered the Client of American Engineering Testing, Inc. (AET). The terms and
conditions stated are binding, upon acceptance, on the Client, its successors, assignees, joint ventures and third -party beneficiaries. Verbal
proposal acceptance or authorizing purchase orders from the Client are considered formal acceptance of AET's terms and conditions. By
signing the proposal or verbally authorizing the services, the authorizing party attests that they have the authority to legally bind the Client
to agreement.
1_2 - Prior to AET performing services, Client will provide AET with all information that may affect the cost, progress, safety and performance of
the services. This includes, but is not limited to, information on proposed and existing construction, all pertinent sections of contracts between
Client and property owner, site safety plans or other documents which may control or affect AET's services. If new information becomes
available or changes are made during AET's services, Client will provide such information to AET in a timely manner. Earthwork and
construction activities are done to support a particular structure (type, size, and shape) or facility at a specific location and elevation. If the
type of structure or facility (structural type, size, shape, location, elevation, etc.) changes, the earthwork or construction activities completed
may no longer provide suitable structural support or be capable of supporting the intended construction. Additional earthwork or redesign of
all or a part of the structure or facility may be needed. Failure of client to timely notify AET of changes to the project including, but not limited
to, location, elevation, loading, or configuration of the structure or improvement will constitute a release of any liability of AET. Client will
provide a representative for timely answers to project - related questions by AET.
1_3 - AET observes and tests earthwork and other construction operations and materials, and may provide opinions, conclusions and
recommendations regarding the same. However, AET's work does not relieve the contractors of their contractual responsibility to perform
their work in accordance with approved plans, specifications and building code requirements.
1.4 - AET personnel do not have authority to accept, reject, direct or otherwise approve the work of the contractor. AET cannot stop work or
waive or alter the requirements of the project documents. Any authority given to AET by Client must be in writing prior to the start of work.
1_5 - AET does not perform construction management, general contracting or surveying services and our involvement with the project does
not constitute any assumption of those responsibilities.
1_6 - Services performed by AET often include sampling at specific locations. Inherent with such sampling is variation of conditions between
sampling locations. Client recognizes this uncertainty and the associated risk, and acknowledges that opinions developed by AET, based on
samples so taken, are qualified to that extent.
1_7 - AET is not responsible for interpretations or modifications of AET's recommendations by other persons.
1_8 - Should changed conditions be alleged, Client agrees to notify AET before evidence of alleged change is no longer accessible for evaluation.
1_9 - Test borings and /or cone penetration test soundings to a proper depth below foundation grade and the base of suitable bearing soils
are recommended for projects where supporting soils will be subjected to increased loads to explore the deeper unseen soil and ground
water conditions. Judgments made by AET personnel regarding the suitability of materials and ground water conditions below the bottom of
an excavation are limited if sufficiently deep test borings /soundings are not provided by the Client prior to our observations and judgments.
AET's opinions, conclusions and recommendations are qualified to that extent.
1.10 — AET reserves the right to charge for time to negotiate new terms and conditions from those portrayed in our proposal or should the
Client require the use of their contract format. If mutually acceptable terms cannot be established, AET shall have the right to withdraw their
proposal without any liability to the Client, Owner or other parties and assigns associated with the project. If Client requests use of their
contract format after the services have already been authorized, AET will be compensated for services rendered prior to approval of the
Client's contract by both parties according to the AET Terms and Conditions.
1.11 —The AET proposal accompanying these terms and conditions is valid for sixty (60) days after the proposal issuance date to the Client. If
Client authorizes the services after the expiration date, AET reserves the right to review and revise the proposal as necessary.
SECTION 2 - WILL CALL SERVICES
2_1 - Unless specifically directed, AET's services will be performed on a will -call basis at the direction of the Client or their authorized
representatives. The client and its authorized representatives accept that there are inherent risks associated with performing engineering
judgments and testing services on a will -call basis. Work performed on a will -call basis does not permit complete evaluation of the work being
performed. AET can not, with certainty, document or provide complete judgments regarding work which we did not observe or test. Our
opinions, conclusions, and recommendations are qualified to that extent.
2_2 - Density tests of fill and soil represent conditions only at the locations and elevations tested and do not necessarily represent conditions.
elsewhere. Judgments made regarding the engineering capability of the entire fill sequence should not be based on random, non-
representative tests.
2_3 — AET requires a minimum of 24 hours notice of the need for services. AET will not be liable for claims, damages, or delays related to
failure of Client to provide adequate advance notice to AET.
SECTION 3 - SITE ACCESS UNDERGROUND FACILITIES AND CONSTRUCTION STAKING
3.1 - Client will furnish AET safe and legal site access.
3_2 - AET is not responsible for locating underground facilities on construction sites. We proceed on the assumption that underground
facilities have been located and cleared, and we will not accept liability for damaging same. An underground facility is an underground line,
fixture, system, and its appurtenances used to produce, store, convey, transmit, or distribute communications, data, electrical power, heat,
gas, oil, petroleum products, water including storm water, steam, sewage, and other similar substances.
3_3 - Normally, the location and elevation of a proposed structure or facility is staked (with offsets) by others or provided by use of their GPS
equipment. Our measurements are made in relation to those stakes or the GPS information provided by others. The reliability of any
opinions, conclusions, and recommendations based on those measurements is strictly dependent on the accuracy of the staking or GPS
information provided by others.
3_4 - During construction, observations and testing services are based on the positioning of the formwork by the contractor or their
subcontractor. AET will not be held responsible for any errors that result due to improper location or positioning of the formwork.
ACS 403C (08/13) AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC.
CONSTRUCTION SERVICE AGREEMENT -TERMS AND CONDITIONS Page 2 of 3
SECTION 4 - SAFETY
4_1 - Client shall inform AET of any known or suspected hazardous materials or unsafe conditions at the site. If, during the course of AET's
services, such materials or conditions are discovered, AET reserves the right to take measures to protect AET personnel and equipment or to
immediately terminate services. Client shall be responsible for payment of such additional protection costs.
4_2 - AET shall only be responsible for the safety of AET employees at the site. The Client or other persons shall be responsible for the safety of
all other persons at the site.
SECTION 5 - SAMPLES
5_1 - Client is responsible for informing AET of any known or suspected hazardous materials prior to submittal. to AET. All samples obtained by
or submitted to AET remain the property of the Client during and after the services. Any known or suspected hazardous material samples will
be returned to the Client at AET's discretion.
5_2 - Non - hazardous samples will be held for 30 days and then discarded unless, within 30 days of the report date, the Client provides a written
request that AET store or ship the samples, at the Client's expense.
SECTION 6 - PROJECT RECORDS
The original project records prepared by AET will remain the property of AET. AET shall retain these original records for a period of three years
following submission of the report, during which period the project records can be made available to Client at AEI's office at reasonable times.
SECTION 7 - STANDARD OF CARE
AET performs its services consistent with the level of care and skill normally performed by other firms in the profession at the time of this
service and in this geographic area, under similar budgetary constraints.
SECTION 8 - INSURANCE
AET maintains Worker's Compensation, Comprehensive General Liability, Automobile Liability and Professional Liability insurance, as described
below. Upon request, prior to commencing the Services, AET can furnish Client with Certificates of Insurance evidencing that the insurance is
in effect and in full force.
8_1 - Commercial General Liability insurance will include coverage for Products /Completed Operations (extending two (2) years after final
acceptance of the Project by Owner or such longer period as the Contract Documents may require), Broad Form Property Damage including
Completed Operations, Personal Injury, and Blanket Contractual Liability insurance applicable to AEI's indemnity obligations under this
Agreement.
8_2 -Automobile Liability insurance shall include coverage for all owned, hired and non -owned automobiles.
8_3 - Professional Liability Insurance is written on a claims -made basis and coverage will be maintained for two years after final acceptance
of the Project by Owner or such longer period as the Contract Documents may require. Renewal policies during this period shall maintain the
same retroactive date.
8_4 - AET can, if requested by client and permitted by AEI's insurer, endorse its Commercial General Liability (including Products /Completed
Operations coverage) to add Client and Owner as an "additional insured" with respect to liability arising out of the Services performed for
Client or Owner by AET. Such insurance afforded to Client and Owner as an additional insured under AEI's policies shall be primary insurance
and not contributory with, any insurance purchased or maintained by Client or Owner.
8_5 - AET will maintain in effect all insurance coverage required by this Agreement at its sole expense, provided such insurance is reasonably
available, and with insurance carriers licensed to do business in the state in which the Project is located and having a current A.M. Best rating
of no less than A minus (A -).
8_6 - AET reserves the right to charge Client for additional coverage, coverage limits or policy modification including waiver of subrogation
and other project specific requirements not known at the time of our proposal, subject to approval by AET's insurance providers.
SECTION 9 - DELAYS
If delays to AET's services are caused by Client or Owner, work of.others, strikes, natural causes, weather, or other items beyond AET's control,
a reasonable time extension for performance of work shall be granted, and AET shall receive an equitable fee adjustment.
SECTION 10 - PAYMENT, INTEREST AND BREACH
10.1 - Invoices are due on receipt. Client will inform AET of invoice questions or disagreements within 15 days of invoice date; unless so
informed, invoices are deemed correct. In any case, Client shall pay for services of AET within 30 days of invoice.
102 - Client agrees to pay interest on unpaid invoice balances at a rate of 1.5% per month, or the maximum allowed by law, whichever is less,
beginning 30 days after invoice date.
10.3 - If any invoice remains unpaid for 60 days, such non - payment shall be a material breach of this agreement. As a result of such material
breach, AET may, at its sole option, terminate all duties to the Client or other persons, without liability as well as withhold any and all data
from Client until such invoice payments are restored to a current status.
10.4 - Client will pay all AET collection expenses and attorney fees relating to past due fees which the Client owes under this agreement.
SECTION 11- MEDIATION
11_1 - Except for enforcement of AET's rights to payment for services rendered or to assert and /or enforce its lien rights, including without
limitation assertion and enforcement of mechanic's lien rights and foreclosure of the same, Client and AET agree that any claim, dispute or
other matter in question arising out of or related to this Agreement shall be subject to mediation as a condition precedent to arbitration orthe
institution of legal or equitable proceedings by either party; provided however that if either party should fail to respond to a request for
mediation within 60 days after the request, this requirement for mediation as a condition precedent to arbitration or the institution of legal or
equitable proceedings shall be of no force and effect.
ACS 403C (08/13) AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC.
CONSTRUCTION SERVICE AGREEMENT - TERMS AND CONDITIONS Page 3 of 3
11.2 - Unless Client and AET mutually agree otherwise, mediation shall be in accordance with the Construction Industry Mediation Rules of the
American Arbitration Association. Request for mediation shall be in writing and the parties shall share the mediator's fee and any filing fees
equally. The mediator shall be acceptable to both parties and shall have experience in commercial construction matters.
SECTION 12 - LITIGATION REIMBURSEMENT
Payment of AET costs for Client lawsuits against AET which are dismissed or are judged substantially in AET's favor will be the Client's
responsibility. Applicable costs include, but are not limited to, attorney and expert witness fees, court costs, and AET costs.
SECTION 13 - MUTUAL INDEMNIFICATION
13.1- AET agrees to indemnify Client from and against liability arising out of AET's negligent performance of the services, subject to Section 14
and any other limitations, other indemnifications or other provisions Client and AET have agreed to in writing.
13.2 - Client agrees to indemnify AET from and against liability arising from the negligent conduct of the Client, Owner, Client's
Contractors /Subcontractors or other third parties, subject to any limitations, other indemnifications or other provisions Client and AET have
agreed to in writing.
13.3 - If Client has indemnity agreement with other persons, the Client shall include AET as a beneficiary.
13.4 — AEI's indemnification to the Client is limited solely to losses or damages caused by its failure to meet the standard of care and only to
the extent of its negligence
13.5 - AET will not accept any obligation to indemnify Client other than to meet the standard of care. If a court of competent jurisdiction
rules that indemnity is implied or if required by law, AEI's obligation for the costs of indemnity is only to the extent due to AEI's negligent
acts, errors or omissions.
SECTION 14 - LIMITATION OF LIABILITY
Client agrees to limit AET's liability to Client arising from AET's negligent acts, errors or omissions, such that the total liability of AET shall not
exceed $50,000.00.
SECTION 15 — UNIONIZATION
AET reserves the right to renegotiate an appropriate fee increase or to terminate its contract on three (3) days written notice to Client and
will not accept any liability for any penalties or costs from Client, Owner and their successors, assignees, joint- venturers, Contractors and
Subcontractors, or any other parties involved with the project for claims, liabilities, damages or consequential damages directly or indirectly
related to AET being required to provide unionized personnel on the project. Reservation of this right on the part of AET represents neither
approval nor disapproval of unions in general or the use of collective bargaining agreements.
SECTION 16 - POSTING OF NOTICES ON EMPLOYEE RIGHTS
Effective June 21, 2010, prime contracts with a value of $100,000 or more and signed by federal contractors on projects with any agency of
the United States government must comply with 29 CFR Part 471, which requires physical posting of a notice to employees of their rights
under Federal labor laws. The required notice may be found at 29 Code of Federal Regulations Part 471, Appendix A to Subpart A. The
regulation also has a "flow- down" requirement for subcontractors under the prime agreement for subcontracts with a value of $10,000 or
more. AET requires strict compliance of its subcontractors working on federal contracts subject to this regulation. The regulation has specific
requirements for location of posting and language(s) for the poster.
SECTION 17- TERMINATION
After 7 days written notice, either party may elect to terminate work for justifiable reasons. In this event, the Client shall pay AET for all work
performed, including demobilization and reporting costs to complete the file.
SECTION 18 - SEVERABILITY
Any provisions of this agreement later held to violate a law or regulation shall be deemed void, and all remaining provisions shall continue in
force. However, Client and AET will in good faith attempt to replace an invalid or unenforceable provision with one that is valid and
enforceable, and which comes as close as possible to expressing the intent of the original provision.
SECTION 19 - GOVERNING LAW
This Agreement shall be construed, and the rights of the parties shall be determined, in accordance with the Laws of the State of Minnesota.
SECTION 20 - ENTIRE AGREEMENT
This agreement, including attached appendices, is the entire agreement between AET and Client. Regardless of method of acceptance of AET's
proposal and general conditions by the Client, this agreement nullifies any previous written or oral agreements, including purchase /work
orders. Any modifications to this agreement must be mutually acceptable to both parties and accepted in writing. No considerations will be
given to revisions to AEI's general conditions or alternate contract format submitted by the Client as a condition for payment of AET's accrued
services.
ACS 403C (08/13) AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC.
k,\ ;\
�l
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item
Title / Subject: Report on Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD) activities
Meeting Date: June 9, 2014
Prepared by: Jean Panchyshyn, City Clerk
Attachments: Att. 1, 2015 Budget; Att. 2, Memo re AIS
#6A
MEETING TYPE
Regular Meeting
Greg Nybeck, LMCD Executive Director and Deborah Zorn, LMCD Board Representative, will be present
to review the LMCD 2015 Budget and provide an Aquatic Invasive Species (AIS) discussion.
Attachment 1 is the Draft 2015 LMCD Budget; Attachment 2 is a letter regarding AIS.
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
4 antNNFTO,',N
May 16, 2014
Ice
FROM:
SUBJECT:
FAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
5349 MAYWOOD ROAD, SUITE 200 ® MOUND, MINNESOTA 55384 - "TELEPHONE 952845 -0789 • FAX 9521745 -9085
Gregory & Nybeck, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
LMCD City Administrators
LMCD Board Members
Greg Nybeck, Executive Director
Draft 2015 LMCD Budget
Enclosed is a copy of the draft 2015 Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD) Budget. The
invites you to attend a meeting scheduled for Thursday June 5 th , at 11 a.m. in the LMCD office to
review and receive your input on it.
By state statute, the allocation of levy to the member cities is based on their percentage of the
cumulative net tax capacity, with no member city paying greater than 20% of the overall levy. The
LMCD Board has considered and recognized the economic challenges the 14 LMCD member cities are
currently facing.
Highlights of the draft 2015 LMCD Budget include the following:
Draft 2015 LMCD Budget
Budget Highlights
Details
Overall Levy Increase
0.6% increase ($342,492 compared to $340,615 in 2014).
Total Expenditures
1.1 % decrease $582,492 compared to $588,805 in 2014).
Personnel Services
2% increase ($254,216 compared to $249,143 in 2014).
Compensation adjustments are proposed at up to 3% in Contingency
and will be based on performance (see attached survey).
Office Lease & Storage
63.8% decrease ($17,180 compared to $47,409 in 2014). This is
due to the relocation of the LMCD office last fall.
Eurasian Watermilfoil
$95,000 for mechanical harvesting of public navigational areas
(EWM) Harvesting Program
for EWM (no increase).
Equipment Replacement
A $35,000 transfer from the AIS Reserve Fund for future
Fund
replacement of EWM capital equipment ($10,000 increase).
Aquatic Invasive Species
$30,000 for unspecified AIS prevention and management projects (no
(AIS) Prevention &
increase). This has typically been spent on watercraft inspections and
Management
has been leveraged with additional stakeholder grant funds.
Media- Cable & Internet
$3,300 for 2015. This line item will pay for a contract producer
(new line item)
and on -line viewing for LMCD Board meetings.
The LMCD values your review and input. Please let me know if you would like me to attend an
upcoming city council meeting to discuss the draft 2015 LMCD Budget or to review LMCD activities
and projects. Review and approval by the LMCD Board is planned for the June 111h meeting.
co eleh Page Address: hdp1 /www.h,cd.org » E,na0 Address: IrncdO.lr'ncd.org
x301' Pnht (Stsunmsr Vraete r0 protect i3P9Cl i?Y`u'S£?YVE f._ake -` Minnetonka.
(Note 1) Per MN statute 1036.631, no city may pay more than 20% of the total levy. The City of Minnetonka would pay a constant 20% of any amounts to be levied.
Remaining cities factor for determining levy amounts is computed as: (City Net Tax Capacity / ( Total Net Tax Capacity - Minnetonka Net Tax Capacity ) )' 80%
Total Net Tax Capacity 214,640,138
less Minnetonka Net Tax Capacity (92,123,180)
Net Tax Capacity for remaining 13 cities 122,516,958
2010 U.S.
% of Total
Share of
Increase in
% of
Census
2013 Taxable
2013 Net Tax
Net Tax
Share of AIS
Share of Total
Share of Total
City
Population
Market Value
Capacity
Capacity
Admin. Levy
Levy in 2015
Levy in 2015
Levy in 2014
Total Levy
Increase
in 2015
from 2014
from 2014
Data
(Note 1)
DEEPHAVEN
3,642
921,435,784
10,292,337
4.8%
$16,667
$6,351
$23,018
$22,767
$251
1.1%
EXCELSIOR
2,188
321,522,182
4,048,069
1.9%
$6,555
$2,498
$9,053
$8,706
$347
4.0%
GREENWOOD
688
259,159,370
2,933,530
1.4%
$4,750
$1,810
$6,560
$6,880
-$320
-4.6%
MINNETONKA
49,734
7,272,259,477
92,123,180
42.9%
$49,598
$18,900
$68,498
$68,123
$375
0.6%
MTKA BEACH
539
223,048,670
2,565,823
1.2%
$4,155
$1,583
$5,738
$6,419
-$681
-10.6%
MINNETRISTA
6,384
1,192,184,783
12,650,081
5.9%
$20,484
$7,806
$28,290
$28,067
$223
0.8%
MOUND
9,052
897,375,019
9,513,754
4.4%
$15,406
$5,871
$21,276
$21,653
-$377
-11%
ORONO
7,437
2,343,388,885
26,531,505
12.4%
$42,963
$16,371
$59,334
$59,056
$278
0.5%
SHOREWOOD
7,307
1,345,804,540
14,770,327
6.9%
$23,918
$9,114
$33,032
$33,122
-$90
-0.3%
SPRING PARK
1,669
206,621,084
2,479,310
1.2%
$4,015
$1,530
$5,545
$5,522
$23
0.4%
TONKA BAY
1,475
475,614,761
5,376,437
2.5%
$8,706
$3,318
$12,024
$12,269
-$245
-Z0%
VICTORIA
7,345
998,285,000
10,438,446
4.9%
$16,903
$6,441
$23,344
$22,008
$1,336
6.1%
WAYZATA
3,688
1,357,177,093
17,982,410
8.4%
$29,119
$11,096
$40,215
$39,326
$889
2.3%
WOODLAND
437
251,371,266
2,934,929
1.4%
$4,753
$1,811
$6,564
$6,698
-$134
-20%
101,585
18,065,247,914
214,640,138
100.0%
$247,992
$94,500
$342,492
1 $340,616
$1,876
0.6%
Maximum Levy Per MN statute 1036.635 (Total
Taxable Market
Value' .00242 %):
$437,179
(Note 1) Per MN statute 1036.631, no city may pay more than 20% of the total levy. The City of Minnetonka would pay a constant 20% of any amounts to be levied.
Remaining cities factor for determining levy amounts is computed as: (City Net Tax Capacity / ( Total Net Tax Capacity - Minnetonka Net Tax Capacity ) )' 80%
Total Net Tax Capacity 214,640,138
less Minnetonka Net Tax Capacity (92,123,180)
Net Tax Capacity for remaining 13 cities 122,516,958
2015 BUDGET DETAIL (Draft)
2012
2013
2013
2014
2014 Actual
2015
Footnote #
Actual
Budget
Actual
Budget
Projected
Budget
See Appendix A
REVENUES
1. Administration
a) LMCD Communities Levy
231,875
238,654
238,652
245,990
245,990
247,992
b) Use from Administration Reserve
0
19,655
34,096
19,565
19,565
0
c) Court Fines
105,036
55,000
55,611
55,000
55,000
55,000
d) Licenses
110,128
115,000
110,382
115,000
115,000
115,000
e) Other Public Agencies
0
0
696
0
0
500
f) Interest
1,941
1,000
2,055
1,250
2,000
2,000
g) Other Income
3,795
2,000
2,259
2,000
2,000
2,000
SUB -TOTAL ADMINISTRATION
452,775
431,309
443,751
438,805
439,555
422,492
2. Aquatic Invasive Species
a) LMCD Communities Levy
90,331
91,950
91,951
94,625
94,625
94,500
b) Other Public Agencies
50,750
32,800
51,893
30,000
57,798
30,000
1
c) Use from AIS Reserve
0
0
0
0
0
0
d) Interest
379
250
484
375
500
500
SUB -TOTAL AQUATIC INVASIVE SPECIES
141,460
125,000
144,328
125,000
152,923
125,000
3. Equipment Replacement
a) Transfers from Administration and AIS Reserves
45,856
25,000
25,000
25,000
25,000
35,000
b) Receipt from LMCIT
32,500
0
0
0
0
0
c) Use from Equipment Replacement Reserve
96,036
0
0
0
0
0
SUB -TOTAL EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT
174,392
25,000
25,000
25,000
25,000
35,000
TOTAL REVENUES
768,627
581,309
613,079
588,805
617,478
582,492
Total Levy
322,206
330,604
330,603
340,615
340,615
342,492
DISBURSEMENTS'
ADMINISTRATION
1. Personnel Services:
a) Salaries- excludes EWM Project Management time
195,445
196,401
198,718
200,524
204,488
204,488
2
b) FICA & Medicare
14,945
15,025
15,199
15,340
15,643
15,643
3
c) Employer Benefit Contributions
29,811
32,015
31,802
33,279
32,297
34,085
4
SUB -TOTAL PERSONNEL SERVICES
240,201
243,441
245,719
249,143
252,428
254,216
2. Contractual Services:
a) Office Lease & Storage
44,032
45,112
39,143
47,409
16,761
17,180
5
b) Professional Services
3,202
2,700
2,130
2,500
2,500
2,500
6
SUB -TOTAL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
47,234
47,812
41,273
49,909
19,261
19,680
2015 BUDGET DETAIL (Draft)
2012
2013
2013
2014
2014 Actual
2015
Footnote #
Actual
Budget
Actual
Budget
Projected
Budget
See Appendix A
3. Office & Administration:
a) Office, General Supplies
4,071
4,500
3,943
4,500
4,500
4,500
b) Telephone
2,069
2,500
2,190
2,160
2,460
2,460
c) Website, Internet, & E -mail
300
300
d) Postage
3,800
5,000
3,637
5,000
5,000
5,000
e) Printing, Publications, Advertising
9,927
10,000
9,996
10,500
10,500
11,000
7
f) Maintenance, Office Equipment
837
1,200
850
1,100
1,100
1,100
g) Subscriptions, Memberships
1,550
1,000
1,611
1,700
1,700
1,700
h) Insurance, Bonds
6,031
7,000
7,205
7,000
7,000
7,250
8
i) Public Information, Legal Notices
139
1,500
939
1,000
1,000
1,000
j) Meeting Expenses
4,399
4,000
3,833
4,500
4,500
4,260
k) Media (Cable & Internet)
2,438
3,300
9
1) Mileage
1796
2000
1817
2000
2000
2000
m) Employee Training
0
400
0
400
400
400
SUB -TOTAL OFFICE & ADMINISTRATION
34,619
39,100
36,021
39,860
42,898
44,270
4. Capital Outlay:
a) Furniture & Equipment
948
1,500
0
1,000
1,000
1,500
b) Computer Software & Hardware
1,553
2,000
543
2,000
2,000
2,000
10
SUB -TOTAL CAPITAL OUTLAY
2,501
3,500
543
3,000
3,000
3,500
5. Legal:
a) Legal Services
21,576
35,000
31,674
32,000
32,000
32,000
11
b) Prosecution Services
39,875
45,000
50,963
45,000
45,000
45,000
12
c) Hennepin County Room & Board
732
1,000
317
1,000
1,000
1,000
SUB -TOTAL LEGAL
62,183
81,000
82,954
78,000
78,000
78,000
6. Contract Services/Studies:
a) Audit
6,850
7,056
7,050
7,268
7,268
7,486
b) Information Technology
0
0
81
500
500
750
SUB -TOTAL CONTRACT SERVICES /STUDIES
6,850
7,056
7,131
7,768
7,768
8,236
7. Code Enforcement Program
3,410
4,000
13,126
4,590
8. Administration Reserve Fund
0
0
0
0
0
0
9. Equipment Replacement Fund
25,000
25,000
25,000
25,000
25,000
0
10. Contingency
4,693
9,400
26,700
7,125
3,160
10,000
TOTAL ADMINISTRATION
423,281
456,309
468,751
463,805
444,641
422,492
2015 BUDGET DETAIL (Draft)
2012
2013
2013
2014
2014 Actual
2015
Footnote #
Actual
Budget
Actual
Budget
Projected
Budget
See Appendix A
AQUATIC INVASIVE SPECIES (AIS)
1. Eurasian Watermilfoil (EWM) Harvesting Program
84,863
95,000
79,428
95,000
95,000
95,000
13
2. Equipment Replacement Fund
0
0
0
0
0
35,000
14
3. AIS Reserve Fund
0
0
0
0
0
0
4. Herbicide Treatment Program
0
0
0
0
0
0
5. AIS Prevention & Management Programs
38,905
30,000
33,472
30,000
47,595
30,000
15
EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FUND
1. Purchase of New Mechanical Harvester
174,392
0
0
0
0
0
TOTAL AQUATIC INVASIVE SPECIES
298,160
125,000
112,900
125,000
142,595
160,000
TOTAL DISBURSEMENTS
721,441
581,309
581,651
588,805
587,236
582,492
Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD)
Draft 2015 LMCD Budget
Appendix A
Other Public Agencies (Footnote #1) It is anticipated that the MN DNR will fund the LMCD with a grant of $30,000 for the 2015 EWM
Harvesting Program.
Salaries (Footnote #2)
2015 estimated actual
Executive Director
$81,210.59 (•)
Administrative Technician (also serves as EWM Project Manager)
$56,805.84 ( *)
Less 1 pay period for EWM Project Manager
- $2,366.91
Administrative Assistant/Code Enforcement
$49,441.60 ( *)
Administrative Clerk (part-time)
$17,397.12
Seasonal Code Enforcement (part-time)
$2,000.00
$204,488.24 ( ")
(`) Salaries will be grossed up to pay for long -term disability insurance for full
-time LMCD employees
( ") Salary adjustments (including F.I.C.A., medicare, & P.E.R.A.) are included in Contingency (line -item 10)
F.I.C.A. & Medicare (Footnote #3)
Total Salaries- including EWM Project Management (7.65 %)
$15,824.42
Less 1 pay period for EWM Project Manager
$181.07
$15,643.35
Employer Benefit
Contributions (Footnote #4)
P.E.R.A. (7.50 %) $15,364.14
NCPERS Life Insurance $576.00
Medical & Dental Insurance $18,145.20
$34,085.34
Office Lease & Storage (Footnote #5) Monthly Rate Months
$1,422.75 9 $12,804.75
$1,458.32 3 $4,374.96
$17,179.71
Professional Services (Footnote #6)
Contracted Payroll & Taxes $2,000.00
Contracted Bookkeeping Consulting $500.00
$2,500.00
Printing, Publications, & Advertising $11,000 has been budgeted for two LMCD Newsletters, the re- printing of the Summer and Winter Rules brochures,
(Footnote #7) and other LMCD literature.
Insurance, Bonds (Footnote #8) $7,250 has been budgeted with the League of Minnesota Cities for insurance for the LMCD
Page 1
Media (Cable & Internet)
$3,300 has been budgeted to contract with Lake Minnetonka Communications Commission for a producer and on -line
(Footnote #9)
viewing of LMCD Board Meetings.
Computer Software & Hardware
$2,000 has been budgeted for information technology, hardware, and software updates.
(Footnote #10)
Legal Services (Footnote #11)
$32,000 has been budgeted for legal services, which will be partially off -set by charging expenses back to applicants.
Prosecution Services (Footnote #12)
$45,000 has been budgeted for prosecution services. These expenses will be offset by projected $55,000 of court fines.
EWM Harvesting Program (Footnote #13)
A 10 -week mechanical harvesting program is planned from mid June through mid August to manage EWM on Lake
Minnetonka. Harvesting priorities will be based on impediments to public navigation to the open water due to EWM
growth (in particular matted areas). All areas that dictate the need for harvesting will be done at least once, with high
growth areas being harvested twice (time permitting). More details of the proposed project (including a more detailed
budget) will be provided in the spring of 2015.
Equipment Replacement Fund
$35,000 has been budgeted for replacement of depreciated EWM Harvesting Equipment.
(Footnote #14)
AIS Prevention & Management
$30,000 has been budgeted for unspecfified AIS management and prevention programs (most likely watercraft
Programs (Footnote #15)
inspections). Similar to past years, the LMCD will seek partnerships for the implementation of these projects (in
particular funding partners).
RESERVE FUND ANALYSIS:
Administration AIS Equipment Replacement Fund
2014
12131/13 Balance
$242,108 $95,861 $42,327
Reserve Fund Contribution
$0 $0 $0
Transfer from Reserve Fund
($19,565) $0 $0
Transfer to Equip. Repl. Fund
($25,000)
$0 $25,000
Projected 12/31/14 Balance
$197,543 $95,861 $67,327
Administration AIS Equipment Replacement Fund
2015
Projected 12/31/14 Balance
$197,543 $95,861 $67,327
Reserve Fund Contribution
$0 $0 $0
Transfer from Reserve Fund
$0 $0 $0
Transfer to Equip. Repl. Fund
$0 ($35,000) $35,000
Projected 12/31/15 Balance
$197,543 $60,861 $102,327
Projected % of 2014 Annual Budget
42.6% 48.7%
Page 2
Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD)
Salary and Hourly Rate Adjustments Survey (2010 -2015)
Public Agency 2010 2011 2012 2013
2014
2015
Deephaven
0%
2%
1%
2%
2 %
2.50%
Excelsior
0%
2%
1%
2%
2%
2.5 %- union employ-
ees (same anticipated
for non union)
Greenwood
Contracts with the City of Deephaven
LMCD
0%
2%
1.5%
2%
2%
Pending
MCWD
2%
2%
3%
5%
Pending Salary Survey
Minnetonka
1.81% 1.56% 1.46% 1.44%
1.83%
Pending
Increases in 2011 were split in January and July. This is the overall
(non union employees)
average (non - union). Every employee receives a I% & based on a
market analysis, some positions receive a market increase.
Minnetonka
2% 2% 1% 1%
3.50%
Pending
Beach
(Plus 3.5% step increases to those eligible)
Minnetrista
1%
0%
2%
1%
Mound
0%
1%
1% $.50 per hour
$.50 per hour
Pending
for all employees
for all employees
($1,040 - full time
($1,040 - full time)
Orono
1%
1%
1%
1%
2.0% (police)
2.5% (police)
(July, 2012)
1.5% (non union)
Non union (pend-
ing)
Shorewood
2% budgeted each year from 2010 -2013 for non -union employees. Funds
were put in a pool & adj ustments were based on performance & position
in the market range for each employee. The average has been 1.5% the
past couple of years (varies by position).
Spring Park
2% 3% 3% 3.75% 3%
Pending
(These numbers include COLA increases)
Tonka Bay
0.83%
1%
1%
1%
2%
2% anticipated
Victoria
1%
1%
1%
2%
2%
Pending
Wayzata
0%
0%
1.5%
2%
2% COLA (non union)
2% on 4/1 (police)
2% COLA & 2%
Non union (pend-
market adjustment (police)
ing)
Woodland
Contracts with the City of Deephaven
�0
I.-AKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD, SUIT F 200 a MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 d R.-I.EPHONE 952 /745 -07£39 - FAX 952/7459085
Gwegory Via. Nybeck, F`XF('JJ I VF DIRECTOR
May 29, 2014
The Honorable Scott Zerby
City of Shorewood
5755 Country Club Road
Shorewood, MN 55331
Dear Mayor Zerby:
ti
1114 i
The Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD) is seeking assistance from the 14 member
cities to encourage their local law enforcement agencies to train officers on Aquatic Invasive Species
(AIS) enforcement. The LMCD's vision to empower local agencies with the ability to enforce will
give local agencies the option to enforce while contributing to the overall AIS management.
Untrained officers cannot enforce the law and write citations.
The LMCD, through its AIS Task Force, facilitates AIS management and prevention efforts for Lake
Minnetonka. AIS risks to Lake Minnetonka and other bodies of water in the west metro area have
been well publicized. In recent years, there has been good progress in creating new and enhanced
laws and regulations that are reducing the risk of introduction of AIS and minimizing the possibility
of its spread from already contaminated waters.
The AIS Task Force and LMCD Board of Directors recognize one important effort that needs to be
addressed; to have the local law enforcement officers trained so that they have the option to enforce
the established laws and regulations (State Statute 84D, Sec. 13, Subd. 4) that have been put in place
to reduce AIS risks. This is a largely missing AIS management and prevention element. To further
explain, only the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MN DNR) Conservation Officers
(who are small in numbers and cannot match the coverage that can be provided by the local agency
officers) and a few local law enforcement officers are properly trained to enforce these laws and
write citations.
At your request, the LMCD will coordinate AIS training for your local agency to enhance this
important effort. The MN DNR offers this training free of charge, in which officers will receive
POST credit for attending the class. The class is approximately two hours and scheduling can be
done to meet the agencies' needs (including on -site training to accommodate scheduling concerns).
To this end, the LMCD is requesting your assistance in proactively accomplishing the following
tasks:
• Discuss AIS enforcement capabilities with your respective police chief;
• Find out how many officers have been trained on AIS enforcement; and
VVol) P-1ge Addr .z�: ht3 � j'/ w v,,, In r.(I rorg - F� niml Art��ir,._ ��: I ic(l�(?Irr�c .org
{} terot,,: e;t m'.] preservee Lake Misu3,,tOnka.
The Honorable Scott Zerby
May 29, 2014
Page 2
• Establish a goal of having all officers trained on AIS enforcement by the 2015 boating season.
The LMCD and the MN DNR are committed to removing any logistical obstacles that may stand in
the way from accomplishing this important effort. Please feel free to contact LMCD Executive
Director Greg Nybeck at gnybeck @lmcd.org or (952) 745 -0789 if you have questions.
Sincerely,
Jay Green, Vice Chair
Lake Minnetonka Conservation District
cc: Member City Administrator
Member City Police Chief
#QA
MEETING TYPE
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting
Title / Subject:
MS4 Annual Meeting
Meeting Date:
June 9, 2014
Prepared by:
Paul Hornby
Reviewed by:
Attachments:
None
Background:
The MS4 Annual Meeting is an opportunity to review the City's Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program
(SWPPP) for compliance with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's Municipal Separate Storm Sewer
System (MS4) General Permit. The meeting is also held to obtain public comments on the program.
Jesse Carlson from WSB & Associates, Inc. will be presenting on the City of Shorewood's SWPPP for
compliance with the MS4 General Permit. He will explain the requirement to hold an annual public meeting
by June 30th of every year to discuss the City's SWPPP, provide a discussion on the previous year's activities,
and allow an opportunity for individuals to provide input on the City's SWPPP. He will explain that the City's
SWPPP will need to include measures to address each of the following Best Management Practices (BMP)
that should be undertaken annually:
1) Public education and outreach
2) Public participation and involvement
3) Illicit discharge detection and elimination
4) Construction site storm water runoff control
5) Post - construction storm water management
6) Pollution prevention and good housekeeping for municipal operations.
Jesse will also summarize the new requirements the City will need undertake as a result of the new MS4
General Permit.
Next Steps and Timelines:
The comments received by the public and Council will be entered into the 2013 Annual Report that will
be submitted to the MPCA on or before June 30, 2014.
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
#9B
MEETING TYPE
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting
Title / Subject: Accept Proposal for Geographical Information Services
Meeting Date: June 9, 2014
Prepared by: Larry Brown, Director of Public Works
Reviewed by: Jean Panchyshyn, City Clerk
Attachments Proposal by WSB and Associates, Inc.
Policy Consideration: Should the City of Shorewood accept the proposal for Geographical
Information Systems (GIS) Services?
Background: During the budget work sessions, it has been discussed as to how GIS will aid staff
and residents for obtaining information for properties and infrastructure.
Staff has solicited a proposal by WSB and Associates for such services. WSB has proposed
hosting the GIS system on their servers. Thus, users can access the databases by an internet
connection and access the following features:
• Search for properties based on address, PID, and owner with an autocomplete function
• Access record drawings by clicking on utility features in the map
• View any layers included in the Local Government Information Model
• Create buffers
• Add text and graphics to maps
• Measure distances and areas
• Create mail labels
• Export data to MS Excel
• Easily print maps
• Export pdf and jpg images
• Access GIS data in the office and in the field
Staff has the need to access data in the field. The Mayor is recommending that parcel and
infrastructure data be made available on line. This subscription would accomplish those items.
Financial Considerations: Per the proposal, costs for such services include an implementation
Cost of $5,960 and an ongoing monthly hosting cost (Beginning in 2015) of $300 per month.
It is suggested that the subscription costs be divided amongst the utility funds on a prorated basis.
Recommendation: Staff is seeking direction from the City Council as to how you would like to proceed.
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
A WSB T, =Wofm itdakS, Joh engineering
planning "O & itO tt�0 t0l" construction
June 3, 2014
Larry Brown
Public Works Director
City of Shorewood
5755 Country Club Road
Shorewood, MN 55331
Re: Work Plan to Implement DataLink for the City of Shorewood
Dear Larry:
701 Xenia Avenue South
Suite 300
Minneapolis, MN 55416
Tel: 763 - 541 -4800
Fax: 763 - 541 -1700
On behalf of WSB & Associates, Inc. (WSB), it is my pleasure to present you with this work plan to
implement DataLink a Web Based GIS solution for the City of Shorewood.
Project Understanding
Based on our conversations, the City would like to implement DataLink to provide users with a
flexible web application to meet staff's GIS needs. DataLink is a web based GIS application
specifically targeted at giving City staff fast access to reliable information. DataLink and the WSB
team give users:
• An easy -to -use web based interface with fast performance and a rich set of features
• An open platform that can easily integrate with Laserfiche, Cartegraph Asset
Management, Computer -Aided Dispatch (CAD) data, and other IT infrastructure
• A team that fully understands the importance of all steps of the implementation
process including education and support
• A fully functional mobile solution that is easy to use and supports multiple devices
All data stored in DataLink is based on industry standard technology using the Local Government
Information Model and includes the tools shown in Attachment A. Based on conversations with
City staff we have outlined a scope to meet the City's needs:
Implement DATALINK with Data Hosted at WSB
WSB will move a copy of the City's geodatabase to WSB's cloud servers and implement the
DataLink application. WSB will perform all required map service and application
configuration.
Implementation Cost: $5,960
Monthly hosting cost (Beginning in 2015): $300
St. Cloud • Minneapolis • St. Paul
Equal Opportunity Employer
wsbeng.com
F: \WPWIN\GIS \doc\Shor ood\ LTR PROP4 brown- 060613b.do
Mr. Larry Brown
June 3, 2014
Page 2
Technical Support and Database Updates
WSB's GIS team is dedicated to providing high - quality, technical support to our clients. Bryan
Pittman will be your primary support contact who ensures that your technical support needs are
being addressed in a fast, effective manner. Bryan will provide support by phone, over the internet,
and with on -site visits. Bryan's time will be billed under the existing GIS Service agreement.
If you have any questions concerning our proposal, please feel free to contact me at 763 - 287 -7194.
We look forward to working with you and greatly appreciate the opportunity to assist you and your
staff in the completion of this project.
Sincerely,
WSB & Associates, Inc.
3
J hn 2 Mackiewicz�
rincipal
Attachments
of
F: \WPWIN\GIS \doc\ShOr ood \LTR PROP4 brawn- 060314.da
Attachment A: Data Link Features
• Search for properties based on address, PID, and owner with an autocomplete function
• Access record drawings by clicking on utility features in the map
• View any layers included in the Local Government Information Model
• Create buffers
• Add text and graphics to maps
• Measure distances and areas
• Create mail labels
• Export data to MS Excel
• Easily print maps
• Export pdf and jpg images
• Access GIS data in the office and in the field
#9C
MEETING TYPE
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting
Title / Subject: Valleywood Area Improvements, City Project 13 -01— Change Order No. 1 Additional
Background: On September 9, 2013, the City Council accepted bids and awarded the construction
contract for the 2013 Street, Drainage, and Utility Improvements (Valleywood Lane and Valleywood
Circle), City Project 13 -01 to Minger Construction, Inc. ( Minger). The following items required
modification during plan and contract review with Minger and represent out of scope work from the
contract as bid:
1. Asphalt Paving of the wearing course to occur in 2015
a. The alternate bid completion identified 2014 placement contrary to City practice
2. Storm sewer modification form circular to arch -span pipe for a roadway crossing
a. Pipe change to provide additional roadway cover above the pipe
3. Removal of large trees near overhead utilities from the right of way
a. These trees would have significant root damage and may not survive past after
construction
b. Removal of dead trees in the right of way to prevent future removals
4. Addition of improved pipe foundation rock due to unsuitable soil conditions
As a result of these modifications, additional construction work was necessary. Minger has submitted
the change order detailing the additional work items. The work orders have been reviewed by staff with
regard to the work scope and additional costs, and recommend approval.
Financial or Budget Considerations: The project construction contract as bid was awarded by the
Council in the amount of $534,228.35. Change Order No. 1 will increase the contract $8,054.45, to
$542,282.80, approximately 1.5% above the original contract amount.
Recommendation / Action Requested: Staff recommends approval of the enclosed Resolution
Approving Change Order No. 1.
Payment for this change order will be made under the payment request process in July, 2014.
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
Work Request
Meeting Date:
June 9, 2014
Prepared by:
Paul Hornby
Reviewed by:
Attachments:
Change Order No. 1, Resolution Approving Change Order No. 1.
Background: On September 9, 2013, the City Council accepted bids and awarded the construction
contract for the 2013 Street, Drainage, and Utility Improvements (Valleywood Lane and Valleywood
Circle), City Project 13 -01 to Minger Construction, Inc. ( Minger). The following items required
modification during plan and contract review with Minger and represent out of scope work from the
contract as bid:
1. Asphalt Paving of the wearing course to occur in 2015
a. The alternate bid completion identified 2014 placement contrary to City practice
2. Storm sewer modification form circular to arch -span pipe for a roadway crossing
a. Pipe change to provide additional roadway cover above the pipe
3. Removal of large trees near overhead utilities from the right of way
a. These trees would have significant root damage and may not survive past after
construction
b. Removal of dead trees in the right of way to prevent future removals
4. Addition of improved pipe foundation rock due to unsuitable soil conditions
As a result of these modifications, additional construction work was necessary. Minger has submitted
the change order detailing the additional work items. The work orders have been reviewed by staff with
regard to the work scope and additional costs, and recommend approval.
Financial or Budget Considerations: The project construction contract as bid was awarded by the
Council in the amount of $534,228.35. Change Order No. 1 will increase the contract $8,054.45, to
$542,282.80, approximately 1.5% above the original contract amount.
Recommendation / Action Requested: Staff recommends approval of the enclosed Resolution
Approving Change Order No. 1.
Payment for this change order will be made under the payment request process in July, 2014.
Mission Statement: The City of Shorewood is committed to providing residents quality public services, a
healthy environment, a variety of attractive amenities, a sustainable tax base, and sound financial
management through effective, efficient, and visionary leadership. Page 1
TKDA
Engineers - Architects- Planners
Saint Paul, MN June 4 20 14 Froj. No. 15187,000 Change Order Nob 1
To Min er Construction, Inc. PO Box 236 Chanhassen Minmesota 55317
for 2013 Street Drainage & Utili 1m rovements
for Ci of Shorewood Minnesota
You are hereby directed to make the following change to your contract dated
September 11 , 20 13 . The change and the work affected thereby is subject to all contract stipulations and
covenants. This Change Order will (increase) (deff&ase) (not -eha ) the contract sum by Eight.. Thousand Fifty Four
Dollars and 45/100 ($ 8,054.45 ).
This change order provides for changes in the work of this contract according to the attached itemization. The final value of
this change order will be determined by the agreed unit price multiplied by the actual quantities installed.
NET CHANGE =
Amount of Original Contract
Additions approved to date (Nos. }
Deductions approved to plate (Nos. )
Contract amount to date
Amount of this Change Order (Add) (De&4) )
Revised Contract Amount
:
Approved
Owner
Contractor
$1 8,054.45
$ 534,228.35
$
534,228.35
$
8,054.45
$
542,282.80
TKDA
B°" a
y
Larry D. liner, P.E.
White - Owner
Pink - Contractor
Blue - TKDA
2013 STREET, DRAINAGE & UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS
CITY OF SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA
TKDA PROJECT NO. 15187-000
ESTIMATED
ITEM CHANGE
NO. DESCRIPTION UNIT ORDER QTY
May 31, 2014
AGREED
UNIT AMOUNT
PRICE
I
ASPHALT PAVING WEAR COURSE INCREASE FOR 2.015
TN
529.0
$
4.70
$
2,486.30
2
RCP 28" X 96" SPAN CL 11A (OVER 24" ROUND)
LF
23.0
$
14.05
$
323.15
3
TREE REMOVAL (EXTRA TREES)
EA
TO
$
660.00
$
4,620.00
4
1.5" ROCK BEDDING FOR PIPE
TN
25.0
$
25.00
$
625,00
SUBTOTAL - DIVISION 1
$
8,054.45
TOTAL CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 $ 8,054.45
g ""56
A,
0
it
P.O. Box 236 Chanhassen, MN 55317
Phone: 952-368-920O Fax: 952-368-9311
Change Order #1
Description
Qty.
Unit
Unit Price
Total
Asphalt Paving Wear Course in 2015
529
Ton
$
4.70
2,486-30
(increase in contract cost)
"Does not include asphalt curb wedge
RCP 28"x96" Span CL IIA
23
LF
$
14.05
$
323.15
(increase in material cost in lieu of 24"
RCP CL 111)
Tree Removal (Extra Trees)
7
Ea
$
660.00
$
4,620.00
1.5" Rock for Pipe
25
Ton
$
25.00
$
625.00
$
TOTAL
$
8,054.45
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
RESOLUTION NO. 14-
A RESOLUTION APPROVING CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 FOR
VALLEYWOOD AREA IMPROVEMENTS
CITY PROJECT 13 -01
WHEREAS, the City of Shorewood Council awarded the contract for the reconstruction of
Valleywood Lane and Valleywood Circle from Eureka Road to the west end to Minger
Construction, Inc. of Chanhassen, Minnesota; and
WHEREAS, the Capital Improvement Plan provides $743,000 for the improvement project;
and
WHEREAS, Change Order No. lis necessary to construct the improvements and associated
work: and
WHEREAS, Change Order No. 1 will increase the project construction costs in the amount
of $8,054.45, from the original contract amount of $534,228.35 to $542,282.80;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shorewood,
Minnesota:
Change Order No. lin the amount of $8,054.45 is hereby approved.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 9th day
of June, 2014.
ATTEST:
Jean Panchyshyn, City Clerk
Scott Zerby, Mayor
#10B
MEETING TYPE
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Title / Subject: Amendment to Shorewood City Code Chapter 401, Liquor Regulations and
Chapter 1301, Municipal Fees
Meeting Date: June 9, 2014
Prepared by: Bill Joynes, City Administrator
Jean Panchyshyn, City Clerk
CC: Tim Keane, City Attorney
Attachments: Attachment 1- MN Statutes 340A.404; Attachment 2- Liquor License fee
schedules, Draft Ordinance
Policy Consideration: Should City Code Chapter 401 Liquor Regulations be amended to include a Ito 4
Day Temporary On -Sale Intoxicating Liquor Permit?
Background: The Excelsior Firefighters Relief Association has requested consideration to allow the
sale of liquor at its annual fundraising dance on Friday, July 18, 2014. In past years, the Relief Association
has received a 3.2 Percent Malt Liquor License for this event. Liquor with an alcohol content higher than
3.2 Percent falls under Intoxicating Liquor. An amendment to the city's ordinance would be necessary
to provide for a 1 to 4 Day Temporary On -Sale Liquor License. A copy of Minnesota Statutes 340A.404,
Subd. 10— Temporary on -sale licenses, is provided as Attachment 1.
The current ordinance Chapter 401.05, Subd. 7, Classification of Licenses, reads as follows:
Subd. 7. Temporary on -sale 3.2% malt liquor. These licenses may be issued only to clubs,
charitable, religious or nonprofit organizations.
The proposed amendment, with added language shown in underline, would read:
Subd. 7. Temporary on -sale 3.2% malt liquor or intoxicating liquor. These licenses may be issued
only to clubs, charitable, religious or nonprofit organizations.
Also, City Code Chapter 1301, Municipal Fees, would be amended as follows, with added language
shown in underline. Attachment 2 includes the City of Shorewood current liquor license fees, as well as
the City of Excelsior's fees for a 1 to 4 day temporary liquor license. Council will need to determine if it
wishes to adjust the fee for a temporary liquor license.
LICENSE, PERMIT, SERVICE CHARGES AND MISCELLANEOUS FEES
Type of Charge /Fee
City Code Reference
Charge /Fee
II. Liquor
Temporary License
3.2% malt liquor or intoxicating liquor
401.06.2
$25
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
Options: Council may determine to approve or deny the ordinance amendments, and any changes in
the fee for the temporary license.
Financial Considerations: Determine the fee to be collected by the city for the temporary on -sale liquor
license. There is no restriction on the fee the city can establish for this license.
Recommendation /Action Requested: Approval of an Ordinance Amending Chapters 401 and 1301
relating to Temporary Liquor Licenses; the fee noted on the draft ordinance will be amended as Council
determines.
EXCERPT FROM MINNESOTA STATUTES
340A.404 INTOXICATING LIQUOR; ON -SALE LICENSES.
Subd. lO.Temporary on -sale Licenses.
(a) The governing body of a municipality may issue to (1) a club or charitable, religious,
or other nonprofit organization in existence for at least three years, (2) a political committee
registered under section 1 OA. 14, or (3) a state university, a temporary license for the on -sale
of intoxicating liquor in connection with a social event within the municipality sponsored by
the licensee. The license may authorize the on -sale of intoxicating liquor for not more than
four consecutive days, and may authorize on -sales on premises other than premises the
licensee owns or permanently occupies. The license may provide that the licensee may
contract for intoxicating liquor catering services with the holder of a full -year on -sale
intoxicating liquor license issued by any municipality. The licenses are subject to the terms,
including a license fee, imposed by the issuing municipality. Licenses issued under this
subdivision are subject to all laws and ordinances governing the sale of intoxicating liquor
except sections 340A.409 and 340A.504, subdivision 3, paragraph (d), and those laws and
ordinances which by their nature are not applicable. Licenses under this subdivision are not
valid unless first approved by the commissioner of public safety.
ATTACHMENT 1
City of Shorewood
Current Liquor License Fees
LICENSE, PERMIT, SERVICE CHARGES AND MISCELLANEOUS FEES
Type of Charge /Fee
City Code
Charge /Fee
Reference
II. Liquor
Intoxicating liquor license - on-
sale
401.06.1
$7,500
Wine license - on -sale
401.06.1
$1,000
Intoxication malt liquor /wine
license - on -sale
401.06.1
$2,000
Intoxicating liquor - off -sale
401.06.1
$310
Liquor special club license
401.06.1
$250
Special Sunday license
401.06.1
$200
3.2% malt
Liquor license - on -sale
401.06.2
$300
3.2% malt liquor
Liquor license - off -sale
401.06.2
$50
3.2% malt liquor
Temporary license
401.06.2
$25
Liquor license investigation fee -
new license
401.06.1
$500
Liquor license investigation fee -
401.06.1
$250
Renewal with change in
managers /owners /and the like
Liquor licensees in violation
401.06.2
$500 /first offense
$1,000 /second offense in 24 -month
period
$1,500 /third offense in 24 -month period
$2,000 /fourth offense in 24 -month
period
ATTACHMENT 2
CITY OF EXCELSIOR
1 TO 4 DAY TEMPORARY LIQUOR LICENSE FEE SCHEDULE
The City of Excelsior has the following fee schedule for a 1 -4 Day Temporary Intoxicating
Liquor Permit:
If the Event is on Private Property: $200 flat fee
If the event is on City Property:
FEES
LOCAL
NON -LOCAL
0 - 100 Persons
$120.00
$240.00
101 - 200 Persons
$240.00
$480.00
201- 500 Persons
$360.00
$720.00
Over 500 Persons
$480.00
$960.00
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTERS 401 and 1301
OF THE SHOREWOOD CITY CODE
RELATING TO TEMPORARY LIQUOR LICENSES
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Section 401.05 Subd. 7, of the Shorewood City Code shall be amended to read as follows:
Subd. 7. Temporary on -sale 3.2% malt liquor or intoxicating liquor. These licenses may be
issued only to clubs, charitable, religious or nonprofit organizations.
Section 2. Section 1301.02 Establishment of Fees and Charges, Section IL Liquor, Temporary
License is amended to read as follows:
Type o Charge/Fee
City Code Reference
Charge/Fee
II. Liquor
Temporary License
401.06.02
$25
3.2% malt liquor or
intoxicating liquor
Section 3. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect following its passage and publication.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 9th day
of June, 2014.
Scott Zerby, Mayor
ATTEST:
Jean Panchyshyn, City Clerk
Shorewood City Council,
Thank you for taking the time to vote on this proposed ordinance. It is our effort today to
explain why this is an important step in moving forward with our annual fire dance. This event
brings together the local community to help promote a social atmosphere around the district, an
opportunity to meet the neighbors and a chance for us as a fire department to reach out in
non - emergency roles. This event serves as virtually all of the fire relief boards budget..
We do not wish for the dance to be taken into an adult only direction. We still have the wonderful
family bands, bouncy castles and face painters that families expect. This event is and will remain
a family first function.
Safety concerns are still being addressed in our standard practice by having all servers go
through training with South Lake Police in proper ID checking and how to identify and handle
patrons who are getting close to being overserved. In addition Thorpe Distributing is providing
additional resources to promote a safe event.
The dance has always been an opportunity for our fire relief board to also fundraise These funds
go towards supplementing our existing gear and charitable donations towards other fire related
charitable causes. This community has always gone out of its way to support us and we thank
you for that. However, Thorpe distributing no longer carries the adult beverages the patrons of
our dance are used to seeing. It is for that reason we ask that the city pass the ordinance they
see today.
We are not pioneering this change by any means, the city of Minneapolis has only 2 bars
remaining that still serve 3.2% beverages, this was not a legislative change but instead a change
in customers palates. Mound Fire, whose dance happened this last weekend made the switch to
serving of full strength adult beverages. It is with a growing business landscape and busier social
calendars that our dance must compete to stay relevant. It is with better offerings of beverages
and continued devotion to service that this event will continue to improve,
Thank you,
Excelsior Fire Relief
Excelsior Fire Dance
Beverage Selection
Keg Beer
Budweiser
Michelob Golden Light
Malt Beverages
Bud Light Lime -a -Rita
Bud Light Straw- Berrita
Wine
Chardonnay 5 oz Servings
Cabernet 5 oz Servings
NIA Beverages
Soda
Dad's Tap Root Beer
O'Douls NIA Beer
Safety & Security
All servers are required to go through South Lake Police Department alcohol awareness, this
involves training servers in proper ID checking, responsible service and a zero tolerance for
underage and over serving of adult beverages.
South Lake Police will once again provide security for the event and closely coordinates with us
to insure patrons are responsible. We also will continue to provide shuttles to allow for as many
guests to safely walk to our event.
Thorpe Distribution also promotes the We -ID- Program and will be providing signage, age
calendars, ID books for out of state and military ID's to provide additional reminders and easy to
reference materials. Staff will also be wearing "We ID" buttons to insure staff & patrons
remember this is a safe first event.
#10c
MEETING TYPE
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting
Title / Subject: Excelsior Firefighters Relief Association Fundraising Event - Friday, July 18, 2014
Meeting Date: June 9, 2014
Prepared by: Bill Joynes, City Administrator
Jean Panchyshyn, City Clerk
CC: Brad Nielsen, Larry Brown
Attachments: Resolutions (2), Special Event Permit Application
Background: As noted in the previous item #1013, the Excelsior Firefighters Relief Association (EFRA) is
requesting consideration of a temporary intoxicating liquor license for its annual fundraising dance
event at the Fire Station located at 24100 Smithtown Road on Friday, July 18. The event will take place
between the hours of 5:00 P.M. and midnight. This will be the 30th year that the EFRA has held this
fundraising event. This will be the 10th year this event has been held at the Fire Station at 24100
Smithtown Road. It is the EFRA's only fundraising event, and has historically been profitable.
In past years, the EFRA has had a Temporary 3.2 Percent Malt Liquor License, but wishes to provide
additional beverage choices that are above 3.2 Percent alcohol content. The EFRA Board will meet on
Thursday, June 5 to formally approve this request; therefore, the formal request from the EFRA Board
will be delivered under separate cover to Council prior to Monday's meeting.
The EFRA has submitted both the Temporary on -sale 3.2 Percent Malt Liquor License, as well as the
Temporary on -sale Liquor License applications. Should Council determine to deny the request for the
temporary Liquor License, the request for the temporary 3.2 Percent Malt Liquor License is under
consideration. The EFRA is requesting the fee be waived for either license, as in past years, as the City is
a member of the Excelsior Fire District.
Prior to the event, the individuals serving alcohol will be attending an alcohol awareness training session
provided by the South Lake Minnetonka Police Department. As all required liquor license documents
have been submitted, a resolution is attached for Council consideration.
The applicant has also submitted a Special Event Permit application. The applicant proposes to provide
shuttle service to the site from downtown Excelsior. Parking is also available at Shorewood City Nall and
the Southshore Center parking lots. On- street parking will not be allowed on Echo Road, Shorewood
Lane or Minnetonka Drive. The Special Event permit has been approved by the Zoning Administrator,
the EFD Fire Chief, and the SLMPD. As in past years, the EFRA will coordinate additional law
enforcement needs with the SLMPD. A copy of the Special Event Permit application is attached.
Recommendation / Action Requested:
A Motion to Adopt a Resolution Approving the Temporary On -Sale Liquor License (which includes 3.2
Percent Malt Liquor), OR Approval of a Temporary 3.2 Percent Malt Liquor License;
AND Approval of the Special Event Permit
Mission Statement: The City of Shorewood is committed to providing residents quality public services, a
healthy environment, a variety of attractive amenities, a sustainable tax base, and sound financial
management through effective, efficient, and visionary leadership. Page 1
Next Steps:
If approved, the Application for a Temporary On -Sale Liquor License will be mailed to the State Alcohol
and Gambling Enforcement Division for approval. The License will be provided to the EFRA after
approval by the State.
DRAFT — INTOXICATING LIQUOR AND 3.2 PERCENT MALT LIQUOR
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
RESOLUTION NO. 14-
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A TEMPORARY "ON- SALE"
LIQUOR LICENSE
WHEREAS, the Shorewood City Code, Section 402 provides for the licensing of the sale
of liquor in the City; and
WHEREAS, said Code provides that an applicant shall complete an application, and shall
fiilfill certain requirements concerning insurance coverage, and;
WHEREAS, the applicant has satisfactorily completed an application, and has fiilfilled the
requirements for the issuance of an "on- sale" temporary liquor license;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Shorewood as follows:
That a temporary license for "on- sale" liquor be issued to the Excelsior Fire Fighters Relief
Association, for its fiindraising event on July 18, 2014 from 5:00 P.M. to Midnight, at
24100 Smithtown Road. This license is approved for 3.2 Percent Malt Liquor and
Intoxicating Liquor.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shorewood that the
Temporary liquor license fee be waived.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Shorewood this 9th day of June,
2014.
ATTEST:
Jean Panchyshyn, City Clerk
Scott Zerby, Mayor
DRAFT — 3.2 PERCENT MALT LIQUOR ONLY
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
RESOLUTION NO. 14-
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A TEMPORARY 3.2 PERCENT "ON- SALE"
MALT LIQUOR LICENSE
WHEREAS, the Shorewood City Code, Section 402 provides for the licensing of the sale
of 3.2 percent malt liquor in the City; and
WHEREAS, said Code provides that an applicant shall complete an application, and shall
fiilfill certain requirements concerning insurance coverage, and;
WHEREAS, the applicant has satisfactorily completed an application, and has fiilfilled the
requirements for the issuance of a temporary license for the "on- sale" of 3.2 percent malt liquor:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Shorewood as follows:
That a temporary license for the "on- sale" of 3.2 percent malt liquor be issued to the
Excelsior Fire Fighters Relief Association, for its fiindraising event on July 18, 2014 from
5:00 P.M. to Midnight, at 24100 Smithtown Road.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shorewood that the
Temporary 3.2 Percent malt liquor license fee be waived.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Shorewood this 9th day of June,
2014.
ATTEST:
Jean Panchyshyn, City Clerk
Scott Zerby, Mayor
s 1• 9
Kt or;ty t�` SPECIAL EVENT
CITY OF APR ? � ". E IT APPLICATION
,HO� OQD on, �F bid, f�%x11�ta£�0 (Pursuant to City Code, Chapter 505)
a , »w HnNY.v,v,.p, 1
5755 Country Club Road t 1 ore�vood, Minnesota 55331
one"
952.960.7900 Fax; 952,474,0128
(Please Print or 7 pe)
Today's Date M ( Application Fee; n/a Receipt #, njaa
Event to be Registered: Any person or persons sponsoring a event at which it may reasonably be anticipated that
there will be more than'75 persons in attendance shall, prior thereto, register such event with the City Cleric, giving the
location, date, time, purpose, names of all sponsors, and the number of persons anticipated will be in attendance,
Permit for Additional Events: Within a period of 6 months following such event, no additional event(s), at which
it may reasonably be anticipated that there will be more than 75 persons in attendance, shat! be permitted at the same
location unless the person or persons who propose to sponsor the same shall first have obtained a special permit
therefore approved by the City Council. Application for such permit shall be made to the City Clerk,
Bvent Location: Cqq1QC2 Date of Event: 7- /?-/1
Number of Persons (anticipated) to Attend, 000 Time: &2a2 —,9, i,9 wt,
Purpose
Sponsor'
Daytime Phone ff: / - �2- 3r Evening Phone Sc
Special Parking or Safety Provisions (e.g., traffic control, parking, pedestrian access): se.,, .. kttko L, j
En omeWegt; A police officer may order all persons. present in any such group or gathering from which such noise emanates,
other than the owners or tenants of a dwelling unit, to immediately disperse from said event in lieu of being charged
under this Chapter should the continued health, safety, comfort, and repose of the public be in jeopardy, or if the event is
in violation of the provisions of Chapter 501 of the Shorewood City Code. Failure to comply with the conditions of the
Special invents Pen-nit may result in-police enforcement,
It0fQI�fi'.AYHUST RE INPA.S �#d3 FQ� taMER(ENCYVEi 7CLESl
Applicant's Signature; y �� .{ �"tylr o� Date 1 14
Allow 5 business days for processing
»., ».w-- --- — ------ --- -M »». For Office Use Only ---------------------- - -- ----- _,.._ »_._. »_.____ ».
SLMPD: 5ez, o ve-, ✓° _ _r_ _ - Date:
Fire Distric
Zoning Administrat
City Administrator:
t)figinait City d3horewood, 5755
Date: _ L - %
Dater
Date: ~ .. / Y _
MN 5533 t Copy to; South Lake Minnetonka Police Department, Fire Distriot, Appiioant
CITY OF 2, 3 2914pE
M
SHOREWOOD .1TY
5755 Country Club Road - off"Wood, Minnesota 55331
952.960.7900 Fax-, 952,474.0128
(Please Print or Type)
SPECIAL EVENT
IT APPLICATION
(Pursuant to My Code, Cbapter505)
Today's Data Application Fee: _n/a Receipt 9 aj�
Zvent to be Registered.- Any person or persons sponsoring a event at which it may reasonably be anticipated that
there will be more than 75 persons in attendance shall, prior thereto, register such event with the City Clerk, 'giving the
location, date, time, purpose, names of all sponsors, and the number of persons anticipated will be, in attendance.
Pvrmilt for Additional Events: Within a period of 6 months following such event, no additional vf;nt s), at which
it may reasonably ba anticipated that there will be more than 75 persons in attendance, shall be permitted at the same
location unless the person or persons who propose to sponsor the same shall first have obtained a special permit
therefore approved by the City Council. Appljo6on for such permit shall be made to the City Clerk.
BventLooatlon: qj.QQ ))meofBvent,
NumWt of Persons (utjoipatcd) to Attend: 7" 1600 Time:
Purpose,
Sponsor
Daytime Phone #: RvWq Phone t-
Special Parking or Safety Provisions (e.g., traffic control, parking, pedestrian ftcutss),
Boapment: A police officer may order all pemans-present ill MV such group or gathering from which such noise Mama,
other Man the owners or tMants of a. dwelling unit to immediately disperse from said event in lleu of being charged
under this Ch"rAoald the continued health, safety, corn Flirt, and repose cifthe public be in jeopardy, or lflht event is
iaviol4on oftho provisions ofC*ter 50) oftfie Short wood City Code. Failure to comply with the conditions of
Special Events Permit may result in'police enforcement,
)?OADWAYMVSTREMAISPA.IAWLBFO,Rggg)?G,ENCYPEH)CIXSI -
Applicant's Signature, wdaw-41k L�kf-c ap Date: CZ/'
Allow 5 business days for processing
d. ------------ Ifor office use Only --------------
Date-, ,f -p L.Ih'� J-Oj�f
Fire District: Date;
Zoning Administrator: Date:
City Administrator,
Date.
Odgi*: clrfofSharewaad, s7ss Country cite. Rood, ghamWaad, MN55131 C"yfo! lowh lAketvifilawouku Police Dinwifflant, Fire blurkt,Appflazor
#10D
MEETING TYPE
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting
Title / Subject: Schultz — Request to Place Dumpster at Christmas Lake Access
Meeting Date: 9 June 2014
Prepared by: Brad Nielsen
Reviewed by: Jean Panchyshyn
Policy Consideration: Should the City allow Dave and Peggy Schultz' contractor to place a dumpster at
the Christmas Lake access for one day during the week of 9 June?
Background:
As you may recall, Dave and Peggy Schultz experienced a significant fire last summer in which their
boathouse at 5950 Ridge Road was destroyed. As part of finishing up the project and removing various
items of debris from the area of the fire, their contractor has requested to use the Christmas Lake
Access on Merry Lane to keep a dumpster for approximately six hours one day next week. The terrain
on Schultz property is among the steepest on the east side of Christmas Lake, making it extremely
difficult to remove fire and construction debris. They would load material from the site onto a pontoon
boat, pull up to the south side of the dock at the access (away from the ramp) and wheelbarrow the
material to the dumpster. If approved, staff would work with the contractor relative to placement of
the dumpster so as not to interfere with AIS inspections at the access.
Financial or Budget Considerations: Approval of the request would involve no expense for the City.
Options: Authorize M A Mortenson Company to place a dumpster at the Christmas Lake Access for a
period of six hours during one day of the week of 9 June; or deny the request.
Recommendation / Action Requested: Staff has found the Mortenson contractor to be very organized,
cooperative and professional and the request is considered reasonable. Approval is recommended.
Next Steps and Timelines: Upon approval by the Council, staff will advise the contractor to proceed
with the cleanup (likely Wednesday). Staff will work with the contractor relative to the optimum
location for the dumpster and will inspect the access to ensure that the access is left in the condition
they found it.
Connection to Vision / Mission: Quality public services.
#11A
MEETING TYPE
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting
Title / Subject: Deer Management Program 2014 — Results of Informal Resident Survey
Meeting Date: 9 June 2014
Prepared by: Brad Nielsen
Reviewed by: Jean Panchyshyn
Attachments: ExhibitA — Tabulation of Results
Exhibit B — Resident Comments
Policy Consideration: Should the City continue its Deer Management Program for 2014?
Background: Earlier this spring, staff reported that the annual aerial deer survey revealed relatively low
numbers of deer within the city. Council agreed with a recommendation from staff to conduct an
informal resident survey through the newsletter and website, asking residents for their observations as
to the status of the deer population and whether the program should be modified or suspended. As
noted in the attached survey results, a fairly strong majority appear to favor the continuance of the
program.
Financial or Budget Considerations: The Council is reminded that the DMP involves relatively little
expense, using existing staff resources and a $50 check for the additional insurance required by the City.
Options: Continue the program as in the past; reduce the number of dates and /or sites for a 2014 hunt;
or suspend the program.
Recommendation / Action Requested: Based on resident comments, staff recommends that the
program be continued for 2014. Proposed dates will be provided under separate cover.
Next Steps and Timelines: Staff will advise Metro Bowhunters Resource Board of the Council's decision
and, if approved, will schedule site inspections for this year's hunt.
Connection to Vision / Mission: Quality public services.
DEER SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSES
May 2014
QUESTION
YES
NO
1. Have you noticed a decline
in the number of deer in
your neighborhood this
104
98
spring compared to other
years?
2. Do you think the Deer
Management Program has
been successful in
135
58
containing /reducing the
number of deer in
Shorewood?
3. Do you think we should
continue the Deer
150
51
Management Program for
2014?
4. If yes, should the number
of weekends hunted be
28
120
reduced from the current
five weekends?
5. Should the number of sites
33
134
being hunted be reduced?
Exhibit A
DEER SURVEY COMMENTS
May 2014
Current plan seems to be working well. Please continue. Thanks.
We have more deer than ever and they continue to damage trees /shrubs. Yet people still feed
them. Argh.
We have a continuous "parade" of deer thri our yard! No hostas or lilies, tulips! Ever! Plus
damage to trees!
Saturday we had 3 deer in our yard and they were not at all frightened by our attempts to get rid
of them!!
Use as many weekends and hunted sites as necessary to keep the deer population down. Many
thanks!
McLain Road is over - populated with deer.
We have less deer in our backyard. Used to have 5 — 7 at a time. Now maybe 2.
I live on Howard's Point Road. August 26 there were 5 deer running down the road at 3:00 P.M.
I have had deer sleeping under my pine trees all winter. The deer population is too large. It is
not healthy for them or the people that live here. We have had up to seven deer in our yard at
one time.
We support a strong deer management program. The herd is above natural carrying capacity.
Please expand efforts to get people to not feed deer.
I really feel bad running them out of town. I tried to employ them every fall — they did a
wonderfi l job of trimming down my hosta gardens before the snow would fly. I guess I will
have to hire a young good looking gardener now!!
All winter long, I had a group of 20 deer pass through my yard daily. I see 3 — 5 every day
crossing through my yard at about 6:00 P.M. now this spring.
I have 5 — 6 deer every evening in my yard — too many!
Do the math — each doe has 2 or 3 fawns so that increases the total yearly. We had 2 sets of 2 in
summer 2013. Increase the number of sites in Amesbury and Garden Road area.
We live in Marsh Pointe and have seen as many as 5 deer together this spring. Thanks.
Often see deer on Eureka between Birch Bluff and Smithtown. Also on Birch Bluff in Tonka
Bay. If Tonka Bay is not aggressive in deer removal, then Shorewood should not scale back.
I Exhibit B
I live on Murray Court. Every day 7 — 13 deer are in my back yard year round. They have a
regular schedule. I planted 13 trees and other plants and have had to replace quite a bit of my
plantings due to the deer ribbing and eating my plants. I try to deter them by spraying plants and
trees with "Deer Off' but doesn't seem to work. Also, have wire protection around my trees but
in the fall the deer are determined to rib their horns on the young trees. So, I would really
appreciate seeing fewer deer in my back yard. Please consider this information.
Don't shoot too many as you have been. Winter kills many also.
I think we should continue for one more year at least.
Pete finds it disturbing hunters don't wear orange. We are a private area and we confront
strangers no matter who they appear to be.
I still have 5 or 6 deer that come into my yard from the adjacent wetland and eat my plants.
We continue to see deer and deer damage in our neighborhood — Boulder Bridge.
Still see a herd of 12 or more in woods behind Birch Bluff Road. Two sets of triplets in the last
two years.
Deer continue to eat many of residential "greens" over winter and summer. Please continue to
harvest the herds.
Reduce the Silver Lake herd. We notice no reduction in numbers here. The deer continue to eat
upon landscape plants.
Still plenty of deer in the Glen Road neighborhood.
Please continue this program. I think Shorewood would be overrun with deer if not for the
annual harvest. Even now, I consistently see three deer in our yard daily. That would be six, 12,
etc. in a few years if not for the harvest.
We live here because we love wildlife. Please don't remove it!
Having deer in Shorewood adds to the ambiance of the area. Now that the number has been
reduced significantly a moratorium for 2014 would be reasonable.
We have many deer almost every day. Yesterday there were nine deer (and two turkeys; at times
a dozen or more). The number visiting us has been reduced a bit. Two winters ago we had 25
deer which bedded down and stayed two weeks. They really did a number on our vegetation at
that time. That was an exception. However the number usually ranges from 5 — 10 almost every
day.
2
Please focus on Howard's Point /Brynmawr Place neighborhood and Murray Court. In Murray
Court my mother -in -law frequently counts up to 13 deer in her back yard. Very destructive. My
neighbor on Howard's Point has a garden fenced in and they still get in. This is an elderly
couple who grow their own food.
We have seen a group of six deer running together. I know deer from adjoining cities run in
Shorewood also. Please continue the management program. I feel it was successful last year but
we still see many deer. They are a hazard to the public. I think the number of sites and
weekends should remain the same. Thank you.
Please continue the deer management program thri 2014 and 2015. The program is worthwhile,
however, you need to refocus the areas of control. The entire area around Freeman Park, Mtka
Country Club, and more each day you see 2 to 7 deer and they are extremely destructive. Also
note that folks over off of Strawberry Lane are "feeding the deer ".
The only times I don't see seer are when the hunters are out. I think an expansion of weekends
and areas hunted would help. I live by Minnewashta School.
Rarely see deer in Sweetwater area.
There seem to be as many or more deer than ever!
NO HUNT! I lived next door to a site and it was disgusting and horrific. The deer took a long
time to die — my kids were terrified. My husband was able to video the deer suffering for my
neighbors to see — they AGREE, stop this senseless hunt!
This Winter, we saw more deer than ever, with additional sightings of deer tracks. And this is
very near Hwy 7. I believe that Shorewood should continue or increase Deer Management
Program efforts.
Keep up the good work.
I live in the Shorewood Oaks area and I still see plenty of deer in my neighborhood. So keep up
the Deer Management program, please.
Spring garden is almost entirely eaten and it is not yet warm or is it because of the deep snow
cover and dinner guest are very hungry. They appear to be well feed and unafraid and do enjoy
the landscaping. So what does it all mean, not sure, plant more, chase more, hunt more, ? ? ? ? ? ? ??
We have seen no deer in our Shorewood neighborhood for the past 3 -5 years, about which we are
disappointed. Prior to that, we saw small groups ( <4 deer at a time) on occasion. We live on the
east side of Shorewood between Manor Park and Minnetonka Blvd. We don't believe hunting the
deer within the city of Shorewood is necessary.
I don't think I was supposed to answer number 5. I think the program can end. Thank you.
Seems like we actually have more deer than previous years.
In my neighborhood the deer population is significantly up.
The decline if there is one is quite small. I have no opinion as to question 5.
We do not see any deer on the islands.
I almost hit a deer on my motorcycle the other day. We need to reduce the deer population.
I see three or four deer at a time in my back yard at least twice a week.
I love wildlife, but the deer in Shorewood still propose a substantial threat. I have a personal
dislike for the damage they cause to my landscape and gardens. I don't like it, but I can live with
it. The threat they pose to traffic is of huge concern. Deer are by far the animal that causes the
most deaths, injury and property damage in the US.
Based on the conditions of the foliage in my yard the deer program has not impacted the herd
that wanders through here. This was a late spring and the foliage is quite eaten - more so than
normal due to other plants not being available. I would prefer to see deer treated like pets vs wild
animals due to the over development of our neighborhood.
The deer on the east side of the city of numerous. I have a wooded area in back of my property
and nothing except buckthorn and garlic mustard grows. The deer eat all the young trees. Despite
their bucolic appearance, deer in large numbers are very destructive to the native plants. A
control program is necessary for environmental sustainability.
Please continue the deer reduction program. Despite the progress there are still too many deer
causing too much yard, tree and plantings damage. A pause will allow the population to rebound
quickly. What do the participating hunters say about their efforts and success rate?
I don't know how successful the program has been. I would think the numbers are down and I
would not like to seethe numbers increase. The specific questions—number of sites, weekends,
should be answered by people in the know.
Still a gang of eight deer wandering our neighborhood.
I live on Smithtown Rd. near the country club. The swamp /forest area to the west of the country
club seems to harbor a number of deer. It's not unusual to have four deer in our yard eating our
plants and shitting all over the yard. We have had them eating hostas and bushes within 4 feet of
the back door. Lots of twin fawns. Let us Hunt them.
We see numerous deer in our area and walking through our yard. Please keep a watchful eye.
Thank you
4
I don't think the deer should have ever been killed!! We live here because we love wildlife.... but
you are taking it away from us!
Those of us that live near marshland still have an abundance of deer that eat everything from
arborvitae and Japanese Yew and can destroy these plants. Might it make sense to do a more
scientific count of deer to better blow the effectiveness of the program and when it should be
scaled back?
I have seen significant browsing from the deer this year in many of the public and private
gardens that I tend to. They are even eating plats that they typically have avoided in the past.
Why would they city considering scaling back this effective management program or eliminate
it ??
Would like to offer to discuss this on the phone. I have way to many deer in my yard and they
have been damaging trees etc.
We have not noticed any difference in the deer population in our yard... perhaps because
someone on Wild Rose Ln seems to be feeding deer (and turkeys). We feel the deer are not only
a hazard to gardens and landscapes, but also cars.
I have lived on Mtka Dr. for 8 years, and I can count my number of deer sightings in my
neighborhood on one hand, and never within a block of my home. I understand that they may be
a bigger issue in other parts of Shorewood, so I won't say the program should be discontinued,
just scaled back to save money. And educate people to not feed them.
Pls also add geese to cull list.
The policy is working well. Nice job. Maybe 2 years ON, then I year OFF. I have faith in your
judgment. As you should have in ours.
We see deer at dusk several times a week along Smithtown Road and on Church Street. One was
hit by a car and the driver left it still alive but badly injured in the middle of Church Street. The
city should continue the deer reduction policy.
At this point I feel we don't need to continue using taxpayers money to thin the deer for several
years.
We consistently see a large number of deer going through our yard heading both toward and
from the Minnetonka golf course. They are eating our plants and shrubs in passing.
I am seeing more deer than ever this spring.
What do we do until the hunting season ? ?? We have had the deer eating the flowers off the
geraniums of the Exc. Men's Garden club flowers this morning, later in day watched the deer
grazing on our neighbors garden. We have seen 2 of them around here 6 or 7 times already this
spring- they are living in town homes on Tierney Woods Rd and Lake Como
The Deer Management Program is successful so I see no need to modify it in any way.
I've noticed a significant increase, not decrease number of deer in my back yard this year.
While we really don't have any problems with deer in our yard, except a few chewed plants. We
have seen more deer in the past year than ever before in 15 yrs. at this address. We do believe
deer numbers should be managed.
I think if you achieved your population reduction goals, then we're done until the population
spikes again. I definitely would like to see fencing laws relaxed, so if residents wanted to put
higher than a 6 foot fence up to protect their landscaping from deer, we could.
I won't blow how bad the deer are until later in the summer when they get into the gardens and
eat everything. The rabbits do a lot of damage too. Although our resident coyote had been
keeping the rabbit population down.
The deer hunts seem more humane than the speeders hitting the deer that are crossing the roads,
but we have not seen quite as many as we used to. It does appear that there is a household that
feeds the deer behind their house on Smithtown Circle, as we see adults and fawns grazing in one
general area quite frequently.
Fewer weekends and only in highest concentration spots (one or two ?)
A decline over the winter months because (a)two private deer feeders have been removed due to
the ordinance, and a neighbor has put 6 foot fence around his arborvitae which had been a
magnet for the deer. Now some greenery has popped up and I have a herd of 6 -8 yearlings who
are here every night causing serious damage to trees and plants.
Having a large number of deer in a residential area is not healthy for the deer or shorewood
residents who may also may become involved in auto accidents.
We still see many deer during all times of the year. We see deer daily in our yard. Also, is it
common to see multiple births? Thank you!
Finally in control of the situation, which is safer for everyone. Thank you.
We purchased our house out in Shorewood to be able to watch wildlife, if we didn't want to see
deer etc we would have stayed in South Minneapolis around those lakes.
I am a bad person to ask because I like the deer.
6
I don't have enough information to answer questions 4 and 5. Although I did not know there was
a Deer Management program prior to this survey I have noticed a reduction in the number of
deer and wondered why. Whether the programs has reduced the numbers sufficiently to cut back,
I cannot say.
The deer seem to be about the same as in recent years. At this time I don't object to the
number... my grandsons love them and I don't mind them.
Continue the Shorewood program. In the Fall of 2013 I had a full grown buck run out in front of
my car on Highway 7 near Eureka Rd. If there had been a split - second difference in timing there
would have been a multiple car accident with cars heading in both directions on Highway 7. Let's
keep the deer population in Shorewood as low as possible.
Don't know when the weekends hunted are or where the sites are located. It would be more
helpful in answering this survey. In our area off Grant Lorenz /Smithtown, we have not seen a
reduction in the population.
To do nothing is not a good idea because I feel the balance will quickly return to too many deer.
However, I'd like to see what the impact is next year by being more targeted in the program this
year. I think we are really close now to the right balance and we will be able to see if it stays that
way.
If 2014 -2015 Hunt over 5 weekends still yields similar harvest numbers as the previous year then
herd still probably needs thinning. However if the hunt yielded smaller harvest numbers then it
would make sense to dial back on either number of sites or number of weekends or both in some
combination. Thanks for chance to comments.
Many deer in southeast Shorewood to the East of Silver Lake.
The program should be continued. Without control the deer population will grow until they
starve. The details (questions 4 and 5) should be decided as necessary to keep a limited and
sustainable population in the city.
We are located at 22695 Murray St. We have not noticed any decline in the animals (up to 10)
that cross though our property.
We sighted three deer in our yard on Garden Road just last night again, 5/9/14. Please continue
the program and focus on our area if possible. Thank you
We have 10 to 20 deer going through our yard several times a day. It is hard to even chase them
off as you have to get within a couple of feet of them before they will leave. They eat hanging
plants on the deck and stand within a foot of our house eating the plants. 6180 Cardinal Drive S.
Help.
Our observations indicate no reduction in deer population. The damage to our shrubs and flowers
is still severe.
7
Two yrs ago a herd of deer and my car had a head on. Herds would cross through our back yard.
Now we see one deer only about once a month go by.
A deer with a broken leg has been tripping around Strawberry lane for several years. She is
getting very thin and needs to rest when she is following the "herd ". Please take her out of her
misery. Other neighbors have commented "it is too sad to watch her" the way she is with her
condition. Many sleep in our yard waiting for the garden to grow!
While I have noticed a decline, it almost seems like it has been too much of a decline. Not so
many should be removed.
I see them in my yard day & night eating the plants in my garden & yard.
The number of excessive deer in our area (eastern Shorewood) has not gone down significantly,
if there is not a hunting location in this area please establish one.
Live on Radisson Entrance, I always have between 5 and 6 deer in my yard every week eating
everything in sight. Love to look at them but hate that they destroy my plants. Two of the ones
that come have been injured and I really feel bad seeing them.
We are still seeing a lot of deer traffic going through the west property line to the Minnetonka
Country Club -golf course. Many were doe, now they are followed by fawn. They are traveling in
groups of three coming in from the north heading south. The hunts are important to us. How
many are necessary.)
We back up to the marsh on Brentwood and I see up to 5 deer every day in the neighborhood,
have had to swerve on Smithtown at least 4 days a week. There is going to be an accident if the
deer population is not continently monitored. Please keep this program and ADD weeks. We
have spotted 3 more babies just this week.
Please Hunt in the Brynmawr /Howard point neighborhood. Too many deer destroying trees and
plants. We have at times 9 deer in our yard. There is also one large loner deer that is particularly
destructive. We need further reduction in the deer population. Thanks.
The program should be continued, however, you need to focus more within the city ... around
MNTKA Country club area and surrounding residential area. Everyday we see 2 to 7 deer at a
time. Please continue the program.
Don't blow how many sites are hunted, might make sense to reduce? Love the deer, but they
have caused landscaping damage by eating young tree bark and other plants, which are
expensive to replace.
We live in a wooded area at the SE corner of the City and enjoy the daily trek of deer from
Purgatory Creek to Silver Lake. We used to see 10 -15 deer daily make that trek, now 2 -4. In a
way, sad but understand the overall good.
I think it would be good to continue the program as the Deer are still cropping the Hosta and
other flowers in our yard.
There has certainly been a reduction in the deer population. However it still could be lower.
There is still a lot of plant and tree damage due to deer over browsing in my yard, for example.
The coyote took the fox, and geese and small family pets. If food is plentiful, the wolves will be
next. I understand they have been sited in Minnetrista.
I don't think that the decreased deer population is a positive thing. We used to have deer go
through our yard every dusk and dawn, and it is rarer now, and I miss that, I want to have
wildlife in my yard.
There are several deer that cross our yard and Smithtown Road each day. I am concerned about
public safety. I am already seeing the effects of the dear population in my garden.
From my observations, I have not seen a significant reduction in the deer population in the area
between Wedgewood Dr. and Eureka Rd. I have 3 -4 trail cameras out and consistently see the
same 18 -20 deer. More of a concern is the exploding Turkey population. Can the MBRB help
control Turkeys? There were 35 in the area last year, with a poor hatch.
Have noticed more deer in our area in the last few weeks. We live near the city hall off of 19 and
are worried some one will hit one and be hurt. They go across 19 to get to the lake. Also they
will be having fawns in the next few weeks which will increase the population.
There were four deer grazing in our yard just yesterday.
In the area of Edgewood Road, we have seen an increase in deer compared to years past
I am totally against ANY deer harvesting program in Shorewood. I purchased my home here
because of the wildlife. I am a gardner and have never had a bad experience with a deer.
Remember, the year you stopped the program, the deer multiplied. How much does the program
cost?
9
24 �La/L �? JAI r✓��i� �
1��A22 �4 /C/ i'� r ✓'ems G%� � � �C�� -
;- 9
/e
From: WayneMHartmann @eaton.com
Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2014 4:31 PM
To: Planning
Subject: Informal Deer Survey
After two successful deer removal seasons, the City Council is considering scaling back the Deer
Management Program for 2014. The annual aerial survey, done in February, shows the lowest number
of deer in Shorewood since the program began seven years ago. Before making a decision, the Council
would like to hear from residents as to their observations of the deer population in their neighborhoods.
A link to an online version of this survey is available on the home page of the city web site, www.
ci.shorewood.mn.us. Answers may also be emailed to planning @ci.shorewood.mn.us; or, complete the
survey below and return this section to city hall, 5755 Country Club Road, by May 31.
Please answer the following questions based on your own observations:
Have you noticed a decline in the number of deer in your neighborhood this spring compared to other years?
No — It seems to me the populations has remained about the same.
Do you think the Deer Management Program has been successful in containing /reducing the number
of deer in Shorewood?
Yes — I am sure that without it, the population of deer would be even higher.
Do you think we should continue the deer management program for 2014?
Yes — Absolutely!
If yes, should the number of weekends hunted be reduced from the current five weekends?
No — Keep it the same.
Should the number of sites being hunted be reduced?
No — In fact, perhaps it should be expanded.
Comments: I enjoy seeing all wildlife, including deer, in and around my yard. But the population of deer is still at
destructive levels. The number of deer out there force them to fan out to find food. They are doing a tremendous
amount of damage to my trees and plants in my yard. I wonder how effective the helicopter survey was... perhaps there
is much variability in a survey such as this (And I wonder what the cost was! An active citizen survey such as this would
be more cost - effective and likely is more reliable.) As recently as March I saw 8 deer in and around my yard at the same
time. Knowing that there are many more likely in the same area, this is a large population.
A couple of other comments and questions:
• The newsletter notes that an online survey is available on the Home page of the Shorewood Web site.... But I
could not find it. If you want reliable feedback, you cannot rely on paper, and you have to make it easier to find
and complete online. If it is truly on the Home page, then it is well- hidden, and that will not promote responses.
• You should consider notes to Shorewood citizens encouraging them not to feed the deer. I see many feeders in
Shorewood, and this habit is discouraged by the MN DNR because of its ability to spread diseases (such as
Chronic Wasting Disease, and Bovine Tuberculosis). It is better for the deer population to keep them dependent
on natural food sources. Feeding the deer only encourages them to leave the wooded and wetland areas and
venture into yards and lawns, where landscape plants become their food. Also note that deer feeding is banned
in some counties of MN because of this issue.
• Perhaps a 'one size fits all' approach does not work for Shorewood. I live in the extreme Western part of
Shorewood, and the population of deer could be significantly different on the Eastern edge. Again, a
comprehensive study conducted with citizen feedback and ensuring an adequate sampling from various areas in
Shorewood would help answer that question.
• 1 found two dead bucks on the wetland adjacent to my property late this winter. While it was an unusually
bitter winter, we must also consider that there may be too many deer for the food available in the area.
• As the deer increase, accidents with cars will increase.
• As noted above, I saw 8 deer in my yard and neighbors yards at the same time in early March. I walk my dog
twice a day and we never go out without seeing several deer (we walk along Smithtown Road). Typically I will
see at least 3 on a given walk
• Are the hunting locations posted somewhere? The last question was in regards to reducing the number of sites...
but I don't recall seeing the sites listed before. I also don't recall ever seeing anyone hunt in my area, and I think
that would be a good thing to consider.
• Do you publish the number of deer harvested? I don't recall seeing that either. The introduction above says this
has been going on for 7 years, but notes "After two successful deer removal seasons...." - were the other ones
unsuccessful ?
I live on Maple Ridge Lane in Shorewood. My wife and I love the neighborhood and are quite fond of the wildlife that we
get to enjoy. But the deer are destroying much of our plantings and we would prefer to get a glimpse of them across the
wetland now and then, rather than watching them stand in the cul -de -sac, eating our hostas.
Please feel free to contact me if you have follow -up questions. And either way, I would appreciate a response to this
message just so I know that it did in fact get delivered.
Thanks,
-Wayne Hartmann
From: RLeaf27 @aol.com
Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2014 6:42 PM
To: Planning
Subject: Deer survey
The link to the online survey is not working.
I live at 19790 Near Mountain Blvd.
We have not noticed any decline in the number of deer in our neighborhood this spring. We have had as many as eight
deer together at one time around our property in the past month, and deer are regularly crossing Near Mountain Blvd.
The deer management program appears to be containing the deer population, but not reducing it.
The deer management program should be continued in 2014, and the number of weekends hunted and number of sites
should not be reduced.
Our property borders the wetland adjacent to Silver Lake, and we would be willing to have this be a hunting site. Our
neighbors have expressed frustration with the damage to shrubs caused by the deer, and those that I have spoken with
would not object to hunting in this area.
Ron Leaf
From: Lauralee Chellen [Ichellen @mchsi.com]
Sent: Friday, May 02, 2014 10:25 AM
To: Planning
Subject: Deer Survey
Hello,
First, thank you for conducting this poll before scaling back this program!
Please confirm your receipt of this email. The online survey link was not working, so I'm emailing you my feedback:
1. Noticed a decline in my neighborhood?
No difference to last year.
2. Has It been successful in reducing?
Slightly over the last seven years — Was 9 deer, is now to 7 deer ... with babies on the way!
3. Continue the program in 2014?
YES
4. Reduce number of weeks hunted?
NO
5. Reduce # number of Sites?
CHANGE SITES as warranted. Residents can help you here. In the next newsletter publishing, perhaps ask residents
whom report overpopulation to provide their location and /or address, so you can identify where harvesting is still
needed.
I'm located on Smithtown at Cathcart Rd. Two out of three nights (year round) a herd of 5 -7 deer walk southward along
our west property line (from the marsh in our back lot) and cross Smithtown rd. Our back yard is the deer hangout —
deer harvesters are welcome!
Hope this helps,
Lauralee
(612) 247 -7189
1
CITY OF
SHOREWOOD
5755 Country Club Road • Shorewood, Minnesota 55331 • 952- 474 -3236
Fax: 952- 474 -0128 • www.ci.shorewood.mmus • cityhall @ci.shorewood.mn.us
Re: Trail Schedule Update — Galpin Lake Road and Smithtown Road (East)
Prepared by Paul Hornby and Brad Nielsen
Galpin Lake Road Walkway Schedule
0 Planning Commission recommendation to Council re trail segment for following year
0 Council authorizes preparation of survey and Feasibility Report
0 Survey (30 days) — May
0 Feasibility Report (30 days) — June
0 Planning Commission review of feasibility report and trail walk — July
0 Planning Commission recommendation to Council re Feasibility Report
0 Council approves Feasibility Report
0 Planning Commission holds Neighborhood Meeting (Open House)
0 Council award of land acquisition services and authorizes preparation of Plans and Specifications
❑ Preparation of Plans and Specifications (90 days)
■ 95% Complete submittal to MnDOT 6/06/14
■ MnDOT Review Complete 7/07/14
■ CC Authorization to Advertise for bids 7/14/14
■ Open Bids 8/07/14
■ CC consideration of Award 8/11/14
❑ Land Acquisition Process (start approx. mid -way through plans and specs)
• Land Acquisition process not required due to design modifications
• Individual temporary easements or rights of entry may be required
• Reduces project schedule
❑ Neighborhood preconstruction meeting
8/18/14
❑ City possession of easements /letter of compliance
N/A
❑ Groundbreaking Ceremony
8/25/14
❑ Begin Construction
8/25/14
❑ Construction substantially complete — Phase 1 Construction
10/31/14
❑ Construction substantially complete — Phase 2 Construction
7/31/15
❑ Ribbon Cutting Ceremony
8/10/15
❑ Restoration complete
7/31/15
Trail Schedule Update — Galpin Lake Road and Smithtown Road (East) Page 2
Smithtown Road East (LRT Trail to Country Club Road) Walkway Schedule
❑
Planning Commission recommendation to Council re trail segment for following year
6/03/14
❑
Council authorizes preparation of survey and Feasibility Report
6/23/14
❑
Survey (30 days) — 6/30/14
— 7/25/14
❑
Feasibility Report (30 days) — 7/01/14
— 8/22/14
❑
Planning Commission review of feasibility report and trail walk —
9/02/14
❑
Planning Commission recommendation to Council re Feasibility Report
9/02/14
❑
Council approves Feasibility Report
9/08/14
❑
Planning Commission holds Neighborhood Meeting (Open House)
9/30/14
❑
Council award of land acquisition services and authorizes preparation of Plans
10/13/14
and Specifications
❑
Preparation of Plans and Specifications (90 -120 days) 10/13/14—
2/13/15
❑
Land Acquisition Process (start approx. mid -way through plans and specs) 9/03/14
— 7/06/15
o Complete parcel descriptions and legal descriptions
o Review proposed easements with staff/attorney
o Letters to property owners regarding survey staking
o Field stake proposed easements for Appraiser /RW Agent
o Easement viewing — parcel owner and RW Agent on -site
o Appraisal information
o Appraisal review
o Council considers resolution to authorize staff to make offers and eminent domain schedule
o Prepare and deliver offers to parcel owners
❑ Neighborhood informational meeting (Open House)
❑ Begin eminent domain action
❑ Council approves Plans and Specifications and authorizes ad for Bids
❑ Receive bids for construction
❑ City possession of easements /letter of compliance
❑ Council awards Construction Contract
❑ Neighborhood preconstruction meeting
❑ Groundbreaking Ceremony
❑ Begin Construction
❑ Construction substantially complete
❑ Ribbon Cutting Ceremony
❑ Restoration complete
5/19/15
2/09/15
5/25/15
6/08/15
6/22/15
6/22/15
6/30/15
6/30/15
7/06/15
10/15/15
10/31/15
11/15/15
#12A1
MEETING TYPE
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Regular Meeting
Title / Subject: Recap of the Spring Cleanup Event
Meeting Date: 6 -9 -2014
Prepared by: Pat Fasching
Reviewed by: Jean Panchyshyn
Attachments: None
CC: Larry Brown, Julie Moore
Background: On May 17th, 2014, the City of Shorewood conducted the annual Spring Cleanup Event.
Once again this year, we had the Salvation Army collecting usable clothing, furniture and household
items and our third annual shredding event was held in the City Hall parking lot.
The event went very smooth and the crews worked well together.
The following are tallies that have been received from our vendors:
• Shred -N -Go, Inc.: 8466 pounds of paper.
• Allied Waste: 6- Loads of miscellaneous refuse or, 18.04 tons!
• Certified Appliance: 154 Appliances, 8 Water Softeners, 66 Power Equipment Items,
1364 Ibs of Batteries, 16,440 Ibs of Electronics, 637 Fluorescent bulbs
• Re -Cycle of Mpls: Bicycles — 72 bicycles were rescued for a total weight of 1800 pounds,
for a 7500 pound reduction in CO2 emissions for the state of MN.
Financial or Budget Considerations:
Shred -N -Go, Inc.:
Allied Waste:
Certified Appliance Recycling:
Re -Cycle of Mpls:
FREE with our monthly service at City Hall
Labor /Deliver /Hauling /Disposal - $4,177.97
Electronics $.311b = $5,096.40, Water Softeners - $160.00,
Power Equipment - $660.00, Fluorescent bulbs - $429.00
Total Certified Appliance - $6,740.40
No Charge to the City for Bicycle Collection and Recycling
Connection to Vision / Mission: This service provides our residents means to properly dispose of waste
products to protect our 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