04-26-21 CC Reg Mtg Agenda Packet
CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MONDAY, APRIL 26, 2021 7:00 P.M.
Due to the Centers for Disease Control's recommendation limiting the number of people present at a
meeting, and pursuant to MN Statute §13D.02, the Shorewood City Council meetings will be held by
electronic means. For those wishing to listen live to the meeting, please go to
ci.shorewood.mn.us/current_meeting for the meeting link. Contact the city at 952.960.7900 during
regular business hours with questions.
AGENDA
1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL MEETING
A. Roll Call
Mayor Labadie___
Siakel___
Johnson___
Callies___
Gorham___
B. Review and Adopt Agenda
Attachments
2. CONSENT AGENDA The Consent Agenda is a series of actions which are being considered for adoption this evening
under a single motion. These items have been reviewed by city council and city staff and there shall be no further discussion by the
council tonight on the Consent Agenda items. Any council member or member of city staff may request that an item be removed from
the Consent Agenda for separate consideration or discussion. If there are any brief concerns or questions by council, we can answer
those now.
Motion to approve items on the Consent Agenda & Adopt Resolutions Therein:
A. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of April 12, 2021 Minutes
B. Approval of the Verified Claims List Claims List
C. Liquor License Renewals Deputy City Clerk Memo
Resolution 21-037
D. Extend Approvals for the Matthew Sayer Addition Planning Director Memo
Resolution 21-038
E. Accept Agreements for Mary Lake Outlet Project, City Engineer Memo
City Project 19-09 Resolution 21-039
F. Approve Demolition Quote for 26245 Smithtown Road City Administrator Memo
Resolution 21-040
G. Approve Donation from American Legion Post 259 for Parks/Rec Director Memo
Bleachers at Badger Park Resolution 21-041
H. Authorize Service Agreement with Hennepin County Planning Director Memo
Resolution 21-042
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
Page 2
I. Accept Proposal for Emerald Ash Borer Management Director of Public Works Memo
Plan Update, Davey Resource Group
J. Award Quote for Water Service Installation, 5815 Howard’s Director of Public Works Memo
Point Road, E.J. Mayers, Inc. Resolution 21-043
K. Award Quote for Water Service Installation, Grant Street Director of Public Works Memo
E.J. Mayers, Inc. Resolution 21-044
L. Approve SLMPD contract with City of Excelsior City Administrator Memo
3. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR This is an opportunity for members of the public to bring an item, which is not on
tonight's agenda, to the attention of the mayor and council. When you are recognized, please use the raise your hand feature. Please
identify yourself by your first and last name and your address for the record. After this introduction, you will be granted a maximum of
three minutes to make your comments. No action will be taken by the council on this matter, but the mayor or council could request
that staff place this matter on a future agenda. (No Council Action will be taken)
4. PUBLIC HEARING
5. REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS
A. Audit Presentation – Justin Nilson Finance Director Memo
B. Jen Weiss, Excelsior Chamber of Commerce
6. PARKS
A. Report by Commissioner Gallivan on 04-13-21 Park Commission Meeting Minutes
B. Approve Purchase of Playground Equipment for Silverwood Park Planning Director Memo
Resolution 21-045
7. PLANNING
A. Report by Commissioner Maddy on 04-06-21 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
B. Approve Comprehensive Plan Amendment to allow a concurrent Planning Director Memo
Detachement/Annexation for parcel 34 117 23 21 0011, Resolution 21-046
West of 450 West Lake Street
8. ENGINEERING/PUBLIC WORKS
A. Approve Feasibility Study and Authorize Final Plans and Specifications Engineer Memo
for Strawberry Lane Reconstruction and Trail, City Project 19-05 Resolution 21-047
9. GENERAL/NEW BUSINESS
A. Ordinance No. 577 Targeted Residential Picketing City Administrator Memo
Ordinance 577
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
Page 3
B. Approve Buckthorn Removal at Freeman Park Proposal City Administrator Memo
Resolution 21-036
C. Legal Services RFP City Administrator Memo
10. STAFF AND COUNCIL REPORTS
A. Staff
B. Mayor and City Council
11. ADJOURN
2A
CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MONDAY, APRIL 12, 2021 7:00 P.M.
MINUTES
1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
Mayor Labadie called the meeting to order at 7:01 P.M.
A. Roll Call
Present. Mayor Labadie; Councilmembers Johnson, Siakel, Callies, and Gorham; City
Attorney Keane; City Administrator Lerud; City Clerk/HR Director Thone; Finance
Director Rigdon; Planning Director Darling; Director of Public Works Brown; and,
City Engineer Budde
Absent: None
B. Review Agenda
Mayor Labadie explained that she would like to postpone item 5.A., Report and Presentation by
Hennepin County Sheriff David Hutchinson to a future meeting. She would also like move item
9.D. Receive Recommendations for Fire Lanes from Park and Planning Commissions, to a work
session in the near future.
Callies moved, Johnson seconded, approving the agenda as amended.
Roll Call Vote: Johnson, Siakel, Callies, Gorham, Labadie voted Aye. Motion passed.
2. CONSENT AGENDA
Mayor Labadie reviewed the items on the Consent Agenda.
Councilmember Callies noted that she had found some typographical errors which were not
substantive and asked if she should just contact City Clerk/HR Director Thone after the meeting
to point them out.
Mayor Labadie noted that since they were not substantive, she felt the best approach would be
to contact City Clerk/HR Director Thone to communicate those changes.
Johnson moved, Gorham seconded, Approving the Motions Contained on the Consent
Agenda and Adopting the Resolutions Therein.
A. City Council Work Session Meeting Minutes of March 22, 2021
B. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of March 22, 2021
C. Approval of the Verified Claims List
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
APRIL 12, 2021
Page 2 of 14
D. Approval of Hennepin Youth Sports Program Playground Grant Application,
Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 21-033, “A Resolution Authorizing a Grant
Application for the Redevelopment of Silverwood Park Playground at 5775
Covington Road.”
E. Authorize Expenditures for Public Works Equipment, One Asphalt Hotbox
F. Accept Proposal for Safety Training, SafeAssure
Roll Call Vote: Johnson, Siakel, Callies, Gorham, Labadie voted Aye. Motion passed.
3. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR
Duncan Storley and Diane Tsari, 5375 Eureka Road, noted that they would like the opportunity to
speak with regard to item 5C. Patricia Hauser, Ranked Choice Voting and 9C, Discuss Options
nd
for Wild Duck 2 Addition Outlot A.
Mayor Labadie noted that she will give them the opportunity to comment at that point in the
agenda.
4. PUBLIC HEARING
5. REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS
A. Hennepin County Sheriff David Hutchinson
Postponed.
B. Jim Lundberg, Operations Manager LMCC
Jim Lundberg, LMCC, gave an overview of the services the LMCC offers, what they accomplished
in 2020 and what they have planned for 2021. He noted that if anyone has a complaint about
Mediacom, they should contact him at jim@lmcc-tv.org. The LMCC received a Telly Award in
2020 for their production of “Anytown USA” that provided insight into the challenges surrounding
road construction in the area. He explained that the if the City had any programming ideas for
LMCC, they can contact chris@lmcc-tv.org for assistance. He noted that they have begun
installing 2 camera, high definition, pan/tilt/zoom recordings systems into the member cities and
explained that they can be upgraded to included a teleconferencing component. He stated that
the plan is to replace the City’s equipment sometime in 2021.
Mayor Labadie thanked Mr. Lundberg for the valuable services the LMCC provides for the
community.
C. Patricia Hauser, Ranked Choice Voting
Patricia Hauser and Jeff Dinsmore, 5805 Minnetonka Drive, thanked the Council for the
opportunity to present a resolution for consideration regarding ‘Ranked Choice Voting’. She gave
an overview of Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) and explained how it would work. She stated that
RCV allows more people to run for office and makes elections more about the issues.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
APRIL 12, 2021
Page 3 of 14
Liz Johnson, FairVote Minnesota, reviewed a sample RCV ballot and explained that a winner
would need a majority which means 50% of the vote, plus one. She stated that because people
rank their ballot, any run off that may be necessary takes place instantly. She stated that there
are already 16% of Minnesota voters already using RCV in cities such as Minneapolis, St. Paul,
St. Louis Park, Bloomington, and Minnetonka. She reviewed what she considers as the benefits
of RCV and noted that RCV has been highly rated by voters using it. She stated that HR 89 and
SF 218 have been brought to the legislators to implement RCV for primary and general elections
for State and federal offices, but also to ensure that it will allow local jurisdictions to adopted RCV.
Mayor Labadie thanked Ms. Johnson and Ms. Hauser for presenting this information to the
Council.
Councilmember Siakel reminded Mayor Labadie that Mr. Storley and Ms. Tsari had wanted a
chance to address the Council regarding this item.
Mr. Storley stated that he has read quite a bit about RCV and as far as he can tell there is not a
downside to it. He stated that anything that can help cut out the negative campaigning and the
name calling in politics is a good thing. He stated that he would support moving to this type of
voting. Ms. Tsari stated that she is also in favor of RCV and would love to get away from situations
where she is choosing between two people that she does not want to hold office and would rather
have more choices.
Mike Melnychuk, 25360 Birch Bluff Road, stated that his research has shown that RCV can
disconnect elections from issues and allow candidates with marginal support to win. He stated
that he feels it also obscures true debate and issue driven dialogues among candidates and
eliminates genuine binary choice between the top candidates. He stated that he also feels RCV
disenfranchises voters because ballots don’t include the two ultimate finalists. He stated that
there should be an opportunity to have a counter-point to RCV presented to the body.
Mayor Labadie explained that Patricia Hauser had approached her to present this matter to the
Council. She stated that she had also given her permission to invite a representative that is not
a Shorewood resident to participate to help educate Council on this issue. She stated that she
would extend the same invitation to Mr. Melnychuk or anyone else, to present an alternate point
of view. She stated that she would like to place this issue on a future work session and is hopeful
that someone representing the opposite side of the issue could come and present their
information before a deeper discussion is held.
Councilmember Callies suggested that the presentation happen at the work session and not at a
regular Council meeting and then give the Council time to discuss it in more depth. She stated
that it seems like it would be more efficient to have the presentations made at the meeting where
the Council would be discussing it rather than holding a sequence of meetings.
6. PARKS
7. PLANNING
8. ENGINEERING/PUBLIC WORKS
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
APRIL 12, 2021
Page 4 of 14
A. Approve Plans and Specifications and Authorize Advertisement for Bids for
2021 Mill and Overlay, City Project 20-08
City Engineer Budde explained that in the City’s CIP, they have identified a mill and overlay project
for 2021 which is intended to extend the longevity of the roadways and infrastructure in the City.
He stated that this project is generally on streets that have the poorest pavement rankings and
are identified as having higher volume. He gave an overview of the work and repair that may
happen as part of the mill and overlay project and reviewed the roadways that are included. He
explained that part of this project, the City is looking to include three new sediment sump
structures and baffles to some of the existing storm sewer around Silver Lake and noted that the
City is going after a grant from Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed to help cover some of those
costs. He noted that this project will also include the Sweetwater Curve watermain repair. He
reviewed the proposed schedule if the Council approves this plan tonight. Staff recommends
approval.
Councilmember Gorham asked if the original plan was for a mill and overlay on Peach Circle but
not, because there is interest from the residents in City water, the plans will be to reconstruct the
street. City Engineer Budde stated that the City had sent out to the residents on Peach Circle to
see if there was interest in watermain. He explained that watermain is only getting added as part
of the Strawberry Lane project, so staff decided it did not make sense to do mill and overlay now
and then come back and patch it in the near future because of watermain. He stated that there
are some known drainage issues along that stretch so he expects that the City will do a
reclamation and replace some of the curb and gutter.
Councilmember Gorham asked whether the City had ever done the pipe bursting that is planned
for the Sweetwater Curve watermain repair. Public Works Director Brown stated that the City has
not done pipe bursting but it has been done all over the Twin Cities area. He explained that it
drags a pipe through the existing pipe and bursts it, then drags a new pipe through the existing
path which minimizes the disruption to the roadway. He stated that one of the potential barriers
to this approach is proximity of utilities in the immediate adjacent area. He stated that they believe
that should not be a problem in this situation, but will require a bit of investigation to ensure that
the utility path is clean.
Siakel moved, Labadie seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 21-034, “A Resolution
Approving Plans and Specifications and Authorize Bidding for the 2021 Mill and Overlay
Project, City Project 20-08, and Sweetwater Curve Watermain Repair, City Project 20-11.”
Roll Call Vote: Johnson, Siakel, Callies, Gorham, Labadie voted Aye. Motion passed.
B. Accept Professional Services Agreement for Enchanted Island Force Main
Replacement
City Engineer Budde explained that the City maintains a sanitary sewer force main and lift station
that services about thirty residents on Shady Island. This force main is mounted on the side of
the Shady Island bridge and last year it was found that portions of the heat tape was not
functioning the way it should and in addition, the force main itself is fifty years old and was ready
for replacement. Staff has had a number of conversations to trouble shoot what needs to be
done in this situation and have determined that the most economical solution is to replace the
system in kind. He reviewed the expected costs and noted that he believes the City will be able
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
APRIL 12, 2021
Page 5 of 14
to solicit quotes because the construction costs will be less than $175,000. He stated this was
not included in the CIP but would be funded from the Sanitary Sewer Fund.
Councilmember Johnson asked if there was a way to push the schedule up because he is
concerned about weather problems if it is delayed too long. City Engineer Budde stated that he
thinks the project could be pushed up by about a month or so.
Councilmember Gorham asked what the City would have done if the force main pipe was newer.
Public Works Director Brown stated that he is not sure but hopes that the new design will ensure
that future Councils and staff will not be faced with this same situation.
Johnson moved, Siakel seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 21-035, “A Resolution to
Approve Proposal for Shady Island Force main Repair.”
Roll Call Vote: Johnson, Siakel, Callies, Gorham, Labadie voted Aye. Motion passed.
9. GENERAL/NEW BUSINESS
A. Ordinance No. 577 Targeted Residential Picketing
City Administrator Lerud explained that targeted residential picketing ordinances have existed for
many years and noted that with some of the recent protests that have occurred in residential
neighborhoods in other cities, many cities who do not have such an ordinance are considering
adopting one. He stated that the proposed ordinance was shared with the City by South Lake
Minnetonka Police Chief Meehan. He stated that this proposed ordinance seeks to prohibit
harassment and intimidation directed at individual residences and their occupants as well as
neighboring properties. It does not prohibit demonstrations from going through a residential
neighborhood, nor does it prohibit a demonstration for a political rally or candidate. He stated that
it will also have no impact on demonstrations that occur on public property or commercially zoned
areas of the City. Staff has heard several comments regarding this proposed ordinance and
based on those comments, staff would like to offer an amendment to the ordinance. He stated
they would propose that “and occurring within 100 feet of the property boundary.” Be added to (a)
of Section 2, Definition. Staff recommends approval of the amended ordinance.
Councilmember Johnson asked if the 100 feet language would be consistent among all the
member cities of the South Lake Minnetonka Police Department. City Administrator Lerud stated
that he is unsure if they had included that language.
Councilmember Siakel stated that she thinks the amended language is a good idea and feels that
the City could take that to the other member cities and explain the reasoning behind the addition
of this language. She stated that she has no problem with people protesting or picketing as long
as it is done in an appropriate way but does have an issue with people who seek to intimidate and
scare people. She stated that she thinks this resolution is timely and will support it.
Councilmember Callies stated that she generally agrees with the idea, but does have some
concern about whether it is necessary. She stated that she does not like having ordinances that
will be difficult to enforce or that are unnecessary, but understands the intent is to prevent
problems going forward. She stated that she does like the distance language that was proposed
by City Administrator Lerud and also noted that there is no duration or time limit included within
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
APRIL 12, 2021
Page 6 of 14
the definition. City Administrator Lerud stated this point is well taken and they can take a look at
an appropriate time limit and bring back proposed language to the Council.
Councilmember Gorham stated that he understands why this is being proposed but explained
that he was against it. He stated that it ends up trying to be a balance between protecting the
privacy and tranquility of our residents but also restricts their right to collectively assemble against
something that they feel strongly about. He stated that there are already a lot of statutes in the
State that restrict riots, noise, and unlawful assembly. He stated that violent speech, obscenities
and threats are not protected speech. He noted that he would be okay with people in front of his
house, peacefully picketing.
Councilmember Johnson stated that he agrees with much of what Councilmember Gorham has
stated. He stated that he also would not have an issue with someone in front of his home
peacefully protesting but wonders if his neighbors would be, if it means that they cannot get in or
out of their street. Councilmember Gorham stated that traffic cannot be blocked or access to their
driveway or front door, nor can you trespass.
Councilmember Johnson stated that he understands what the language is designed to do, but the
reality is many times different. He stated that the neighbors of the Council members did not sign
up for to be public officials and gave the example of another situation where this may be relevant
would be if a neighbor was on a high-profile jury.
Councilmember Callies stated that it would be nice if the people protesting were respectful of
everyone’s rights, but that is why these kinds of regulations have come into play because there
has not been common sense or respect used. She stated that she feels this is a bit over-broad
and the way it is written does not allow marching or standing by one or more persons in front of a
dwelling without the residents permission. She stated that she understands that you should not
be allowed to stand there and shout obscenities, but questions why one person could not stand
in front of someone’s house. She explained that she feels the language is a bit too broad in its
attempt to have some common-sense regulation. Councilmember Gorham stated that he finds
the language requiring the owner’s permission a bit of a high hurdle to cross and seems a bit
absurd.
Councilmember Siakel stated she thinks there is a line between protesting peacefully and
preventing intimidation. She stated that as Councilmember Johnson stated it is not necessarily
about her, what asks if it would be fair to her neighbors. She stated that the way this has been
explained to her, she is comfortable with and it would provide consistency to South Lake
Minnetonka Police Department which will help with enforcement.
Mayor Labadie noted that she is the City’s representative on the Police Board and agreed that it
is beneficial to the Police Department when there is uniform language throughout the jurisdiction.
She stated that it is not mandatory that all of the member cities pass this and noted that Tonka
Bay has passed this resolution, but Greenwood and Excelsior have not yet discussed it and is on
their upcoming agendas.
Councilmember Johnson asked how much discussion has there been at the Police Board
regarding the specifics of the language in the ordinance. City Administrator Lerud stated that he
does not believe the Coordinating Committee has talked about this in great detail. He noted that
it was shared with the Operating Committee to take back to the cities. He stated that each city is
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
APRIL 12, 2021
Page 7 of 14
responsible for passing its own ordinances and the request from Police Chief Meehan was that if
the cities adopted this, he asked that they be consistent.
Mayor Labadie noted that there is a Police Board coming up later in the week and offered to bring
this issue up for discussion. There was consensus to have Mayor Labadie bring this up at the
upcoming Police Board meeting.
Alan Yelsey, 26335 Peach Circle, stated that he strongly supports this resolution and the
proposed language amendment regarding distances. He stated that it is specifically about
targeted picketing of a residence and does not mean you cannot stand in front of your neighbors
door before walking in. He stated that this will protect the entire City from the unknown of who is
out there. He stated that there are angry people out there and reiterated his support for this
ordinance for the protection of the City officers, elected representatives and people in the
community who have views on any side of the issue. They should all be protected in their
residence and should have the right to the enjoyment of their residence in privacy and in safety
without worrying who the person is in front of their house that is doing something disturbing. He
stated that he believes this particular language is constitutional and would be a misdemeanor and
will let it be known that in this City people should use other mechanisms to protest rather than
targeting individual residences.
City Administrator Lerud explained that staff’s goal was to, wherever possible, use language that
has been tested by the court system already. He stated that any change or addition made may
make it open for challenge and noted that the ordinance as it is in front of the Council has been
challenged and found constitutional.
Diane Tsari, 5375 Eureka Road, stated that she does not like the idea of members of the
community being picketed at their own homes because there are other people who live nearby.
She stated that if someone wants to talk to the Council or staff, they are accessible and would
hope that there could be polite, calm, and reasonable discussions. There have been events in
the area where a bunch of people come from outside the area to have big events that are very
disruptive to residents such as last fall when they could not get in or out of their neighborhood
because of something someone was doing at a home. She stated that this may be going too far
if the language included prevents people from picketing like that. City Administrator Lerud stated
that for the event Ms. Tsari was referring to last fall, that type of protest would have still been
allowed.
Councilmember Callies stated that to her, it looks like the definitions need to be tightened up a
little bit to make it clear because some sections appear to say that it is illegal for one person to be
in front of a residential dwelling unless they have permission from the owner. She stated that she
does not think that is the intent of this document, but that is what it says.
Mayor Labadie stated that what she has heard from the Council so far is that Councilmember
Callies would like a second look at this ordinance language and Councilmember Johnson would
like her to bring this up for discussion at the upcoming Police Board meeting. She asked
Councilmembers Siakel and Gorham to weigh in with their opinion. Councilmember Callies stated
that she would like to table this discussion and not take a vote on it tonight.
Councilmember Siakel stated that she had to call staff for clarification, so she understands some
of Councilmember Callies concerns. She stated that she is in favor of this, but if the language
needs to be tightened up a bit, that would be fine. She stated that the if the purpose is to have
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
APRIL 12, 2021
Page 8 of 14
something that applies to all of the South Lake area and is something to be discussed with the
Police Board, she is also okay with that. She just wants to ensure that this item comes back
before the Council because she feels it is relevant, especially in today’s world. She stated that
she does not want to see a decision on this item to linger for three months and wants to move it
forward at the next Council meeting. Councilmember Johnson stated that he would agree that he
does not want this to sit out there for too long either.
Mayor Labadie stated that prior to the Police Board meeting, she will discuss this matter with City
Attorney Keane
There was consensus to table discussion of this item until the next Council meeting.
B. Approve Buckthorn Removal at Freeman Park Proposal
City Administrator Lerud explained that the City received a Legacy Fund Grant through the
Minnesota DNR to create a health forest and the City is proposing to remove buckthorn from a
portion of Freeman Park. The City has used goats in past years as a control measure with limited
results. This proposed work will involve cutting and removing the plant and treating the stump
with a State approved herbicide. He explained that eradicating buckthorn is a multi-year process
with this year being the most labor intensive. Staff recommends acceptance of the proposal as
presented.
Mayor Labadie applauded staff for their work to get this $50,000 grant.
Councilmember Callies stated that she supports this because buckthorn is kind of like the ‘carp’
of trees and shrubs and is not a helpful vegetation. Councilmember Gorham confirmed with City
Administrator Lerud that the herbicide will be localized and not widely broadcasted.
Councilmember Siakel asked if there were alternatives to the type of herbicide that is used and
noted that some residents have brought up concerns about what will be used. City Administrator
Lerud explained that this is what Tree Trust, who does this type of work, has recommended and
clarified that the herbicide is not Round Up.
Alan Yelsey, 26335 Peach Circle, stated that he would like to see who the residents are who
actually complain about buckthorn. He stated that he would agree that buckthorn is invasive and
not the greatest thing, however, he does not believe it is necessarily the enemy that it has been
identified as. He stated that he loves that the City received a grant and the restoration of that
wooded area would be wonderful. He stated that it would also be great to create jobs locally for
things like summer jobs and noted that he really likes Tree Trust. He stated that he has no
problem with the grant or trying to restore the wooded area, but he also has no major amount of
problem with the amount of buckthorn. He stated that he loves the idea of plantings that are bee
and butterfly friendly. He stated that his concern is with putting a poison into the ground and
Round Up has been proven to be a carcinogen even though it cannot be easily proven because
of the way it breaks down. He stated that in this case it would refer to Pathfinder and this does
leech into the water and has been found in the ground water which is disclosed on the label and
they tell you not to use it in any area where there is a high-water table which is exactly where it is
being placed because the wooded area floods. He questioned why the City would choose to put
a potential carcinogen, that has been shown to cause breast tumors in mice and has been
indicated to cause problems with human reproduction, where it could get into the water table. He
stated that he would suggest that rather than the herbicide that the City bag the large stumps and
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
APRIL 12, 2021
Page 9 of 14
carry away the small pieces. He stated that if the City chooses to proceed with the carcinogens,
he will take action to stop them.
Greg Larson, stated that he agrees with Mr. Yelsey to a certain degree. He stated that he has
worked hard to eliminate pesticides out of the environment. He stated that this is not Round Up
or glyphosate and is another chemical called triclopyr He stated that he has used it before and
while he is not saying people should drink it, it is not the same as Round Up and is applied directly
to the stump during the winter. He stated that he thinks it is important to remove the buckthorn
and thinks the triclopyr is almost needed to rid the woods of the buckthorn.
Diane Tsari, 5375 Eureka Road, she stated that she agrees that buckthorn needs to be removed
but she is very wary of the use of chemicals. She stated that she has pulled buckthorn by hand
in her yard, when it is small and pulls with a weed wrench when she can and has also cut big
buckthorn and has eventually had large root systems shrivel up. She explained that there are
alternatives that a bunch of people if they were given the work to do it could remove it via those
means rather than with the chemicals. Duncan Storley, 5375 Eureka Road, suggested that
perhaps the City could seek volunteers to do the work.
Mayor Labadie asked for Council input and noted that she is not an expert in this area. City
Administrator Lerud stated that he is also not an expert. The DNR states that this is an approved
product as a way to eradicate buckthorn and so does Tree Trust, who are licensed arborists are
familiar with this product and use it elsewhere, so the City is relying on their expertise.
Public Works Director Brown explained that when the City met with Tree Trust, they were very
knowledgeable and did dive into the difference between the chemicals. This product is water
based and not oil based so they explained that the risk of this propagating was minimal. He stated
that the City could check into the DNR method of bagging the roots.
Mr. Yelsey stated that he would not trust anybody about chemicals and their long-term effect on
human beings and reproduction and children because there is not yet enough evidence to judge.
This is a systemic herbicide and is a potential carcinogen. He stated that the baggies work and
asked the City to check them out and stated that it can be done quickly and simply. He stated
that he would like the City to look at every other option that does not include putting a potential
carcinogen into the soil and water.
Patricia Hauser, 5805 Minnetonka Drive, she stated that there are some entities that can be
contacted such as Beyond Pesticides and Sarah Fultz Jordan from the Xerxes Society to
comment on this issue. She stated that what she notices when walking around the neighborhoods
that there are a lot of female plants and would suggest that the City do what it can to encourage
residents to get rid of their buckthorn that has seed bearing on it. She explained that these are
the female plants that have seeds and then the birds eat it and it gets planted elsewhere. She
stated that she can pass along contact information for both Beyond Pesticides and Sarah Fultz
Jordan to City staff.
Councilmember Callies stated that the Council is relying on what experts have told the City and
to her knowledge, this product has not been shown to be a carcinogen. She stated that she
realizes that exposure to any chemical can have a negative effect, but she does not believe this
is harmful based on the information the City has been told from the tree experts as well as the
DNR. She stated that if the Council does not feel as though they have the necessary scientific
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
APRIL 12, 2021
Page 10 of 14
information then it should obtain that information prior to making a decision but noted that she
would be okay with moving forward on this project.
Councilmember Gorham stated that the quote in front of the Council is valid for thirty days and
noted that he would not mind knowing a bit more about the proposed chemical before the Council
takes action.
Councilmember Siakel stated that she can see both sides. The City is relying on the arborists
and would like to know if they have used it on other projects and if so, whether there had been
any consequences as a result of its use. She stated that on one side she feels like the City needs
to deal with it because buckthorn has been a problem at Freeman Park, but the other side would
be the thought on how it can be dealt with the most effectively. She stated that she ends up going
back to the idea that they are arborists and are professionals and would ask them if there had
been any disastrous results with any of their other projects.
Councilmember Johnson stated that where he struggles is that not only is the City trusting the
expertise of the arborists, but also the DNR is offering to invest $50,000 to help the City. He
stated that the approach of targeted spraying makes him much more comfortable rather than
widespread spraying. He read aloud from the quote regarding their proper work and treatment
protocol. He stated that the City has to rely on their expertise.
Mayor Labadie asked if there were any other time restraints outside of the quote being valid for
thirty days. City Administrator Lerud stated that there is not a time crunch but there is an unknown
when the State will return the contract. He explained that the City has signed its share of the
contract but it has not yet been returned and is unsure how long that may take. He stated that
the Council could make a decision tonight, or delay it until April 26, 2021 and staff could bring
back some additional information.
Mayor Labadie stated that since the Council has raised various concerns, she would ask staff to
take direction from those concerns and bring back answers to those questions at the next Council
meeting for action. City Administrator Lerud stated that his understanding is that the Council
would like additional information about this particular product and look at getting a price for the
potential baggie program and more information on that method as a competing proposal. He
stated that he will have to check on the grant details but does not feel there will be any problem
with it if the City changes the method it uses.
Mr. Yelsey stated that he thinks the Council has come up with a good solution and noted that
people are questioning whether this chemical is safe or not and gave examples of some of the
birth defects that have been caused by subcomponents of this chemical.
nd
C. Discuss Options for Wild Duck 2 Addition Outlot A
Planning Director Darling explained that at the previous Council meeting, Mr. Greg Larson had
presented an idea during Matters from the Floor about the possibility of protecting Outlot A of the
nd
Wild Duck 2 Addition and keeping it as green space. She noted that she has heard that there
have been e-mails sent around stating that there was a townhouse development proposed for
this land and she wanted to make it clear that there have been no applications received to develop
this property, nor has anyone inquired about developing the property in the four years she has
been with the City. She explained that the property was created to be a privately owned open
space in 1975 with a condition that an easement should be recorded against the property that
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
APRIL 12, 2021
Page 11 of 14
would prevent further development of the property. She noted that the easement was not
recorded by the developer and in 1986 a developer had expressed interest in developing the
property, but the Council was not inclined to approve more development. In 2002, the developer
gifted the property to the City and explained that there are some current protections for this outlot
and read aloud a portion of the Comprehensive Plan. She explained that the property was created
as open space in exchange for approval of smaller lots than would typically be allowed. She
stated that an outlot does not permit any additional subdivision of development without formal
approval to change the legal description. She stated that by acquiring the property, the City has
protected it from development. She reviewed a few options for other protections for this property
and amending the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance.
Councilmember Gorham asked if the City amended the Comprehensive Plan how much stronger
would that be than doing the ordinance. Planning Director Darling stated that there would need
to be one additional approval through the Council and would involve more layers.
Councilmember Callies stated that she does not see the need for the City to take action because
it is open space and is owned by the City and any change would involve public process. She
stated that there is nothing imminent in this situation that needs to be protected because the land
is already being protected and reiterated that she did not think a change is needed.
Mayor Labadie stated that she agrees with Councilmember Callies. She stated that there has
been a lot of talk on social media and via e-mail about this issue, but the reality is that it is not an
issue in the sense that no one has ever approached the City about the availability of this parcel.
She stated that this parcel, at this point, is protected as it is and the City does not have any intent
of moving forward with anything. She stated that when the City was considering the possibility of
a storm water pond, it was done in a public forum where the Council took residents concerns into
consideration which is much different than the allegations that are going around the social media
stating that the City wants to develop this property and is completely inaccurate.
Councilmember Gorham stated that his earlier line of questioning was in order to understanding
the options as they stood against the leave ‘as is’ option. He stated that he does not see any
benefit to pursuing the other two options. Councilmember Siakel stated that she agreed and
noted that she was not aware of a Wedgewood Forest until 6 months ago when someone came
up with the term and placed in on social media. She stated that she has never heard any comment
about this parcel being developed.
Duncan Storley, 5375 Eureka Road, stated that one of the things that concerns him is that
apparently the property was deeded to the City but somehow the easement was never filed
property. He stated that he is not sure that the City really legally owns the property and would
like to see this information be filed and make sure that the original wishes are met.
Diane Tsari, 5375 Eureka Road, she stated that she understands that the Council has not seen
any inquiries into development this parcel, but she knows that it is a possibility. She stated that
she would get the most comfort by knowing that the land is permanently protected which can be
accomplished by putting a conservation easement on the parcel. She stated that a conservation
easement was used to preserve the marsh that is directly south of their home.
Greg Larson, 25535 Orchard Circle, asked if he was correct in saying that the City does not have
a zoning classification that is specific to permanently protected greenspace.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
APRIL 12, 2021
Page 12 of 14
Planning Director Darling noted that this was correct and there was not specific zoning district just
for open space but is an allowed use in almost all of the zoning districts.
Mr. Larson asked how other cities handle the protection of greenspace. Planning Director Darling
stated that they also do it with development regulations, easements and ownership. She stated
there may be one or two cities around that have a permanent open space district, but the majority
of them do not.
Mr. Larson stated that it seems to him that without that type of category then any greenspace in
the City will always be open for another Council to come in and take it away. He stated that he
would like to see the City find a way to permanently protect the greenspace in the City and should
be a special zoning area so it is more difficult for a future Council to come in and make changes.
He stated that this particular Council considered bulldozing the woods and putting in a stormwater
pond, so he does not think they can say that it is permanently protected in its current form.
Councilmember Johnson stated that he has some concern with the use of the word ‘bulldoze’ and
explained that as he looks at this type of project, that is not the intent he would have. He stated
that when he looked at the petition that was submitted, he saw names of people he knew and
when he contacted them to find out their concerns and explained what the City was considering
they were not as concerned and shared that they also had their own drainage concerns.
Kathy Ottum, 30 Lilah Lane, Tonka Bay, stated that she wanted to put to rest some of the
comments that she is hearing. She has lived in this location since 1973 and is a representative
for Preserve the Woods. She stated that she would like to address the comments made that the
City has been protecting this forest for all this time. She stated that she does not blame the
current Council, but about every five years or so, something comes up to take the forest and
shared some of the examples. She stated that she is excited that City Administrator Lerud shared
the easement because she has been looking for that document. She stated that according to her
attorney, the City can very easily file what is called a ‘corrected deed’ with a minor filing fee. She
stated that will protect things so when the current Council is gone, the land will still be protected.
Mr. Larson asked about the easement because it would seem that the plans to put in the
stormwater pond would have also been invalid because it says no excavation or topographic
changes. He asked if the easement was still valid and asked why it had not been attached to the
title and if it could be attached at this point.
Planning Director Darling stated that the easement is not valid because it was never recorded but
does not know the reason. She stated that an easement could be attached to the property which
would be valid for up to forty years. City Attorney Keane stated that he also does not know why
the easement was not prepared in a recordable form, so it could not have actually been recorded
when it was prepared, nor could it be recorded today because the signatures were not property
notarized.
Councilmember Siakel stated that she agrees with Councilmember Callies comments that if there
was anything that came up, there would be a public process put into place so the Council cannot
just one day say they are going to do something. She stated that she does not see any imminent
danger for this parcel.
Callies moved, Siakel seconded, directing that no action be taken regarding Outlot A, Wild
nd
Duck 2 Addition.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
APRIL 12, 2021
Page 13 of 14
Roll Call Vote: Johnson, Siakel, Callies, Gorham, Labadie voted Aye. Motion passed.
D. Receive Recommendations for Fire Lanes from Park and Planning
Commissions
Moved to a future work session.
10. STAFF AND COUNCIL REPORTS
A. Administrator and Staff
st
1. 1 Quarter 2021 Investment Report
Finance Director Rigdon gave a brief overview of the First Quarter Investment Report.
Other
Public Works Director Brown stated that this is the second week of sweeping streets and noted
that weight restrictions were lifted today. Once the roadways have been swept, they will begin
flushing the watermains and both of these will proceed east to west within the City.
City Engineer Budde stated that they have been working on the final design for the Smithtown
Pond project and were notified about a month ago that the Army Corps of Engineers has claimed
jurisdiction on some of the streams and wetlands in there. He stated that the schedule did not
anticipate that and will mean that the start of the project will potentially be delayed by about four
to six months as they acquire the necessary permits from them. He stated that the contractors
he had spoken with felt it would be a good winter project anyway but noted that the Shorewood
Oaks segment could not be constructed this fall if there ends up being a six-month delay.
B. Mayor and City Council
Councilmember Siakel asked if the City would be passing on the Shorewood clean-up day again
this year. City Administrator Lerud stated that he believes it has been scheduled for May 15, 2021
and there will also be a paper shredding event held at the same time. He stated that this
information will be shared in the newsletter.
Councilmember Callies stated that she cannot serve as the liaison for the month of May for the
Planning Commission and asked if someone could fill in for her. Councilmember Gorham offered
to attend the Planning Commission meeting as the liaison.
Councilmember Callies thanked Planning Director Darling for her work on the Just Deeds project
which is where, in partnership with the University of Minnesota, lawyers are looking at where there
have been restrictive covenants on residential properties throughout the Twin Cities. She noted
that she had also completed the Respectful Workplace training.
Councilmember Johnson commended the local non-profit called Bunny Besties. He explained
that his daughter had volunteered there recently and noted that it is an organization that seeks to
help with mental illness via interactions with bunnies and encouraged people to find their
Facebook page for more information.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
APRIL 12, 2021
Page 14 of 14
Councilmember Gorham stated that he will be able to attend the Planning Commission meeting
on May 4, 2021, but noted that he would be a bit late because he is coaching at Tonka United.
Mayor Labadie stated that she and City Administrator Lerud will be attending a quarterly meeting
with the Superintendent Peterson from Minnetonka public schools and will also attend the Police
Board meeting.
11. ADJOURN
Johnson moved, Gorham seconded, Adjourning the City Council Regular Meeting of April
12, 2021, at 9:37 P.M.
Roll Call Vote: Johnson, Siakel, Callies, Gorham, Labadie voted Aye. Motion passed.
ATTEST:
Jennifer Labadie, Mayor
Sandie Thone, City Clerk
#2 B
MEETING TYPE
Regular Meeting
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item
Title / Subject: Verified Claims
Meeting Date: April 26, 2021
Prepared by: Michelle Nguyen, Senior Accountant
Greg Lerud, City Administrator
Joe Rigdon, Finance Director
Attachments: Claims lists
Policy Consideration:
Should the attached claims against the City of Shorewood be paid?
Background:
Claims for council authorization.
66766-66784 & ACH 432,473.42
Total Claims $432,473.42
We have also included a payroll summary for the payroll period ending April 11, 2021.
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 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.
$%&!'((
)*+#,- .!-/0.-'1#2 3'!.
!"#>1?0& 1
@%.AB"CCCCDECFEGCGD#H#$2HCFHDGHGCGD
4567#89#:;82<=88,
!"#$%!&'()*('+#$ & !"#,)(-+#$ & !"#*(. )+/#+ "
9 I,#DCD) 1 !%(#901J
DCDHCCHDCDCHCCCC#CECC#KLMNODEKP4Q:;#QI,#5IR<:6S<I6:
DCDHDLHFDCDHCCCC#DLMDDFEDK#CECC9 ++H65S<#2<) +Q2
DCDHDLHFDCLHCCCC#PCFEKC#CECC$Q26H65S<
DCDHDLHFDGDHCCCC#DMCFLENT#CECC$<2Q#48I625@#H#4567#:;Q2<
DCDHDLHFDGGHCCCC#DMCONEDO#CECC954Q#48I625@#H#4567#:;Q2<
DCDHDLHFDLDHCCCC#GMCOOEKF#CECC<S$+87<<#5I: 2QI4<#H#4567
DCDHDLHFDODHCCCC#PNEOK#CECC=82U<2:#48S$<I:Q658I
DCDHDOHFDCDHCCCC#OMFOTECO#CECC9 ++H65S<#2<) +Q2
DCDHDOHFDGDHCCCC#FCNEGG#CECC$<2Q#48I625@#H#4567#:;Q2<
DCDHDOHFDGGHCCCC#FGLEFF#CECC954Q#48I625@#H#4567#:;Q2<
DCDHDOHFDLDHCCCC#TCKEFK#CECC<S$+87<<#5I: 2QI4<#H#4567
DCDHDOHFDODHCCCC#LCEPG#CECC=82U<2:#48S$<I:Q658I
DCDHDPHFDCDHCCCC#KMTKCEDK#CECC9 ++H65S<#2<) +Q2
DCDHDPHFDGDHCCCC#OKOEGT#CECC$<2Q#48I625@#H#4567#:;Q2<
DCDHDPHFDGGHCCCC#OTPENK#CECC954Q#48I625@#H#4567#:;Q2<
DCDHDPHFDLDHCCCC#DMCDFEPT#CECC<S$+87<<#5I: 2QI4<#H#4567
DCDHDPHFDODHCCCC#FOENO#CECC=82U<2:#48S$<I:Q658I
DCDHGFHFDCDHCCCC#LMOKPECF#CECC9 ++H65S<#2<) +Q2
DCDHGFHFDGDHCCCC#GTPELT#CECC$<2Q#48I625@#H#4567#:;Q2<
DCDHGFHFDGGHCCCC#GKFETT#CECC954Q#48I625@#H#4567#:;Q2<
DCDHGFHFDLDHCCCC#TKDENL#CECC<S$+87<<#5I: 2QI4<#H#4567
DCDHGFHFDODHCCCC#DPEPC#CECC=82U<2:#48S$<I:Q658I
DCDHLGHFDCDHCCCC#DKMLLNEND#CECC9 ++H65S<#2<) +Q2
DCDHLGHFDCGHCCCC#DGKEPF#CECC8R<265S<
DCDHLGHFDCOHCCCC#PPTELF#CECC:62<<6#$Q)<2#$Q7
DCDHLGHFDGDHCCCC#DMLKTEOT#CECC$<2Q#48I625@#H#4567#:;Q2<
DCDHLGHFDGGHCCCC#DMGNTEDC#CECC954Q#48I625@#H#4567#:;Q2<
DCDHLGHFDLDHCCCC#GMKCPENK#CECC<S$+87<<#5I: 2QI4<#H#4567
DCDHLGHFDODHCCCC#DMDGLEKK#CECC=82U<2:#48S$<I:Q658I
DCDHLLHFDCDHCCCC#GNNECN#CECC9 ++H65S<#2<) +Q2
DCDHLLHFDGDHCCCC#GGEFD#CECC$<2Q#48I625@#H#4567#:;Q2<
DCDHLLHFDGGHCCCC#LTEDL#CECC954Q#48I625@#H#4567#:;Q2<
DCDHLLHFDLDHCCCC#GPCEPF#CECC<S$+87<<#5I: 2QI4<#H#4567
DCDHLLHFDODHCCCC#GTEKD#CECC=82U<2:#48S$<I:Q658I
$2#H#)*+#,- .!-/0.-'1#2 3'!.#VCF*DG*GCGD#H#DG"GN#$SW$%? #D
!"#$%!&'()*('+#$ & !"#,)(-+#$ & !"#*(. )+/#+ "
DCDHOGHFDCDHCCCC#OMDDDECP#CECC9 ++H65S<#2<) +Q2
DCDHOGHFDGDHCCCC#LPLELF#CECC$<2Q#48I625@#H#4567#:;Q2<
DCDHOGHFDGGHCCCC#LKCEFN#CECC954Q#48I625@#H#4567#:;Q2<
DCDHOGHFDLDHCCCC#PGOELF#CECC<S$+87<<#5I: 2QI4<#H#4567
DCDHOGHFDODHCCCC#GKNEPD#CECC=82U<2:#48S$<I:Q658I
DCDHOLHFDCDHCCCC#DMFCTEGL#CECC9 ++H65S<#2<) +Q2
DCDHOLHFDGDHCCCC#DCOEFT#CECC$<2Q#48I625@#H#4567#:;Q2<
DCDHOLHFDGGHCCCC#DCPEGP#CECC954Q#48I625@#H#4567#:;Q2<
DCDHOLHFDLDHCCCC#DTETD#CECC<S$+87<<#5I: 2QI4<#H#4567
DCDHOLHFDODHCCCC#LNEDP#CECC=82U<2:#48S$<I:Q658I
$6789:;<6=$6789:;<6=
01%*$2 #345
9 I,#GCD:B'! X''J#4'>>E#Y#<Z 1.#4 1. !
GCDHCCHDCDCHCCCC#CECC#GMDGTENF4Q:;#QI,#5IR<:6S<I6:
GCDHCCHFDCDHCCCC#DMOLDEDG#CECC9 ++H65S<#2<) +Q2
GCDHCCHFDCLHCCCC#GTKECC#CECC$Q26H65S<
GCDHCCHFDGDHCCCC#DDFEPF#CECC$<2Q#48I625@#H#4567#:;Q2<
GCDHCCHFDGGHCCCC#DLPEPP#CECC954Q#48I625@#H#4567#:;Q2<
GCDHCCHFDLDHCCCC#GFEND#CECC<S$+87<<#5I: 2QI4<#H#4567
GCDHCCHFDODHCCCC#OCEDN#CECC=82U<2:#48S$<I:Q658I
$>8;>?<9@$>8;>?<9@
01%*$2 #345
9 I,#TCD=%. !# .-(-.&
TCDHCCHDCDCHCCCC#CECC#DCMCLTETK4Q:;#QI,#5IR<:6S<I6:
TCDHCCHFDCDHCCCC#KMDDPEFN#CECC9 ++H65S<#2<) +Q2
TCDHCCHFDCOHCCCC#GCFEOF#CECC=Q6<2#$Q)<2#$Q7
TCDHCCHFDGDHCCCC#OFNEDO#CECC$<2Q#48I625@#H#4567#:;Q2<
TCDHCCHFDGGHCCCC#OODETP#CECC954Q#48I625@#H#4567#:;Q2<
TCDHCCHFDLDHCCCC#DMLLTETC#CECC<S$+87<<#5I: 2QI4<#H#4567
TCDHCCHFDODHCCCC#GKTEGD#CECC=82U<2:#48S$<I:Q658I
$;A8A7?<?6$;A8A7?<?6
01%*$2 #345
9 I,#TDD:%1-.%!&#: X !# .-(-.&
TDDHCCHDCDCHCCCC#CECC#PMDOGEKF4Q:;#QI,#5IR<:6S<I6:
TDDHCCHFDCDHCCCC#OMTLFEGP#CECC9 ++H65S<#2<) +Q2
TDDHCCHFDCGHCCCC#DCGEGK#CECC8R<265S<
TDDHCCHFDCOHCCCC#GCFEOF#CECC:<=<2#$Q)<2#$Q7
TDDHCCHFDGDHCCCC#FFOETO#CECC$<2Q#48I625@#H#4567#:;Q2<
TDDHCCHFDGGHCCCC#FOGEPT#CECC954Q#48I625@#H#4567#:;Q2<
TDDHCCHFDLDHCCCC#DMCNDETT#CECC<S$+87<<#5I: 2QI4<#H#4567
TDDHCCHFDODHCCCC#GGDEFP#CECC=82U<2:#48S$<I:Q658I
$2#H#)*+#,- .!-/0.-'1#2 3'!.#VCF*DG*GCGD#H#DG"GN#$SW$%? #G
!"#$%!&'()*('+#$ & !"#,)(-+#$ & !"#*(. )+/#+ "
$=8;:><6@$=8;:><6@
01%*$2 #345
9 I,#TGD2 A&A(-1?# .-(-.&
TGDHCCHDCDCHCCCC#CECC#TGOETC4Q:;#QI,#5IR<:6S<I6:
TGDHCCHFDCDHCCCC#FKCEDL#CECC9 ++H65S<#2<) +Q2
TGDHCCHFDGDHCCCC#LOEGF#CECC$<2Q#48I625@#H#4567#:;Q2<
TGDHCCHFDGGHCCCC#LOEFF#CECC954Q#48I625@#H#4567#:;Q2<
TGDHCCHFDLDHCCCC#PDEKN#CECC<S$+87<<#5I: 2QI4<#H#4567
TGDHCCHFDODHCCCC#LECC#CECC=82U<2:#48S$<I:Q658I
$?>:<?A$?>:<?A
01%*$2 #345
9 I,#TLD:.'!>#=%. !# .-(-.&
TLDHCCHDCDCHCCCC#CECC#GMLCKECL4Q:;#QI,#5IR<:6S<I6:
TLDHCCHFDCDHCCCC#DMTPTECO#CECC9 ++H65S<#2<) +Q2
TLDHCCHFDGDHCCCC#DGTEFL#CECC$<2Q#48I625@#H#4567#:;Q2<
TLDHCCHFDGGHCCCC#DLCETF#CECC954Q#48I625@#H#4567#:;Q2<
TLDHCCHFDLDHCCCC#GNNETT#CECC<S$+87<<#5I: 2QI4<#H#4567
TLDHCCHFDODHCCCC#TFEGO#CECC=82U<2:#48S$<I:Q658I
$>87A6<A7$>87A6<A7
01%*$2 #345
9 I,#KCC$%&!'((#4( %!-1?#901J
KCCHCCHDCDCHCCCC#NKMGCCEKT#CECC4Q:;#QI,#5IR<:6S<I6:
KCCHCCHGDKCHCCCC#CECC#FOMLCGEDG)28::#$Q728++#4+<Q25I)
KCCHCCHGDKDHCCCC#CECC#DCMKLNEFC;<Q+6;#5I: 2QI4<#$Q7Q@+<
KCCHCCHGDKGHCCCC#CECC#TMTGCEFD9<,<2Q+#=56;;8+,5I)#$Q7Q@+<
KCCHCCHGDKLHCCCC#CECC#LMDGKEOK:6Q6<#=56;;8+,5I)#$Q7Q@+<
KCCHCCHGDKFHCCCC#CECC#DCMPNLEFF954Q*S<,54Q2<#6Q\[#$Q7Q@+<
KCCHCCHGDKOHCCCC#CECC#DCMDPFELG$<2Q#=56;;8+,5I)#$Q7Q@+<
KCCHCCHGDKTHCCCC#CECC#OMTOCECC,<9<22<,#48S$<I:Q658I
KCCHCCHGDKKHCCCC#CECC#GMGTNEKF=82U<2:#48S$<I:Q658I
KCCHCCHGDPCHCCCC#CECC#PNTENP+59<#5I: 2QI4<
KCCHCCHGDPGHCCCC#CECC#LCKEPT I58I#, <:
KCCHCCHGDPLHCCCC#CECC#DMGCPENG;<Q+6;#:QR5I):#Q448 I6
$968>AA<6?$968>AA<6?
01%*$2 #345
B(/ )#2 #345
$;9@8@A;<:>$;9@8@A;<:>
$2#H#)*+#,- .!-/0.-'1#2 3'!.#VCF*DG*GCGD#H#DG"GN#$SW$%? #L
-N?W
-N?W
-=IEN>
#?1 -+
>-F06@53 -#5!&$5%>-F06@53 !-#5!&$5%
N!2 N!2 N!2 N!2 N!2 N!2
)$ #$
3$4$>4M-F%?<@ '"-#C-A?&87-((((+B()B,(,+- %$5%-K2 >4M-F%?<@ '"-#C-A?&87-((((+B()B,(,+-ME>.A>GS>4M-F%?<@ '"-#C-A?&87-((((+B()B,(,+-DI4#C-A?&87-((((+B()B,(,+-DI4#C-A?&87-((((+B()B,(,+-/
'$8?! -F06@53 -#5!&$5%#C-A?&87-((((+B()B,(,+-/ '$8?! -F06@53 !-#5!&$5%#C-A?&87-((((+B()B,(,+-D ' !?@-I%850 >4M-F%?<@ '"-#C-A?&87-((((+B()B,(,+-K : !! '-4506.I4/>.D@?&>4M-F%?<@ '"-#C-A?&87-((((+B()B
,(,+-E&?& -I%850 >4M-F%?<@ '"-#C-A?&87-((((+B()B,(,+-;$: -I% 2!?%8
,##+%&.-2$)47 89-E L2 %8 "-+P((.((.,+Q,.((((47 89-E L2 %8 "-,P((.((.,+QO.((((47 89-E L2 %8 "-OP((.((.,+P).((((P((.((.,+P).((((P((.((.,+P).((((P((.((.,+P).((((P((.((.,+P,.((((47 89-E
L2 %8 "-)P((.((.,+PR.((((47 89-E L2 %8 "-JP((.((.,+PO.((((47 89-E L2 %8 "-RP((.((.,+Q(.((((
()*+,*,(,+()*+,*,(,+()*+,*,(,+()*+,*,(,+()*+,*,(,+()*+,*,(,+()*+,*,(,+()*+,*,(,+()*+,*,(,+()*+,*,(,+
/01-$ +%'0+$
-O(PBQR-,PRBT,-QQ(BTQ
-O(PBQR-,PRBT,-QQ(BTQ
-)V)+)BOO-)V)+)BOO-+V(O,BOT-+V(O,BOT-RVR,(B)+-OV(,JB((-OV+,PBJP
-OV(,JB((-OV+,PBJP
,-!. +
-+PVJ+OBQJ
-N?W
-N?W
-=IEN>
>-F06@53 -#5!&$5%>-F06@53 !-#5!&$5%
;-J-.- GIHG-K FE
-= %'5!
;-U*M
""""""
N>-KF#>CN/FGN--HD-CF=FG FN>-;IDF
-=IEN>
-= %'5!-X()*+,*,(,+-.--+"()-#/Y
-N5&?@-N5&?@-N5&?@-N5&?@-N5&?@-N5&?@
>-CFNICF/FGN-NC EN.O(,+O+.)JP
'$(#)"*+"! >DE4/F-/G-4H G4I#C-A?&87-((((+B()B,(,+- %$5%-K2 47 89A>GS#C-A?&87-((((+B()B,(,+-ME>.A>GS47 89FDN#E-.-DFKFC>#C-A?&87-((((+B()B,(,+-DI4#C-A?&87-((((+B()B,(,+-DI4#C-A?&87-((((+B()B,(,+-/
'$8?! -F06@53 -#5!&$5%#C-A?&87-((((+B()B,(,+-/ '$8?! -F06@53 !-#5!&$5%#C-A?&87-((((+B()B,(,+-D ' !?@-I%850 47 89I4/#C-A?&87-((((+B()B,(,+-K : !! '-4506.I4/>.D@?&47 89/IGGFEH#C-A?&87-((((+B()B,(,+-E
&?& -I%850 47 89/IGGFEH#C-A?&87-((((+B()B,(,+-;$: -I% 2!?%8 47 89
0%123 %()*+,*,(,+-.--+"()#/(((()B()B,(,+-.-#C.().+,.,(,+
+,+(Q)J,++P
""""""
>8852%& -#?3?<@ 45062& !-47 89-#!55:-;$ &-<3 !"#!$%& '"A?&87" !"#$%&!= %'5!>6!$@.,(,+= %'5!#C.().+,.,(,+= %'5!#C.().+,.,(,+#C.().+,.,(,+#C.().+,.,(,+#C.().+,.,(,+#C.().+,.,(,+= %'5!#C.().+,.,(,+=
%'5!#C.().+,.,(,+= %'5!>6!$@.,(,+>#.45062& !-47 89-#!55:-;$ &-<3
>-K '28&$5%
>-A % :$&-F06@53 !#?1 -,
>-;$:
N!2 N!2 N!2 N!2
)$ #$
3$4$>4M-F%?<@ '"-#C-A?&87-((((+B()B,(,+-K : !! '-4506./ECE.#! #C-A?&87-((((+B()B,(,+-K : !! '-4506./ECE.C5&7)JP>4M-F%?<@ '"-#C-A?&87-((((+B()B,(,+-#FC>4M-F%?<@ '"-#C-A?&87-((((+B()B,(,+-ME>.H#N /-A>G
S>4M-F%?<@ '"-#C-A?&87-((((+B()B,(,+-/G.#FC#C-A?&87-((((+B()B,(,+-/G-#FC
,##+%&.-2$)47 89-E L2 %8 "-PP((.((.,+PR.((((P((.((.,+PR.((((47 89-E L2 %8 "-QP((.((.,+Q(.((((47 89-E L2 %8 "-TP((.((.,+QO.((((47 89-E L2 %8 "-+(P((.((.,+PJ.((((P((.((.,+PJ.((((
()*+,*,(,+()*+,*,(,+()*+,*,(,+()*+,*,(,+()*+,*,(,+()*+,*,(,+
/01-$ +%'0+$
-+(
-+RB((
-+RB((
-+J(B((-TO,B((
-TO,B((
-,V)PJB((-)VP,QB))-JV)JJBQQ
-,VR,JB((
,-!. +
-+(V+Q)BO,-OQVQQTBJ(
>-K '28&$5%
>-A % :$&-F06@53 !
#-#;>G-)JP
>-;$:
"
"
#-;IDF-IGE C>G4F
""""
-= %'5!-X()*+,*,(,+-.--+"()-#/Y
-N5&?@-N5&?@-N5&?@-N5&?@
'$(#)"*+"! /ECE./G-KFDFCCFK-4H/#C-A?&87-((((+B()B,(,+-K : !! '-4506./ECE.#! #C-A?&87-((((+B()B,(,+-K : !! '-4506./ECE.C5&7)JP47 89G4#FCE-ZCH #C-A?&87-((((+B()B,(,+-#FC47 89H#N /-A>GS#C-A?&87-((((+B()
B,(,+-ME>.H#N /-A>GS47 89#FC>#C-A?&87-((((+B()B,(,+-/G.#FC#C-A?&87-((((+B()B,(,+-/G-#FC47 89N5&?@-:5!-47 89-C2%N5&?@-5:-G20< !-5:-47 89
+(T++(RRJT
""""
!"#$%&!= %'5!#C.().+,.,(,+#C.().+,.,(,+= %'5!>6!$@.,(,+= %'5!#C.().+,.,(,+= %'5!#C.().+,.,(,+#C.().+,.,(,+>#.45062& !-47 89-#!55:-;$ &-<3
#A4 -,
V!5
)$ #$
3$4$17P-H%A?B '"-QAB 17P-H%A?B '"-QAB 17P-H%A?B '"-
,,.((.)U(U.((((,,.((.)U(U.((((
,##+%&.-2$)7: ;<-N O5 %; "-,,(,.,E.)U(,.((((7: ;<-N O5 %; "-+,(,.0U.)+)0.((((7: ;<-N O5 %; "-UEU,.((.)U(U.((((,(,.U,.)U(U.((((),U.((.)U(U.(((()(+.((.)EZ(.((((EU,.((.)U(U.(((()(R.((.)U(U.((((,(,.U,.))
((.((((,(,.,Z.))((.(((()(+.((.)EZ(.((((,(,.U,.)U(U.(((()(R.((.)U(U.((((EU,.((.)U(U.((((EE,(,.U,.)U(U.((((EU,.((.)U(U.(((()().((.)E+(.((((EU,.((.)U(+.(((/EU,.((.)U(U.((((EU,.((.)U(U.((((,(,.((.U),).((
((,(,.((.U),).((((
()*+E*+(+,()*+E*+(+,()*+E*+(+,()*+E*+(+,()*+E*+(+,()*+E*+(+,()*+E*+(+,()*+E*+(+,()*+E*+(+,()*+E*+(+,()*+E*+(+,()*+E*+(+,()*+E*+(+,()*+E*+(+,()*+E*+(+,()*+E*+(+,()*+E*+(+,()*+E*+(+,()*+E*+(+,()*+E*+(+
,()*+E*+(+,()*+E*+(+,()*+E*+(+,()*+E*+(+,
/01-$ +%'0+$
-RZD((
-,((D((-U)(D((-+()D((-EZ(D((-E(+D((-/+)D((-U0ZD((-E(+D((-)(ZD((-R/,D((-/EZD((-/(ED((
-,((D((
-RTR((D((-,T())D((-UT(Z(D((-UT,+/D0(-+T(((D((-,T+R+D((-+T/RZD((
-RTR((D((
,-!. +
-,+TRRRD0(-+ET+(UD0(-UUT,/0D((-EUT()(D0(
-@ %'8!
-\[ &BA%'
-@$' 8
""
1LVGX-CHMF1P>
==-N&! &-K- &$B$&6
-@ %'8!-\]()*+,*+(+,-.--/"0/-12^
-V8&AB-V8&AB
>VGX-K-2HXJT-IX7D
'$(#)"*+"! 1CFG-HI7J-K-2HLHMN->>#15'$&-N !S$; 7: ;<W12HN-7>+(+,.1'89&.1.YA!' %7: ;<CG7A&;:?A $%-K-75BS !&-M 9A$! Y % !AB-H%4$% !$%42$BB-K-GS !BA6CA'4 !-#A!<C S !B6-F!$S C$!;:-CB578% &!5;&$8%Q$!
->A% -N5!S 6Q! 3A%-#A!<-CA ?ABB-Q$ B'YIN. &$B$&$ YB %-M'.2A%$&85->%.13B -M'-N&Y!A%&-N&! &-F!A$%A4 >$=&-N&A&$8%-,(-M :A?$B$&A&$8%>$=&-N&A&$8%-R-M :A?$B$&A&$8%>MI#.Y!A%&-2$%% &8%<A-CBS'2A!6->A<
-G5&B &285%'->8;A&$8%-K-Q!A3 \\8!<2N)-1'3$%$ &!A&$8%N:8! \\88'-GA< -F!A$%A4 N3$&:&8\\%-#8%'N85&:->A< -2$%% &8%<A-I39!8S N&8''A!'-7839A%$
3%456 %()*+,*+(+,-.--/"0/12((((0D()D+(+,-.-77.().+E.+(+,
,(+00RERR
"""
1;;85%& -#A6A?B 78395& !-7: ;<-#!88=->$ &-?6 !"#!$%& '"CA&;:" !"#$%&!@ %'8!))+R(0@ %'8!+(+,.YA!' %@ %'8!(+ER(R0(+ER(RE(+ER(RR(+ER(R/(+ER(Z((+ER(Z,(+ER(Z+(+ER(ZU(+ER(Z)(+ER(Z0(+ER(ZE(+ER(ZR(+ER(ZZ
(+ER(Z/(+ER(/((+ER(/,(+ER(/+(+ER(/U(+ER(/)(+ER(/0(+ER(/E(+ER(/R1#.78395& !-7: ;<-#!88=->$ &-?6
#A4 -+
V!5
)$ #$
3$4$17P-H%A?B '"-QAB 17P-H%A?B '"-QAB 17P-H%A?B '"-QAB 17P-H%A?B '"-QAB 17P-H%A?B '"-QAB 17P-H%A?B '"-QAB 17P-H%A?B '"-17P-H%A?B '"-QAB
,,
,,.((.+(,(.((((,,.((.))((.((((
,##+%&.-2$))(/.((.)U(U.((((E(,.((.)U(U.((((7: ;<-N O5 %; "-),(,.0U.)+)0.((((7: ;<-N O5 %; "-0,(,.0U.)+)0.((((7: ;<-N O5 %; "-E,(,.,/.))((.((((,(,.U+.))((.((((7: ;<-N O5 %; "-REEU,.((.+(,(.((((E+,.((.
+(,(.((((7: ;<-N O5 %; "-ZE7: ;<-N O5 %; "-/,(,.UU.)+)0.((((7: ;<-N O5 %; "-,(,(,.U+.)U+,.((((7: ;<-N O5 %; "-E(,.((.+(,(.((((
()*+E*+(+,()*+E*+(+,()*+E*+(+,()*+E*+(+,()*+E*+(+,()*+E*+(+,()*,0*+(+,()*,0*+(+,()*,0*+(+,()*+E*+(+,()*+E*+(+,()*+E*+(+,()*,0*+(+,
/01-$ +%'0+$
-EDU)
-)RDR,-+(D))-+(D)0
-ZZDE(
-,((D((-,((D((-)/0D((-+/0D((-,+RD0(-,/ED)(
-,((D((-,((D((-R/(D((-,+RD0(-,/ED)(
-+T(RZD((-UT,+RDZ(
-UT,+RDZ(
,-!. +
-,0T(ZUD0(
-,R+TR)+D0(
#1XLT-IX7D
#1XLT->>7-VA9
V!B
L-IXQGM21VIGX-VH7PXG>GYL-FH#1MV2HXV
-\[A& !3A$%
""""""""
-@ %'8!-\]()*+,*+(+,-.--/"0/-12^
-V8&AB-V8&AB-V8&AB-\[8!< -28%&:B6-NS;-V8&AB-V8&AB-V8&AB-V8&AB-V8&AB
1-CM1XFPGMNV
'$(#)"*+"! N&!A\\? !!6->%-N&-M ;8% &-K-N\\ &\\A& !-75!7: ;<VHX+(+,.1'89&.1.YA!' %7: ;<7GXXIH-CM1XNGX+(+,.1'89&.1.YA!' %7: ;<7>1NNI7-7>H1XIXY-7G27$&6-PABB-28%&:B6-NS;#5?B$;7: ;<W8:%-K-W8A%%
-F A%M =5%'-7: ;<M =5%'-7: ;<M =5%'-7: ;<7: ;<HMI7JNGX-H>H7VMI7-7G2N:A'6-I BA%'-C!$'4 -Q2-P A&7: ;<HMGNIGX-#MGF 7VNT-->>7>A&: -Q8!-#B8\\-2A!<$%47: ;<PHXXH#IX-7G XV28%&:B6-MA'$8-QB
&-K-2HNC7: ;<W8:%-I AA; M =5%'-7: ;<
,+R,,++,0( C_((U/U,,Z(,RE+,0 C_((U/+
""""""""
!"#$%&!(+ER(/Z(+ER(//@ %'8!+(+,.YA!' %@ %'8!+(+,.YA!' %@ %'8!U,+(EU,+(R@ %'8!@ %'8!EUZZ@ %'8!/0,)@ %'8!,(((,E)0R0@ %'8!1#.78395& !-7: ;<-#!88=->$ &-?6
#A4 -U
V!5 V!5 V!5
)$ #$
3$4$17P-H%A?B '"-QAB 17P-H%A?B '"-QAB 17P-H%A?B '"-QAB 17P-H%A?B '"-QAB 17P-H%A?B '"-M$;8:*2#.+(((--789$ !17P-H%A?B '"-17P-H%A?B '"-QAB 17P-H%A?B '"-
,,.((.+(,(.((((,,.((.)UZ0.((((
,##+%&.-2$)EEU,.((.+(,(.((((E+,.((.+(,(.((((7: ;<-N O5 %; "-,+,(,.,E.)U().((((7: ;<-N O5 %; "-,U+(,.((.))((.((((+(,.((.)+)0.((((+(,.((.)+)Z.((((7: ;<-N O5 %; "-,),(,.0U.)+)0.((((7: ;<-N
O5 %; "-,0,(,.0U.)+)0.((((7: ;<-N O5 %; "-,E,(,.U+.)++,.((((7: ;<-N O5 %; "-,RE7: ;<-N O5 %; "-,Z,(,.U+.)+,+.((((,(,.U+.)+,+.((((7: ;<-N O5 %; "-,/
()*,0*+(+,()*,0*+(+,()*,0*+(+,()*+E*+(+,()*+E*+(+,()*+E*+(+,()*+E*+(+,()*+E*+(+,()*+E*+(+,()*+E*+(+,()*+E*+(+,()*+E*+(+,()*+E*+(+,
/01-$ +%'0+$
-RD),-UD,R-UD,R
-)+D0(-U0D)U
-+(D(/-)+D0(
-U((D((-++)D((-,((D((-,((D((-)(+D((-UZ/D(E-E+UDRR
-00/D)U-,((D((-,((D((-)(+D((
-,T(,+DZU
,-!. +
-Z+T//,DE,
-Z+T//,DE,
V1X--7G X7I>--\]\[1NVH\[1VHM^L-7GG#
""""""""
L-K-YM1@HX-7P1MVHMHF
-\[A & -\[A& !-NS;
1-21MIHX
-@ %'8!-\]()*+,*+(+,-.--/"0/-12^
L-2HN1
-V8&AB-V8&AB-V8&AB-V8&AB-V8&AB-V8&AB-V8&AB-V8&AB
\[-JMIHNH>
'$(#)"*+"! M =5%'-7: ;<M =5%'-7: ;<M =5%'-7: ;<7: ;<JHXXHFM8%-W8:% 8%->$&$4A&$8%7: ;<FMHC5$B'$%4-2A$%&D-N !S$; HS %& -H`9 % HS %& -H`9 % 7: ;<XGM2+(+,.1'89&.1.YA!' %7: ;<>17H+(+,.1'89&.1.YA!'
%7: ;<2HVMG-N1>HNT-IX7DM$;8:*2#.+(((--789$ !7: ;<2HVMG#G>I28%&:B67: ;<2IF.7G XVQ5 BQ5 B7: ;<2XN#H7VT-->>7
+U/+)R+EZ,,+U+ZU+R/,(U/U(0
""""""""
,,
!"#$%&!@ %'8!,E()(E@ %'8!2A!;:.+(+,2A!;:.+(+,2A!;:.+(+,@ %'8!+(+,.YA!' %@ %'8!+(+,.YA!' %@ %'8!IX@,R/)ZRU@ %'8!,,+++//@ %'8!0,0,(0,0@ %'8!1#.78395& !-7: ;<-#!88=->$ &-?6
#A4 -)
V!5 V!5
)$ #$
3$4$17P-H%A?B '"-17P-H%A?B '"-QAB 17P-H%A?B '"-QAB 17P-H%A?B '"-QAB 17P-H%A?B '"-17P-H%A?B '"-QAB 17P-H%A?B '"-QAB 1;;&-bZ)+(,RUZE.((((,1;;&-bZ)+(,RUZE.((((,
,,.((.)U+,.((((
,##+%&.-2$),(,.+).))((.((((7: ;<-N O5 %; "-+(,(,.0+.)),(.((((,(,.0+.)),(.((((,(,.0+.)),(.((((,(,.0+.)),(.((((,(,.0+.)),(.((((,(,.0+.)),(.((((,(,.0+.)),(.((((7: ;<-N O5 %; "-+,,(,.0U.)+)0.((((7:
;<-N O5 %; "-++,(,.U+.))((.((((7: ;<-N O5 %; "-+U,(,.+,.))((.((((,(,.+,.))((.((((7: ;<-N O5 %; "-+),(,.,Z.))((.((((7: ;<-N O5 %; "-+0E(,.((.))((.((((7: ;<-N O5 %; "-+EE(,.((.)U+,.((((E
()*+E*+(+,()*+E*+(+,()*+E*+(+,()*+E*+(+,()*+E*+(+,()*+E*+(+,()*+E*+(+,()*+E*+(+,()*+E*+(+,()*+E*+(+,()*+E*+(+,()*+E*+(+,()*+E*+(+,()*+E*+(+,()*+E*+(+,()*+E*+(+,
/01-$ +%'0+$
-E0DR(-E0DR(-E0DR(-E0DR(-E0DR(-R0D((
-/)0D((-+E+DZ(-++/D/0-,((D((-+(+D+0-,+(D((-,E)D(0-,E)D(0
-/)0D((-Z+,D+0-,((D((-+(+D+0-,+(D((
-UTU/ED0,
-UTU/ED0,
,-!. +
,,+T+RED(E
,,+TU0,D(E
-
-
>V1XVNT-IX7D
VGXJ1-#G>I7H-FH#1MV2HXV
-1B?A% -CA6
V1VIGX-.V\[IX-7IVIHN
"""""""
L-\[1VHM-7>IXI7
-\[IMH>HNN
\[A& !-.-1;;&Z)+(,RUZE\[A& !-.-1;;&Z)+(,RUZE
1@HM-GQQ-NIVH-NH7MHV1MI1>T-IX7D
-@ %'8!-\]()*+,*+(+,-.--/"0/-12^
-V8&AB-V8&AB-V8&AB-V8&AB-V8&AB-V8&AB-V8&AB
ML-MGV XXG
'$(#)"*+"! I% 9 ;&$8%-N !S$; 7: ;<GX-NIVH-N1XICA'4 !-#<.0R)0-785%&!6-7B5?-M'7A&:;A!&-#A!<.+EE00-\[.-E+%'-N&Q! 3A%-#A!<.E(((-H5! <A-M'2A%8!-#A!<.+(EU(-2A%8!-M'N$BS !\\88'-#<.0R00-78S$%4&8%-MN85&:-N:
8! .0U00-N&7:!$ &3A -><-M'.0E+0-2 !!6->%7: ;<21+(+,.1'89&.1.YA!' %7: ;<N1QH1NN MH-7GXN NA= &6-78% 5B&-NS; 7: ;<NG VP->1JH-2IXXH28%&:B6.P %%-7&6-#!8; -Q 28%&:B6.G9 !A&$%4-C5'4 &-H`97:
;<VI2HN#BA%%$%4-2 &$%47: ;<V\[IX-7IV28%&:B6-CA;& !$A-NS;7: ;<@HMIaGXN \\ !-K-N \\ !-K-
U+0,,R/U)0UE(E/)UZE)+,
"""""""
!"#$%&!ZE,0@ %'8!,,(//R+,,(//RU,,(//R),,(//R0,,(//RE,,(//RR,,(//RZ@ %'8!+(+,.YA!' %@ %'8!+/E(@ %'8!2A!;:.+(+,.P7#Q2A6.+(+,.GC@ %'8!2+EUZU@ %'8!,0ZUE@ %'8!/ZRER+)0(//ZRER+)0(/1#.78395&
!-7: ;<-#!88=->$ &-?6
#A4 -0
V!5 V!5
)$ #$
3$4$17P-H%A?B '"-17P-H%A?B '"-0E00-2 !!6->A%
,##+%&.-2$)7: ;<-N O5 %; "-+R,(,.,/.)U+,.((((,(,.,/.)U+,.((((7: ;<-N O5 %; "-+Z,(,.0+.)UZ(.((((
()*+E*+(+,()*+E*+(+,()*+E*+(+,
/01-$ +%'0+$
-+Z
-+,D,Z
-+,D,Z
-0RUDR0
-U+ZD,(
-)T)+UD0E
-)T//RDU,
,-!. +
-U/UT0ZUD/+
"
"
"""
-@ %'8!-\]()*+,*+(+,-.--/"0/-12^
-V8&AB-V8&AB-V8&AB
>-HXHMYLT-IX7D
'$(#)"*+"! 7: ;<\[1MXHM-7GXXH7VX &\\8!<-2A$%&-N !S$; X &\\8!<-2A$%&-N !S$; 7: ;<c7H0E00-2 !!6->A% 7: ;<V8&AB-=8!-7: ;<-M5%V8&AB-8=-X53? !-8=-7: ;<
,,
),0)
""
!"#$%&!@ %'8!+//U//),+//U//EE@ %'8!R+R)+ZER+1#.78395& !-7: ;<-#!88=->$ &-?6
2C
MEETING TYPE
Regular Meeting
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item
Title/Subject: Resolution 21-037; 2021 Liquor License Renewals
Meeting Date: Monday, April 26, 2021
Prepared by: Brenda Pricco, Deputy City Clerk
Reviewed by: Sandie Thone, City Clerk/Human Resources Director
Attachments: Resolution 21-037 Approving 2021 Liquor License Renewals
Policy Consideration: Approval of 2021 Liquor License Renewals: Shorewood City Code Chapter
401, Liquor Regulations provides for consideration of licensing establishments to sell on and off-sale
liquor in the city limits.
Background: The following establishments are requesting council consideration in renewing their
existing liquor licenses which expire on May 31, 2021:
1) Shorewood 2001 L.L.C, 23800 State Highway 7 Off-Sale/3.2%
DBA/Cub Foods Shorewood, MN 55331
2) American Legion 259 24450 Smithtown Road Club On-Sale
DBA/Clarence Clofer Post Shorewood, MN 55331 Sunday
3) Wine & Spirits by JD Inc 5660 County Rd 19 Off-Sale
DBA/MGM Wine & Spirits Shorewood, MN 55331
4) Shorewood Liquor Inc. 23670 St Hwy 7 Off-Sale
DBA/Shorewood Liquors Shorewood, MN 55331
5) Fat Jacks LLC 19215 MN Hwy 7 On-Sale Wine/3.2%
DBA/Big Mike’s Shorewood, MN 55331 Strong Beer/Sunday
6) Waterford Liquors, LLC 19905 Hwy 7 Off-Sale
DBA/Waterford Liquors Shorewood, MN 55331
The licensees have submitted all the required documentation, met the insurance liability requirements,
successfully passed background investigations, submitted the required licensing fees and met the State
of Minnesota, Department of Public Safety, Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement requirements as well.
Financial or Budget Considerations: Licensing fees as set forth in the City’s fee schedule for liquor
licenses have been collected.
Recommendation/Action Requested: Staff respectfully recommends the city council approve liquor
license renewals effective June 1, 2021 through May 31, 2022 for the above delineated establishments in
the city limits. Motion, second, and simple majority vote required.
Connection to Vision /Mission: Consistency in providing the community with quality public services and
a variety of attractive amenities.
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
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 21-037
A RESOLUTION APPROVING 2021 LIQUOR LICENSE RENEWALS
WHEREAS, Shorewood City Code, Chapter 401 provides that no person may directly or
indirectly, on any pretense or by any device, sell, barter, keep for sale, charge for possession, or
otherwise dispose of alcoholic beverages as part of a commercial transaction without having
obtained the required license or permit; and
WHEREAS, in addition to the requirements set forth by the Minnesota Department of Public
Safety, Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement Division, Shorewood City Code provides that the
applicant shall complete an application for a liquor license, pay the required licensing fee, fulfill
insurance coverage requirements and complete a successful background investigation; and
WHEREAS, the following applicants successfully completed the application process, satisfying
the requirements as delineated above for the issuance of liquor licenses issued for the period of
one year, or that portion thereof, from June 1, 2021 to May 31, 2022, consistent with the
requirements and provisions of Chapter 401 of the Shorewood City Code.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shorewood, the
following licenses issued to the applicants as follows are approved:
Applicant Address License_______
Shorewood 2001 L.L.C, 23800 State Highway 7 Off-Sale/3.2% Malt Liquor
Cub Foods Shorewood, MN 55331
American Legion 259 24450 Smithtown Road Club On-Sale
Clarence Clofer Post Shorewood, MN 55331 Sunday Sales
Wine & Spirits by JD Inc 5660 County Rd 19 Off-Sale
MGM Wine & Spirits Shorewood, MN 55331
Shorewood Liquor Inc. 23670 St Hwy 7 Off-Sale
Shorewood Liquors Shorewood, MN 55331
Fat Jacks LLC 19215 MN Hwy 7 On-Sale Wine/3.2%
Big Mike’s Shorewood, MN 55331 Strong Beer/Sunday Sales
Waterford Liquors LLC 19905 Hwy 7 Off-Sale
Waterford Liquors Shorewood, MN 55331
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Shorewood this 26th day of April 2021.
_______________________________
Jennifer Labadie, Mayor
______________________________
Sandie Thone, City Clerk
2D
MEETING TYPE
Regular Meeting
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item
Title / Subject: Extend Approvals for the Matthew Sayer Addition
Applicant: Red Granite Construction
Location: 20325 Excelsior Boulevard
Meeting Date: April 26, 2021
Prepared by: Marie Darling, Planning Director
Attachments: Extension Request Letter
Site Plan
Resolution 20-035 Approved on 4/27/2020
Resolution approving the extension
Background: Section 1202.03 regarding procedures for filing and review of preliminary and final plats
states that “If the preliminary plat is approved by the City Council, the subdivider must submit the final
plat within 180 days after the approval or approval of the preliminary plat shall be considered void,
unless a request for time extension is submitted in writing and approved by the City Council prior to
expiration of the 180 day period. A reasonable time extension will be considered by the City Council, if
circumstances requiring the extension are beyond the control of the applicant.”
Last April, the City Council approved a preliminary plat, conditional use permit, and variances to
subdivide the property for two new twin-homes. At the September 28, 2021 meeting, City Council
approved the first extension of approvals to allow the previous subdivider time to clear the property
and prepare the application. The applicant is currently purchasing the development from the original
developer and is completing the design and materials for their final plat submission. The timing is very
close and they may not have a complete application submitted prior to the expiration on April 27.
Consequently, they have also requested this extension.
Recommendation / Action Requested: Staff recommends the approval of the request for an
extension of the deadline for the final plat application submission to October 17, 2021.
Next Steps and Timelines: If the City Council approves the request, the applicant would need to
submit the final plat application and any additional materials listed in Resolution 20-035 by October
17, 2021. Once the subdivision is recorded, the applicant could request a building permits or grading
permits to complete the subdivision.
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.
S:\\Planning\\Planning Files\\Applications\\2019 Cases\\Matthew Sayer Subd\\Extension Requests\\CAF Memo- 2nd Extension.docx
Red Granite Construction
Rob Sharot, V.P. of Construction
P.O. Box 180
Roberts, WI 54023
4/5/2021
Subject: Request for Planning & Zoning Extension Lot 37 Subdivision #141
To: Marie Darling,
Please accept this letter as written request for a planning and zoning extension for lot 37 subdivision #141 Noted as
Preliminary plat Matthew Sayer Addition. This request would also include the extension of variances and conditional
use permits as needed.
If you have any questions or concerns you can reach me at 612-597-6575 or rob@redgraniteconstruction.com
Thank you,
Ejhjubmmz!tjhofe!cz!Spc!Tibspu
EO;!D>VT-!F>spcAsfehsbojufdpotusvdujpo/dpn-!
P>Sfe!Hsbojuf!Dpotusvdujpo-!PV>WQ!pg!Dpotusvdujpo-!
DO>Spc!Tibspu
Spc!Tibspu
Sfbtpo;!J!bn!uif!bvuips!pg!uijt!epdvnfou
Ebuf;!3132/15/16!21;63;45.16(11(
Rob Sharot
V.P. of Construction
Cc: Luke Busker
wĻķ DƩğƓźƷĻ /ƚƓƭƷƩǒĭƷźƚƓ t͵h͵ .ƚǣ ЊБЉ wƚĬĻƩƷƭͲ L ЎЍЉЋЌ ağźƓʹ АЊЎΏЍЍЊΏЉЉЊЎ aƚĬźƌĻʹ ЏЊЋΏЎВАΏЏЎАЎ
RESOLUTION 21-038
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
STATE OF MINNESOTA
A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN EXTENSION TO APPROVALS FOR THE
MATTHEW SAYER ADDITION LOCATED AT
20325 EXCELSIOR BOULEVARD
WHEREAS, the City of Shorewood approved a request on April 27, 2020 from Sathre-
Bergquist, LLC. for preliminary plat, conditional use permit and variances to lot area for the
property legally described as:
Lot 37, Auditor’s Subdivision Number 141, Hennepin County, Minnesota. And,
WHEREAS, Section 1202.03 Subd. 2. f. (3) of the City Code establishes the deadline for
submittal of the final plat and other required materials as 180 days from the approval of the
preliminary plat; and
WHEREAS, the City of Shorewood approved a request to expend the original approvals by 180
days on September 28, 2020; and
WHEREAS, the 180-day period expires on April 27, 2021; and
WHEREAS, Section 1202.03 Subd. 2. f. (3) of the City Code allows the applicant to request an
extension of the deadline prior to the expiration of the 180-day period.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shorewood that the
deadline to submit the final plat application to be called “Matthew Sayer Addition”, is hereby
extended, subject to the following conditions:
1. The final plat and all other required materials established in City of Shorewood
Resolution 20-035 be submitted by October 17, 2021.
2. All conditions listed in Resolution 20-035 shall be adhered to.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 26th day of
April, 2021.
___________________________
Jennifer Labadie, Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________________
Sandie Thone, City Clerk
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item
2E
Title/Subject: Accept Agreements for Mary Lake Outlet Project;
City Project 19-09
MEETING
Meeting Date: Monday, April 26, 2021 TYPE
Regular
Prepared by: Andrew Budde, City Engineer
Meeting
Reviewed by: Larry Brown, Director of Public Works
Attachments: Agreements, Resolution
Background: The Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) has conditionally
approved the project and approved the variance allowing for the outlet of Mary Lake to
drain through Studer Pond and raise the HWL by 0.07 feet. The City of Excelsior has
also provided a conditional municipal consent for the project. The MCWD conditional
approvals included having the parcel located at 23445 County Road 19 record a
declaration against their property identifying the change in the proposed high-water
level. The City of Excelsior also required a hold harmless agreement with the property
owner and a maintenance agreement with Shorewood, or similar documents. In
addition, the City of Shorewood had negotiated three permanent drainage & utility
nd
easements. At the time of the March 22 Council Meeting staff had received verbal
approval from the property owner that the agreements were acceptable, but staff had
not received the executed copy.
The executed documents have now been received and will fulfill the conditional
approvals of the City of Excelsior and Minnehaha Creek Watershed District.
Financial Considerations: The City has budgeted $558,000 for the project and would
pay for the improvements through the Storm Water Fund. The cost associated with the
acquisition of easements have been accounted for in the project budgeting.
Recommendation/Action Requested: Staff recommends authorization to execute final
agreements with property owners, City of Excelsior, and Minnehaha Creek Watershed.
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
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 21-039
A RESOLUTION TO APPROVE AGREEMENTS
FOR THE MARY LAKE OUTLET PROJECT
CITY PROJECT 19-09
WHEREAS, Mary Lake that does not have a natural drainage outlet and staff has
reviewed various options to allow for a gravity flow outlet; and
WHEREAS, the recommended solution would increase the water level of Studer Pond
located in the City of Excelsior and would require a variance from the Minnehaha Creek
Watershed District, and
WHEREAS, the current Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) identifies improvements to
provide an outlet from a land locked Mary Lake in 2020; and
WHEREAS, the city has awarded the construction contract to G.F. Jedlicki; and
WHEREAS, staff has submitted the necessary permitting information to the required
agencies and the City of Excelsior, and has acquired conditional approvals by both the
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and the City of Excelsior; and
WHEREAS, staff has acquired all necessary easements and agreements to fulfill the
conditional approvals for the City of Excelsior and Minnehaha Creek Watershed District;
and
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: by the City Council of the City of Shorewood
hereby approve the final agreements with property owners, City of Excelsior, and
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and authorize the Mayor and Clerk to execute final
agreements.
th
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 26 day of April
2021.
__________________________
Jennifer Labadie, Mayor
Attest:
___________________________
Sandie Thone, City Clerk
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item
2F
Title/Subject: Demolition of House at 26245 Smithtown Road
Meeting Date: April 26, 2021
MEETING
Prepared By: Greg Lerud, City Administrator
TYPE
REGULAR
Attachments: Quotation for removal of removal of structures, well
abandonment, property cleanup, Resolution
Background: This property is the proposed site for the Smithtown Pond project. The
fire department has completed their training on the building so staff solicited a quote
from Bollig & Sons for the removal of the house and other buildings on the property, as
well as properly abandoning the well. The city has contracted with Bollig in the past and
have always been very satisfied with their work. Staff has reviewed the quote and
found it to be competitive.
Financial or Budget Considerations: The demolition of this house has always been
planned as part of the pond project, and the quote has been prepared that the city will
only pay for the services and expenses that are actually incurred. Staff does not believe
that the TBD items will be needed. The entire cost of this project will comp from the
project fund.
Recommended Action: Staff recommends accepting the bid from Bollig & Sons as
presented, by adopting the included Resolution.
Next Steps and Timeline: Staff will work with the company to complete the work. It is
anticipated that the work would be done within 60 days of the notice 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
BOLLIG & SONS INC.
11401 COUNTY ROAD 3
HOPKINS,MN 55343
952-938-4133 FAX 952-938-9615
bolligandsons@msn.com
April 9, 2021
City of Shorewood
Attn: Greg Lerud City Administrator 952-960-7905
glerud@ci.shorewood.mn.us
JOB SITE: 26245 Smithtown Road, Shorewood
Job Description: Demo
Install bio-logs only --- feet at $2.00 per foot removal not included. Bid Price $ TBD
Construction entrance to past culvert area driveway is bad in this area. Bid Price $ 1,000.00
Inlet protection at $200.00 each if required. Bid Price $ TBD
Demo permit. Bid Price $ N/C
Disconnect sewer. (No street work) (No dewatering figured) Bid Price $ 2,100.00
Seal one existing deep well other is sealed per Stodola records. Bid Price $ 2,354.00
Remove house, garage, shed, landscaping, tires, and etc. Bid Price $ 19,188.00
NOTE:
Assumed city is waiving all permit fees again. No grading included just slope sides for safety.
Demo figure normal conditions no extra deep foundation or extra thick concrete.
Tree, stump and overgrowth removal not included. No utility conflicts figured.
No winter conditions. No restoration included. Price is good for 90 days.
Thank you for the opportunity to work with you on this project.
We do appreciate your business.
Respectfully,
Dan Meyer Estimator Cell 612-322-1880 Email dmeyer@bolligandsons.com
Chad Fix Job Supervisor Cell 369-7380 Email cfix@bolligandsons.com
RESOLUTION 21-040
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
STATE OF MINNESOTA
A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING QUOTE TO REMOVE STRUCTURE AND CLEAN UP
OF PROPRETY AT 26245 SMITHTOWN ROAD
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD,
MINNESOTA that the Council hereby accepts a quote from Bollig & Sons for the
removal of the house and clean-up of the property at 26245 Smithtown Road.
th
Adopted by the City Council of Shorewood, Minnesota this 26 day of April 2021.
__________________________
Jennifer Labadie, Mayor
Attest:
___________________________
Sandie Thone, City Clerk
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item
2G
Title/Subject: Donation from American Legion Post 259 for Bleachers
At Badger Park Field
MEETING
TYPE
Regular
Meeting Date: April 26, 2021
Meeting
Prepared by: Twila Grout – Park and Rec Director
Attachment: Resolution
Policy Consideration: Pursuant to Minnesota State Statutes sections §465.03 and
§471.17 all donations or gifts of real and personal property, including donations for the
benefit of public recreational services, must be accepted by the city council.
Background: Staff had received a request to have bleachers placed for spectators to
watch football and lacrosse at Badger Park Field. The cost for this project is $5,493.26.
Minnetonka Football Association has donated $3,000 towards the project. Staff sent out
donation letters and heard back from the American Legion that they would like to donate
towards the project.
Name of Donor Amount
American Legion Post 259 $2,500.00
A plaque will be installed saying that the Minnetonka Football Association and the
American Legion donated towards the bleachers.
Financial Considerations: The donation will cover the cost of purchase of bleachers.
Action Requested: Staff recommends the city council accept the donation.
Accepting a donation requires a simple majority of Council members.
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.
RESOLUTION 21-041
A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING DONATIONS TO THE
CITY OF SHOREWOOD FOR BLEACHERS AT BADGER PARK
WHEREAS, the City of Shorewood is generally authorized to accept donations of real and
personal property pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 465.03 for the benefit of its citizens,
and is specifically authorized to accept gifts and is authorized to accept gifts for the benefit of
their public recreational services pursuant to Minnesota Statutes section 471.17; and
WHEREAS, the following persons and entities have offered to contribute the cash amounts set
forth below to the city:
Name of Donor Amount
American Legion Post 259 $2,500.00
WHEREAS, the terms or conditions of the donations are to be used for the bleachers at Badger
Park field; and
WHEREAS, all such donations have been contributed to the city for the benefit of its citizens, as
allowed by law; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that it is appropriate to accept the donations offered.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA AS FOLLOWS:
1. The donations described above are accepted and shall be used to establish and/or operate
services either alone or in cooperation with others, as allowed by law.
2. The city clerk is hereby directed to issue receipts to each donor acknowledging the city’s
receipt of the donor’s donation.
Passed by the City Council of Shorewood, Minnesota this 26th day of April 2021.
__________________________
Jennifer Labadie, Mayor
Attest:
___________________________
Sandie Thone, City Clerk
2H
MEETING TYPE
REGULAR
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item
Title/Subject: Authorize User Agreement with Hennepin County for Nearmap
Access
Meeting Date: April 26, 2021
Prepared By: Marie Darling, Planning Director
Reviewed By: Greg Lerud, City Administrator
Attachments: Agreement
Resolution
Background: Staff proposes to authorize the user agreement with Hennepin County to
be able to use the most up-to-date aerial, obliques and ortho images as well as all their
metadata, data layers and other information needed for GIS purposes.
Financial or Budget Considerations: The County offers this information free to
partner cities that formally adopt the attached user agreement.
Recommended Action: Staff recommends authorizing the user agreement for
Nearmap access with Hennepin County.
Action requires a simple majority vote.
Next Steps and Timeline: Staff will inform the Hennepin County of the council’s
decision and forward an executed user agreement.
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.
Contract No. ____________
H ENNEPIN C OUNTY U SER A GREEMENT
and ________________________
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, COUNTY and Nearmap US, Inc. (Nearmap) executed AGREEMENT,
Contract No. PR00002983, as amended, for the licensing of oblique images and related
Nearmap
WHEREAS, Nearmapstem, except the Footprint module,
(collectively isplays and allows access to a
collection of ortho images, oblique images, metadata, data layers, and other
geographic or structural visualizations or embodiments (collectively
Conte
WHEREAS, by the terms of the Nearmap Agreement, Nearmap granted COUNTY the
right to allow duly authorized political units or political subdivisions located totally or
substantially within the boundaries of Hennepin County, including cities or townships,
to access the System and Nearmap Delivered Content.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual undertakings and agreements set
forth herein, COUNTY and USER agree as follows:
1. Term.
This Agreement shall commence upon March 12, 2021 and shall continue for one (1)
year unless terminated earlier in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement.
Subject to the provisions herein and unless COUNTY otherwise notifies USER within
thirty (30) days prior to the expiration of a term of this Agreement, this Agreement
shall then automatically renew for another two (2) year term. However, in no event
shall this Agreement continue beyond March 11, 2024.
2. Licenses.
Subject to the provisions herein, COUNTY grants USER a limited, revocable,
non-exclusive, royalty-free license to access and use the System and Delivered
Content exclusively for the performance oresponsibilities in the
- 1 -
Contract No. ____________
ordinary course of government business. The rights granted in this paragraph
For clarification and not limitation, the
License permes and contracted personnel
in the ordinary course of USERs
business (said employees or contracted personnel may be referred to as
shall include and apply to Eligible Personnel). However, subject to the
foregoing, upon a third-party (e.g., public) request to USER for the right to
inspect, copy or otherwise access Delivered Content pursuant to the MGDPA
(as defined herein), USER shall 1) direct the request to the COUNTY Contract
Administrator (identified herein); 2) explain to the requesting party that the
request has been directed to the COUNTY and communicate appropriate
COUNTY contact information; and 3) perform any other reasonable tasks
necessary to expedite fulfillment of the request.
USER is solely responsible for implementing the technology necessary to access
the System, to retrieve Delivered Content and to use, control and safeguard the
Delivered Content pursuant to the obligations set forth herein.
Except as expressly set forth herein, USER shall acquire no right, title or interest
in or to the System or Delivered Content.
USER shall strictly comply with the following:
(i) USER shall access the System and access, use, control and safeguard
Delivered Content in compliance with the terms of this HCUA;
(ii) USER shall only access the System and Delivered content by and
through a computer workstation or server (i) that is owned or leased by
USER; (ii) that is under the exclusive control of USER; and (iii) that is
exclusively available for use ;
(iii) USER shall not share or distribute System authentication
information, Authentication with any
unauthorized third-party;
(iv) USER shall secure and safeguard the System, Authentication and
Delivered Content i
that USER secures and safeguards its own critical or confidential
systems, software, data, passwords or other information. If there is a
- 2 -
Contract No. ____________
prevail;
(v) USER shall not access the Delivered Content by any means other
than the System including but not limited to scraping, robots,
wanderers, crawlers, spiders, etc (as those terms are commonly used
and understood in the information technology industry);
(vi) USER shall be solely responsible for accessing, using and otherwise
supporting the System including but not limited to paying all costs,
expenses and communication charges associated with the same;
(vii) USER shall use, control and safeguard the Delivered Content in
compliance with the terms of this HCUA and with applicable law
including but not limited to the Minnesota Government Data Practices
Act, Minnesota Statutes, chapter 13;
(viii) Except as expressly provided herein, USER shall not use, disclose,
sell, market, distribute or otherwise make available the Delivered
Content during the term of this HCUA or at any time thereafter except
as required by la written consent;
(ix) USER shall not allow third-party access to Delivered Content;
(x) USER shall not create derivative works, including but not limited to
any new work for USER, COUNTY, or any other party, that incorporates,
embeds, or includes all or part of any Delivered Content, without
COUNTYs express written consent; and
(xi) USER shall not remove, delete, alter or otherwise modify any
copyright messages on or associated with the System or Delivered
Content, including but not limited to copyright notices from COUNTY or
Nearmap.
3. Disclaimers and Limitations of Liability.
COUNTY, BY AND THROUGH NEARMAP, IS PROVIDING THE SYSTEM AND
DELIVERED CONTENT ON AN AS-IS BASIS WITH NO SUPPORT WHATSOEVER.
THERE IS NO WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY, NO WARRANTY OF FITNESS
FOR PARTICULAR USE, NO WARRANTY OF NON-INFRINGEMENT, NO
- 3 -
Contract No. ____________
WARRANTY REGARDING THE USE OF THE INFORMATION OR THE RESULTS
THEREOF AND NO OTHER WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED.
WITHOUT LIMITING THE FOREGOING, COUNTY DOES NOT WARRANT THE
PERFORMANCE OF THE SYSTEM OR RELATED AND NECESSARY
COMMUNICATIONS OR CONNECTIONS TO THE SYSTEM, THAT THE SYSTEM
WILL BE UNINTERRUPTED OR ERROR FREE, THAT DEFECTS WILL BE CORRECTED,
OR THAT THE SYSTEM IS FREE OF HARMFUL CODE. USER fully understands and
agrees that (i) the System is subject to errors, omissions, delays or
interruptions; and (ii) COUNTY, by and through Nearmap, may modify or
change the System in a manner that may impact or restrict USERcess. In
any such event, the COUNTY will not be liable for the cost of such changes,
damages or other liability which may be sustained by USER.
WITHOUT LIMITING THE FOREGOING, COUNTY DOES NOT WARRANT THE
ACCURACY, COMPLETENESS OR TIMELINESS OF THE DELIVERED CONTENT NOR
DOES COUNTY WARRANT THAT DEFECTS IN THE SAME WILL BE CORRECTED.
USER fully understands and agrees that (i) the Delivered Content is provided by
third-parties, including but not limited to Nearmap; and (ii) COUNTY does not
directly control and is not responsible for the Delivered Content. USER fully
understands and agrees that the Delivered Content is subject to errors,
omissions, delay or interruptions, including but not limited to (i) delays, errors
or omissions in the receipt of the Delivered Content, (ii) changes, adjustments,
corrections or modifications of the Delivered Content and (iii) that COUNTY
may make modifications, changes and/or adjustments to the Delivered Content
at any time and without notice to USER.
At the point of initial contact with any Delivered Content provided to the
public, USER shall include the disclaimer set forth in the preceding three
paragraphs, in the same or substantially similar format with necessary
adjustments for accuracy and applicability, including but not limited to defining
IN NO EVENT SHALL COUNTY BE LIABLE FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT,
SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OR LOSS OF PROFIT, LOSS
OF BUSINESS OR ANY OTHER FINANCIAL LOSS OR ANY OTHER DAMAGES EVEN
IF THE COUNTY HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.
USERSOLE AND EXCLUSIVE REMEDY FOR ANY
DAMAGES RELATED TO THIS HCUA OR FOR ANY BREACH OF THIS HCUA,
INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO LIABILITY FOR SYSTEM OR DELIVERED
CONTENT NONPERFORMANCE, ERRORS OR OMISSIONS, SHALL BE LIMITED TO
- 4 -
Contract No. ____________
RESTORING OR CORRECTING THE SYSTEM OR DELIVERED CONTENT TO THE
EXTENT AND DEGREE COUNTY IS CAPABLE OF PERFORMING THE SAME AND AS
IS REASONABLY POSSIBLE UNDER THE PERTINENT CIRCUMSTANCES.
4. Royalty Free License.
The License is royalty free. COUNTY is not providing any implementation,
maintenance, support or other services hereunder and, as such, USER shall not
pay COUNTY any amount for services pursuant to this HCUA.
5. Compliance with Applicable Law and Data.
USER and COUNTY shall comply with all applicable federal, state and local
statutes, regulations, rules and ordinances currently in force or later enacted.
Subject to the provisions set forth in Section 2 above, the parties, their officers,
agents, owners, partners, employees, volunteers and subcontractors shall
abide by the provisions of the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act,
Minnesota Statutes, chapter 13 (MGDPA) and all other applicable state and
federal laws, rules, regulations and orders relating to data privacy or
confidentiality. USER shall promptly notify COUNTY if USER becomes aware of
any potential claims, or facts giving rise to such claims, under the MGDPA.
6. Termination.
If COUNTY reasonably believes that USER is not complying with any terms of
this HCUA, including but not limited to the license or related limitations,
COUNTY may immediately terminate this HCUA and thereby terminate the
License and Uccess to and use of the System and Delivered Content.
Either party may terminate this HCUA without cause at any time by upon thirty
(30) day written notice to the other party.
Notwithstanding the term set forth herein, the parties expressly agree that
COUNTY may (i) terminate the license granted herein for Nearmap Delivered
Content; or (ii) terminate this HCUA upon the expiration or termination, for any
reason, the Nearmap Agreement.
7. Liability.
- 5 -
Contract No. ____________
USER agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the COUNTY, their
officials, officers, agents, volunteers and employees from any liability, claims,
causes of action, judgments, damages, losses, costs, or expenses, including
use of or
failure to comply with
the terms of this HCUA or from failure to perform any duties and obligations
required by applicable law and/or this HCUA.
be governed by the provisions of
applicable law including but not limited to the Municipal Tort Claims Act,
Minnesota Statutes Chapter 466, and other applicable law. The statutory limits
of liability for some or all of the parties may not be added together or stacked
to increase the maximum amount of liability for any party. This paragraph shall
not be construed to bar legal remedies one party may have for the other
HCUA. Nothing in this HCUA
constitutes a waiver by the USER or COUNTY of any statutory or common law
defenses, immunities, or limits on liability.
8. Miscellaneous Provisions.
The Hennepin County Geographic Information Systems Manager, or his/her
designee, shall manage this HCUA on behalf of the COUNTY and perform the
other duties expressly set forth herein.
Except as directed by COUNTY, USER
any derivative thereof in USER
communication and/or marketing, including but not limited to advertisements
of any type or form, promotional ads/literature, client lists and/or any other
form of outreach, without the written approval of the Hennepin County Public
Affairs/Communications Department, or their designees.
USER and COUNTY intend that this HCUA will not benefit or create any right or
cause of action in or on behalf of any person or entity other than the parties.
The laws of the state of Minnesota shall govern all questions and
interpretations concerning the validity and construction of this HCUA and the
legal relations between the parties and their performance.
The remainder of this page is blank.
- 6 -
Contract No. ____________
COUNTY AUTHORIZATION
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
Reviewed by the County STATE OF MINNESOTA
Attorney's Office
By:
Hennepin County Administrator
Date:
USER warrants that the person who
executed this Agreement is authorized to do
so on behalf of USER as required by
applicable articles, bylaws, resolutions or
ordinances.*
USER
By: _______________________________
Printed Name: ______________________
Printed Title: _______________________
Date:
*USER shall submit applicable documentation (articles, bylaws, resolutions or
s delegation of authority. This documentation
shall be submitted at the time USER returns the Agreement to COUNTY.
Documentation is not required for a sole proprietorship.
- 7 -
RESOLUTION NO. 21-042
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
COUNTY OF HENNIPIN
STATE OF MINNESOTA
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A
USER AGREEMENT FOR NEARMAP TECHNOLOGY INFORMATION
WITH HENNEPIN COUNTY
WHEREAS, the City of Shorewood (“City”) desires access to the Nearmap technology
information and mapping systems; and
WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the user agreement at a public meeting on April
26, 2021.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Shorewood,
Minnesota hereby authorizes the Mayor to sign the user agreement with Hennepin
County for and on behalf of the City of Shorewood.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 26th day of
April, 2021.
___________________________
Jennifer Labadie, Mayor
ATTEST:
________________________________
Sandie Thone, City Clerk
2I
MEETING TYPE
Regular Meeting
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Update
Title / Subject: Accept Proposal For Emerald Ash Borer Management Plan Update, Davey Resource
Group
Meeting Date: April 26, 2021
Prepared by: Larry Brown, Director of Public Works
Reviewed by: Greg Lerud, City Administrator
Attachments: Proposal by Davey Resource Group
Background: In 2017, the City had Davey Resource Group (DRG) prepare an “Urban Forest Management
Plan.” One chapter of the plan was dedicated to management of the Emerald Ash Borer (EAB). A link to
the original plan is as follows: \\\\COSSHARE01\\Shared\\Company\\Public Works\\URBAN FOREST
MANAGEMENT\\2017 Urban Forest Management Plan.pdf
Since the original plan is now four years old and there have been changes in methods of management,
staff solicited a proposal from DRG to update the chapter addressing the Emerald Ash Borer.
Attachment 1 to this report is the proposal from Davey Tree. The plan consists of updating the plan
text, providing a pricing budget, updating the selection and schedule for ash injections, and providing
website material regarding the program. The price for the proposed work is $2,750.
As mentioned above, there have been changes in the management strategy for EAB. Due to
competition in the marketplace, the injection process has become less expensive. Having an arborist
determine which ash trees to make the investment of the injections is key to effectively managing the
ash canopy and is a long-term investment.
Financial Impact: It is recommended that if approved, that this plan update be funded from the Tree
Management Budget.
Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of a motion that accepts the proposal from Davey
Resource Group to update the Emerald Ash Borer Management Plan.
.
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
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 21-043
A RESOLUTION AWARDING QUOTE FOR INSTALLATION
OF WATER SERVICE TO E.J. MAYERS, INC.
FOR 5815 HOWARD’S POINT ROAD
WHEREAS, the property owner(s) of 5815 Howard’s Point Road petitioned the city for
connection to municipal water service; and
WHEREAS, municipal water service is in the proximity to the property, however, a
water service is not available to serve the subject property; and
WHEREAS, staff has solicited quotes for installation of a water service to serve the
subject property; and
WHEREAS, the low quote for installation of a water service was provided by E.J.
Mayers, Inc. in the amount of $11,750.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA AS FOLLOWS:
1. The City Council of the City of Shorewood, Minnesota awards the contract for
installation of a water service to E.J. Mayers, Inc., in the amount of $11,750.
th
Passed by the City Council of Shorewood, Minnesota this 26 day of April, 2021.
Jennifer Labadie, Mayor
ATTEST
Sandie Thone, City Clerk
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 21-044
A RESOLUTION AWARDING QUOTE FOR INSTALLATION
OF TWO WATER SERVICES TO E.J. MAYERS, INC.
FOR GRANT STREET
WHEREAS, the property owner of 5960 Grant Street petitioned the city for connection
to municipal water service; and
WHEREAS, municipal water service is in the proximity to the property, however, a
water service is not available to serve the subject property; and
WHEREAS, the City owns the property at 5965 Grant Street that would also benefit
from water service; and
WHEREAS, staff has solicited quotes for installation of two water services to serve the
subject properties; and
WHEREAS, the low quote for installation of two water services was provided by E.J.
Mayers, Inc., in the amount of $24,665.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA AS FOLLOWS:
1. The City Council of the City of Shorewood, Minnesota awards the contract for
installation of two water services in Grant Street right of way to E.J. Mayers, Inc., in the
amount of $24,665.
th
Passed by the City Council of Shorewood, Minnesota this 26 day of April, 2021.
Jennifer Labadie, Mayor
ATTEST
Sandie Thone, City Clerk
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item
2L
Title/Subject: Approve Agreement between SLMPD and City of Excelsior
for Summer Dock and Park Patrol Services
MEETING
TYPE
REGULAR
Meeting Date: April 26, 2021
Prepared By: Greg Lerud, City Administrator
Attachments: Memo from Chief Meehan and 2021 Excelsior Park and Dock
Patrol Proposal
Background: Each year, the City of Excelsior enters into an agreement with the
SLMPD for dock and park patrol services. The Joint Powers Agreement allows a
member community to contract with the SLMPD for additional services provided these
services do not use existing SLMPD staff. All costs are the responsibility of the
contracting city and the other member cities must approve the agreement.
Financial or Budget Considerations: There are no financial considerations.
Options: Approve the agreement between Excelsior and the SLMPD; deny approval;
or request additional information.
Recommendation / Action Requested: Staff recommends Council approve the
agreement between Excelsior and the SLMPD for the 2021 summer dock and park
patrol services.
Next Steps and Timeline: Staff will notify the SLMPD and the City of Excelsior of the
approval.
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
#5A
MEETING TYPE
REGULAR
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item
Title / Subject: 2020 Audit
Meeting Date: April 26, 2021
Prepared by: Joe Rigdon, Finance Director
Reviewed by: Greg Lerud, City Administrator
Policy Consideration: Acceptance of the 2020 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report
Background:
The 2020 financial statements audit was completed by Abdo, Eick & Meyers, LLP, and Justin
Nilson from the firm will be available to present information from the Comprehensive Annual
Financial Report. A link to the financial statements follows.
http://www.ci.shorewood.mn.us/audit2020
Options: The City Council can either accept the 2020 Comprehensive Annual Financial
Report, or give staff other direction.
Recommendation / Action Requested: Staff recommends that the City Council accept the
2020 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report.
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
7A
CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB RD
PARK COMMISSION MEETING SHOREWOOD CITY HALL
TUESDAY, APRIL 13, 2021 7:00 P.M.
MINUTES
1. CONVENE PARK COMMISSION MEETING
Chair Hirner convened the meeting at 7:02 p.m.
A. Roll Call
Present: Chair Hirner, Commissioners Schmid, Gallivan, Tauer, and Heinz;
City Council Liaison Siakel; Parks and Recreation Director Grout;
Planning Director Darling
Absent: None
B. Review Agenda
Schmid moved to approve the agenda as written. Gallivan seconded the motion. Roll Call
Vote: Ayes – all. Motion carried 5-0.
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. Park Commission Meeting Minutes of March 9, 2021
Heinz moved to approve the minutes of the March 9, 2021 meeting as written. Schmid
seconded the motion. Roll Call Vote: Ayes – all. Motion carried 5-0.
3. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR
There were none.
4. NEW BUSINESS
A. Determine Liaisons to City Council Meetings
May – Commissioner Tauer
June – Chair Hirner
July – Commissioner Heinz
August – Commissioner Gallivan
B. Review Results of the Park Survey for Adult/Senior Activities
Chair Hirner noted that from the responses of the Park Survey, there was one topic that was very
important to everyone, the walking trails.
Commissioner Heinz stated that he agreed and noted that the walking trails were important to
people regardless of the demographics.
PARK COMMISSION MINUTES
TUESDAY, APRIL 13, 2021
PAGE 2 OF 6
Commissioner Schmid expressed her disappointment that there were not more people over the
age of 75 that responded to the survey.
Chair Hirner noted that there are three different types of trails in the City and wished that the
survey would have asked a more specific question about what type of trail people would prefer.
He asked Commissioner Heinz if he had seen much use on the trail through the woods at
Freeman Park.
Commissioner Heinz stated that his wife uses them every morning and he uses them during the
mid-day. He stated that they are nature trails, so it is a nice feeling. He stated that in wet weather
the trails do get a bit mushy but are quite well compacted. He noted that during the winter months,
the City plows them so people can utilize the trails in all seasons.
Commissioner Tauer stated that she also lives in this area and they walk them frequently and do
see people using the trails.
Commissioner Schmid stated that she thinks the access to the trails are more difficult for people
who have balance issues.
Commissioner Tauer asked if there was live data that she could play with and suggested that it
be sent in Excel.
Parks and Recreation Director Grout stated that she will send it after the meeting.
Councilmember Siakel asked if there was more detail under the third question about other
facilities.
Parks and Recreation Director Grout stated that the comments for that were things like pickle ball,
tennis, walking trails, and disc golf.
Commissioner Gallivan noted that they had also mentioned outdoor yoga and tai chi classes. He
listed off a few more of the comments and noted that quite a few people mentioned pickle ball.
Parks and Recreation Director Grout noted that currently the only parks marked for pickle ball are
Badger and Manor.
The Commission discussed the almost even split of comments related to having equipment
spread out or in one location.
Chair Hirner asked if there had been any thought to lighting for this kind of equipment or if it will
be just a use at your own risk and the City just provides the equipment.
Planning Director Darling explained that the planning has not gotten as far as thinking about
lighting.
Chair Hirner stated that he would be interested in knowing what other cities have done because
lighting can get expensive.
Commissioner Schmid noted that she did not think many seniors would go out after dark whether
the equipment is lit or not.
PARK COMMISSION MINUTES
TUESDAY, APRIL 13, 2021
PAGE 3 OF 6
Commissioner Gallivan stated that he found it interesting that there were only 4 people that
answered South Shore as the park they had spent the most time in over the last thirty days, but
19 respondents said that was where they would like to see the equipment placed. He stated that
there was also quite a bit of interest, besides the exercise equipment, in bocce or horseshoe
courts. He clarified that there is not currently a CIP item for a project that would add this type of
exercise equipment.
Planning Director Darling stated that there is not one as a separate line item, but the budget set
aside for redevelopment of, for instance, South Shore Park, could be used for it. She believes
that it has been set for 2027.
Commissioner Heinz asked if this survey would be conducted annually.
Chair Hirner explained that this was the first time it had been done and was done with the focus
on finding out what the senior residents may be interested in.
Commissioner Heinz stated that he would like to see the survey conducted in some sort of
schedule time period in order to establish trends.
5. OLD BUSINESS
A. Silverwood Park Playground
Planning Director Darling reviewed the information she had gotten from the vendor to answer the
questions from the Commission.
Commissioner Gallivan asked about the e-mail Planning Director Darling had sent earlier today
and asked if all of those elements were done if it would be in addition to the $212,901.
Planning Director Darling stated that this was correct and would be a total cost of around
$282,900. She noted that there is already $240,000 budgeted and the City has applied for a
$25,000 grant. She noted some ways there may be to hold down the costs a bit, but asked for
input from the Commission on a few things or areas where they would not mind cutting back on
the price just in case the City cannot find the money to pay for it. She gave possible examples
where costs could possibly be brought down. .
The Commission discussed the importance of keeping the shade sails and perhaps consider
eliminating the second platform and perhaps going down from two slides to one on the playground
structures because if kids wanted to race, they could do it on the big slides.
Chair Hirner asked if a way to keep the costs down may be to do a community project for some
of the work like replacing railings.
Planning Director Darling noted that is a good idea, in general, but the railings are one place that
she would want to ensure that contractors installed them because the City needs them to last a
long time and be very safe. She stated that there is a small amount of work to do like replace
the top blocks around the playground area.
Commissioner Schmid asked about insurance considerations with volunteer labor.
PARK COMMISSION MINUTES
TUESDAY, APRIL 13, 2021
PAGE 4 OF 6
Planning Director Darling stated that she did not think there would be a difference and noted that
she believes all of the old playgrounds were put together by a volunteer labor force.
Commissioner Gallivan asked for the pricing difference if the middle platform was removed.
Chair Hirner asked for the pricing for the musical instruments.
Parks and Recreation Director Grout noted that in March, the music components cost $11,867.
Planning Director Darling stated that it was actually reduced to $10,000 because they replaced
concert drums and replaced them with harmonic chimes. She stated that she could remove those
elements but those are the elements that are usable by everyone within the park.
Chair Hirner stated that his concern with taking out the second platform is that they would not
want to reduce the older kids playground set to the point that it is not even something they want
to play on because it is too small.
Commissioner Gallivan asked if the Commission felt people would be more upset if there was
only one slide on the hill or if the middle platform was removed. He stated that his thinking was
that removing one of the big slides on the hill would upset people more so he would support
removal of the platform if the costs needed to be reduced further.
The Commission discussed the difficulty of finding ways to cut the budget.
Council Liaison Siakel noted that Council in the past has leaned towards finding the extra money
for this type of project so it can be done right rather than having to cut corners. She stated that
in her opinion, $15,000 will not make or break the plans. She stated that she cannot speak for
the other Councilmembers but she feels that these costs are a bit out of their control because of
the increase in cost for materials such as steel.
Planning Director Darling thanked Council Liaison Siakel for her input and suggested that the
Commission could move forward with their plans as they are right now.
The Commission discussed the color scheme for the equipment and determined that the posts
should be changed to gray, the sails should be purple, so it is a blue, gray and purple color
scheme. They reviewed the other plans for the park and noted their preference for flipping the
adaptive swing so it is on the west, removal of the existing sidewalk, installation of a sidewalk
connection from the shelter over to the playground and then to the south and the swing set area,
and to raise the upper end of the big slides rather than excavating the lower end.
Schmid moved to recommend approval of the Silverwood Park plans as discussed. Heinz
seconded the motion. Roll Call Vote: Ayes – all. Motion carried. 5-0.
B. Update on Badger Park Grand Opening
Parks and Recreation Director Grout noted that she reached out to a few more food trucks and
Urban Sub is interested in participating. She stated that there will also be Joey Nova’s pizza and
Kona Ice truck. She stated that the Minnetonka Lacrosse board is meeting this week to decide if
they want to participate by doing a demo during the event. The Excelsior Library is also planning
PARK COMMISSION MINUTES
TUESDAY, APRIL 13, 2021
PAGE 5 OF 6
to do a ‘story stroll’. She stated that there will also be demos for tennis, pickleball, football, and
balloon creations. She stated that the Commission should consider what should happen in the
event of inclement weather and asked if they would like the event to take place rain or shine,
schedule a back-up date, and if they would like Urban Sub to participate as a food truck.
Chair Hirner stated that he likes the idea of including the Urban Sub food truck and the story
stroll.
Commissioner Gallivan stated that he agreed with Chair Hirner and noted that he would suggest
a back-up date if there is inclement weather since this is the City’s premier park.
Chair Hirner suggested the back up date be something in July.
Parks and Recreation Director Grout suggested that the back-up date be July 14, 2021 and will
check with the vendors to see if that would work in their schedules.
Tauer moved to recommend approval of the back-up date for the Badger Park Grand Open
in case of inclement weather to July 14, 2021 and that Urban Sub, Joey Nova’s and Kona
Ice be the food trucks available at the event. Gallivan seconded the motion. Roll Call Vote:
Ayes – all. Motion carried 5-0.
C. Determine Movie for Movie in the Park
Parks and Recreation Director Grout stated that after she told the sale rep that the Commission
had chosen E.T., they informed her that it would not be available until September 6, 2021, so the
Commission will need to choose a different movie for the Movie in the Park event.
The Commission discussed movie options such as Toy Story, The Lion King, or The Mighty
Ducks.
Gallivan moved to recommend approval of the animated movie The Lion King for Movie in
the Park. Hirner seconded the motion. Roll Call Vote: Ayes – all. Motion carried 5-0.
6. STAFF AND LIAISON REPORTS / UPDATES
A. City Council
Council Liaison Siakel gave an overview of the April 12, 2021 Council meeting as reflected in the
minutes.
B. Staff
a. Galpin Lake/South of Highway 7 – Safe Routes to School Planning Grant
for Trail
Planning Director Darling stated that the City got a grant through Safe Routes to School to begin
planning for the Galpin Lake trail which will cross Highway 7 at Oak Street.
Commissioner Gallivan thanked Planning Director Darling, staff and Mayor Labadie who have
been persistent in looking to get this completed.
PARK COMMISSION MINUTES
TUESDAY, APRIL 13, 2021
PAGE 6 OF 6
Chair Hirner noted that he attended the baseball clean up event in Freeman Park this past
weekend and the fence posts are about a foot out of the ground on Field #2 which is becoming a
hazard. He asked if staff could go take a look and see what can be done to ensure the concrete
bases do not cause a problem or an injury.
7. ADJOURN
Gallivan moved to adjourn the Park Commission Meeting of April 13, 2021 at 8:30 p.m.
Schmid seconded the motion. Roll Call Vote: Ayes – all. Motion carried 5-0.
#6B
MEETING TYPE
Regular Meeting
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item
Title / Subject: Silverwood Park Playground Rehab
Location: Silverwood Park at 5755 Covington Road
Meeting Date: April 21, 2021
Prepared by: Marie Darling, Planning Director
Attachments: Park Commission memorandum from April 13, 2021
Plan and Quotes for Equipment
Engineering Estimates for site alteration
Resolution
Background: See the attached Park Commission memorandum for more background on this
project. The Park Commission has been working on the Silverwood Park playground
rehabilitation project for a few months and is at the point where we are ready to present the
scope for the project. The project includes:
replacing the hillside slides
replacing the playground within the existing playground boundary
replacing the swingset within the existing boundary
removing the sidewalk between the slides and the play structures
adding sidewalk between the picnic shelter, the swings, and the play structures
replacing the top layer of masonry blocks around the play structures/swings
replacing the railings and any other decaying timbers in the steps up to the hillside slides
retaining wall improvements near the slides to correct the existing erosion
At their last meeting, the Park Commission unanimously recommended approval of the project
as shown on the attached graphics, subject to the following:
1. Substitute purple shades for yellow and use grey for the supports instead of white as shown.
2. Use the single pole swingset instead of the double arch swingset so there is room for five
swings, with the accessible swings closest to the parking lot.
3. Remove the wearmats including in the invoices. With the engineering wood fiber (“chips”)
surface, the wearmats are unnecessary.
The attached quotes for the hillside slides include new entry platforms and guard-railings to
accommodate higher slide entry points than the current entries. Staff are exploring a second
option for the design without the need for platforms and additional guard rails, but that may
require additional site preparation to lower the grade at the base. Staff and the Park
Commission are in agreement that disturbance at the bottom of the slide should be minimized to
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.
protect the slopes from further erosion.
However, the slide landing area is slightly
higher than the playground and staff will be
exploring how much the grade would need to
be dropped. If it’s a minimal amount and
wouldn’t be noticeable, we would proceed
with that option. The City Engineer will have
his team out to verify the elevations so that
the slope of the slide may be finalized and the
last details verified.
Financial or Budget Considerations:
The money for this project would be from Fund 402. The 2021 CIP included $240,000 for this
project. The estimates for the above scope of the project are $282,000. At the last meeting, the
City Council authorized a grant application for $25,000 from the Hennepin County Youth Sports
Association. If the City receives this grant, the project would be about $18,000 over the
anticipated budget.
Options:
The options to proceed with this project are:
1. Increase the budget to purchase all the materials and move forward.
2. Reduce the scope of the project, by reducing the amount of playground equipment, the
amount of new sidewalks, etc. Staff discussed reducing the equipment with the Park
Commission and there were a few small adjustments the Commission discussed, but they
recommended the design of the playground as is.
3. Phase the project to include the playground and swing replacement now and come back
next year to complete the slides and hillside improvements as phase 2. Staff doesn’t see
this as a money saving option, as the price of materials and labor continues to climb.
Recommendation / Action Requested:
Staff and the Park Commission recommend the City Council approve the quote and authorize
the purchase of this equipment. The quotes may be modified to reduce the scope as needed.
Approval requires a simple majority.
5A
CITY OF
SHOREWOOD
5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, Minnesota 55331 952-960-7900
www.ci.shorewood.mn.us cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us
To: Park Commission
From: Marie Darling, Planning Director
Meeting Date: April 12, 2021
Re: Silverwood Park Playground Redux
At the last meeting, the Park Commission asked staff to work with the playground vendor to:
Verify that the single-pole swing has the same lifespan as the double and flip the swings so
that the handicap adaptive swing is closest to the parking lot. The vendor indicated that the
single-pole swing has been on the market for 20 years and is performing well and would be
the only way to increase the number of swings from four to five. The swings can be flipped
around without cost impact. Double swing is $6701 instead of the price marked below.
Get more accurate estimates for the cost of the slides. The additional information is
attached, included in the table below and is shown on the revised site plans.
Acquire quotes for the erosion control/retaining walls and erosion control and stairs rails
and other site improvements like removing the sidewalk between the playground and the
slides, a sidewalk to the swing and removal of the pea gravel. This information will be
provided before the meeting.
Substitute another instrument for the concert trio and face the instruments toward the
sidewalk. The vendor substituted three low-toned harmonic chimes instead of the concert
trio drums and the price is slightly lower as shown in the table below. The instruments
now face the sidewalk.
Substitute spring green for yellow. The vendor changed all the hard metal pieces to green
but not the shades. We can specify colors in writing. Below are photos of the recent
playgrounds at Freeman and Badger so you can compare the colors to the proposed.
Item Previous New
Structure Ages 2-5 $31,105 $31,105
Structure ages 5-12 (with owner’s kit) $63,566 $63,566
Music $11,867 $10,765
Swings $4,785 $4,785
Hillside Slides $22,732 $28,960
EWF Surface plus geotextile roll $7,417 $7,482
Opt. PIP Rubber Surf. $12,450 (slides only)
Opt. PIP Rubber Surf. $91,365 (swings/structure)
Added Duck Rider (could substitute another piece) $967 $967
Removal of old equipment/install $49,277 $49,261
Wear Mats 0 0
Freight $9,296 $9,286
Surcharge for material increases in wood and steel $6,724
since last quote
Total $201,012 $212,901
(The above table does not include wear mats or the sidewalk)
Here’s the link to the color wizard:
https://www.gametime.com/color-wizard
Attachments:
Revised 3-D Renderings
Revised Site Plans
Quotes
Color Themes
Previous 3-D Rendering
Silverwood Park
Shorewood, Minnesota
info@mnwiplay.com
763-546-5050
P.O. Box 27328, Golden Valley, MN 55427FaxE-Mail
763-546-7787 1-800-622-5425
THIS PLAN REQUIRES A FINISHED GRADE RESOLUTION
Please Initial & Sign the Final Top View:
Sold & Distributed By:
Mfg. By:
RESOLUTION NO. 21-045
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
STATE OF MINNESOTA
A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING A QUOTE FOR PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT AND
PROCEEDING WITH OTHER SITE IMPROVEMENTS FOR SILVERWOOD PARK
WHEREAS, the City of Shorewood (“City”) authorizes the replacement and purchase of
playground equipment for Silverwood Park playground; and,
WHEREAS, the installation of the playground equipment would require additional
improvements to accommodate the new equipment; and,
WHEREAS, the cost to the City would be about $212,901 for demolition of the existing
playground, and purchasing and installing the new playground equipment from
Minnesota Wisconsin; and
WHEREAS, the cost of other related improvements would be about $70,000.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Shorewood
hereby accepts the quotes from Minnesota-Wisconsin Playground to replace the
existing playground; proceed with acquiring bids for other site improvements at
Silverwood Park; and authorizes staff to execute the bid with Minnesota Wisconsin
Playground.
th
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 26 day of
April, 2021.
___________________________
Jennifer Labadie, Mayor
ATTEST:
________________________________
Sandie Thone, City Clerk
CITY OF SHOREWOOD COUNCIL CHAMBERS
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
TUESDAY, APRIL 6, 2021 7:00 P.M.
MINUTES
CALL TO ORDER
Chair Maddy called the meeting to order at 7:04 P.M.
ROLL CALL
Present: Chair Maddy; Commissioners Eggenberger, Gault, Huskins, and Riedel (arrived at
7:18 p.m.); Planning Director Darling; Planning Technician Notermann and,
Council Liaison Callies
Absent: None
1. INTRODUCTION OF NEW PLANNING COMMISSIONER – KEN HUSKINS
2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Eggenberger moved, Gault seconded, approving the agenda for April 6, 2021, as
presented. Roll Call Vote: Ayes – all. Motion passed 4/0.
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
March 2, 2021
Eggenberger moved, Huskins seconded, approving the Planning Commission Meeting
Minutes of March 2, 2021, as presented. Roll Call Vote: Ayes – Eggenberger, Maddy;
Abstain – Gault and Huskins. Motion passed 2/0/2.
4. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR
5. PUBLIC HEARINGS
Chair Maddy explained the Planning Commission is comprised of residents of the City of
Shorewood who are serving as volunteers on the Commission. The Commissioners are
appointed by the City Council. The Commission’s role is to help the City Council in
determining zoning and planning issues. One of the Commission’s responsibilities is to
hold public hearings and to help develop the factual record for an application and to make
a non-binding recommendation to the City Council. The recommendation is advisory only.
A. PUBLIC HEARING – DETACHMENT AND ANNEXATION
Applicant: Cities of Shorewood and Excelsior
Location: 450 West Lake Street
Planning Director Darling stated that this application is a joint request from the City of Shorewood
and the City of Excelsior to detach .1 acre from the City and allow it to be annexed into the City
of Excelsior. The parcel is the west half of 450 West Lake Street and explained that the home
straddles the boundary line between the two cities. She gave an overview of the surrounding
properties and explained that this boundary adjustment is to correct the issue of the building being
built over the property/boundary line. She stated that this adjustment would allow the property to
CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
APRIL 6, 2021
Page 2 of 9
become one property and only be within one of the cities. Because the property straddles the
two cities, the property owner is responsible for knowing the codes for both cities and noted that
this is a very uncommon situation. She gave an overview of the options for resolving this issue
and noted that staff is recommending that the smaller parcel be annexed into Excelsior.
Commissioner Eggenberger asked if there would be any negative impact to the City if this parcel
is annexed into Excelsior, besides losing the small amount of tax dollars the City receives.
Planning Director Darling stated that she does not know of any negative impacts.
Commissioner Huskins noted that this is a joint application and asked if the Excelsior Planning
Commission had made any recommendation.
Planning Director Darling stated that she has spoken with her counterpart at the City of Excelsior
but they have not conducted any studies other than both cities are aware of the problems. She
stated that they will be bring the same type of request to their Planning Commission and Council
at upcoming meetings.
Commissioner Huskins confirmed with Planning Director Darling that he was understanding
correctly that Shorewood was taking the first look at this issue and then Excelsior would consider
it.
Chair Maddy opened the Public Hearing at 7:18 P.M. noting the procedures used in a Public
Hearing.
Petra Cripe, 450 West Lake Street, stated that she has lived here for twenty years and this
property has been subdivided between two cities since before 1940 and noted that there has not
been an issue with it during that entire time. She stated that they were a little concerned when
they received notice of tonight’s meeting and asked who actually initiated this appeal. She
explained that she would like to know their reason and noted that she thinks she deserved to
know that information since she is the resident on the property being discussed. She stated that
they did not ask for this action and are concerned about their best interests not being looked after.
She stated that both of their neighbors who have caused them extreme stress over the last year
appear to be present at the meeting. She stated that she is worried about why the City wants to
push this through. She shared that there was a water break on their lake side some years ago
because all of the lines were tied together and it turned out to be the neighbors piece of the T that
had broken. In order to get a small excavator into the backyard, part of their back deck needed to
be removed. She asked Excelsior if they could have an extra three feet in order to build a porch
in that location and they said no because it was against their zoning and ordinances. They then
presented the request to Shorewood and because that portion of the property was within the City
boundary, they said they could build a porch. She stated that she has concerns that if they were
to be annexed into Excelsior and something were to damage her porch, that they may not allow
her to repair it. She stated that if this goes forward, she wants to be assured that they would be
grandfathered in on the porch and numerous other things. She stated that another example is
that her sons want to raise chickens which is allowed in Shorewood with a permit, but is not in
Excelsior. She stated that she wants to make sure they, as the homeowner, are protected
because in the past year, they have not been protected and have seen much hardship because
of what the cities have done along with what their neighbors have done to them. She stated that
they are just a family, raising their kids, minding their own business, and they need to be protected.
She stated that they do not want to be railroaded by the cities like they have been over the last
year.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
APRIL 6, 2021
Page 3 of 9
Chair Maddy asked Planning Director Darling what led to this application.
Planning Director Darling explained that this was a staff-initiated recommendation and did not
come from any member of the public. She stated that it came from the difficulty of trying to apply
two codes to the same property.
Chair Maddy stated that he agrees with what the City is trying to do to simplify things so there is
only one set of rules. He asked Ms. Cripe for her opinion on which city she would like to reside
in.
Ms. Cripe stated that she likes it the way it is and reiterated that it has never been a problem for
them other than when they first moved in when they were escrowing their taxes to the bank. She
stated that they like being part of both cities and like them both the same. She stated that they
have no plans to tear down their house and rebuild. She stated that she wonders if their neighbors
have been complaining to Planning Director Darling about ordinance violations. She noted that
in the 20 years they have lived here, nobody has ever complained about them and noted that they
live on a dead-end street. She explained that they used to park their boat on their driveway, but
suddenly their neighbors had issues with what she considers to be ridiculous things like ensuring
the boat is 10 feet from the street and that there is only one kayak on the dock. She stated that
she is convinced that this is why this action has been initiated. She asked which staff member
had initiated this action. She stated that she thinks she should be privy to that information since
this is her property.
Commissioner Riedel stated that he is not sure that point is relevant because complaints are
treated anonymously and is the policy of the City not to reveal this information.
Ms. Cripe stated that she is not looking for the person who initiated the complaints, because she
already knows who they are, but would like to know who initiated the annexation appeal.
Planning Director Darling reiterated that this issue came to the Planning Commission because of
the complexity of applying two different cities codes to the same property.
Chair Maddy stated that he agrees with that and remembers that there was a storage issue on
this property which was an awkward conversation because depending on which side of the
property they were considering, there were two sets of rules. He reiterated that it makes sense
from a distance, but would like to make sure the homeowner is part of the conversation.
Gabriel Jabbour, stated that he owns the property known as ‘the dredging company” which was
the former Shorewood Yacht Club. He stated that he has not registered one single complaint with
the City but admitted that it has been extremely frustrating for everyone to figure out what set of
rules they should live by. He stated that he thinks this is a great housekeeping issue and will just
clean things up. He stated that he is assuming the Cripes, by law, would be considered residents
of Excelsior since that is where they vote. He stated that it has been a difficult summer for
everyone because nobody seemed to be happy about anything. He stated that he thinks this
action is the right thing to do and is a bit past due. He reiterated that he did not initiate or file any
complaint, but did express frustration in response to having to remove the gate and the fence.
Kurt Wehrmann, 444 West Lake Street, Excelsior, explained that he lives next door to Ms. Cripe.
He stated that he thinks it is a good idea to eliminate code violations and annex the property to
one city or the other. He stated that he agrees that this would reduce confusion between the two
cities and also save time for the cities in working on code enforcement. He stated that they are
not out to get anybody but just want to do their best to keep their property looking good and keep
CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
APRIL 6, 2021
Page 4 of 9
their property values up by eliminating eye sores on the south side of the street on City property.
He stated that the boat in the driveway was an issue because they have small school bus that
needs to turn around on this dead-end road. He stated that he does not wish ill will on anyone
and hopes that the property is annexed one way or the other.
Ms. Cripe asked why both of her neighbors just spoke in support of annexing her property when
they claim that they have no ill will towards her or any type of agenda. She stated that it seems
quite ironic that these two people are the only other people speaking at tonight’s public hearing,
besides herself. She explained that the issue with the bus and the boat was all caused by Mr.
Jabbour moving the fence up by 20-25 feet which now makes it difficult for the short bus, FedEx,
UPS, or any delivery vehicle to find a way to back up to do the turn around which means they
have been turning around in Mr. Wehrmann’s driveway which he has an issue with. She stated
that she does not mind trucks turning around in her driveway. She stated that both Mr. Jabbour
and Mr. Wehrmann showed animosity towards her family last summer and have an interest in this
meeting.
There being no additional public input, Chair Maddy closed the public hearing at 7:36 p.m.
Chair Maddy reminded everyone that the Planning Commission is just a recommending body,
and noted that his understanding is that even if the City Council in Shorewood voted to approve
this, nothing would happen without the City Council in Excelsior doing the same thing.
Planning Director Darling stated that this was correct.
Commissioner Gault stated that when he saw this on the agenda, he assumed the property owner
was a participant in the request and was supportive of this action. He stated that it is a major
concern for him because Ms. Cripe is opposed to this action. He stated that he does not feel the
City should be doing anything with the property without the property owner’s approval.
Commissioner Riedel stated that the building code does not permit a structure to straddle two
properties which means this is a building code violation. He stated that he understands that the
Commission is discussing a zoning issue and in principle for that type of issue an applicant can,
in principle, apply for a variance. He stated that he is struggling to find what part of City law
applies to a building code violation that would be permitted to stand and asked if this was just a
situation where the Council just has complete discretion.
Planning Director Darling stated that the Council has complete discretion within their boundary
lines, but the building code itself is a State rule. She explained that the building code does not
permit structures or buildings to cross property lines. One way to correct the situation is to move
the jurisdictional boundary which is sometimes not possible and explained some of the other ways
to deal with the issue.
Commissioner Gault asked if this meant that the portion on the City side would need to comply
with our ordinances and setbacks and vice versa for the Excelsior side.
Planning Director Darling stated that this would be correct but there can be variances granted.
She noted that there was a variance granted by Shorewood at one point to allow for an expansion
of the garage.
Chair Maddy noted that Ms. Cripe stated that the garage variance was granted in 1986.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
APRIL 6, 2021
Page 5 of 9
Commissioner Gault asked what would happen if the garage was destroyed and the property
owner wanted to rebuild it. He asked if it would be grandfathered in.
Planning Director Darling stated that they would have six months to pull a permit and rebuild.
Chair Maddy asked if she was referring to a Shorewood permit or an Excelsior permit.
Planning Director Darling stated that it would have to be both.
Commissioner Eggenberger stated that the answer Planning Director Darling just gave shows
how absurd this situation is and this is something that should have been resolved many years
ago. He stated that it makes no sense to have this resident straddle two jurisdictions. He stated
that the only advantage he can see for the homeowner is the ability to play two cities off of each
other. He stated that it makes the most sense to him that this property would go to Excelsior
because that is where the utilities and the residence is located. He stated that, to him, this is a
slam dunk, regardless of who brought the issue forward. He reiterated that it makes sense for
this property to be under one jurisdiction.
Eggenberger moved, Riedel seconded, recommending approval of the Comprehensive
Plan Amendment to detach a parcel from the City of Shorewood and allow annexation of
the parcel into the City of Excelsior for property located at 450 West Lake Street PID # 34-
117-23-21-0011. Roll Call Vote: Ayes – Eggenberger, Riedel, Huskins, and Maddy. Nay –
Gault. Motion passed 4/1.
Commissioner Gault explained that he had voted against this motion because the City would be
taking this action over the objection of the property owner.
Planning Director Darling stated that this should go to the City Council on April 26, 2021. She
explained that the Excelsior Planning Commission will also be meeting on April 26, 2021 and their
recommendation will be sent to their City Council at their first meeting in May.
6. NEW BUSINESS
A. Sign Ordinance Update – Discussion on Political Signs
Planning Director Darling explained that this item is also a staff-initiated item regarding text
amendments for political signage. She stated that one of the priorities that the Council set for
themselves and the Planning Commission this year was to review and consider amendments of
the political sign regulations and noted that of concern specifically were the number and proximity
of campaign signs to the streets. She stated that it is a complicated issue and there are a number
of State statutes that give the City some requirements for what is allowed. She read aloud the
State statute and the City’s sign regulation language. She stated that the language is similar but
has two separate standards that apply to all elections which causes confusion about when the
City can apply their standards and when they cannot. Staff is proposing that the code be changed
to be more clear when the non-commercial signs can be put up before all elections. She reviewed
the recommendations from staff that they would like the Planning Commission to consider.
Commissioner Eggenberger asked about regulation of non-commercial signage and whether the
City can regulate where they are placed.
Planning Director Darling stated that the City can impose location requirements.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
APRIL 6, 2021
Page 6 of 9
Councilmember Callies stated that she thinks it is a good idea to have the language be consistent
with the State law but thinks that 15 feet from the edge of the pavement is not practical for most
areas of the City and would basically prohibit any campaign signs being visible.
Commissioner Huskins stated that he would agree that a 15-foot setback seems a bit excessive,
but his concern was that it may have the unintended consequence of having people place larger
signs in order for them to be visible. He stated that he would prefer smaller signs in the
neighborhoods. He asked if a campaign would be allowed to have signage for an event if they
got a permit to hold a rally on public lands.
Planning Director Darling stated that she would have to review that information and noted that
there are very few signs that organizations can put up during events.
Commissioner Huskins stated that the proposed language states that the City would have the
right to remove the signs that are in violation.
Planning Director Darling clarified that this is would either be in the right-of-way or on public land.
She stated that if there were violations on private property, the City would notify the property
owner.
Commissioner Gault commented that he was not sure if residents understood the regulations
surrounding nameplate signs and substitution of non-commercial signs.
Planning Director Darling stated that nameplate signs seem to be going away and very few
homeowners even have them anymore.
Commissioner Riedel asked if Commissioner Gault was asking if someone, under this ordinance,
would be permitted to put up a non-conforming sign simply because it contains non-commercial
speech. He stated that he does not think that is the case and people cannot put up a fully non-
conforming sign.
Commissioner Gault stated that he agreed, but feels this language says they can substitute their
nameplate sign with a non-commercial speech sign but cannot have both.
st
Commissioner Riedel stated that he would agree and feels that this is a 1 Amendment issue that
if you are allowed to write something, then you are allowed to write anything.
Chair Maddy stated he has the same concern because you can have a sign that says, “Vote for
Joey”, but cannot have a sign that says, “Eat at Joey Nova’s”. He stated that he would like to stay
as far away from this as possible.
Commissioner Riedel stated that he would not want to go further than the City has to with this
st
issue and would like to do the minimum to avoid 1 Amendment issues.
Chair Maddy stated that State law dictates what the City has to do and asked why the City would
not just match their language and not touch any restrictions. He stated that he did not think the
City has had a problem with excessive signage.
Planning Director Darling stated that the City can match the State law exactly, except State law
does not apply to things like school board elections or municipal elections that would happen in
non-State general election year. She stated that she thinks that there should be rules for those
instances as well.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
APRIL 6, 2021
Page 7 of 9
Chair Maddy suggested having the school board and other elections match the framework of the
State election language and just leave it at that.
Planning Director Darling stated that would be fine.
Commissioner Gault suggested that it just refer to ‘public elections’.
Planning Director Darling clarified that there have been complaints about the number of signs and
how close they were which is why the Planning Commission was directed to take a look at this
issue.
Commissioner Gault stated that he would go to the free speech issue that if he can say one thing,
he should be able to say it 100 times or be able to say 100 different things.
Commissioner Huskins stated that the State language does not appear to say anything about
setbacks. He stated that if the City simply takes the State’s language, he does not think that
would be sufficient.
Chair Maddy asked if the setback issue was because of traffic and visibility concerns.
Planning Director Darling stated that there could be visibility issues which is why she thinks there
has been a setback included. She stated that she thinks it was that there were so many, so close
to the street, that there was a concern that it would be a distraction.
Commissioner Riedel stated that he thinks a setback is helpful and becomes an issue when there
are complaints if there is a specific hard number to point to, then it becomes less of a subjective
issue. Just stating that signage is not allowed to interfere with visibility opens it up for discussion
and interpretation. He stated that he thinks a 15-foot setback is excessive and would suggest
something like 5-10 feet.
Chair Maddy stated that he does not want to dictate how many feet back a sign can be. He stated
that it is not blocking the view of traffic, he would prefer the City just stay out of it.
Commissioner Gault stated that it has to be on private property so whatever number that would
be forces there to be a setback. He stated that then this raises the question of whether the City
allows it at the property line.
Planning Director Darling asked what would be done when the property line is in the middle of the
street.
Commissioner Gault stated that some common sense needs to be used and people cannot put
any sign where it will obstruct traffic either for pedestrians or vehicles. He stated that the speech
he wants to promote on his private property is whatever he wants it to be and the City has no
constitutional ability to stop that unless he would advocate for violence or something. He stated
that he does not have a concern with the number of signs, but does have a concern with someone
putting up a 10 x 12 sign at an intersection where it will obstruct visibility.
Commissioner Eggenberger stated that the trouble with that, without using a setback, is people
just saying, ‘oh, well that doesn’t obstruct traffic’ and it is just an opposing discussion without a
tangible solution. He stated that if there is a setback then it is clear when things need to be moved
and when they do not.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
APRIL 6, 2021
Page 8 of 9
Commissioner Riedel stated that the more he thinks about this, the more he agrees with Chair
Maddy. A setback onto private property could actually be challenged. He stated that a public
right-of-way is one thing, but an individuals property is their property and a setback in this situation
would be somewhat arbitrary.
Commissioner Eggenberger stated that all of the City codes could be considered somewhat
arbitrary and listed a few examples.
Chair Maddy stated that to paraphrase, it appears that what the Commission wants to do is not
push any values and let people speak. He stated that the setback issue is interesting because
there are good arguments on both sides.
Commissioner Huskins stated that he would agree with Commissioner Gault and thinks that a
setback will help clarify and reduce some of the subjectivity that would otherwise occur. He stated
that he believes a ten-foot setback is reasonable.
Commissioner Eggenberger stated that he would agree with Commissioner Huskins.
Planning Director Darling asked if they meant ten feet from the edge of the road or ten feet from
the front property line.
There was a consensus that the measurement would be from the edge of the road. There
was consensus to follow the State guidelines for all public elections for signs to be posted
46 days before the election.
Commissioner Huskins stated that he prefers the terminology ‘non-commercial speech’ versus
‘campaign signs’.
Commissioner Riedel asked what type of sign is permitted year round with or without a permit.
Planning Director Darling stated that most small signs, such as nameplates and the small signs
that stick in the ground do not require a permit. Nameplate signs are allowed in any residential
district, so there can also be a non-commercial speech sign of the same size, subject to the same
setback requirements at any time in the year. She clarified that people get to have one sign and
can choose to use it for their name or some other non-commercial speech message. She thanked
the Commission for their input and stated that she will bring this back to the Commission at a
future date.
7. OTHER BUSINESS:
Planning Director Darling asked for volunteers to act as the Commission Liaison in the upcoming
months.
April – Chair Maddy
May – Commissioner Gault
June – Commissioner Eggenberger
July – Commissioner Huskins
August – Commissioner Riedel
8. REPORTS
CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
APRIL 6, 2021
Page 9 of 9
• Council Meeting Report
Council Liaison Callies reported on matters considered and actions taken during the most recent
Council meeting (as detailed in the minutes).
• Draft Next Meeting Agenda
Planning Director Darling stated there will be a variance for a screened porch, site plan review for
a rehab of the former Park Nicollet clinic into a school, and a CUP, variance, and site plan review
for the Wash and Roll at the next Planning Commission meeting.
9. ADJOURNMENT
Riedel moved, Gault seconded, adjourning the Planning Commission Meeting of April 6,
2021, at 8:30 P.M. Motion passed 5/0.
#7B
MEETING TYPE
Regular Meeting
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item
Title / Subject: Comprehensive Plan Amendment for a concurrent
detachment/annexation of a parcel from the City of Shorewood to the City
of Excelsior
Location: 34 117 23 21 0011 (West side of 450 West Lake Street)
Applicant: Cities of Shorewood and Excelsior
Meeting Date: April 26, 2021
Prepared by: Marie Darling, Planning Director
Review Deadline: None
Attachments: Planning Memorandum from the April 6, 2021 Meeting
Resolution
Background: See attached planning memorandum for detailed background on this request.
At the April 6, 2021 meeting, the Planning Commission voted four in favor, one opposed to
recommend approval of the detachment/annexation. Commissioner Gault voted against the
motion as he did not support the change without the property owners’ support.
The property owner was present at the meeting and spoke in opposition to the amendment as
she supports leaving the boundary where it is. She brought up a concern that is summarized
below. Two residents requested to speak and spoke in favor of the detachment/annexation.
Nonconformities
Ms. Cripes stated that she does not support the boundary adjustment because sometimes
one city permits things that the other does not. Specifically, she mentioned the following: 1)
they had added a porch to the back of their home on the Shorewood side where Excelsior had
indicated she couldn’t have one, and 2) Shorewood allows chickens but Excelsior doesn’t.
She wanted assurances that they would be permitted once the adjustment occurred.
Excelsior staff were consulted, and they indicated that because the porch addition to the home
was an approved addition, it would be able to continue as a legally nonconforming structure
within the City of Excelsior.
Because Ms. Cripes does not currently have chickens, any future request to have them would
be subject to the regulations of the City of Excelsior.
Financial or Budget Considerations: The impact to the budget is minimal as the total tax
collected on the parcel is less than $700, of which the City receives approximately one third.
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.
S:\\Planning\\Planning Files\\Applications\\2021 Cases\\Detach and Attach 450 W Lake St\\CAF Memo.docx
Recommendation / Action Requested: Staff and the Planning Commission recommend
approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment for detachment of a .1 acre parcel from
Shorewood to allow annexation of the parcel into the City of Excelsior.
Proposed motion: Move to adopt the attached resolution approving a comprehensive plan
amendment to allow a concurrent detachment/annexation of parcel 34 117 23 21 0011, a .1
acre parcel, based on the findings in the attached resolution.
Any action on this request would require a simple majority.
Next Steps and Timelines: If the item is approved, the Cities will send the request to the
Metropolitan Council and the state Office of Administrative Hearings.
City of Excelsior
Resolution No. _____
City of Shorewood
Resolution No. 21 - 046
A JOINT RESOLUTION REQUESTING CONCURRENT DETACHMENT FROM
SHOREWOOD AND ANNEXATION INTO EXCELSIOR OF CERTAIN LANDS
PURSUANT TO MINNESOTA STATUTES SECTION 414.061
WHEREAS, the property located at 450 West Lake Street consists of two parcels, PID 34-
117-23-21-0031 (Shorewood) and PID 34-117-23-21-0012 (Excelsior); and
WHEREAS, certain real property, approximately .1 acres in size, legally described on
Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein and depicted on the survey thereof attached
hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit B (the “Annexation Property”) is located in the City of
Shorewood; and
WHEREAS, the Annexation Property is located along the westerly border of Excelsior
and is located adjacent to the City of Shorewood; and
WHEREAS, the adjacent parcels in Shorewood and Excelsior are under common
ownership by the same husband and wife, with the city boundary between Shorewood and
Excelsior dividing the two parcels; and
WHEREAS, the City of Shorewood, the City of Excelsior want the entire Annexation
Parcel to be located in the corporate limits of the City of Excelsior; and
WHEREAS, the Cities of Excelsior and Shorewood want to modify their mutual municipal
boundary to permit the Annexation Parcel to be located entirely within Excelsior; and
WHEREAS, to modify the boundary, the City of Shorewood desires to detach and the City
of Excelsior desires to annex the Annexation Parcel pursuant to Minnesota Statutes §414.061.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
1. The Cities of Excelsior and Shorewood jointly request that the Minnesota Office of
Administrative Hearings – Municipal Boundary Adjustment Unit concurrently detach the
Annexation Property from the City of Shorewood and annex the same to the City of
Excelsior at the earliest possible date.
2. The City Attorney for the City of Shorewood is authorized to submit this resolution along
with all appropriate application materials to the Minnesota Office of Administrative
Hearings – Municipal Boundary Adjustment Unit for the purposes set forth herein.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Excelsior on the ___ day of ____________, 2021.
Todd Carlson, Mayor
ATTEST:
Lynette Peterson, City Clerk Kristi Luger, City Manager
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Shorewood on the ___ day of ____________, 2021.
Jennifer Labadie, Mayor
ATTEST:
Sandie Thone, City Clerk Greg Lerud, City Administrator
EXHIBIT A
That part of Lot 24, “Auditor’s Subdivision No. 313, Hennepin County, Minnesota” lying
easterly and northeasterly of a straight line running from a point in the south line of said
Lot 24 distant 100 feet southwesterly at right angles from the northeasterly line of Lot 1,
said subdivision to a point on the northwesterly line of said Lot 24 distance 75 feet
southwesterly at right angles from the northeasterly line of said Lot 1, said subdivision,
Hennepin County, Minnesota.
EXHIBIT B
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item
8A
Title/Subject: Approve Feasibility Study and Authorize Final Plans
And Specifications for Strawberry Lane
MEETING
Reconstruction and Trail, City Project 19-05 TYPE
Regular
Meeting Date: Monday, April 26, 2021
Meeting
Prepared by: Andrew Budde, City Engineer
Reviewed by: Larry Brown, Director of Public Works
Attachments: Feasibility Study, Proposal, and Resolution
th
Background: On June 8, 2020 City Council authorized the preparation of the
Feasibility Study for Strawberry Lane Reconstruction and Trail Project. The project
includes the full reconstruction of Strawberry Lane, addition of a bituminous trail on the
east side, regional storm sewer/drainage improvements, and new watermain. The
project will also include the reconstruction of Peach Circle and reclamation of
Strawberry Court, both of which would include the installation of watermain under the
streets. All the proposed drainage is planned to be routed to the Smithtown Pond
project, which will be constructed in the fall of 2021 thru April 2022. Staff will provide a
presentation of the feasibility study at the Council Meeting and the full report is
attached.
Staff is also seeking authorization to prepare the final plans & specifications. This will
allow staff to begin the right of way and easement acquisition process. The existing
right of way width along Strawberry Lane ranges from 35’ to 60’ wide. Due to the
narrow corridor, it is anticipated that right of way and/or permanent easement
acquisition would be required on at least eight parcels. Several other parcels may have
temporary impacts and require right of entry agreements and temporary construction
easements. These temporary impacts will be determined early in the design phase and
as staff further engages with residents along the corridor. Staff will negotiate with the
residents to acquire the necessary permanent easements, however if a reasonable
agreement cannot be made, the city may need to pursue eminent domain for this
project.
The preparation of final plans and specifications will also include acquiring the
necessary permits for the project, coordination with private utilities, updated cost
estimates, and meetings and coordination with residents along the corridor.
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
Financial Considerations: This project has been budgeted for in the Capital
Improvement Plan (CIP) in years 2021 and 2022 and includes several items from the
CIP:
2021 Strawberry Lane Right of Way Acquisition $150,000
2022 Strawberry Lane Drainage (North) $1,071,509
2022 Strawberry Lane Drainage (South) $381,924
2022 Strawberry Lane Reconstruction, Trail, & Watermain $3,029,429
2022 Strawberry Court Reclamation & Watermain $514,000
2022 Peach Circle Reconstruction & Watermain $469,000
Subtotal Estimated Project Costs (Budget Amount) $5,466,012
The above budgets include concept construction estimates and project development
costs such as survey, engineering, legal, and administration. The total project cost as
shown in the feasibility study are estimated to be $4,820,000.
Recommendation/Action Requested: Staff recommends the city council Approve the
Feasibility Study and Authorize Preparation of Final Plans and Specifications for
Strawberry Lane Reconstruction and Trail project.
April 21, 2021
City of Shorewood
Attn: Larry Brown
5755 Country Club Road
Shorewood, MN 55331
RE: Strawberry Lane Reconstruction and Trail Final Plans & Specifications
Dear Mr. Brown:
As requested, we have prepared a scope of services fee estimate for preparation of Final Plans &
Specifications for the Strawberry Lane Reconstruction and Trail project (City Project No. 19-05). The
nd
project includes the reconstruction of Strawberry Lane from West 62 Street to Smithtown Road. This
segment will also include the addition of a walking trail parallel to the roadway, installation of 12
watermain, trunk storm sewer and drainage improvements within and adjacent to the corridor to ensure
the proposed improvements can facilitate and improve drainage now and into the future. The project will
also include two additional street segments: Peach Circle is proposed to be a full reconstruction to correct
poor pavement, drainage issues, and facilitate the installation of watermain; Strawberry Court is proposed
to be reclaimed and watermain added.
The City has completed the Feasibility Study for the above listed improvements which has helped define
the scope and construction impacts associated with the project. The existing right of way width along
corridor, it is anticipated that right of
way and/or permanent easement acquisition would be required on at least eight parcels. Several other
parcels may have temporary impacts and require right of entry agreements and temporary construction
easements. These impacts will be determined early in the design phase and as we individually engage
residents along the corridor.
The City has included the Strawberry Lane Reconstruction and Trail project in their CIP under several
line items and are summarized below:
2021 Strawberry Lane Right of Way Acquisition $150,000
2022 Strawberry Lane Drainage (North) $1,071,509
2022 Strawberry Lane Drainage (South) $381,924
2022 Strawberry Lane Reconstruction, Trail, & Watermain $3,029,429
2022 Strawberry Court Reclamation & Watermain $514,000
2022 Peach Circle Reconstruction & Watermain $469,000
Subtotal Estimated Project Costs (Budget Amount) $5,466,012
This budget amount includes concept construction estimates and 25% in soft costs for engineering,
administration, and legal.
Proposed Scope of Engineering Services
To assist the City with this improvement project, Bolton & Menk proposes the following scope of
services:
H:\\SHWD\\C16120450\\1_Corres\\A_Meetings\\2021-04-26 Approve Feasibility Study and Authorize Final Design-Strawberry Lane\\2021-04-26_Strawberry Lane Final Design.docx
Strawberry Lane Reconstruction and Trail
April 21, 2021
Page 2
Final Plans & Specifications Bolton & Menk will prepare a final plans & specifications for the project.
The final design will establish final alignment, profile, and cross sections of the roadway, trail, and pipes,
review and mitigate existing utility conflicts, establish final construction limits, and prepare
easement/right of way figures. The final design will detail out all the project information, provide
updated project cost estimates, identify project staging, and project schedules. Throughout the
preparation of the final design, Bolton & Menk will coordinate with City staff and provide updates and
opportunities for resident input and feedback, as needed. At the completion of the final design, Bolton &
Menk will present the plans at a Council meeting seeking approval and authorization to bid the project.
Permitting/Utility Coordination Bolton & Menk will coordinate and complete all final permitting
requirement for the project which includes: Wetland Conservation Act, Army Corps of Engineers,
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, Minnesota Department of Health, and the National Pollution
Discharge Elimination System. We will also coordinate with all utilities within the corridor as needed for
construction.
Resident Meetings /Communications Our team will work with City staff through design process to
acquire input on design elements that affect costs, maintenance, operations, and risk. We will prepare
information to notify residents of the project, will provide appropriate notifications for the public
information meetings, lead presentation at the public information meetings, and happily meet and answer
questions from residents or other concerned persons throughout the feasibility process.
Fee Estimate
Based on the scope of services described above, we propose to complete the Final Plans and
Specifications for the Strawberry Lane Reconstruction and Trail project at an hourly rate, estimated to be
$330,000.
Final Plans & Specifications $260,000
Permitting/Utility Coordination $30,000
Resident Meetings /Communications - $40,000
Additional miscellaneous work identified during final design and will be coordinated with the City and
will be completed at our normal hourly rates. Fee listed above does not include construction
administration or right of way acquisition/negotiations. Council has previously approved a proposal for
Henning Professional Services to assist in the right of way acquisition/negotiations for this project.
Please let me know if you have questions or need additional information.
Sincerely,
.ƚƌƷƚƓ ε aĻƓƉͲ LƓĭ͵
Andrew Budde, P.E.
City Engineer
H:\\SHWD\\C16120450\\1_Corres\\A_Meetings\\2021-04-26 Approve Feasibility Study and Authorize Final Design-Strawberry Lane\\2021-04-26_Strawberry Lane Final Design.docx
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 21-047
A RESOLUTION TO APPROVE FEASIBILITY STUDY AND AUTHORIZE FINAL
PLAN AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE STRAWBERRY LANE RECONSTRUCTION
AND TRAIL PROJECT
CITY PROJECT 19-05
WHEREAS, the current Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) identifies improvements to
nd
Strawberry Lane Reconstruction and Trail project from West 62 Street to Smithtown
Road and includes street reconstruction, walking trail, watermain, and drainage
improvements; and
WHEREAS, the current Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) also identifies improvements to
Strawberry Lane Court and Peach Circle and includes street reconstruction or
reclamation, watermain, and drainage improvements; and
WHEREAS, the above improvements are identified in the CIP for 2022 construction and
will require the acquisition of easements and right of way which is identified in the CIP
for 2021; and
WHEREAS, the City has completed the Feasibility Study and the recommended
alternatives for the project area will be incorporated into the design; and
WHEREAS, the City Council as appointed Bolton & Menk as the City Engineer and will
prepare the final plans & specifications for the Strawberry Lane Street Reconstruction
and Trail project; and
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA AS FOLLOWS:
1. The City Council of the City of Shorewood, Minnesota approves the Feasibility
Study and authorizes Bolton & Menk to prepare final plans & specifications for
the Strawberry Lane Reconstruction and Trail project.
th
Passed by the City Council of Shorewood, Minnesota this 26 day of April 2021.
__________________________
Jennifer Labadie, Mayor
Attest:
___________________________
Sandie Thone, City Clerk
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item
9A
Title/Subject: Targeted Residential Picketing Ordinance
Meeting Date: April 26, 2021
MEETING
Prepared By: Greg Lerud, City Administrator
TYPE
REGULAR
Reviewed By: Tim Keane, City Attorney
Attachments: Ordinance
Background: This proposed targeted residential picketing ordinance was originally
discussed at the April 12 city council meeting. Based on questions about the ordinance,
staff has had the opportunity to review the proposed ordinance and discuss potential
changes. After further discussion, it is staff’s recommendation to make no additional
changes to the ordinance other than the 100-foot distance discussed at the April 12
meeting.
Options: Approve the ordinance as presented; amend the ordinance as presented and
approve; decline to approve the ordinance.
Recommended Action: Staff recommends passing the ordinance as presented. A
simple majority is necessary for approval.
Next Steps and Timeline: The ordinance would become effective upon passage and
publication in the city’s official newspapers.
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
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
STATE OF MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 577
AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING SECTION 613 OF THE CITY
CODE OF ORDINANCES PERTAINING TO PENALTIES TO TARGETED
RESIDENTIAL PICKETING
The city council of the city of Shorewood ordains as follows:
TARGETED RESIDENTIAL PICKETING
Section 1. Purpose. The city of Shorewood has an interest in safeguarding the right of its
residents to enjoy, in their home and dwelling, a feeling of well-being, tranquility, and privacy.
The city council finds that targeted residential picketing in front of or about a residential dwelling
causes emotional distress to the dwelling occupants, obstructs and interferes with the free use of
public rights-of-way, and has as its object the harassment of the dwelling occupants. The city
council further finds that, without resorting to targeted residential picketing, ample opportunities
otherwise exist for those desiring to exercise constitutionally-protected freedom of speech and
expression.
Section 2. Definition. For purposes of this section, the term “targeted residential picketing”
means:
(a) An activity focused on a single residential dwelling, and occurring within 100 feet
of the property boundary, without the consent of the dwelling’s occupants;
(b) marching, standing, patrolling or other similar activities by one or more persons
directed at a particular residential dwelling in a manner that adversely affects the
safety, security, or privacy of an occupant of the dwelling;
(c) marching, standing, patrolling or other similar activities by one or more persons
which prevents or hinders an occupant of a residential dwelling from gaining access
to or exiting from the property on which the residential dwelling is located; or
(d) marching, standing, patrolling or other similar activities by one or more persons
focused on, in front of or about a particular residential dwelling without the consent
of the dwelling's occupants.
Section 3. Targeted Residential Picketing Prohibited. No person shall engage in targeted
residential picketing within the city of Shorewood.
Section 4. Penalty. Any person convicted of violating this section shall be subject to the
penalties prescribed for misdemeanors in Minnesota Statutes, section 609.02, subd. 3 as may be
amended from time to time.
Section 5 . Effective Date. This ordinance shall be effective upon its adoption and publication.
Passed this ____ day of _____________, 2021.
____________________________
Jennifer Labadie, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________
Sandie Thone, City Clerk
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item
9B
Title/Subject: Buckthorn Removal in Freeman Park
Meeting Date: April 26, 2021
MEETING
Prepared By: Greg Lerud, City Administrator
TYPE
REGULAR
Reviewed By: Larry Brown, Director of Public Works; Tim Keane, City
Attorney
Attachments: Tree Trust Proposal
Background: At the conclusion of the discussion about this matter at the April 12
meeting, the Council requested additional information in three areas; information about
the product and application, information about using baggies as an alternative, and if
that was done, would it impact the city’s grant application.
I spoke with Casey Johnson at Tree Trust, and also the DNR about the use of
Pathfinder. According to both, Pathfinder is the most used herbicide for the removal of
Buckthorn, and the DNR said that it is used in 99% of the project applications they
receive. Pathfinder clings to organic particles and breaks down over a relatively quick
time period – several weeks, and the toxicity level is much less than other herbicides. A
copy of the MSDS sheet is attached for your information.
According to Tree Trust the label says to use no more than 2.7 gallons per acre of
Pathfinder in a location like this. Johnson said that they plan to use .25 to .5 gallon per
acre. They will be using a dauber or brush to apply the herbicide directly to the plant,
which will reduce the amount of herbicide needed to be effective.
One of the questions I had for the DNR was if we chose to use baggies rather than
cutting and herbicide, would that impact our grant application. They said that if we
chose to modify the grant proposal we submitted, they would reevaluate if the city’s
application, and potentially withdraw approval.
Both the DNR and Tree Trust said the use of the baggies is discouraged. According to
both, baggies require repeat maintenance due to tearing or weather impacting them.
The biggest issues, according to them is the baggies become litter over time and
require them to be removed for disposal because they do not break down like
Pathfinder does. I checked the cost of baggies at one provider, and for 500 baggies,
the cost was $400. Tree Trust estimated that 500 to 700 baggies would be needed per
acre, and they said it would dramatically reduce the amount of acreage of Buckthorn
they could remove.
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
Financial or Budget Considerations: Unchanged from previous memo.
Options:
1. Accept Tree Trust proposal.
2. Reject Tree Trust proposal and either take no further action or direct staff to
modify the DNR grant application and resubmit for their consideration.
Recommended Action: Based on the information received since the last meeting,
staff recommends accepting the proposal from Tree Trust for the removal of Buckthorn
in Freeman Park.
MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEET
Emergency Phone: 800-992-5994
Dow AgroSciences LLC
Indianapolis, IN 46268
Effective Date: 2/11/02
Product Code: 41753
PATHFINDER* II HERBICIDE
MSDS: 004778
INGESTION: Low toxicity if swallowed. The oral LD for
50
1.PRODUCT AND COMPANY IDENTIFICATION:
rats was 2389 mg/kg (males) and 1000 mg/kg (females).
PRODUCT:Pathfinder* II Herbicide
Small amounts swallowed incidental to normal handling
operations are not likely to cause injury; however,
COMPANY IDENTIFICATION:
swallowing larger amounts may cause injury. Aspiration into
Dow AgroSciences
the lungs may occur during ingestion or vomiting, causing
9330 Zionsville Road
lung damage or even death due to chemical pneumonia.
Indianapolis, IN 46268-1189
INHALATION: The LC for rats is >5.0 mg/L for 4 hours.
50
2.COMPOSITION/INFORMATION ON INGREDIENTS:
Excessive exposure may cause irritation to upper respiratory
tract (nose and throat) and lungs. May cause central nervous
Triclopyr: ((3,5,6-trichloro-2- CAS# 064700-56-7 13.6%
system effects. Symptoms of excessive exposure may be
pyridinyl)oxy)acetic acid,
anesthetic or narcotic effects; dizziness and drowsiness may
butoxyethylester
be observed.
Inert Ingredients, Total, Including: 86.4%
Proprietary Solvent
SYSTEMIC (OTHER TARGET ORGAN) EFFECTS: For
triclopyr butoxy ether ester, in animals, effects have been
This document is prepared pursuant to the OSHA Hazard
reported on the following organs: blood, kidney and liver.
Communication Standard (29 CFR 1910.1200). In addition,
other substances not 'Hazardous' per this OSHA Standard
CANCER INFORMATION: Triclopyr butoxyethyl ester did
may be listed. Where proprietary ingredient shows, the
not cause cancer in laboratory animals.
identity may be made available as provided in this standard.
3.HAZARDOUS IDENTIFICATIONS:
TERATOLOGY (BIRTH DEFECTS): For triclopyr
butoxyethyl ester, birth defects are unlikely. Exposures
EMERGENCY OVERVIEW
having no effect on the mother should have no effect on the
Hazardous Chemical. Yellow to amber liquid. May cause
fetus. Did not cause birth defects in animals; other effects
eye and skin irritation. LD for skin absorption in rabbits is
50
were seen in the fetus only at doses which caused toxic
>2000 mg/kg. Oral LD for rats is 2389 mg/kg (males) and
50
effects to the mother.
1000 mg/kg (females). LC for rats is >5.0 mg/L for 4
50
hours. Toxic to aquatic organisms.
REPRODUCTIVE EFFECTS: For triclopyr butoxyethyl ester,
EMERGENCY PHONE NUMBER: 800-992-5994
in laboratory animal studies, effects on reproduction have
been seen only at doses that produced significant toxicity to
the parent animals.
POTENTIAL HEALTH EFFECTS: This section includes
possible adverse effects, which could occur if this material is
4.FIRST AID:
not handled in the recommended manner.
EYES: Flush eyes thoroughly with water for several minutes.
EYE: May cause slight temporary eye irritation. Corneal
Remove contact lenses after initial 1-2 minutes and continue
injury is unlikely. Vapor may cause eye irritation experienced
flushing for several additional minutes.
as mild discomfort and redness.
SKIN: Wash skin with plenty of water.
SKIN: Prolonged contact may cause skin irritation with local
redness. Repeated exposure may cause irritation, even a
INGESTION: Do not induce vomiting. Call a physician
burn. Repeated contact may cause drying or flaking of the
and/or transport to emergency facility immediately.
skin. Prolonged skin contact is unlikely to result in absorption
of harmful amounts. The LD for skin absorption in rabbits
50
INHALATION: Move person to fresh air. If not breathing,
is >2000 mg/kg. Did not cause allergic skin reactions when
give artificial respiration. If breathing is difficult, oxygen
tested in guinea pigs.
should be administered by qualified personnel. Call a
physician or transport to a medical facility.
*Trademark of Dow AgroSciences
1
MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEET
Emergency Phone: 800-992-5994
Dow AgroSciences LLC
Indianapolis, IN 46268
Effective Date: 2/11/02
Product Code: 41753
PATHFINDER* II HERBICIDE
MSDS: 004778
NOTE TO PHYSICIAN: The decision of whether to induce
8.EXPOSURE CONTROLS/PERSONAL PROTECTION:
vomiting or not should be made by a physician. If lavage is
These precautions are suggested for conditions where a
performed, suggest endotracheal and/or esophageal control.
potential for exposure exists. Emergency conditions may
Danger from lung aspiration must be weighed against
require additional precautions.
toxicity when considering emptying the stomach. If burn is
present, treat as any thermal burn, after decontamination.
EXPOSURE GUIDELINE(S):
No specific antidote. Treatment of exposure should be
3,5,6-trichloro-2-pyridinyloxyacetic acid, Dowanol EB ester:
directed at the control of symptoms and the clinical condition
Dow AgroSciences Industrial Hygiene Guide is 2 mg/M3 as
of the patient.
acid equivalent, Skin.
5.FIRE FIGHTING MEASURES:
A "skin" notation following the exposure guideline refers to
FLASH POINT: 350°F, 177°C
the potential for dermal absorption of the material. It is
METHOD USED: SFCC
intended to alert the reader that inhalation may not be the
only route of exposure and that measures to minimize
FLAMMABLE LIMITS
dermal exposures should be considered.
LFL: Not determined
UFL: Not determined
ENGINEERING CONTROLS: Provide general and/or local
exhaust ventilation to control airborne levels below the
EXTINGUISHING MEDIA: Water fog, foam.
exposure guideline.
FIRE & EXPLOSION HAZARDS: May emit toxic, irritating
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR MANUFACTURING,
vapors if involved in a fire.
COMMERCIAL BLENDING, AND PACKAGING
WORKERS:
FIRE-FIGHTING EQUIPMENT: Use positive pressure self-
contained breathing apparatus and full protective clothing.
RESPIRATORY PROTECTION: Atmospheric levels should
be maintained below the exposure guideline. When
6.ACCIDENTAL RELEASE MEASURES:
respiratory protection is required for certain operations, use
a NIOSH approved air-purifying respirator.
ACTION TO TAKE FOR SPILLS/LEAKS: Dike large spills.
Keep out of streams and domestic water supplies. Absorb
SKIN PROTECTION: When prolonged or frequently
small spills in inert material such as dry sand. Eliminate all
repeated contact could occur, use chemically protective
ignition sources. Report large spills to Dow AgroSciences at
clothing resistant to this material. Selection of specific items
800-992-5994.
such as faceshield, gloves, boots, apron or full-body suit will
7.HANDLING AND STORAGE:
depend on operation.
PRECAUTIONS TO BE TAKEN IN HANDLING AND
EYE/FACE PROTECTION: Use safety glasses. If exposure
STORAGE: Keep out of reach of children. Harmful if
causes eye discomfort, use a NIOSH approved full-face
swallowed, inhaled, or absorbed through skin. Avoid contact
respirator.
with skin, eyes, and clothing. Avoid breathing vapor or spray
mist. Users should wash hands before eating, drinking,
APPLICATORS AND ALL OTHER HANDLERS: Refer to
chewing gum, using tobacco, or using the toilet. Store in the
the product label for personal protective clothing and
original container with the lid tightly closed.
equipment recommendations.
*Trademark of Dow AgroSciences
2
MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEET
Emergency Phone: 800-992-5994
Dow AgroSciences LLC
Indianapolis, IN 46268
Effective Date: 2/11/02
Product Code: 41753
PATHFINDER* II HERBICIDE
MSDS: 004778
DEGRADATION & PERSISTENCE:
9.PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL PROPERTIES:
Based largely or completely on information for triclopyr
BOILING POINT: 425°F (218.5°C) @ 20mmHg
butoxyethyl ester.
VAPOR PRESSURE: Not determined
Based on the stringent OECD test guidelines, this material
VAPORDENSITY: Not determined
cannot be considered as readily biodegradable; however,
SOLUBILITY IN WATER: Insolublethese results do not necessarily mean that the material is not
biodegradable under environmental conditions.
SPECIFIC GRAVITY: 0.920 at 20°C (68°F)
The photolysis half-life in water is 6.6 days.
APPEARANCE: Yellow to amber liquid
ODOR: Minimal
ECOTOXICOLOGY:
FREEZING POINT: -10°C, 13°F
Based largely or completely on information for triclopyr
10.STABILITY AND REACTIVITY:
butoxyethyl ester.
Material is highly toxic to aquatic organisms on an acute
STABILITY: (CONDITIONS TO AVOID) Stable under
basis (LC/EC between 0.1 and 1 mg/L in most sensitive
5050
normal storage and handling conditions. Product will burn;
species.)
keep away from heat and open flame.
13.DISPOSAL CONSIDERATIONS:
INCOMPATIBILITY: (SPECIFIC MATERIALS TO AVOID)
DISPOSAL METHOD: Product, spray mixture, or rinsate
Acids, bases, and strong oxidizers.
that cannot be used according to label instructions must be
disposed of according to applicable federal, state, or local
HAZARDOUS DECOMPOSITION PRODUCTS: Carbon
procedures.
monoxide, nitrogen oxides, hydrogen chloride, and
phosgene may be formed if product is involved in
14.TRANSPORT INFORMATION:
fire.
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (DOT)
HAZARDOUS POLYMERIZATION: Not known to occur.
INFORMATION:
11.TOXICOLOGICAL INFORMATION:
This material is not regulated for transportation.
MUTAGENICITY: For triclopyr butoxyethyl ester, in-vitro
15.REGULATORY INFORMATION:
and animal mutagenicity studies were negative.
NOTICE: The information herein is presented in good faith
12.ECOLOGICAL INFORMATION:
and believed to be accurate as of the effective date shown
above. However, no warranty, express or implied, is given.
ENVIRONMENTAL DATA
Regulatory requirements are subject to change and may
differ from one location to another; it is the buyer’s
MOVEMENT & PARTITIONING:
responsibility to ensure that its activities comply with federal,
Based largely or completely on information for triclopyr
state or provincial, and local laws. The following specific
butoxyethyl ester.
information is made for the purpose of complying with
Bioconcentration potential is moderate (BCF between 100
numerous federal, state or provincial, and local laws and
and 3000 or Log Pow between 3 and 5).
regulations.
U.S. REGULATIONS
SARA 313 INFORMATION:To the best of our knowledge,
this product contains no chemical subject to SARA Title III
Section 313 supplier notification requirements.
*Trademark of Dow AgroSciences
3
MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEET
Emergency Phone: 800-992-5994
Dow AgroSciences LLC
Indianapolis, IN 46268
Effective Date: 2/11/02
Product Code: 41753
PATHFINDER* II HERBICIDE
MSDS: 004778
SARA HAZARD CATEGORY: This product has been
reviewed according to the EPA "Hazard Categories"
promulgated under Sections 311 and 312 of the Superfund
Amendment and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA Title
III) and is considered, under applicable definitions, to meet
the following categories:
An immediate health hazard
A delayed health hazard
TOXIC SUBSTANCES CONTROL ACT (TSCA): All
ingredients are on the TSCA inventory or are not required to
be listed on the TSCA inventory.
STATE RIGHT-TO-KNOW: This product is not known to
contain any substances subject to the disclosure
requirements of
New Jersey
Pennsylvania
NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTION ASSOCIATION (NFPA)
RATINGS:
Category Rating
Health 1
Flammability 1
Reactivity 0
COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE
COMPENSATION AND LIABILITY ACT (CERCLA, or
SUPERFUND):To the best of our knowledge, this product
contains no chemical subject to reporting under CERCLA.
16.OTHER INFORMATION:
MSDS STATUS: Revised Sections: 3, 4, 7, 8, & 14
Reference: DR-0298-9448
Replaces MSDS dated: 12/9/99
Document Code: D03-104-003
Replaces Document Code: D03-104-002
The Information Herein Is Given In Good Faith, But No
Warranty, Express or Implied, Is Made. Consult Dow
AgroSciences for Further Information.
*Trademark of Dow AgroSciences
4
RESOLUTION NO. 21-036
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
COUNTY OF HENNIPIN
STATE OF MINNESOTA
A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING A PROPOSAL FROM TREE TRUST LANDSCAPE
SERVICES TO REMOVE BUCKTHORN FROM PARTS FREEMAN PARK
WHEREAS, the City of Shorewood (“City”) received a grant from the MN Department of
Natural Resources for the removal of buckthorn from a portion of Freeman Park; and,
WHEREAS, the City contacted the Conservation Corps, as required, as well as Tree
Trust, to obtain a proposal for the work; and,
WHEREAS, the City only received a proposal from Tree Trust Landscaping Services,
and that proposal is within scope of the grant,
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Shorewood,
Minnesota:
1. The quote from Tree Trust Landscape Services in the amount of $70,000 was
the lowest quote received.
2. Staff are hereby authorized and directed to enter into a service agreement with
the company for and on behalf of the City of Shorewood.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 26th day of
April, 2021.
___________________________
Jennifer Labadie, Mayor
ATTEST:
________________________________
Sandie Thone, City Clerk
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item
9C
Title/Subject: Legal Services Request for Proposal
Meeting Date: April 26, 2021
MEETING
Prepared By: Greg Lerud, City Administrator
TYPE
REGULAR
Attachments: Proposed Legal Services RFP
Background: At the January 25, 2021 council meeting, the Council approved a motion
to prepare a Request for Proposal (RFP) for civil and prosecution legal services. Staff
has prepared an RFP that will allow prospective firms or individuals to prepare
proposals for either or both services.
Financial or Budget Considerations: There are minimal financial expenses in
preparing or distributing the RFP.
Options: The Council has the following options:
1. Approve the RFP has prepared.
2. Edit the RFP and approve.
3. Decline to approve the RFP and provide staff alternative direction.
For options 1 and 2, in addition to advertising as required, staff requests that the
Council provide the names of individuals or firms that they would like the RFP to be
sent.
Next Steps and Timeline: Staff will proceed based on the decision of the Council.
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
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS TO PROVIDE LEGAL SERVICES TO THE
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
I. PURPOSE
The City of Shorewood is requesting proposals for legal services from firms experienced in
municipal law and representation of municipal clients. Firms may choose to be considered for
either or both of the following services:
City Attorney
Prosecuting Attorney
II. BACKGROUND
The City of Shorewood is in western Hennepin County. The city is fully developed and
approximately eight square miles in area. There are three islands in city limits, and the city is
bordered by eight other cities. The city is primarily residential in nature and has a population of
8,000. The City operates under a plan A statutory form of government consisting of a four-
member City Council and a Mayor all elected at-large, and all elected to four-year terms.
Regular City Council meetings are held the second and fourth Mondays of each month, and if
needed, work sessions precede Council meetings.
The City Council is responsible for adopting the City’s budget and tax levy, adopting Resolutions
and ordinances, all hiring and firing decisions, policy making, development planning, and overall
direction of the City. The city offers a full range of municipal services through the following
departments: administration, finance, building and safety inspections, planning and zoning,
parks, public works, water, and sewer. In addition, the city owns and operates the Shorewood
Community and Event Center. The city contracts with Bolton & Menk for engineering services.
South Lake Minnetonka Police Department provides police services to member cities through a
Joint Powers Agreement. SLMPD member cities include Shorewood, Excelsior, Greenwood
and Tonka Bay. Excelsior Fire District provides fire services to member cities through a Joint
Powers Agreement. EFD member cities include Shorewood, Deephaven, Excelsior,
Greenwood, and Tonka Bay. The public safety building is owned by the Shorewood Economic
Development Authority, but shared responsibility is maintained through the respective police
and fire joint power agreements.
III. SCOPE OF GENERAL LEGAL SERVICES
The law firm/attorney(s) are required to be knowledgeable in a variety of legal areas, including
but not limited to:
General municipal law.
Labor law.
General state and federal laws relating to municipal government.
1
Municipal litigation.
Zoning, land development, platting, condemnation, subdivision, and land use law.
Economic development activities including development, redevelopment, and
property/real estate law.
Ordinance and Resolution development. (Note: Shorewood utilizes American Legal for
codification services.)
Contract law.
State rules and regulations that control and manage private utilities in public right-of-
way.
Environmental law.
IV. CITY ATTORNEY SERVICES REQUESTED
City attorney services, for the purposes of this proposal, shall include those legal services
generally understood within the field of municipal law to fall within the category of “general
counsel” work, and shall include, but not necessarily be limited to, the following:
Routine legal advice, telephone and personal consultations with the City Council, City
Administrator, and department heads or authorized representatives.
Assistance in the preparation and review of ordinances, resolutions, agreements,
contracts, forms, notices, certificates, deeds, and other documents required by the city.
Attendance at regular City Council meetings as well as other meetings requested.
Attendance at other board, commission, and committee meetings upon request.
Attendance at weekly staff meetings and other meetings with city staff, upon request.
Legal advice and opinions concerning legal matters that affect the city.
Legal work pertaining to property acquisitions, property disposals, public improvements,
easement dedications, and right-of-way vacations.
Reviewing bonds and insurance requirements required by or for City contracts or
activities.
Provide advice on open meeting law, data practice, records retention, and privacy
issues.
Preparing deeds, easements, and other documents for recording purposes.
Assistance in acquiring easements and public right-of-way through negotiations or the
use of eminent domain and in compliance with federal acquisition and relocation
regulations.
Enforcement of city codes, zoning regulations, and building standards through
administrative and judicial actions.
Monitoring pending and current state and federal legislation and court decisions as
appropriate.
Coordination of outside legal counsel as needed, and as directed by the City Council
and City Administrator.
Defending the city in all litigation, as requested, except in those cases where insurance
companies are required to exclusively provide defense including, but not limited to: (1)
human rights claims, (2) condemnation, (3) zoning and land use regulation matters, (4)
permits and administrative actions, and (5) employment matters.
2
V. PROSECUTING ATTORNEY SERVICES REQUESTED
Represent the city including attendance at all arraignments, pre-trials, rule 8 hearings,
omnibus hearings, court trials, sentence revocation hearings, restitution hearings and
sentencing hearings.
Prosecute all non-felony criminal law matters occurring within the City’s jurisdiction.
Scheduling and coordinating officer appearances. Reviewing all criminal cases
presented for purposes of charging or charging recommendations. Determine technical
compliance with criminal code and other state statutes, writing complaints, and making
recommendations to the Court for alternatives to prosecution where appropriate.
Timely pursuit of disposition of criminal cases in advance of actual Court cases to avoid
any unnecessary court time.
Process and present vehicle forfeiture cases related to DUI violations that occur within
the city’s jurisdiction.
Notifying and communicating with crime victims.
VI. REQUIRED CONTENTS FOR PROPOSALS
A. Indicate which of the two (City Attorney or Prosecuting Attorney) legal services, or
both, for which you wish to be considered. All proposals, one for City Attorney services
and one for City Prosecution services shall not exceed 20 pages in length and provide,
at a minimum, details for the following:
B. Firm Background:
1. Brief History of the firm, including nature of the firm’s practice.
2. Number of attorneys, including number of partners and associates and areas
of specialties.
3. Provide the overall capabilities, qualifications, training, and areas of expertise
for each of the principals, partners, and associates of the law firm including
the length of employment for each person and his/her area of specialization.
4. Support personnel including number and expertise.
5. Office organization and support capabilities.
6. Office location(s).
7. Current use of technology, especially capability for computerized legal
research and for sharing and editing documents electronically.
8. Statements of any malpractice claims and/or ethics complaints taken against
your firm or firm’s attorney(s) over the last five years and the status or
outcomes of such action. Indicate whether any action is pending or is
currently under review by the State Ethics Board.
9. Describe malpractice insurance coverage: carrier, limits, and exemptions.
3
C. Attorney Qualifications:
1. Identify the specific attorney who will serve as the lead attorney for each of
the legal services you have expressed interest in providing, and indicate the
following:
1. Academic training and degrees.
2. Description of background and experience.
3. Description of prior municipal experience including cities served in
a similar capacity.
2. Identify attorney who will serve in the lead attorney’s absence and provide
information as requested in (1) of this section.
3. Identify other attorneys and support staff who will supply services for which
the City will be charged.
4. Indicate current responsibilities of person designated to serve as lead
attorney.
D. List of cities firm and/or attorney current represent and for what type of service.
E. List of cities the firm and/or attorney began representing in the last three years and
cities you stopped representing in the last three years.
F. Provide contact information for at least three client references, at least two of which
need to be cities.
G. Describe the firm’s view of their responsibilities to the City in providing legal services.
H. Conflict of Interest:
1. Indicate whether designated lead attorneys or the law firm represent, or have
represented, any client whose representation may conflict with your ability to
provide legal services to the City.
2. Indicated whether designated lead attorney or law firm currently represents
any other local units of government having jurisdiction within, or contiguous
to, the City of Shorewood.
3. List all professional relationships that the proposed led attorney has with the
City Council members.
4. Identify what procedures your firm utilizes to identify and resolve conflicts of
interest.
J. Fees:
1. City Attorney – firms desiring to be considered for City Attorney services my
indicate a monthly retainer amount (if appropriate) and describe specific services
to be included within the retainer and any services that would be outside the
retainer (refer to the list of services in Section IV.) For services outside the
retainer, indicate the hourly rate for City Attorney and other attorneys and support
staff that may be working on City business. Alternatively, firms may propose
hourly rates for all services.
4
2. City Prosecutor – firms interested in providing City Prosecutor services may
indicate a monthly retainer amount and describe specific services to be included
within the retainer and provide an hourly rate for the lead attorney and hourly
rates for other attorneys and staff that may be working on non-retainer City
Business. Alternatively, firms may propose hourly rates for all services.
4. Firms shall indicate all other costs and reimbursable expenses including travel
(per mile), telephone, printing, photocopying, etc.
5. Firms shall indicate the minimum increment of time billed for each service
including phone calls, correspondence, and personal conferences.
6. The City of Shorewood requests monthly billing statement which:
Itemize the date of service.
Identify the personnel providing the services.
List the time spent.
Provide a detailed description of the services performed.
State the fees for those services.
Organize billing based on activity and City contact.
For activities that span multiple billing periods, a project-to-date
summary is requested.
Summarize monthly and annual costs by type of activity.
VII. GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS AND SCHEDULE
A. Responses must provide complete information as described in this request. Seven
(7) hard copies and an electronic version shall be submitted no later than 4:30 p.m. May 28,
2021. Proposals shall be in a sealed envelope bearing the caption, “Shorewood City Attorney
Proposal.” Late proposals will not be considered. All proposals will be deemed confidential and
will be retained by the City of Shorewood. The envelope shall be delivered to:
Greg Lerud, City Administrator
City of Shorewood
5755 Country Club Road
Shorewood, MN 55331
glerud@ci.shorewood.mn.us
B. To ensure fairness and uniformity, firms submitting responses are requested to not contact
City staff or City Council members. Written questions about this RFP may be sent via email to
glerud@ci.shorewood.mn.us prior to the submission deadline.
C. The City will not reimburse any expenses incurred by the firm submitting a response
including, but not limited to; expenses associated with the preparation and submission of the
response and/or attendance at interviews.
5
D. The City reserves the right to reject any and all proposals, to request additional information
from any and all Proposers for the purpose of clarification, to accept and negotiate any
modification to any proposal following the deadline for receipt of all proposals, and to waive any
irregularities if such would serve the best interest of the city as determined by the City Council.
E. Following is the anticipated schedule the City Council expects to utilize for the review and
selection of a City Attorney and Prosecuting Attorney. This is tentative schedule and subject to
change.
1. Distribute RFP – April 13 - 23
2. Deadline for receipt of RFP – by 4:30 p.m., May 28, 2021
3. Council review of proposals and schedule interviews – June 28, 2021
4. Conduct interviews – July, 20201
5. Council appointment will be pending a mutually agreeable contract - TBD
VIII. EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCESS
Proposals will be screened, and the top candidates selected by the City Council. The
qualifications for the top candidates will be verified and references will be checked. In reviewing
proposals, the city will carefully weigh the following:
Depth and breadth of experience and expertise in the practice of law,
specifically in those areas most often encountered in municipal government
operations.
Capability to perform legal services promptly and in a manner that permits the
City Council and staff to meet established deadlines and to operate in an
effective and efficient manner.
Degree of availability for quick response to inquiries that arise out of day-to-
day operating questions or problems.
Degree to which firm and individual attorneys stay current through continued
professional development and active communication with practitioners in the
municipal law field.
Communication skills.
Cost of services.
Other qualifications/criteria as deemed appropriate by the City Council.
6