The URL can be used to link to this page

11-13-23 CC Reg Mtg Agenda Packet CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING COUNCIL CHAMBERS MONDAY, NOVEMBER 13, 2023 7:00 P.M. 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. Pledge of Allegiance B. Roll Call Mayor Labadie___ Callies___ Maddy___ Sanschagrin___ Zerby___ C. 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 October 23, 2023 Minutes B. Approval of the Verified Claims List Claims List C. Assign Development Contract for Excelsior Woods Planning Director Memo Resolution 23-109 D. Approve Independent Contract with Roots and Wings Parks/Rec Director Memo Therapeutic Services LLC E. Approve SCEC Attendant Hires City Clerk/HR Director Memo F. Approve Memo of Agreement for AFSCME Members City Administrator Memo CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA Page 2 G. Utility Operator Pay Issue Public Works Director Memo Resolution 23-110 H. Approve Timesaver’s Addendum to Recording Secretary City Clerk/HR Director Memo Service Agreement for 2024 I. Approve Food Truck Permit for SCEC Rental Parks/Rec Director Memo Resolution 23-111 J. WAC Assessment Report Finance Director Memo Resolution 23-112 K. Approve WAC Assessment Agreement 26625 Strawberry Court City Administrator Memo Resolution 23-113 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 Council. Anyone wishing to address the Council should raise their hand, or if attending remotely please use the “raise hand” function on your screen and wait to be called on. Please make your comments from the podium and identify yourself by your first and last name and your address for the record. Please limit your comments to three minutes. No discussion or action will be taken by the Council on this matter. If requested by the Council, City staff will prepare a report for the Council regarding the matter and place it on the next agenda. 4. REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS 5. PARKS A. Report by Commissioner Hirner on 10-24-23 Park Commission Meeting Minutes B. Consider Quote for Buckthorn Removal Contract for Public Works Director Memo Freeman Park Resolution 23-114 6. PLANNING 7. ENGINEERING/PUBLIC WORKS A. No Parking – Enchanted/Shady Islands and Strawberry Lane, Public Works Director Memo Birch Bluff Resolution 23-115 Resolution 23-116 Resolution 23-117 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA Page 3 8. GENERAL/NEW BUSINESS A. PUBLIC HEARING Certification of Assessment for Unpaid Charges Finance Director Memo Resolution 23-118 9. STAFF AND COUNCIL REPORTS AND DISCUSSION A. Staff 1. New Website Kickoff Meeting Project Update B. Mayor and City Council 10. ADJOURN 2A CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING COUNCIL CHAMBERS MONDAY, OCTOBER 23, 2023 7:00 P.M. MINUTES 1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING Mayor Labadie called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. A. Pledge of Allegiance B. Roll Call Present. Mayor Labadie; Councilmembers Callies, Maddy, Sanschagrin, and Zerby; City Attorney Shepherd; City Attorney Land; City Clerk/HR Director Thone; Finance Director Rigdon; Planning Director Darling; Park and Recreation Director Crossfield; and, City Engineer Budde Absent: City Administrator Nevinski C. Review Agenda Maddy moved, Sanschagrin seconded, approving the agenda, as presented. Motion passed. 2. CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Labadie reviewed the items on the Consent Agenda. Sanschagrin moved, Zerby seconded, Approving the Motions Contained on the Consent Agenda and Adopting the Resolutions Therein. A. City Council Work Session Minutes of October 10, 2023 B. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of October 10, 2023 C. Approval of the Verified Claims List D. Accept Resignation of SCEC Attendant E. Approve Promotion to Public Works Utility Lead F. Designate 2024 Polling Place Locations, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 23-104, “A Resolution Designating 2024 Polling Precinct Locations for the City of Shorewood.” G. Approve Independent Contractor Agreement with Tenicity CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES October 23, 2023 Page 2 of 21 H. Approve Release Agreement with Alex and Elena Ugorets Motion passed. 3. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR Barry Brown, 6050 Burlwood Court, noted that he had lived in Shorewood since 1995 and noted that his property backs up to the wooded area in Freeman Park. He stated that he had used the Freeman Park trail almost every single day for the last twenty-nine years and explained that over the last seven years he has conducted various maintenance tasks along the trails and the easement areas including mowing, cutting back buckthorn, blowing leaves, removal of fallen trees, and snow plowing. He stated that he would like to request that Public Works once again take over these responsibilities on a regular basis, like they used to do. He noted that they stopped doing the work about eight years ago. He noted the location of an easement between Burlwood Court and Maple Leaf Circle that leads to the new ponds project. He stated that there have been several conversations with City staff where they were told that this area was supposed to be graded and reseeded this past spring. He explained that he is proposing that the City enforce the original contract agreement or have Public Works complete the project. He stated that once this area is reseeded, he feels that Public Works should take over the maintenance which should include weekly mowing. He stated that because the grading issues remain open, there is standing water in the easement area which has been brought to the attention of the City and noted that placement of the walking trail blocks the water from freely flowing into the storm sewer drain nearby and causes puddling and a place for mosquitos to breed. He reiterated that this was supposed to be corrected by the contractor. He shared a recap of what he felt was a very important community meeting regarding buckthorn and the grant the City has received. He stated that it appears as though the City’s preferred approach is to clear cut the buckthorn using forestry mulching equipment and spray some type of poison on the stems to kill the regrowth. He stated that these actions are to take place in November or December of 2023. He stated that the larger buckthorn will be stacked in an open area of Freeman Woods and then burned sometime over the 2024-2025 winter. He stated that there appears to be no maintenance plan beyond the first year to fund the ongoing buckthorn removal. He urged the Council to fully fund these efforts for the next five years in order to maintain the woods. He asked the City to release to the public all proposals for the project at least one week prior to the November 13, 2023 City Council meeting so concerned residents can contact the Council directly in order to provide input before approvals are granted. Councilmember Zerby asked that Mr. Brown leave a copy of his statement and questions with staff. Mr. Brown noted that this has been an ongoing situation for the last eighteen months and noted that Planning Director Darling should already have copies of the information. 4. REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS A. Chief Tholen, SLMPD – Flock Camera and Approval of Allocation Detective Protivinsky and Officer Weinmann gave an overview of the proposed Flock Camera System and shared examples of other communities where it was currently being used. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES October 23, 2023 Page 3 of 21 Councilmember Sanschagrin asked if the primary purpose of the cameras was to just read license plates and collect data on the vehicles. Detective Protivinsky confirmed that was their primary purpose. Councilmember Sanschagrin asked where the cameras would be positioned. Detective Protivinsky outlined the way that Flock plots the community and takes into consideration their solar aspects. He noted that for Shorewood they are thinking of positioning the camera on Smithtown facing County Road 19. He stated that if Excelsior agrees to having a camera, they would like to place in near the elementary school in order to capture Highway 7 traffic as well. He outlined proposed camera locations in Tonka Bay and Greenwood. Councilmember Zerby asked about the ability to go back thirty days in looking back at data. Detective Protivinsky outlined the way the nation wide Flock system worked and explained their ability to go back and look for specific vehicles, if needed, without license plate information. Councilmember Zerby asked about transparency and what the intent was in terms of releasing information to the public. He gave the example of information released by Wayzata about the number of cameras, hot list hits and searches that took place over the last thirty days. Detective Protivinsky stated that was something that he would have to speak to Chief Tholen about, but noted that he is generally very open and up front about anything the Department is involved in. He stated that the information is readily available from Flock so he would hope that the transparency would be similar to what they have seen with other agencies. Councilmember Callies noted that Detective Protivinsky had made a comment that anybody could buy this kind of camera and asked if that meant they could log into the cameras and use it for their own purposes. Detective Protivinsky explained that the general public would not have access to the Department’s cameras unless they would agree to share it with them. He stated that they can share with other law enforcement agencies, but does not believe they can share it with a private citizen. He stated that if a neighborhood bought a camera, in theory, the individuals in the neighborhood should be able to share with each other but reiterated that they would not have access to the Department’s cameras. Councilmember Callies asked how the Department would be monitoring these and whether there would be someone stationed looking at the camera feeds or if they would only be looked at when there was some type of alert. Detective Protivinsky stated that for the patrol officers, there will be an app and they will be able to have it on their computer screen. He explained that if they get an alert, it would automatically be sent to their phone or their computer and then they can pull over and review the footage. He explained that like every other database, they cannot just review the data for fun and need to have a law enforcement purpose first. Councilmember Maddy stated that it appears as though the camera equipment would be leased so the Department would not be responsible for any maintenance activities. He asked what the CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES October 23, 2023 Page 4 of 21 plan would be for after the initial two year period and if it would be to plan to spend twelve thousand per year in order to keep them in operation. Detective Protivinsky explained that their goal is to continually get the grant funding. He noted that the only reason that they needed to come back to the cities and ask for additional funding this time around was because there was a slight price increase between the time they received the grant and the present time. Sanschagrin moved, Maddy seconded, Approving the Installation of the Flock camera in Shorewood and authorize the expenditure of $800 from the City’s Public Safety Aid allocation. Motion passed. 5. PARKS 6. PLANNING A. Report by Commissioner Holker on October 3, 2023 Planning Commission Meeting Planning Commissioner Holker gave an overview of the discussion and recommendations from the October 3, 2023 meeting. B. Conditional Use Permit for over 100 cubic yards Applicant: JK Landscaping Construction Location : 4800 Spray Island Planning Director Darling reviewed the application for a CUP to import two-hundred and fifty cubic yards of material. She noted that the affected property is on Spray Island and explained that they are proposing to import the material by barge in order to level the lawn area on the actively used portions of the property. She stated that the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this item and recommended approval, subject to the conditions as outlined in the staff report. Councilmember Sanschagrin asked if any approval from the DNR would also be required. Planning Director Darling stated that the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District is the permitting authority on behalf of the DNR. Councilmember Callies stated that she attended the Planning Commission meeting when this item was discussed and her recollection is that this fill material would not change the elevation on the site or the overall grading and was really just to level off the property. Zerby moved, Sanschagrin seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 23-106, “A Resolution Approving a Conditional Use Permit to Allow the Import of 250 Cubic Yards of Fill at 4800 Spray Island.” Motion passed. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES October 23, 2023 Page 5 of 21 C. Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Concept and Development Stage PUD for a Paddle Sports Club Applicant: Admark, LLC Location: 24560 Smithtown Road Planning Director Darling explained that the City was utilizing two consultants who are giving aid to the City due to potential conflicts of interest with the City’s typical consultants. She introduced Korine Land serving as a City Attorney, from LeVander Gillen and Miller, and Josh Phillips, serving as City Engineer, with Barr Engineering and noted that he was joining the Council via online video conferencing. She gave an overview of the proposal to re-guide the property from residential to commercial and the concept and development stage PUD for property located at 24560 Smithtown Road. She explained that the applicant is proposing a hybrid use that is essentially a twelve-unit self-storage condominium project where each condo owner would have access to the clubhouse level which has a lounge, kitchen area, and an indoor pickleball court. She stated that each member would purchase a storage unit as a condominium and would use it for personal storage, vehicle storage, or leisure uses. She stated that the plans have the project divided into two buildings with both having self-storage units with the southerly building having units that would each have their own restroom and have a mezzanine level over half the unit and the northerly building would have the clubhouse on the second floor with storage areas on the first floor. She outlined the purpose of a PUD and noted that the applicant was requesting flexibility in most of the applicable setbacks, the height of the structures, impervious surface coverage, parking, hours of operation, and landscaping and screening requirements and reviewed some specifics from the proposed plan. She explained that staff had originally recommended denial of the application because of the over-development of the site and the amount of flexibility requested. Darling noted that at the October 3, 2023, Planning Commission meeting, they voted 4-1 in favor of the application. She noted that they had discussed the possibility of limiting the height of the buildings, but ultimately did not act on that proposal, but included the remainder of the conditions that staff had proposed. She stated that at the meeting, the Planning Commission had expressed concern that they did not have enough information about this type of project in the area. She explained that staff had not provided extensive research on the other projects in the area because City codes are adequately written to provide protection from the over development of properties and this parcel is smaller than the storage condos that are proposed in other communities. She stated that following the meeting, staff spoke with many of the other planners in nearby communities and spoke with a developer of storage condos and reviewed photos and plans for four different developments. She stated that she found that this type of project is typically located away from residential uses and is generally in commercial areas. She stated that they are always buffered and screened from residential properties with either distance or natural environment features. She reviewed some of the smaller questions that the Planning Commission had asked her to look at more closely, including the driveway visibility. Darling noted that the applicant had submitted a revised plan that included diagonal parking and stated that her concerns were essentially the same with this proposal as they were with the original proposal. She stated that the Excelsior Fire District reviewed the plans and confirmed that they would not be in support of this layout because it further reduces the width of the required fire lane on the property. She noted that this proposal is up against the 120-day review period deadline which will end on November 4, 2023, so there is not an option to extend it to another meeting. She gave a brief overview of the two options available to the Council to either deny the request or approve the request. She explained votes that would be necessary in order to approve the Comprehensive Plan amendments or rezoning from residential to commercial. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES October 23, 2023 Page 6 of 21 Councilmember Callies stated that the City had just undergone a major review of the Comprehensive Plan and at that time there were no changes to this site being guided as commercial from medium density residential. Planning Director Darling stated that was correct and noted that the Planning Commission and the City Council had approved the Plan with this property being residential but increasing the density from low to medium density up to medium density. Councilmember Callies clarified that at that time it was still considered appropriate for it to remain as residential. Councilmember Zerby stated that in looking at the City website and the City zoning map it appears to be shown as C-1 and asked if he had the wrong parcel or the wrong map. Planning Director Darling stated that he was looking at the correct map and explained that the property was not rezoned after the City Council initially changed the land use designation on the property to residential. Councilmember Zerby asked about when a super majority vote would be needed and noted that this appeared to be a situation where it would be changed from commercial to a CUP. City Attorney Land clarified that the property has been ‘guided’ as residential, so once that Comprehensive Plan has been approved by the Met Council, they will have one-hundred eighty days to make their zoning ordinance comply, which would be the next step that would have to be taken. Councilmember Zerby asked if the Comprehensive Plan had been approved. City Attorney Land stated that she believed it was scheduled for approval in the near future. Planning Director Darling stated that it is scheduled for approval on Wednesday. Councilmember Zerby clarified that as of today it was not approved. City Attorney Land stated that she would strongly urge the Council to go with their last vote on this parcel which was that they approved a plan guiding it for residential use, which is why it would require a super majority vote in order to re-guide it to commercial. Councilmember Zerby stated that he was not a lawyer, but the law, to him, is black and white and, at the moment, the Comprehensive Plan was not approved. Planning Director Darling clarified that the current 2030 Comprehensive Plan does guide this property for low to medium density residential and not commercial. Councilmember Zerby noted that the map, which is available to the public, has it designated as commercial property. Planning Director Darling clarified that he was referring to the zoning map and not the Comprehensive Plan map. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES October 23, 2023 Page 7 of 21 Councilmember Zerby stated that he understands that, but reiterated that the land, today, is zoned as commercial. City Attorney Land stated that it is guided as residential whether is low to medium density or medium density, so this would still change the zoning classification. Planning Director Darling stated that she believed what Councilmember Zerby was saying is that because there is commercial zoning on it now, and there is a commercial PUD, this would be considered commercial to commercial zoning. City Attorney Land confirmed that that part is correct, but the portion that is still in conflict is the Comprehensive Plan. She stated that changing the zoning classification of the Comprehensive Plan still requires a super majority vote. Councilmember Zerby reiterated his point that the Comprehensive Plan had not yet been approved by the Met Council. City Attorney Land stated that even if the City went with their old Comprehensive Plan, it was still guided for residential and changing it would require the super majority vote. Councilmember Zerby noted that he did not believe the old Comprehensive Plan had been approved by the Met Council. Planning Director Darling stated that the 2030 Comprehensive Plan had been approved by the Met Council. City Attorney Land explained that they are kind of stuck on the no-man’s land of the Comprehensive Plan not being consistent with the zoning ordinance, but reiterated that was guided as residential, and to amend that, a super majority vote would be needed in order to change the zoning classification to a commercial designation. Councilmember Zerby reiterated that, as of today, it is commercial property because that is what it is zoned as. City Attorney Land confirmed that it was zoned as commercial but was not guided as commercial. Councilmember Callies stated that Minnesota Statute requires that the zoning ordinance be brought into conformance with the Comprehensive Plan and that has not been done for this parcel. Councilmember Zerby stated that if he were a property owner and looked at the City’s website to see how it is zoned and what options there would be for using this property, he would have seen that it is zoned as commercial, C-1. He stated that there is no discussion about the gray area of what it may be ‘guided’ as. He stated that it does not seem logical for a developer to investigate and create plans based on the information that the lot is commercial to then come to the City and be told this parcel is now residential. Councilmember Callies stated that she thought the property owner had to also consider the Comprehensive Plan. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES October 23, 2023 Page 8 of 21 Councilmember Zerby stated that he did not believe most people were aware of what a Comprehensive Plan is. Councilmember Callies noted that she felt that was beside the point because she believes both things go hand in hand but could acknowledge that there was some inconsistency in this case. Councilmember Zerby reiterated that if he went to the City website it would say this property is zoned as commercial and noted that there was no asterisk that tells anyone to go take a look at the Comprehensive Plan guidance. Mayor Labadie noted that this applicant had worked with the City on other applications. She asked if the Comprehensive Plan and zoning was discussed with the applicant. Planning Director Darling stated that it was discussed for both potential projects. She noted that this was the first official application and explained that in 2021 they had submitted a sketch plan for a residential development that was discussed at a work session. Mayor Labadie noted that even though this is the first official application, the Comprehensive Plan and zoning were discussed with the applicant for both potential projects. She asked City Attorney Land about why she highly recommended that the Council go in one direction versus the other. City Attorney Land stated that she does a lot of training with Planning Commissions because there are a lot of rules that regular people just do not know. She stated that the guiding document for the City was not intended to be very black and white and is to be guidance with a broad brush. She stated that the zoning map gets much more particular and breaks it down into smaller parts of what is planned, for example single family residential and multi-family residential. She stated that the Comprehensive Plan is just as important as the zoning plan, and both have to be taken into account when they apply every single land use application. She stated that just because the City’s zoning ordinance was not made consistent does not make the Comprehensive Plan any less important. She noted that every single applicant has a duty to look at both documents and both are available on the City’s website. She stated that one of the last Council decisions on this property was that it should be guided as residential, and the most recent Council decision was that it should be guided for medium density residential. She clarified that was why changing this from residential to commercial, which requires a Comprehensive Plan amendment, should be a super majority vote. Councilmember Zerby stated that he disagreed with that point because this parcel was not residential. He stated that the meeting that was held when the sketch plan was presented had many residents attend who told the City that they did not want this to be changed and the Council agreed with them. He stated that they had directed the applicant to keep it commercial and find a commercial purpose for it. He reiterated that the property was still zoned commercial today and is not zoned residential at this point. Mayor Labadie asked City Attorney Land about the votes that would be required for the two alternatives presented by staff. City Attorney Land stated that for a vote to deny, that would be a simple majority vote. She noted that, if the Council were to vote to approve the request and change the Comprehensive Plan, by CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES October 23, 2023 Page 9 of 21 law, it would require a super majority vote regardless of whether or not it was what the people wanted, because it is guided as residential. Councilmember Sanschagrin stated that he was trying to understand how many code sections required flexibility and asked if he was correct that it was six. Planning Director Darling noted that there were a few that she summarized together in her report, but believes it is likely around six in total. Councilmember Sanschagrin asked if there were specific requests that concerned staff related to safety or well-being. Planning Director Darling stated that the variances that she felt were most concerning were the limited amount of screening from the residential properties to the west, the height of the buildings, which is compounded by the height of the retaining walls, and the lack of parking on the site. Councilmember Sanschagrin asked about the impervious surface requests and if staff was concerned about hard cover and the impact on the adjacent properties. Planning Director Darling stated that the applicant was requesting impervious coverage of seventy percent when the ordinance allows for sixty-six percent. She noted that for this difference, they are proposing a pervious paver which will need annual maintenance. She stated that the applicant is showing quite a bit of stormwater treatment and control on site so she believes they will be able to provide rate and volume control on the site and would be able to provide some treatment. She explained that the limitation on impervious surface was not just controlling stormwater and was also related to bulk control, so they are holding more of the site open for open space, which, in this case, she believed showed another example of over development of the site. Councilmember Sanschagrin stated that there are a number of suggested conditions included in the report if this were approved and asked how the City would enforce those conditions. Planning Director Darling stated that there are some that would be relatively easy because the City would not issue a permit until the requirement had been met. She stated that long term, it would require staff going out and investigating complaints or keeping their eye on the development to ensure that they adhered to the conditions of approval. Mayor Labadie stated that she was concerned and having a hard time getting around the parking issue that cannot be resolved without blocking the fire lane. She stated that she was not sure that this concept was appropriate for this particular parcel, and she felt a big factor was the parking issue. She stated that concept of the man cave and the lounge area would probably be utilized for an event such as Super Bowl Sunday and noted that the American Legion is designated as an overflow parking spot, but they would also have a lot of patrons on that kind of day. She expressed concern about where the guests coming to this building were supposed to park. She stated that she was also concerned that the Fire Department had not given this proposal their blessing. Councilmember Zerby asked if the Council could hear from the applicant. Mayor Labadie noted that she would like the Council to finish discussing Planning Director Darling’s report before they heard from the applicant. She stated that the public hearing on this CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES October 23, 2023 Page 10 of 21 item already took place at the Planning Commission meeting but knows that there are many people present at the meeting who are very interested in this topic, but she intended to only open discussion up with the applicant. She encouraged them to get their questions or comments to the applicant before he addressed the Council. Planning Director Darling clarified that the Fire Department signed off on the parallel parking stall plan, but not the diagonal parking plan that had been resubmitted. She stated that the concern she has with parallel parking is that the parking spaces would block pedestrian access out of the doors of the units. Mayor Labadie asked why a revised parking plan had been submitted if the Fire Department had already signed off on approval for the parallel parking plan. Planning Director Darling stated that she thinks it was because staff met with the applicant after the Planning Commission meeting, and they discussed the concept of parking. She stated that the applicant was hoping to provide more convenient parking on the site by providing angled parking stalls. She stated that this is just very tight on the site and noted that the Fire Department had stated that if the applicant wanted to provide more parking in front of the buildings, they would need to cut off the landscaped area in order to provide the required fire lane. Councilmember Sanschagrin asked if the City had heard from the adjacent property owner. Planning Director Darling explained that the adjacent property owner was at the first Planning Commission meeting. She stated that following that meeting they met with the applicant and did not attend the second Planning Commission meeting. Councilmember Callies stated that she was in attendance at the Planning Commission meeting, and they had a lot of discussion around events and there is a condition of approval that states that events that exceed the amount of parking on the site would not be permitted. She stated that the problem she sees with that is how it will be monitored. Mayor Labadie asked the applicant to address the Council. Mark Kaltsas, 6015 Cathcart Drive and Adam Schultz, 26030 Valley Wood Lane, addressed the Council. Mr. Kaltsas noted that he has a handout that he would like to distribute to the Council in response to the report that was sent out on Friday. He stated that he would also like to give the Council some additional context which the Planning Commission had found helpful. He noted that they came to the Council in 2021 after purchasing the property that had been for sale for about ten years. He stated that they are aware of what the property is guided for in the Comprehensive Plan, but noted that the property today is zoned commercial. He stated that he did not believe the onus for rezoning the property was on them and should be the City’s responsibility. He noted that it had been over a decade and the City had not rezoned this property. He stated that they came in with an initial plan for a residential project and the room was packed with residents who were opposed to developing it into a medium density residential development. He stated that, at the time, there was discussion from the Council that they were not sure that the property should be developed as residential either. Kaltsas explained that following that discussion, they went back to the drawing board and took a look at what this property would allow for and what project they could put in front of the City that would benefit the City and the local residents. He explained that there was a group of local CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES October 23, 2023 Page 11 of 21 residents from the area that have an interest in pickleball and C-1 states that private clubs and lodges are allowed. He explained that they would like to form a private club called the Shorewood Paddle Club and noted that this group also has a common interest in boats. He stated that there is heavy industrial use to the east of this parcel, with an auto repair facility that is very loud and some type of motel or apartment building on the other side. He explained that they had looked at the marketability of putting residential products on this property with the proximity to the other uses and felt that this site could be a nice transition property with what they are proposing to the residential area on the west side of the property. He stated that if this were a multi-family residential development they would need the same drive aisle, the same amount of storm water management, and the same limitations with building setbacks along with a driveway to serve the units and a fire lane. He stated that when they looked at it, they felt that C-1 made sense and had discussions with staff about those standards and tried to put together a site plan that made sense. Kaltsas noted that it is important to note that this property slopes 22 feet from the street to the park on the north side which makes it challenging to develop. He stated that they tried to step the buildings with the grade rather than just flatten it out and just build one big retaining wall and have a product that fit the site and not one that just a mass building which was why they broke it into two buildings. He explained that one of the things they heard loud and clear with the residents who came out in opposition of the residential project was the amount of traffic that would be generated. He stated that the site is guided for six to eight units per acre by the current Comprehensive Plan. He noted that usage versus a private club would generate a two to one traffic count. He stated that because of traffic in the area, particularly along Smithtown Road, they felt this current proposal was a better solution and that this project would add huge value to the City and this area. He stated six or seven residential units would barely fit on this property when you take into consideration fire lanes, setbacks, and the building. Kaltsas explained they met with staff last week and were trying to pinpoint the targeted parking number and explained that they have gone back to the parallel parking proposal after they understood the comments from the Fire Department. He noted that he had reached out to Medina, Watertown, Chanhassen, and Independence about their projects and they allow parallel parking in front of their buildings, but do not stripe it. He stated that they are proposing a ten foot wide space in front of the units for parallel parking which still leaves about three feet for people to have to room to walk around the car and open the door and enter the unit. He explained that he had taken a look at recent approvals in the City and referenced a twin home development behind the Tonka Bay project which had a PUD and each of those units is located on a twenty-six foot wide drive lane with no parking on either side and two parking spaces in the driveway and seven additional spaces for eleven units. He stated that the Council made a provision that each unit had to maintain one indoor garage space open for parking and explained that they were proposing the same for this project. Kaltsas noted that he thinks it is important to note that they have four space garages with the condo units not and not just the two spaces that the twin homes have. He stated that they would include this in their HOA and CIC documents and mandate that each unit maintains one space for their own parking indoors. He stated that these will be heated garage units, so during the colder months, he suspects they will want to park inside. He stated that the City had asked them to provide six spaces for the pickleball, ten spaces for the lounge area, five spaces for the individual units, if they were categorized as storage units, and noted that he would not categorize them as storage units. He explained that they were proposing six spaces, with one being accessible, fourteen spaces for the lounge, and each unit would have their own individual space on top of that, so there would be a total of thirty-two spaces. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES October 23, 2023 Page 12 of 21 Kaltsas explained he is awaiting additional information from the building inspector because ADA excludes private clubs from their requirements. He noted that he thinks they will plan to maintain their accessible space, but does not believe it is an actual requirement. He stated that regardless, they will have thirty-two or thirty-three spaces which is in excess of the twenty-one spaces that are required. He noted that there has been a lot of discussion about the pickleball and lounge area becoming somewhat of a party facility but it would simply be a place to play pickleball and comfortably hang out. He noted that it would not be a party facility and explained that they would not be serving alcohol. He stated the intent is for this to really be a residential based indoor pickleball court with some seating on one end. He stated that there will be bathrooms and a locker room storage area for the members. He reiterated that it was not intended to be a public facility and noted that the fire lane will have signage so people will know that they cannot park there. Kaltsas explained there has been a lot of discussion on buffer and landscaping. He explained that with a site that is one-hundred feet wide, they are also concerned about buffering and landscaping. He stated that would like to not be seen and noted that they had pulled back the driveway back from the property line to meet the setback requirement which was not clear in the report. He explained that they are proposing over sixty trees to be planted on the property line. He stated that he is a licensed landscape architect and does planting plans for a living. He stated that he believes they can successfully grow and screen anything with what they are putting in. He explained that they are planning to put in a significant number of six to ten foot evergreen trees as well as a significant row of arbor vitae and some overstory deciduous trees. He noted that they have also agreed to put in an opaque fence along the entire property line. He stated that they have met with the adjacent property owners and they are in support of the project. He noted that the motel property has changed hands recently and he had not yet met with the current property owner. He stated that he also feels it is important to note that there were no negative comments that came forward with this proposed project. Kaltsas explained they are calling these units ‘lifestyle condos’ and people would be purchasing them and not rental units. He stated that with a purchase of one of the condo units they will have membership in the club and explained that there is no other access to the membership, so it would be capped at the twelve units. He stated that the build out for each unit would depend on each individual member and explained that they will provide them with a shell that has heated space and they can finish it how they like through the City’s process. He stated that the south building meets all applicable setback requirements, but noted that the report had indicated that it did not. He stated that the exceptions they are asking for on this project relate to the north building and explained the reason that they went a little wider was that they were trying to accommodate a pickleball court. He reiterated that he feels this will serve as a great transition for the nearby residential properties. He stated that he looks at this as a ‘quasi’ commercial development as a transition that will elevate the quality of the area from the motel and car garage usage. He stated that they were excited by the recommendation from the Planning Commission and were also in agreement with their proposed conditions. He explained that their intent was to work with the City to get a project going that makes sense and that everybody would like. He stated that the people that are in the room tonight all live in the area and were here in support of the project. Mayor Labadie stated that the nearby property has been referred to as a motel and asked if it was that or an apartment building. Planning Director Darling explained that it was an apartment building. Mayor Labadie asked that this property be referred to as an apartment building and not a motel. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES October 23, 2023 Page 13 of 21 Councilmember Maddy stated that he really likes the concept being presented. He noted that it looks fun and vibrant, but not too vibrant for the City. He stated that the problem is that a little over ten years ago the City did a small area plan to try to prevent proposals just like this one with an awkwardly shaped lot that makes it tough to deal with things like drainage and fire lanes. He stated that the idea, at the time, was that the best use would be to combine lots and share some of the burdens of things like stormwater and parking. He asked if Mr. Kaltsas had approached neighboring properties to see about the possibilities to combine them. Mr. Kaltsas stated that the neighboring property owner wants to stay and the apartment building just changed ownership. He stated that the residents in the building are leaving because they are doubling the rent. He noted that they had approached those owners as well as the auto shop, however, the price was too high. He stated that he thinks it was a noble idea on behalf of the City, but they were just not able to assemble any additional properties for that type of use. Mr. Schultz explained that when they bought this property from the Legion, they said they knew the City was trying to assemble properties for a project and the only way the Legion would move and sell their property was if someone found a lot the area and built them a building which is unattainable. Councilmember Callies stated that a lot of what is being discussed is theoretical and noted that she agreed that assembling properties for a project was a good idea, but people cannot be forced to sell nor should someone have to buy something else in order to use their property. She stated that the Council needs to consider the proposal that is in front of them right now. She stated that when residential use was discussed in the past there was not a particular appetite for it, but reiterated that was not what they were being asked to consider. She stated that she thinks this is an interesting concept, but it seemed a bit ‘faddish’ and noted that it will be hard to determine if people will still be interested in pickleball in ten years. She stated that it essentially would not matter though, because pickleball and storage are allowed uses in commercial zoning. Planning Director Darling explained that a private club serving food and drink is allowed as a permitted use and a self-storage facility is allowed as a conditional use. Councilmember Callies stated that what it gets down to is how the use is developed on this site and to her, it seems that it is over developed for the site and seems to require too many modifications to make it work. Mr. Kaltsas asked if anyone else had considered putting another residential project on this parcel. He stated that they had looked at it extensively and the things that are being brought up as deficits are the same as they would be for a residential project. He stated that he feels they will end up having the same conversations about the massing in order to get to six units which they have to based on Met Council approvals. He stated that in order to develop this site, there will need to be modifications allowed because of its size and the way the City has decided to guide it. He reiterated that was why they looked at this proposal because it seemed like it provided a better break and gave more separation from the adjacent residential property than a residential project would offer. He stated that it was not their proposed usage that was causing an issue with the massing but were because the site is small and the requirements are high. He noted that for the south building which is the most visible, they are proposing to be about twenty-one feet tall and a residential multi-family structure will easily be about thirty-five feet tall. He stated that what they are currently proposing is less intense and less dense than what it would be with the residential CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES October 23, 2023 Page 14 of 21 use that it is guided for. He stated that what they are proposing will not be an eyesore with a massive multi-family unit building on it which he feels will have much less impact on the surrounding properties. Councilmember Callies stated it is possible for there to be a smaller project, however, the Council does not have additional time to consider those since they are up against the deadline. Mr. Kaltsas clarified that the reason that he was not in favor of extending the timeline was because they submitted their initial application in December of 2022. He stated that they have tried to work with the City and noted that before they even bought the property, they approached the City to see what they wanted to see in this location. He stated that they have spent a few years trying to go through the process and get to a point where they had a yes, this is the right project and have been spending money to put together the various plans and have tried to listen to staff. He reiterated that they submitted their application in December of 2022 and cannot just continue to delay because they want to do something with the property. Mr. Schultz explained that they have a lot of carrying costs associated with the property. Mayor Labadie stated that they understand that, but the Council needs to make a decision that impacts the footprint of the City in that area. Councilmember Callies stated that she did not want to have the impression that Mr. Kaltsas has been doggedly submitting things and working with the City since December of 2022 when the City has really only had a complete application for a few months. She noted that she wanted it to be clear that they were not leaving the impression that the City has somehow been slow walking this application. Mr. Kaltsas stated that they were not implying that, but were asking for direction. He stated that they want to know what the City wants on this site and to know the significant points. He reiterated that they intend to put together a project where they can work with the City. Mr. Kaltsas noted that Mayor Labadie had suggested that those in the audience get their questions or input to him since she was only going to allow him, as the applicant, to address the Council. He explained that he received texts from many of them stating that they were in favor of the proposed project and reiterated that there have been no residents in the City opposed to the project. Mayor Labadie asked about the statement of the five foot setback being met which was not stated in the staff report. Planning Director Darling stated that the setback for a drive aisle is five feet and they will meet that requirement. She noted that her questions were related to the planting centers that she thought were closer than three feet. She stated that the other concern is within the zoning ordinance, the fifty foot required buffer is supposed to be landscaped and screen fencing can be used in addition but not as a substitute. Councilmember Zerby stated that he was looking at the Minnesota State Statute 462.357 and referenced 1.H. which talks about Comprehensive Plans in greater Minnesota and asked if that would be applicable to Shorewood. City Attorney Land clarified that this section refers to ‘greater Minnesota’ and noted in this section or the next it lays out the timeframe for having to match your zoning ordinances with the CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES October 23, 2023 Page 15 of 21 Comprehensive Plan. She noted that most cities fail to make the documents consistent within the timeframe though. Councilmember Zerby stated that in reading through this it talks about cities being ‘encouraged’ to make the zoning changes ahead of the Comprehensive Plan. He stated that the City has not done this despite having had ten years to do it. He noted that the City also had the ability to purchase this land which they also did not do. He stated that from the history of what the City has done, there does not appear to be an interest in rezoning it. He stated that he believes they got feedback from the Met Council that said the City cannot leave things the way they are and needed more density, and were asked to go find a place to put it. He stated that he believes the City was told that they needed to find ‘x’ number of units and told them to go find it which is where the thirst for higher density housing comes from. He stated that the City has seen high density housing projects and referenced the recently approved Lake Park Villas project that basically has no grass because it is almost all hard cover in order to fit the units on the lot. He stated that getting that type of density on this lot will be very challenging. He referenced that Statute language that says when there is rezoning there is a requirement to notice by mail, ten days before the hearing. He stated that he thinks a vote against this project, would really be a vote in favor of residential use, would not meet that notification requirement. He stated that his argument is still that the City has not rezoned the land yet so it is still commercial and not residential. He stated that this was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission and typically, the Council takes their recommendations very seriously. He stated that the overall statement shared by Commissioner Holker was that this proposal provided a softer buffer between the commercial and residential areas. He stated that he feels it would help define the commercial zone for the Smithtown and County Road 19 intersection. He noted that the public feedback on this proposal has been unanimously in favor of this project and did not appear to have anyone in opposition. Councilmember Callies stated that she understands what he is saying about the designation of the property being appropriate as commercial, but she believes that is missing the point. She stated that this is the application that is in front of the Council and she feels forcing this particular commercial development on this site is too large, which is why she was not in favor of this particular proposal. Mayor Labadie stated that she agreed with Councilmember Callies on the point that this is the application in front of the Council. She noted that Councilmember Zerby had implied that a vote against this application was essentially a vote a in favor of high density residential, which she disagreed with. She stated that she understands where he was coming from with his comments, but reiterated that this is the application in front of the Council. She stated that she is planning to follow the guidance of City Attorney Land related to whether a majority or super majority vote would be necessary. She noted that the Planning Commission gives the Council an advisory recommendation and noted that however the Council ends up voting on this issue she wants to make sure the Planning Commission understands that this is not a slap against them if they choose to vote against their recommendation. Councilmember Zerby stated that he understands the argument that this is the application that is in front of the Council, but they have heard the developer say that they are willing to make changes. He stated that often the City has said that they will approve a project with a list of conditions, so while this is the application in front of them, they can say, for example, that they want a smaller footprint, a larger setback, and more parking. He stated that the Council has flexibility and noted that ultimately it is the Council’s decision whether to follow the lawyers CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES October 23, 2023 Page 16 of 21 guidance or not because if the wrong decision is made, it is the Council that will take the brunt of that choice and not the attorney. Councilmember Sanschagrin stated that as he read through the Planning Commission minutes, he found that they wanted more information but were up against a time constraint. He stated that the recommendation for approval from the Planning Commission was more in the vein of a mindset that they felt that, conceptually, it sounded like a great plan, but we would have liked to have more information if they had more time. He stated that he got the impression that the approval was ‘tepid’ from many of the Commissioners and that staff’s position was a strong ‘no’, which he did not feel should be ignored. Councilmember Maddy stated that he has been trying his best not to say anything mean about the Met Council and the requirement that they placed upon the City of not being able to build anything less than six units/acre density which has entered the conversation. He asked if, procedurally, the City takes one of the residentially guided properties and turned it into C-1, if there would be repercussions on the Comprehensive Plan amendment that they may run into trouble with further down the road. Planning Director Darling stated that there would not be all out warfare on the City streets if they do not follow the guidance and approve something with a different land use. She stated that they would have to amend their Comprehensive Plan and noted that they do have enough places in the City where they can still get the required units required by the Met Council, however, it shrinks up the opportunity areas. She noted that there is a possibility that the Met Council could make it uncomfortable for the City and explained that one of their tools is extending out the application and noted that one thing she has heard is that they will have to incorporate all conditions of approval into the final package before they will accept an amendment. Councilmember Maddy stated that for him, this proposal is too much for a PUD. He stated that he likes the idea, but to be using the PUD tool to scale something up this large on this tough of a lot does not seem like a good use of a PUD. He stated that the Country Club development was a PUD and the City loosened some requirements for the houses, but then got a portion of the property as public space which he felt was a win/win. He stated that he does not see the same type of justification for the use of a PUD in this instance, and reiterated that he liked the project and believed it was a good area for this kind of use. He explained that, as it is proposed, he would have to vote to deny the request. Mayor Labadie stated that she saw some nodding heads when the point was made that the auto repair shop is a noisy neighbor and the opinion was shared that it will be hard to put any type of residential use in next door. She stated that the apartment buildings in Tonka Bay back up to the Public Works building and every time a snow plow backs up they will hear the ‘beep’ and those units still filled up. She stated that she was not sure that this proposed use was the best for the community, based on all the things being discussed. She noted that it was difficult when the Comprehensive Plan was rejected by the Met Council on the grounds of lack of density and lack of affordability. She stated that she understands some of the concerns shared would be the same with a residential project but she was concerned about the laundry list of requests and using the PUD method. She stated that the applicant has indicated that they were willing to bend a bit, but noted that she was still uncomfortable about the idea of using a PUD in this instance. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES October 23, 2023 Page 17 of 21 Councilmember Callies noted that she did not think the Council should say that they would consider a different application and basically redesign the project and reiterated that this was the application that is in front of the Council. Councilmember Zerby noted that he would like to echo the comment made by the Met Council. He stated that they are an appointed body and not an elected body nor do they have representatives for the City. He stated that they apply the same standards to every City regardless of its characteristics and he takes offense that the City is being driven by the Met Council to make these changes and not listen to the residents. He stated that the residents have spoken out on this property before and they have said that they like what they see with this proposal. He stated that he felt ignoring what the residents are saying and going with what Met Council says would be a mistake. Mayor Labadie stated that she agreed with everything he just stated, however, the Met Council does have authority over the City, to a certain degree, which cannot be eliminated tonight. Callies moved, Sanschagrin seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 23-107, “A Resolution Denying a request for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment and PUD Concept and Development Stage PUD for property located at 24560 Smithtown Road.” Motion passed 4-1 (Zerby opposed) Mr. Kaltsas asked to address the Council. He stated that he felt he was deserved a chance to speak since he has been working on this for so long and had spent a lot of money on this project. Mayor Labadie noted that Mr. Kaltsas was not in charge of the meeting but she would allow him a few minutes to address the Council. Mr. Kaltsas thanked the Council for looking at their proposal but wanted to express his frustration with the process and with where it has ended up. He stated that he bought the property in order to develop it and not simply throw darts at a dart board and try to guess what the five members of the Council may want on the property. He stated that he was disappointed because there were two public hearings on their proposal and there were no negative comments received from the residents of the City regarding this project. He noted that there were also over a dozen people who live in the City who are on the record in support of it. He noted that the Planning Commission recommended approval and he did not understand why the Council decided to just disregard what the residents and the Planning Commission have said about the project. He stated that it appears as though the Council is looking at this from a procedural basis and explained that he had asked the City what would be the best way to approach this and staff had recommended that he look at a PUD. He stated that he felt the standards that the Council said they were asked to make concessions to were cherry picked from the ordinance. He gave the example of the City basically saying, ‘you cannot do it as a C-1, but we are going to apply this C-1 standard’. He stated that in the review process, he feels that this was cherry picked which has been super frustrating as someone who was truly trying to meet the standards. He stated that they were asked for a couple of setback requirement changes and to be able to put two buildings on one property which he did not feel was an excessive amount of exceptions. He stated that this proposal is not for a self-use storage facility so for staff to draw from the self-use storage height requirements was frustrating. He stated that it has also been frustrating for him, as a resident, throughout this entire process. He noted that he spent the money to buy the property, try to develop the property, meet with residents and neighbors, as well as the Planning Commission. He reiterated that everyone has CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES October 23, 2023 Page 18 of 21 said that they liked the project and felt this was a good use and stated that for the Council to go against that for reasons that he did not feel were clearly articulated has been frustrating. He stated that he believes the message he got was that they ‘just did not like it’, but noted that he had already gotten a lot of pushback on the residential project he brought before the City the last time and now he has to go back and ask the question of what he can use his property for. He stated that he understands that what he brought before the City at that time was a concept/sketch plan but that is the point where they should be able to give him some feedback and comments. He stated that proposal was noticed and they got a ton of public input and the residential proposal was not well liked or well accepted. He stated that he brought a commercial development plan to the City and was also given a simple ‘no’ answer. He stated that because the entire conversation on his project was started with a statement on how many votes they would need to deny the request, it gave him the impression that the decision was preconceived in opposition to the project. He stated that the impression they and others present tonight have gotten is that they really walked into a meeting where they had been sabotaged by staff. He stated that in addition to the concerns he has shared he was also concerned that he does not have a reasonable use of this property because he has come forward with both a residential and a commercial option that have been rejected. He stated that he understands he does not have a formal denial on his residential proposal, but there was a room full of people, including the Council, that clearly expressed their opposition. He suggested that it feels a bit like the Council was trying to guard that property because they own the property two parcels down and are hoping to assemble something else. He stated that may not be what is happening, but noted that it certainly feels like it from what he has seen from staff and the Council’s actions. He stated that he would like be able to have some interaction with the Council to talk through some of these issues and noted that he had reached out a few times but was unable to connect. Mayor Labadie noted that she did not recall him reaching out. Mr. Kaltsas stated that he and Mr. Schultz had sent several e-mails and had made several phone calls to all of the Councilmembers. He noted that he had heard back from the Councilmember who is no longer on the Council. Mayor Labadie stated that the Council’s action tonight was not preconceived and she had asked what votes were needed for both alternatives that were presented. Mr. Kaltsas stated that he went back three years in Council minutes and noted that every time the Planning Commission had made a recommendation for approval, a positive resolution was brought before the Council. He explained that he could not find an instance where both a negative and positive resolution was brought before the Council, especially with the denial resolution being placed in the first position. He stated that bringing both a negative and positive resolution were not standard practice in this industry and, to him, seems odd. He stated that it does not feel good for that to be what was done when the Planning Commission has made a recommendation for approval and reiterated that he did not find any other similar examples in the three years of minutes that he reviewed. Councilmember Callies stated that some of this is a matter of timing due to the deadline. Mr. Kaltsas stated that the whole process of the Council being presented with both a positive and negative resolution felt odd and icky and explained that walking into the room tonight also felt odd and icky. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES October 23, 2023 Page 19 of 21 Mayor Labadie stated that it also felt ‘icky’ when he made the statement that the City made this decision because they own a parcel nearby. She stated that fact was not in her mindset and explained that the Council makes hard decisions at every meeting and even disagree which each other at every meeting. She stated that she has not felt that anyone on the Council made a decision with any type of beneficial intent to them and she did not appreciate that implication. She stated that she feels the Council has been clear in their comments that this proposal just did not quite feel like the right thing and encouraged him to work with staff and assured him that they did not want him to have a parcel that he could not do anything with. Councilmember Maddy asked if Mr. Kaltsas had reached out to him. Mr. Kaltsas stated that he was not yet on the Council when he had reached out. 7. ENGINEERING/PUBLIC WORKS 8. GENERAL/NEW BUSINESS 9. STAFF AND COUNCIL REPORTS A. Staff Mayor Labadie asked if City Attorney Land had any additional items for the Council. City Attorney Land stated that she did not have any additional items and City Attorney Shepherd had not passed along any additional information. Mayor Labadie explained that she would like to allow City Attorney Land to leave the meeting at this time. rd 1. 3 Quarter 2023 General Fund Budget Report Finance Director Rigdon summarized the report and noted that the City was, overall, in a good situation. He noted that the tax revenues have come up to $2.7 million, and for licenses and permits are at 108% of budget as of September 30, 2023, and reviewed details from the other areas of revenue. He reviewed expenditures by type and program and noted that they were all pretty much in line with what they had planned. Councilmember Sanschagrin asked if there were any huge variances that Finance Director Rigdon saw that were not explained by timing differences. He referenced specific examples throughout the report. Finance Director Rigdon gave an explanation for Councilmember Sanschagrin’s examples and noted that things look pretty good overall and should be able to hit their budget. He noted that in past years they had a bit more of a surplus and did not think that would be as large this year. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES October 23, 2023 Page 20 of 21 rd 2. 3 Quarter 2023 Investment Report rd Finance Director Rigdon gave a general overview of the 3 quarter investment report and stated that the City is solid in the safety, liquidity, and yield categories. Councilmember Maddy stated that he has noticed Finance Rigdon’s technique of keeping as much in the 4M fund as possible appears to be paying off and thanked him for his efforts. Other Staff Reports Park and Recreation Director Crossfield stated that the Park Commission will meet tomorrow night where they will be discussing the Shorewood Community and Event Center Fee structures. She noted that they had fifty-three rentals in October and have fifty-seven rentals scheduled for November. She noted that Public Works Director Morreim was not able to attend tonight’s meeting but sent her an update and asked her to share it with the Council. She noted that Public Works staff began sweeping today on the west side of town and will work their way eastward and should be completed in about five weeks. Public Works staff are also preparing equipment for winter and will bring more details to the next Council work session. City Engineer Budde stated that Birch Bluff continues to get buttoned up with restoration. He noted that the concrete work at Strawberry Lane should be finished up tomorrow and paving is slated for later in the week, however there is rain in the forecast, which could delay things. He stated that there are also plans to pave Freeman Park trails later this week if the weather holds. He noted that there are areas peppered around the City for the utility and drainage improvement project and the contractor will be working on that over the next two or three weeks. He stated that the contractor who did the crack filling through the City came back to do some corrective work, including the City Hall parking lot, so that has been wrapped up for the year. City Clerk/HR Director Thone provided an update on the new website progress and noted that there is a link to the website survey in the Shore Report and online. Planning Director Darling stated that the first deer hunt was held October 13-16, 2023. She noted that there was a lot of rain so the amount of time they could actually hunt was reduced. She stated that they did harvest seven deer and noted that the next hunt is scheduled for October 27- 29, 2023. B. Mayor and City Council Councilmember Sanschagrin stated that he had just completed week two of Citizen’s Academy which has been a very fun program to go through. Councilmember Maddy noted that he was also in the Citizen’s Academy program and felt he was learning a lot of new information. Councilmember Callies stated that the lift station project on Radisson Road is ongoing but wanted to note that the contractors have been really great and responsible about cleaning up. She asked about the audit of Laserfiche. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES October 23, 2023 Page 21 of 21 City Clerk/HR Director Thone stated that they had completed the audit and noted that she had just received the report earlier today. She noted that it will take a few hours to go through the report and garner feedback from CDI and then work on the areas of improvement. Councilmember Callies asked for a summary of what happened at a future meeting and explained that she was interested in some of the settings. City Clerk/HR Director Thone stated that she will report back to the Council on the audit results and noted that later this week there will be some additional staff training on Laserfiche and explained that they were really looking to optimize their use of it. Councilmember Zerby complimented those individuals involved in the virtual meeting on Zoom and noted that tonight, it appeared to have gone flawlessly. Mayor Labadie stated that she recently attended the Mayor’s Alliance to end childhood hunger. She stated that she had attended the Minnetonka School District meeting with the mayors meeting and noted that it was very interesting and the money that trickled down to public schools was not trickled down equally and was done based on other financial factors. She stated that the students in the Minnetonka School District received $61/student, which was the lowest in the entire State. She stated that some districts received close to $3,000/student. She stated that most of the Council attended the buckthorn removal session at Freeman Park with about twenty-five residents. She stated that she wanted to extend a sincere thank you to the Council because tonight was a hard meeting where they had to make a hard decision. She explained that she did not appreciate a resident questioning the integrity of the Council. She stated that they appreciate everyone who serves on the Council and that they thoroughly read the packets and take their jobs very seriously. She stated that this is a hard job that she feels they undertake with courtesy to each other and residents. Councilmember Maddy stated that he believes the Planning Commission also deserves appreciation. Mayor Labadie agreed and stated that it may feel like a slap in the face when the Council chooses to vote against their recommendation, but it was not. She stated that she also wanted to thank the Commission because they ask a lot of the questions ahead of time and also have a hard job. 10. ADJOURN Maddy moved, Sanschagrin seconded, Adjourning the City Council Regular Meeting of October 23, 2023, at 9:49 P.M. Motion passed. ATTEST: Jennifer Labadie, Mayor Sandie Thone, City Clerk ASSIGNMENT th ASSIGNMENT made this ___ day of __________, 2023 by, between and among the CITY OF SHOREWOOD, a Minnesota Municipal Corporation ("City"), RED GRANITE CONSTRUCTION, LLC a Minnesota Limited Liability Company Developer, and EXCELSIOR WOODS, LLC a Minnesota Limited Liability Company Successor Developer RECITALS A. The City approved a development agreement on October 12, 2021 with the Developer Agreement, recorded as Document Number 11089526. B. Developer has requested the Development Agreement be assigned to Successor Developer for the property legally described as: Lot 37, Hennepin County, Minnesota, according to the recorded plat thereof . C. Successor Developer has purchased the Property and desires to develop the Property consistent with City approvals and the Development Agreement. D. Successor Developer has requested to assume the rights and obligations of the Development Agreement E. Paragraph 47 of the Development Agreement prohibits Developer from assigning the Development Agreement without written permission of the City Council. NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THEIR MUTUAL COVENANTS THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. ASSIGNMENT. rights and obligations under the Development Agreement are assigned to the Successor Developer subject to the terms of this Assignment. Successor Developer shall be responsible for all legal expenses related to this Assignment. Successor Developer accepts the assignment and agrees to be bound by the terms of the Development Agreement. 2. BINDING EFFECT. Successor Developer agrees to be bound by the Development Agreement to the same extent as if it had been the original party to the Development Agreement. Successor Developer shall be responsible for all work previously performed by Developer under the Development Agreement. 3. CASH ESCROWS AND UNPAID BILLS. Cash escrows established by Developer for remaining work required under the Development Agreement are hereby assigned to Successor Developer. Any unpaid bills or obligations of Developer that are due or that may become due under 1 228445v2 the Development Agreement are assumed by Successor Developer. 4. NOTICES. Required notices to the Successor Developer shall be in writing, and shall be either hand delivered to Successor Developer, its employees or agents, or mailed to Successor Developer by registered mail at the following address: Excelsior Woods, LLC 14712 High Tower Minnetonka, MN 55345 5. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Assignment shall be effective when the City has received from Successor Developer: a certificate of insurance in the amount and on the form required by the Development Agreement and security to the City for $310,971 as required by Section 27 of the Development Agreement. 6. RECORDING. This Assignment may be recorded against the Property and is binding upon the parties, their successors, heirs, and assigns. \[Remainder of page intentionally left blank\] \[Signature pages to follow\] 2 228445v2 CITY OF SHOREWOOD BY: ________________________________ Jennifer Labadie, Mayor (SEAL) AND _______________________________ Sandie Thone, City Clerk STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ______ day of ______________, 20__, by Jennifer Labadie and by Sandie Thone, respectively the Mayor and City Clerk of the CITY OF SHOREWOOD, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation and pursuant to the authority granted by its City Council. ____________________________________ NOTARY PUBLIC 3 228445v2 RED GRANITE CONSTRUCTION, LLC BY: ________________________________ Its: STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( ss. COUNTY OF __________ ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ________________ day of ______________, 2023, by ________________________________, the _________________ of RED GRANITE CONSTRUCTION, LLC, a Minnesota Limited Liability Company on behalf of said company. ____________________________________ NOTARY PUBLIC 4 228445v2 EXCELSIOR WOODS, LLC BY: ________________________________ Its: STATE OF _____________ ) ( ss. COUNTY OF __________ ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ______ day of ______________, 2023, by _____________________________________, the ________________ of Excelsior Woods LLC, a Minnesota Limited Liability Company, on behalf of the company. ____________________________________ NOTARY PUBLIC 5 228445v2 MORTGAGE CONSENT TO ASSIGNMENT _______________________________________________________, which holds a mortgage on the subject property, the development of which is governed by the foregoing Development Agreement between the City of Shorewood and Red Granite Construction, LLC dated October 12, 2021 and recorded as Document Number 11089526, agrees that the Development Agreement, assigned herein to Excelsior Woods, LLC, shall remain in full force and effect even if it forecloses on its mortgage. Dated this _____ day of ____________, 2_____. ______________________________________ ______________________________________ STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF __________ ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of ________________, 2_____, by __________________________________________________________________________. ________________________________________ NOTARY PUBLIC DRAFTED BY: C AMPBELL K NUTSON Professional Association Grand Oak Office Center I 860 Blue Gentian Road, Suite 290 Eagan, Minnesota 55121 651-452-5000 JDS/jds 6 228445v2 CITY OF SHOREWOOD COUNTY OF HENNEPIN STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 23-109 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ASSIGNMENT OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR EXCELSIOR WOODS LOCATED AT 20325 EXCELSIOR BOULEVARD WHEREAS, in 2021, the City of Shorewood approved a final plat and development agreement for Excelsior Woods (the “Project”), located at 20325 Excelsior Boulevard, on property legally described as: Lot 37, Auditor’s Subdivision No. 141, Hennepin County, Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the Project is subject to a Development Agreement (the “Agreement”), dated October 12, 2021 which outlines rights and obligations of the developer, Red Granite, LLC; and WHEREAS, Red Granite Construction, LLC, has sold the property and project to Excelsior Woods, LLC. (the “Applicant”); and WHEREAS, the applicant has agreed to assume the rights and obligations of the development agreement as drafted. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Shorewood has approved the Assignment of the Development Agreement, as follows: 1. The Assignment of the Agreement makes no other changes to the rights and obligations outlined therein. 2. Prior to the issuance of any permits for homes, grading or other work on the site, the Applicant must record the Assignment with the Hennepin County Recorder and complete all outstanding conditions of approval. 3. This Resolution authorizes the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the Assignment of the Development Agreement. th Adopted by the City Council of the City of Shorewood this 13 day of November, 2023. Jennifer Labadie, Mayor ATTEST: Sandie Thone, City Clerk City Council Meeting Item Item Title/Subject: Contractor Agreement with Roots and Wings 2D Therapeutic Services, LLC. Meeting Date: Monday, November 13, 2023 Prepared by: Janelle Crossfield, Parks and Recreation Director Reviewed by: Mark Nevinski, City Administrator Attachments: Parks and Recreation Independent Contractor Agreement Background: Shorewood Parks and Recreation is excited to offer outdoor play groups, yoga and nature based art programming in collaboration with Michelle Pettit of Roots and Wings Therapeutic Services. Michelle Pettit is an occupation therapist, yoga teacher and co-owner of Roots and Wings Therapeutic Services LLC. Michelle is passionate about providing services that are meaningful, bring joy and support learning, growth, connection, and autonomy. Michelle deeply values the astounding therapeutic benefits of nature and enjoys sharing this with others while facilitating individual and group services. Michelle has been an occupational therapist for seven years, has worked with children for over 15 years and most recently has enjoyed expanding her services and working with adults. Approval of the agreement includes any future addenda executed between the contractor and Parks and Recreation Director through December 2024. For the purposes of this contract the addenda includes program logistics such as location, dates, times, program fees, no class days, and program descriptions. These program logistics are agreed upon throughout the year by City staff and the contractor. Financial or Budget Considerations: Roots and Wings Therapeutic Services, LLC will receive 80% of the program revenue collected by City of Shorewood. Action Requested: Motion to approve the independent contractor agreement with Roots and Wings Therapeutic Services, LLC. A simple majority vote is required. 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 Item 2E City Council Meeting Item Title/Subject: Approve PT Community Center Attendant Hires Meeting Date: November 13, 2023 Prepared by: Sandie Thone, City Clerk/Human Resources Director Reviewed by: Janelle Crossfield/Park and Recreation Director Reviewed by: Marc Nevinski, City Administrator Attachments: None Background: The city most recently recruited candidates for the PT Community Center Attendant positions. Thanks in part to the Council approving our new NEOGOV Insight recruiting software, the City received 631 hits on the position posting, and seven very good applicants for the position as of November 8, 2023. As discussed with the city council, as the programs and rentals increase, Staff has observed that current staffing levels were not adequate to cover the demand. Without additional attendants to cover these shifts, programs and rentals would have to be limited to current staffing capacities. The department is currently running with just two active Community Center Attendants which is burdensome to both them and staff to fill all the shifts required to support the Community Center’s activities and rentals. Interviews were held with four candidates for the position on October 23, 2023, and November 2, 2023. During the interviews, all candidates were interested in picking up both SCEC and warming house shifts in the capacity of this position. As a result of those interviews, staff is recommending conditional approval upon receiving successful background checks, for the following: Nataley Vassar Emma Quam Nicholas Rogney Avery Bomstad These employees, if approved, will work in the capacity as part-time Community Center Attendants working schedules of 12-15 hours per week and not to exceed 20 hours per week. The position is classified as a part-time casual position on Grade 1 of the city’s compensation schedule with a range of $13.23 to $19.84 per hour. The position is non-exempt and does not qualify for benefits. The above candidates were conditionally offered a starting wage of $15.43 per hour which is Step C on the compensation schedule. The position is eligible to receive an annual increase on the employee’s anniversary date to Step D on the compensation schedule and yearly thereafter, upon meeting performance measures. In addition, existing employees in 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 the position will be receiving an increase from $14.33 to $15.43, as well. For this season and this job market, it is expected that employees hired in the capacity of Community Center Attendant and Warming House Attendant will be hired at the $15.43 rate. Financial Considerations: These positions are included in the 2024 budget under the Shorewood Community & Event Center (SCEC) personnel budget, the Park and Recreation personnel budget and the SCEC revenues generated by rentals and programming. The above candidates and existing employees were conditionally offered a wage of $15.43 per hour which is Step C on the city’s compensation schedule. The position is eligible to receive an annual increase on the employee’s anniversary date to Step D on the compensation schedule and yearly thereafter, upon meeting performance measures. Action Requested: Staff respectfully recommends the city council approve the Community Center Attendant hires as presented and upon receiving successful background investigations. Motion, second and simple majority vote required. Item 2F City Council Meeting Item Title/Subject: Consider Memorandum of Agreement, AFSCME Council 5, Local 224 Meeting Date: November 13, 2023 Prepared by: Marc Nevinski, City Administrator Attachments: Memorandum of Agreement Background The contract with AFSCME Council 5, Local 224, which represents the Public Works Light Equipment Operators, the Shop Technician, and the Utility Operators, is updated annually to reflect employer provided monthly benefit amount for the upcoming year, and to update the seniority list. Additionally, the wage table is being updated this year to reflect the added step (“after 6 years”) that resulted from the Compensation Study. Financial Considerations Compensation and benefits costs have been included in the preliminary 2024 budget. Action Requested Motion to approve the attached Memorandum of Agreement with AFSCME Council 5, Local 224. A majority vote by the Council is required. Mission Statement: The City of Shorewood is committed to providing residents quality public services, a healthy environment, a variety of attractive amenities, a sustainable tax base, and sound financial management through effective, efficient, and visionary leadership. Page 1 After 6 After 1 After 2 After 3 After 4 After 5 After 6 ClassificationStartMonthsyearsyearsyearsyearsyearsyears LEO$ 29.45$ 30.52$ 31.59$ 32.70$ 33.74$ 34.86$ 35.93$ 37.01 Shopt Tech$ 30.12$ 31.19$ 32.27$ 33.37$ 34.40$ 35.51$ 36.58$ 37.68 Utility Operator$ 30.79$ 31.85$ 32.93$ 34.03$ 35.07$ 36.17$ 37.24$ 38.36 Utility Lead$ 33.11$ 34.33$ 35.55$ 36.77$ 37.97$ 39.14$ 40.40$ 41.61 MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD AND AMERICAN FEDERATION OF STATE, COUNTY AND MUNICIPLE EMPLOYEES (AFSCME) COUNCIL 5, LOCAL 224 The purpose of this Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) is to memorialize the agreement between the City of Shorewood (the EMPLOYER) and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) regarding 2024 benefit contributions, the wage schedule, a State designated holiday, and the Seniority List. 1. Starting January 1, 2024 Article 20, Section 3 will be amended as follows. In 2024 the Employer shall provide up to $1480 per month to regular full-time employees for coverage stated in Section 1 above. An employee who elects coverage under the Health Savings Account that, combined with other benefits, results in a total cost that is less than the contribution level, shall have the balance applied toward their Health Savings Account up to a maximum of $2,500 for the year, or $208 per month. This amount shall be deposited into the members’ HSA account at the start of the New Year. Regular part-time employees working more than 20 hours per week shall be entitled to pro-rated contribution. The Employer and Union agree to reopen negotiations for year 2021 Employer contribution amount. 2. Starting January 1, 2024 Appendix A-Wage Schedule will be amended to add an additional wage step to be titled “After 6 Years”, as shown below: 3. The Seniority List for 2024 is updated as follows: Employee Job Classification Seniority Date Bruce Stark Utility Operator 3/19/2001 Rob Hanson Utility Operator 1/16/2014 Luke Weber Utility Lead 4/30/2020 Tim Kosek Utility Operator 7/20/2020 Matt VanLith LEO 5/2/2022 Jeremy Moe Shop Technician 8/22/2022 Ryan Brant LEO 9/19/2022 Todd Roden LEO 9/26/2022 Chris Pratley LEO 3/1/2023 1 This Memorandum of Agreement is approved by the Shorewood City Council as of November 13, 2023 and agreed to by AFSCME Council 5, Local 224 as of ______________, 2023. City of Shorewood AFSCME Council 5, Local 224 Jennifer Labadie, Mayor Rob Hanson Marc Nevinski, City Administrator Tim Kosek Name 2 Item 2H City Council Meeting Item Title/Subject: Addendum to TimeSaver’s Recording Secretary Service Agreement for 2024 Meeting Date: November 8, 2023 Prepared by: Sandie Thone, City Clerk/Human Resources Director Reviewed by: Marc Nevinski, City Administrator Attachments: None Background: For the past six years the city has contracted with TimeSaver’s Off-Site Secretarial, Inc. for city council, planning commission, and park commission meeting minutes. Attached is an Addendum to the Recording Secretary Agreement dated December 31, 2023, that proposes to extend the expiration date to December 31, 2024. The terms and conditions include $1.50 per hour and .50 cents per page increases due to the organization’s compliance to MN ESST requirements that become effective January 1, 2024. TimeSaver’s has continued to provide excellent service and turn-around time for the city council and city commission minutes. Staff is recommending approval of the attached Addendum as submitted. Financial or Budget Considerations: The 2024 contract reflects a base rate increase from $159/first hour plus $37.75 each subsequent 30 minutes to $167/$39.50, respectively. It reflects a unit rate increase from $51/first hour, $34/hour thereafter, and $16/per billable page to $53.25/$35.50/$16.50, respectively. The service has been provided for in the 2024 budget. Action Requested: Staff respectively requests approval of the 2024 Addendum to the TimeSaver’s Recording Secretary Service Agreement. Motion, second and simple majority vote required. Connection to Vision/Mission: Consistency in providing residents quality public services, a healthy environment, a sustainable tax base, and sound financial management through effective, efficient, and visionary leadership. Mission Statement: The City of Shorewood is committed to providing residents quality public services, a healthy environment, a variety of attractive amenities, a sustainable tax base, and sound financial management through effective, efficient, and visionary leadership. Page 1 CITY OF SHOREWOOD COUNTY OF HENNEPIN STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 23-111 A RESOLUTION GRANTING A FOOD TRUCK PERMIT FOR A PRIVATE RENTAL AT SHOREWOOD COMMUNITY AND EVENT CENTER WHEREAS, the City of Shorewood regulates food trucks in City parks and Tyler Hirth (Applicant), has rented the banquet room at the Shorewood Community and Event Center for December 2, 2023 and has coordinated with a food truck for catering services; and WHEREAS, staff has reviewed the submitted information and assembled a list of requirements and fees and the City Council has considered the application at its regular meeting on November 13, 2023. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD: The Applicant’s request to utilize a food truck at Shorewood Community and Event Center is hereby approved subject to the following conditions: 1. The Applicant is entirely responsible for the operation of the food truck and will be expected to assume financial responsibility in case of damage to City-owned facilities or structures. 2. Submit evidence of comprehensive liability insurance in the amount of $300,000 per occurrence and the city must be named an additional insurer. 3. The applicant has agreed that the city is indemnified and held harmless from any claims arising out of the use of the park and the operation of the event. 4. The damage deposit would be returned to the applicant after the event if no damage to city-owned facilities or structures has occurred. The applicant would also be responsible to compensate the city for any damage that occurs that exceeds the amount of the damage deposit. 5. The applicant shall be responsible for picking up all litter and placing it in trash containers. 6. The applicant shall ensure that the food parks in the recommended location allowing access for emergency vehicles. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to provide a certified copy of this resolution as permit for the event when the applicant has fulfilled all the above conditions. ADOPTED BY THE SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL this 13th day of November 2023. _______________________________ Jennifer Labadie, Mayor Sandie Thone, City Clerk 2J MEETING TYPE REGULAR City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Title / Subject: Assessment Agreements for Water Connections Meeting Date: November 13, 2023 Prepared by: Joe Rigdon, Finance Director Reviewed by: Marc Nevinski, City Administrator Attachment: Resolution Certifying Special Assessments on the 2024 Hennepin County Property Tax Rolls Background The City Council for the City of Shorewood offers a program for residents who have public water available but are not connected to the municipal system, the ability to assess the water access charge over a number of years. An assessment agreement was developed in consultation with the city attorney, and numerous properties have signed assessment agreements since 2019. The owners of all the properties listed below have signed Assessment Agreements that state the terms of the assessment and are waiving their right to appeal the assessment. The current water access charge is $10,000. Prior water assessments collected are applied against the $10,000 access charge when applicable. The assessments will be certified with the Hennepin County Assessor’s office. PID ADDRESS NAME AMOUNT TERM INTEREST RATE 28-117-23-33-0006 25530 Birch Bluff Fiedler 10,000 5 years 5.0% Road 29-117-23-44-0032 25700 Birch Bluff Wipson/ 10,000 5 years 5.0% Road MacDonald 32-117-23-33-0011 6040 Cajed Lane Magistad 10,000 5 years 5.0% 32-117-23-42-0021 26370 Peach Koenig/ 10,000 5 years 5.0% Circle McMullen 32-117-23-31-0034 26625 Strawberry Miller 10,000 5 years 5.0% Court Financial Considerations Allowing water access connection charges to be assessed incentives connections to City water and supports the water enterprise fund. Action Requested Staff recommends approval of the Resolution Certifying Special Assessments on the 2024 Hennepin County Property Tax Rolls. 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 23-112 A RESOLUTION CERTIFYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS ON THE 2024 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY TAX ROLLS WHEREAS, the City Council for the City of Shorewood offered a program for residents who had public water available but were not connected to the municipal system, the ability to assess the water access charge over a number of years; and, WHEREAS, the owners of all the properties listed below have signed Assessment Agreements that state the terms of the assessment and waiving their right to appeal the assessment, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD AS FOLLOWS: That pursuant to the terms of the assessment agreements, the city hereby approves and certifies the following special assessments: PID ADDRESS NAME AMOUNT TERM INTEREST RATE 28-117-23-33-0006 25530 Birch Bluff Fiedler 10,000 5 years 5.0% Road 29-117-23-44-0032 25700 Birch Bluff Wipson/ 10,000 5 years 5.0% Road MacDonald 32-117-23-33-0011 6040 Cajed Lane Magistad 10,000 5 years 5.0% 32-117-23-42-0021 26370 Peach Koenig/ 10,000 5 years 5.0% Circle McMullen 32-117-23-31-0034 26625 Strawberry Miller 10,000 5 years 5.0% Court Such certification, which is due to the County Auditor no later than November 30, 2023, shall be payable over the period of years indicated on the table. The owner of the affected party may, at any time prior to certification of assessments to the County Auditor, pay the whole of the certified assessments to the Shorewood City Clerk. The clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified copy of this certification roll to the County Auditor to be extended on the property tax lists of the county and such certified assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as property taxes. Hennepin County Special Assessment Division is hereby authorized to certify the assessments on the property tax rolls payable in 2024. th ADOPTED BY THE SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL this 13 day of November 2023. ________________________________ Jennifer Labadie, Mayor ATTEST ________________________________ Sandie Thone, City Clerk 5A CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB RD PARK COMMISSION MEETING SHOREWOOD CITY HALL TUESDAY, OCTOBER 24, 2023 7:00 P.M. MINUTES 1. CONVENE PARK COMMISSION MEETING Chair Hirner convened the meeting at 7:00 p.m. A. Roll Call Present: Chair Hirner, Commissioners Garske, Wenner, Czerwonka, and DiGruttolo, City Council Liaison Zerby; Parks and Recreation Director Crossfield; Planning Director Darling Absent: None B. Review Agenda Garske moved to approve the agenda as written. Czerwonka seconded the motion. Motion carried 5-0. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. Park Commission Meeting Minutes of September 12, 2023 Chair Hirner noted that the date was incorrect at the top of the minutes. Commissioner Wenner referenced a few additional changes needed including: the spelling of Pat Arnst; a change from ‘feed’ to ‘feet’ on page two; clarified that a statement was not made by Ms. Arnst about a specific class of bikes being illegal and suggested potential changes; and a typographical error 5 paragraphs below that where it should say ‘once’, rather than ‘one’. Wenner moved to approve the minutes of the September 12, 2023 meeting, as amended, per discussion. Garske seconded the motion. Motion carried 5-0. 3. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR Chair Hirner extended an official welcome to incoming Commissioner DiGruttolo and suggested that they take some time to introduce themselves. The Commissioner took turns sharing their name and their history of serving on the Park Commission. 4. NEW BUSINESS A. Shorewood Community and Event Center Fee Structure Park and Recreation Director Crossfield reminded the Commission that last month they had taken a tour of the Shorewood Community and Event Center (SCEC) and had discussed some of the opportunities available, things that were going well, and areas of challenges. She noted that they PARK COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, OCTOBER 24, 2023 PAGE 2 OF 7 had also reviewed data about the frequency of various renters of the facility. She stated that year to date, the SCEC has brought in rental revenue of $53,945 and explained that it appears as though revenue was a bit lower over the last few years due to Covid but noted that things have begun trending higher. She noted that they have had to turn away some rentals due to staffing shortages and have also lost rentals because of specific AV needs. She reviewed general cost recovery goals and how they relate to community benefit. She stated that staff have begun training for a phased implementation of the new CivicRec program software that will help with reservations and rentals. She explained that the 2024 CIP has plans and funds allocated for improvements to the restrooms as well as new chairs for the conference room. She stated that based on the conversation at the last meeting, they conducted a market analysis and reviewed the results for rates of residents versus non-residents, and those that offered a special rate for non-profits. She noted that they found all the nearby venues have significantly higher rental rates than the SCEC, but also have a higher capacity. Chair Hirner stated that the rates shown in the analysis show quite a vast difference in what is being charged, but it looks to him like the SCEC is on the lower side of the ranges. Park and Recreation Director Crossfield stated that the SCEC is definitely on the lower end of the ranges being charged. Chair Hirner asked if Park and Recreation Director Crossfield wanted to continue to have a different rate for non-profit organizations. Park and Recreation Director Crossfield explained that her recommendation would be that they do not completely eliminate the lower non-profit rates. Commissioner DiGruttolo asked what the total expenditures and costs were to run the SCEC. Park and Recreation Director Crossfield explained that she had not calculated those total amounts because she had not yet been with the City for a full calendar year. Commissioner DiGruttolo explained that if they knew how much they were spending on the SCEC to keep it open, that would show them the minimum that they need to make in order to break even. She noted that once they have those figures, then it will be easier for them to discuss what they should be charging. She stated that her thought is that they would not necessarily need to charge what everyone else is charging but explained that she had gone through and broke down some of the data comparison in greater detail and thinks if the City were to charge around $800- $900/day for residents they would be in the middle of what everyone else is charging and it would also cover the shortfall that they have been borrowing from the General Fund. She stated that this is a bit of a guess though since she does not know what the total expenditures are. She noted that if they had some additional spreadsheet numbers she believes there is a way to still have a non-profit rate and keep their rates below some of the other venues, provide community benefit and also generate enough revenue to cover its own costs. Park and Recreation Director Crossfield stated that the fees will ultimately be approved by the City Council. She suggested that the discussion today focus on the categories and the discount options that she had presented. She stated that one thing she did not cover in her review was the separate custodial charge the SCEC has because those duties are done by a third party and all of the other facilities have that included in their rental fee. PARK COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, OCTOBER 24, 2023 PAGE 3 OF 7 Commissioner Garske clarified that Park and Recreation Director Crossfield was only asking for feedback tonight on fee categories and discount rates and not specifics about actual rates. Park and Recreation Director Crossfield stated that was correct and noted that staff would be making a recommendation to the Council on the actual rate structure. Council Liaison Zerby asked how they determined whether a non-profit was considered local or non-local. Park and Recreation Director Crossfield explained that was currently how it was written in the fee structure and she has gone off of the five cities that originally provided funds to the building, but noted that it is primarily Shorewood residents who are renting the facility. She stated that if someone is from outside of the metro area or out of State, they would receive 50% off of the non- resident rate. Council Liaison Zerby gave the example of the Rotary Club and how a determination would be made about them being consider local. Park and Recreation Director Crossfield noted that because they would be serving the community, including Shorewood, she would consider them to be local but noted that there was not really a black and white rule on this issue for SCEC. She noted that Minnetonka specifically makes a distinction between a Minnetonka non-profit organization and other non-profit organizations. Chair Hirner expressed the difficulty with having a smaller community and being able to make some of these distinctions. He noted that he liked the idea of saying that if it was someone from the original five communities from when the SCEC started would be considered local. He stated that during the tour, Park and Recreation Director Crossfield had expressed some concern about the potential loss of non-profit usage, if the rates were increased too much. He asked her to elaborate on those issues and noted that he also had a the idea regarding the possibility of raising the rate but lowering the requirement amount of usage time. Park and Recreation Director Crossfield explained that it was hard to give an exact answer, but would say that the non-profits that come in have a set amount of hours so she was not sure if lowering the requirement regarding the amount of usage time would greatly impact things. She expressed concern about the few longer term, frequent non-profit renters that would be impacted by the higher rates. She stated that they may decide to look elsewhere, but after having done the analysis for nearby rates, the SCEC rates are pretty favorable, so it may not be an issue and explained that she would worry more about the individual resident and non-resident if fees were raised significantly higher. Commissioner DiGruttolo stated that the SCEC is far and away lower than all of their competitors. She stated that if they do go ahead and raise their rates but are still not as expensive as others in the community she thinks it may be worth testing the waters to see if they would lose any of their clientele. Park and Recreation Director Crossfield explained that she would definitely be looking at a rate increase but most likely will recommend taking ‘baby steps’. Commissioner DiGruttolo stated that she felt this was definitely something that needed a plan and noted that they should also have a list of things that need to be upgraded so they can also budget PARK COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, OCTOBER 24, 2023 PAGE 4 OF 7 appropriately. She stated that she thinks the SCEC is a great space that has many advantages that other facilities do not have. Commissioner Garske stated that he thinks the Commission was in agreement that the rates are not really where they should be. He stated that he thinks having multiple non-profit categories is complicating things more than they need to be and would like to see the distinction just be between resident or non-resident and non-profit or not. He stated that he feels a 20% discount for residents would be fair, but was not sure that non-profits needed to have a 50% discount. He noted that he would like to see a better balance overall of the cost structure. Commissioner Czerwonka stated that he feels it should all be predicated on the function of what they are trying to do. He asked whether the idea was to try to satisfy the non-profit entities or the residents. He stated that before they can decide on discount percentages he feels there needed to be additional analysis and then they will be able to determine things like whether it makes sense to raise things by another 5% or 10%. He reiterated that he thinks they first need to look at what they are trying to do and what do they want to provide. . He noted that he also liked the idea of trying to simplify the number of fees they have, as suggested by Commissioner Garske. Commissioner DiGruttolo stated that if they have resident, non-resident, and one non-profit category and asked if there would be situations where there could be a corporate business that would have a separate rate. She gave the example of Hazelwood hosting an employee meeting and asked if they would have a separate rate or if it would fall under the resident rate. Park and Recreation Director Crossfield explained that the person who would be booking on their behalf would determine if they are a resident or not. She stated that this approach is common among the other cities as well. She noted that she had worked in cities where, if the business was located in the city, or if the individual worked in the city, then they were considered a resident. She noted that this was another area where things are not quite as black and white as you would think. Chair Hirner asked Council Liaison Zerby if the Council had a thought process on the timeframe of making the SCEC revenue neutral and paying their own way. He asked what they would think if, for example, they recommended some of these changes right now as Step 1, then took another look in a year or two and then recommended additional changes as a Step 2. He asked if they would support that approach or if the thought was to get there are quickly as possible. Council Liaison Zerby stated that this complicated and noted that the make-up of the Council has changed over the years. He stated that the SCEC sort of ended up in a situation where there was lack of ownership and the City stepped in and have slowly taken the steps to take more of the management from the seniors. He stated that the motivation in the beginning was to just do this for the seniors because they are valuable members of the community and this is a way to keep them engaged and happy. He stated that they decided to make some investments into the building in order to expand to other uses. He explained that he has only been on the Council for about three months this time around and does not get the feeling that this Council has a driving need for it to break even. He stated that breaking even had been mentioned as something they would like to achieve, but did not believe there was a timeframe tied to that sentiment. He stated that he would suggest that the City keep the SCEC going, make some investments, and get it where it needs to be to operate, and work towards the goal of breaking even. PARK COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, OCTOBER 24, 2023 PAGE 5 OF 7 Chair Hirner stated that he stated that he also agreed with the statements already made that the current designations are overly complicated, for example, the non-local non-profit designation. He stated that he was not opposed to the current discount rates but would suggest that instead of basing the non-profit rate on the resident or non-resident that it just be the higher non-resident rate. He stated that he also agreed that the current rates are a bit low and believes that there is room for an overall increase. He explained that he would like it to be simple and just have rates for resident, non-resident, and non-profit. Commissioner DiGruttolo asked if the rates were adjusted annually for inflation. Park and Recreation Director Crossfield reminded the Commission that she has been with the City for less than a year. She explained that she had increased the rates slightly about a month after she began work in the City and noted that she believes all the rates stayed pretty flat during Covid. She stated that prior to that time, her understanding was that staff took a look at rates every few years. Chair Hirner stated that he does not recall ever talking about the rates while he has served on the Park Commission which is about five years and noted that he believed those conversations happened at a staff level. Park and Recreation Director Crossfield agreed and noted that if you read through the description of the Park Commission duties it would not fall under their duties but she was looking to get more public input on possible changes. Commissioner Wenner stated that she felt it would be good for the Park Commission to know what percentage of the population of Shorewood was actually using the facility. She stated that she did not think they should be spending more, percentage wise, of taxpayer dollars on something that taxpayers are not even using. She stated that she would like to make sure that the proportionality of this is correct and has been looked at it and feel it aligns with the City’s values. Park and Recreation Director Crossfield noted that they did not have software in the past and now they do, so they should be able to gather that type of information in the future. She noted that what she has seen is that the usage does seem to be a majority of residents. She explained that she was not proposing any changes to the senior rental situation, at the moment, but noted that with another frequent renter, there is sort of a handshake agreement. She stated that this business rents the building and has a special reduced rate but explained that they know that their rate will be changing sometime in the next year. She explained that she was not looking for a specific motion tonight but just wanted Commission feedback and guidance before she brings this to the Council. Commissioner Garske stated that he thinks a 20% discount for residents is a great idea and would like to see the discount for non-profits be somewhere between 40-50%. He reiterated that he would strongly recommend taking this discount from the non-resident rate,as the baseline. 5. OLD BUSINESS 6. STAFF AND LIAISON REPORTS / UPDATES A. City Council PARK COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, OCTOBER 24, 2023 PAGE 6 OF 7 Council Liaison Zerby reviewed the discussions and actions from the recent City Council meeting. B. Staff Park and Recreation Director Crossfield stated that Oktoberfest was held on September 30, 2023. She thanked everyone who was able to either participate or volunteer for the event. She stated that there were about 400 in attendance which was a great turn out and noted that they received a lot of positive feedback. She stated that the Rotary Club and Legion also had about 2,000 people in attendance at their festivities and were able to raise a significant amount of money for the Hendrickson Foundation. She stated that she believed an event summary would be presented to the City Council in the future. Chair Hirner noted that there was a buckthorn presentation that took place last week that he and Commissioner Wenner had attended. Commissioner Wenner stated that the presentation was led by Public Works Director Morreim and noted that he had reviewed the $50,000 DNR grant that the City received in 2021 for removal of buckthorn from Freeman Park. She noted that they had learned that the project was delayed due to citizen concerns with pesticide usage. She stated that they were waiting for the IPM report which was finished in 2022 and explained that they were now at the point where the work needed to be completed by June 30, 2024 in order to receive the grant funds. She stated that she believes that they are looking at contractors to complete the work this fall. She reviewed the area for the treatment and noted that she believes the handouts with this information were available in the City Hall lobby. She explained that the process would involve stacking the cut buckthorn in areas of the park which would then be burned by Public Works under the supervision of the Fire Department sometime over the following winter. She noted that there were about 15-20 residents in attendance at the presentation and shared some of the comments and concerns that were raised by those individuals. She stated that there was some discussion about creating a volunteer group of some sort to address the buckthorn issues but City Administrator Nevinski had expressed concerns with potential liability issues. She explained that she was a Master Naturalist and Tree Care Advisor and offered to look into some type of situation where was a citizen commission working group of some sort. She stated that this group of residents really want their voices to be heard. Council Liaison Zerby stated that he believes the City used some funding from the Friends of the Mississippi River to help cover the costs for the goats they used in the park. He stated that there used to be volunteer gardeners for the parks in the past, so he was a bit confused on why City Administrator Nevinski would be concerned about a possible liability issue in this instance. Chair Hirner noted that he believed the concerns were related to use of power tools. He stated that they had a very lively discussion on this issue and believes that others have utilized volunteer services where they have signed a waiver. He stated that the Council and the City Attorney will have to look at this and see what is required for something like that to be put into place. Commissioner DiGruttolo asked if this grant was renewable or if the City could ask for an extension since they were delayed in their implementation. She expressed concern that meeting the original deadline may involve rushing and doing a terrible job. Chair Hirner stated that the answer to both questions was ‘no’. PARK COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, OCTOBER 24, 2023 PAGE 7 OF 7 Commissioner Wenner noted that it was not renewable, but it is an annual grant, so the City intends to apply again. Chair Hirner noted that they discussed the goat usage at the presentation and were told that goats are a good maintenance option but not necessarily a treatment option. Commissioner Wenner noted that the problem with goat usage is that while they do a good job of taking care of getting rid of the small seedling buckthorn, they also end up wiping out the other native plants as well. She stated that she has had experience working with spraying of the plants in Minnetonka and feels they are safe and effective, but noted that idea was met with a lot of resistance. She stated that there was discussion about having a follow up meeting on IPM and another meeting where they discussed trees. She stated that there was a question asked by the public about how the Park Commission was overseeing management of the IPM program. She suggested that the Commission address that issue next month. She noted that she would be willing to speak as a tree care advisor to discuss Tree Management. Park and Recreation Director Crossfield noted that Public Works Director Morreim oversees the budget for trees and has been working on the tree inventory so he would need to be involved in that discussion. She noted that she believes he had planned to bring the IPM issue forward for discussion in January of 2024. 7. ADJOURN Garske moved to adjourn the Park Commission Meeting of October 24, 2023 at 8:15 p.m. Czerwonka seconded the motion. Motion carried 5-0. City Council Meeting Item 5B Title/Subject: Award Quote and Service Agreement for Buckthorn MEETING TYPE Removal Project Regular Meeting Meeting Date: November 13, 2023 Prepared by: Matt Morreim, Public Works Director Reviewed by: Marc Nevinski, City Administrator Attachments: October 17, 2023 Buckthorn Meeting Handouts Summary of Public Comments Service Agreement w/ Quote Resolution Background: Buckthorn is an invasive plant that can displace native vegetation and harm wildlife. In 2021, the City of Shorewood received a $50,000 MnDNR grant with a $20,000 city match for buckthorn removal in Freeman Park. The grant deadline to complete buckthorn removal is June 30, 2024. The city met with residents on October 17, 2023 to inform residents of project details (see meeting handouts) and receive feedback on the project. In order to complete the buckthorn removal work, the city solicited for and received quotes for the removal of buckthorn in Freeman Park from Davey Resource Group, Prairie Restorations, Inc. and Tree Trust. The city evaluated the quotes based on the following criteria:  Cost  Experience  Timeline  Proposed methods – Mechanized removal or manual removal After reviewing quotes and considering resident feedback, the city recommends awarding the project to Prairie Restorations, Inc. The city has coordinated with Prairie Restorations, Inc. to complete all buckthorn removal in areas two and three and partial removal of area one. Area one removal will focus on the east side of the area and move westwardly. The proposed methods detailed in the attachment are in line with the city’s IPM workplan. Financial or Budget Considerations: The cost of the buckthorn removal project will be funded through MnDNR grant ($50,000) and a city match. The city match of $17,000 would be funded through operations budget for Department 52 – Parks Maintenance. The remainder of the $20,000 city match ($3,000) is accounted for with city staff time. Action Requested: A Majority of the Council is required Motion to approve the resolution to award the buckthorn project to Prairie Restorations, Inc. and approve the service 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. Page 1 Freeman Park Buckthorn Removal Fall/Winter 2023 Summary of Public Comments Open House, October 17, 2023 at Freeman Park, Eddy Sta?on A?endance: Sixteen residents, three Councilmembers, two Park Commissioners, three staﬀ members.  Concern about the return of buckthorn once removed. Suggested reviewing process used by Friend of the Mississippi.  Separate berries to prevent spread.  Need long term plan for maintaining area. City needs to commit to funding one.  Establish volunteer or “Friends of Freeman” program to help maintain the park.  Sign area regarding treatment.  Desire to maintain some buckthorn for privacy.  Need to removal all buckthorn to allow seedlings from trees to grow.  Be though?ul about loca?ons for buckthorn pile burning to not damage trees.  Mechanical removal has high value, but concern about removing small desirable trees.  Given limited funds, recommenda?on to focus on comple?ng areas #2 and #3 ﬁrst. Summary of Comments from Emails and Ma?ers from the Floor  Reforest area to prevent emergency of new buckthorn.  Avoid removal of trees.  Retain enclosed wooded feel and do not expand developed park area.  Open house was a good event.  Consider if shade tolerant shrubs could be planted to address privacy concerns.  Many knowledgeable residents who can provide insight is valuable.  Budget for long term maintenance. Buckthorn removal is a mul?-year eﬀort.  Establish a volunteer group to maintain and fundraise for improvements. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR BUCKTHORN REMOVAL th THIS AGREEMENT is made this October 10, 2023 (“Effective Date”) by and between Prairie Restorations, Inc., with its principal office located at 601A Lewis Avenue North, Watertown , MN 55338 (“Contractor”), and the City of Shorewood, Minnesota, a Minnesota municipal corporation located at 5755 Country Club Road, Shorewood, MN 55331 (the “City”): RECITALS A. Contractor is engaged in the business of buckthorn removal services. B. The City desires to hire Contractor to provide buckthorn removal services in the wooded areas of Freeman Park. C. Contractor represents that it has the professional expertise and capabilities to provide the City with the requested services. D. The City desires to engage Contractor to provide the services described in this Agreement and Contractor is willing to provide such services on the terms and conditions in this Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the terms and conditions expressed in this Agreement, the City and Contractor agree as follows: AGREEMENT 1. Services. Contractor agrees to provide the City with the services as described in the attached Exhibit A (the “General Instructions for our Cleaning Staff” & “Service Schedule” & “Terms”). Exhibit A shall be incorporated into this Agreement by reference. All Services shall be provided in a manner consistent with the level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by professionals currently providing similar services. st 2. Time for Completion. The Services shall be completed on or before April 1, 2024, provided that the parties may extend the stated deadlines upon mutual written agreement. This Agreement shall remain in force and effect commencing from the effective date and continuing until the completion of the project, unless terminated by the City or amended pursuant to the Agreement. 3. Consideration. The City shall pay Contractor for the Services according to the terms on the attached hereto as Exhibit A. The consideration shall be for both the Services performed by Contractor and any expenses incurred by Contractor in performing the Services. Contractor shall submit statements to the City upon completion of the Services. The City shall pay Contractor within thirty-five (35) days after Contractor’s statements are submitted. th 4. Term. The term of the Agreement shall commence on November 15, 2023 and terminate on st December 31, 2024. 1 225407v1 5. Termination. Notwithstanding any other provision hereof to the contrary, this Agreement may be terminated as follows: A. The parties, by mutual written agreement, may terminate this Agreement at any time; B. Contractor may terminate this Agreement in the event of a breach of the Agreement by the City upon providing thirty (30) days’ written notice to the City; C. The City may terminate this Agreement at any time at its option, for any reason or no reason at all; or D. The City may terminate this Agreement immediately upon Contractor’s failure to have in force any insurance required by this Agreement. In the event of a termination, the City shall pay Contractor for Services performed to the date of termination and for all costs or other expenses incurred prior to the date of termination. 7. Amendments. No amendments may be made to this Agreement except in a writing signed by both parties. 8. Standard of Care. Contractor shall exercise the same degree of care, skill, and diligence in the performance of the services as is ordinarily possessed and exercised by members of the profession under similar circumstances. Contractor shall be liable to the fullest extent permitted under applicable law, without limitation, for any injuries, loss or damages proximately caused by Contractor’s breach of this standard of care. City shall not be responsible for discovering deficiencies in the accuracy of Consultant’s services. Contractor shall be responsible for the accuracy of the work and shall promptly make necessary revisions or corrections resulting from errors and omissions on the part of Contractor without additional compensation. 9. Remedies. In the event of a termination of this Agreement by the City because of a breach by Contractor, the City may complete the Services either by itself or by contract with other persons or entities, or any combination thereof. These remedies provided to the City for breach of this Agreement by Contractor shall not be exclusive. The City shall be entitled to exercise any one or more other legal or equitable remedies available because of Contractor’s breach. 10. Subcontractors. Contractor shall not enter into subcontracts for services provided under this Agreement without the express written consent of the City. Contractor shall comply with Minnesota Statute § 471.425. Contractor must pay subcontractor for all undisputed services provided by Subcontractor within ten days of Contractor’s receipt of payment from City. Contractor must pay interest of 1.5 percent per month or any part of a month to subcontractor on any undisputed amount not paid on time to subcontractor. The minimum monthly interest penalty payment for an unpaid balance of $100 or more is $10. 11. Records/Inspection. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes § 16C.05, subd. 5, Contractor agrees that the books, records, documents, and accounting procedures and practices of Contractor, that are relevant to the contract or transaction, are subject to examination by the City and the state auditor or legislative auditor for a minimum of six years. Contractor shall maintain such records for a minimum of six years after final payment. The parties agree that this obligation will survive the completion or termination of this Agreement. 2 225407v1 12. Insurance Requirements. The Contractor, at its expense, shall procure and maintain in force for the duration of this Agreement the following minimum insurance coverages: A. General Liability. The Contractor agrees to maintain commercial general liability insurance in a minimum amount of $1,000,000 per occurrence; $2,000,000 annual aggregate. The policy shall cover liability arising from premises, operations, products completed operations, personal injury, advertising injury, and contractually assumed liability. The City shall be endorsed as additional insured. B. Automobile Liability. If the Contractor operates a motor vehicle in performing the Services under this Agreement, the Contractor shall maintain commercial automobile liability insurance, including owned, hired, and non-owned automobiles, with a minimum liability limit of $1,000,000 combined single limit. C. Workers’ Compensation. The Contractor agrees to provide workers’ compensation insurance for all its employees in accordance with the statutory requirements of the State of Minnesota. The Contractor shall also carry employers liability coverage with minimum limits are as follows:  $500,000 – Bodily Injury by Disease per employee  $500,000 – Bodily Injury by Disease aggregate  $500,000 – Bodily Injury by Accident The Contractor shall, prior to commencing the Services, deliver to the City a Certificate of Insurance as evidence that the above coverages are in full force and effect. The insurance requirements may be met through any combination of primary and umbrella/excess insurance. The Contractor’s policies shall be the primary insurance to any other valid and collectible insurance available to the City with respect to any claim arising out of Contractor’s performance under this Agreement. The Contractor’s policies and Certificate of Insurance shall contain a provision that coverage afforded under the policies shall not be cancelled without at least thirty (30) days advanced written notice to the City. 11. Independent Contractor. Contractor is an independent contractor. Contractor’s duties shall be performed with the understanding that Contractor has special expertise as to the services which Contractor is to perform and is customarily engaged in the independent performance of the same or similar services for others. Contractor shall provide or contract for all required equipment and personnel. Contractor shall control the manner in which the services are performed; however, the nature of the Services and the results to be achieved shall be specified by the City. The parties agree that this is not a joint venture and the parties are not co-partners. Contractor is not an employee or agent of the City and has no authority to make any binding commitments or obligations on behalf of the City except to the extent expressly provided in this Agreement. All services provided by Contractor pursuant to this Agreement shall be provided by Contractor as an independent contractor and not as an employee of the 3 225407v1 City for any purpose, including but not limited to: income tax withholding, workers' compensation, unemployment compensation, FICA taxes, liability for torts and eligibility for employee benefits. 12. Indemnification. To the fullest extent permitted by law, the Contractor agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City and its employees, officials, and agents from and against all claims, actions, damages, losses, and expenses, including reasonable attorney fees, arising out of the Contractor’s negligence or the Contractor’s performance or failure to perform its obligations under this Agreement. The Contractor’s indemnification obligation shall apply to the Contractor’s subcontractor(s), or anyone directly or indirectly employed or hired by the Contractor, or anyone for whose acts the Contractor may be liable. The Contractor agrees this indemnity obligation shall survive the completion or termination of this Agreement. 13. Compliance with Laws. Contractor shall exercise due professional care to comply with applicable federal, state and local laws, rules, ordinances and regulations in effect as of the date Contractor agrees to provide the Services. Contractor’s guests, invitees, members, officers, officials, agents, employees, volunteers, representatives, and subcontractors shall abide by the City’s policies prohibiting sexual harassment and tobacco, drug, and alcohol use as defined on the City’s Tobacco, Drug, and Alcohol Policy, as well as all other reasonable work rules, safety rules, or policies, and procedures regulating the conduct of persons on City property, at all times while performing duties pursuant to this Agreement. Contractor agrees and understands that a violation of any of these policies, procedures, or rules constitutes a breach of the Agreement and sufficient grounds for immediate termination of the Agreement by the City. 14. Entire Agreement. This Agreement, any attached exhibits, and any addenda signed by the parties shall constitute the entire agreement between the City and Contractor and supersedes any other written or oral agreements between the City and Contractor. This Agreement may only be modified in a writing signed by the City and Contractor. If there is any conflict between the terms of this Agreement and the referenced or attached items, the terms of this Agreement shall prevail. 15. Third Party Rights. The parties to this Agreement do not intend to confer any rights under this Agreement on any third party. 16. Choice of Law and Venue. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the state of Minnesota. Any disputes, controversies, or claims arising out of this Agreement shall be heard in the state or federal courts of Hennepin County, Minnesota, and all parties to this Agreement waive any objection to the jurisdiction of these courts, whether based on convenience or otherwise. 17. Conflict of Interest. Contractor shall use reasonable care to avoid conflicts of interest and appearances of impropriety in representation of the City. In the event of a conflict of interest, Contractor shall advise the City and, either secure a waiver of the conflict, or advise the City that it will be unable to provide the requested Services. 18. Agreement Not Exclusive. The City retains the right to hire other professional Contractor service providers for this or other matters, in the City’s sole discretion. 19. Data Practices Act Compliance. Any and all data provided to Contractor, received from Contractor, created, collected, received, stored, used, maintained, or disseminated by Contractor pursuant to this Agreement shall be administered in accordance with, and is subject to the requirements of the Minnesota 4 225407v1 Government Data Practices Act, Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 13. Contractor agrees to notify the City within three business days if it receives a data request from a third party. This paragraph does not create a duty on the part of Contractor to provide access to public data to the public if the public data are available from the City, except as required by the terms of this Agreement. These obligations shall survive the termination or completion of this Agreement. 20. No Discrimination. Contractor agrees not to discriminate in providing products and services under this Agreement on the basis of race, color, sex, creed, national origin, disability, age, sexual orientation, status with regard to public assistance, or religion. Violation of any part of this provision may lead to immediate termination of this Agreement. Contractor agrees to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act as amended (“ADA”), section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and the Minnesota Human Rights Act, Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 363A. Contractor agrees to hold harmless and indemnify the City from costs, including but not limited to damages, attorneys’ fees and staff time, in any action or proceeding brought alleging a violation of these laws by Contractor or its guests, invitees, members, officers, officials, agents, employees, volunteers, representatives and subcontractors. Upon request, Contractor shall provide accommodation to allow individuals with disabilities to participate in all Services under this Agreement. Contractor agrees to utilize its own auxiliary aid or service in order to comply with ADA requirements for effective communication with individuals with disabilities. 21. Authorized Agents. The City’s authorized agent for purposes of administration of this contract is the City Administrator of the City, or designee. Contractor’s authorized agent for purposes of administration of this contract is Benton Sellwood, or designee who shall perform or supervise the performance of all Services. 22. Notices. Any notices permitted or required by this Agreement shall be deemed given when personally delivered or upon deposit in the United States mail, postage fully prepaid, certified, return receipt requested, addressed to: Contractor The City Prairie Restorations, Inc. City Administrator 601A Lewis Avenue North 5755 Country Club Road Watertown, MN 55388 Shorewood, MN 55331 or such other contact information as either party may provide to the other by notice given in accordance with this provision. 26. Waiver. No waiver of any provision or of any breach of this Agreement shall constitute a waiver of any other provisions or any other or further breach, and no such waiver shall be effective unless made in writing and signed by an authorized representative of the party to be charged with such a waiver. 27. Headings. The headings contained in this Agreement have been inserted for convenience of reference only and shall in no way define, limit or affect the scope and intent of this Agreement. 28. Severability. In the event that any provision of this Agreement shall be illegal or otherwise unenforceable, such provision shall be severed, and the balance of the Agreement shall continue in full force and effect. 5 225407v1 29. Signatory. Each person executing this Agreement (“Signatory”) represents and warrants that they are duly authorized to sign on behalf of their respective organization. In the event Contractor did not authorize the Signatory to sign on its behalf, the Signatory agrees to assume responsibility for the duties and liability of Contractor, described in this Agreement, personally. 30. Counterparts and Electronic Signatures. This Agreement may be executed in two or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which taken together shall constitute one and the same instrument. This Agreement may be transmitted by electronic mail in portable document format (“pdf”) and signatures appearing on electronic mail instruments shall be treated as original signatures. 31. Recitals. The City and Contractor agree that the Recitals are true and correct and are fully incorporated into this Agreement. \[Remainder of page left blank intentionally. Signature page follows.\] 6 225407v1 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City and Contractor have caused this Professional Services Agreement to be executed by their duly authorized representatives in duplicate on the respective dates indicated below. Prairie Restorations, Inc. City of Shorewood: By: _________________________________ By: _________________________________ Jennifer Labadie, Mayor Name: __ ______________ Title: ______________ ___________ By: _________________________________ Sandie Thone, City Clerk 7 225407v1 EXHIBIT A SCOPE OF SERVICES & FEE SCHEDULE 225407v1 CITY OF SHOREWOOD COUNTY OF HENNEPIN STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 23-114 A RESOLUTION AWARDING CONTRACT FOR THE BUCKTHORN REMOVAL PROJECT WHEREAS, the City applied for and received a Minnesota Department of Natural Resources grant in 2021; and WHEREAS, the City council approved resolution 21-026 approving the grant contract with the city’s required match; and WHEREAS, the City has solicited and received three quotes for the buckthorn removal project; and WHEREAS, the City reviewed the quotes and has recommended that the agreement for the buckthorn removal project be awarded to Prairie Restorations, Inc.; and NOW THEREFORE, IT RESOLVED: by the City Council of the City of Shorewood hereby approve the resolution to authorize and direct to enter into a service agreement with Prairie Restorations, Inc. for and on behalf of the City of Shorewood. th ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 13 day of November, 2023. __________________________ Jennifer Labadie, Mayor Attest: ___________________________ Sandie Thone, City Clerk CITY OF SHOREWOOD COUNTY OF HENNEPIN STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 23-115 A RESOLUTION TO PROHIBIT PARKING FOR BOTH SIDES OF ENCHANTED LANE AND SHADY ISLAND ROAD AND ENCHANTED DRIVE WHEREAS, the City has existing sporadic no parking signage along Enchanted Lane and Shady Island Road; and WHEREAS, the existing street width of 20’ with gravel shoulders does not accommodate for parking on both sides of the roadway and still provide a safe and effective route for the general public, pedestrians, school buses and emergency response vehicles; and WHEREAS, both sides of Enchanted Lane and Shady Island Road from the western city limits with Minnetrista to 200’ west of Shady Island Circle shall be signed and enforced as no parking; and WHEREAS, both sides of Enchanted Drive from Enchanted Lane to 300’ north of Enchanted Lane shall be signed and enforced as no parking; and NOW THEREFORE, IT RESOLVED: by the City Council of the City of Shorewood hereby approve the resolution to sign and enforce no parking along both sides of Enchanted Lane and Shady Island Road from the western city limits with Minnetrista to 200’ west of Shady Island Circle and both sides of Enchanted Drive from Enchanted Lane to 300’ north of Enchanted Lane. th ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 13 day of November, 2023. __________________________ Jennifer Labadie, Mayor Attest: ___________________________ Sandie Thone, City Clerk CITY OF SHOREWOOD COUNTY OF HENNEPIN STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 23-116 A RESOLUTION TO PROHIBIT PARKING ON THE WEST SIDE OF STRAWBERRY LANE; CITY PROJECT 19-05 WHEREAS, the City reconstructed Strawberry Lane, Peach Circle, and Strawberry Court as an urban roadway with curb & gutter at the city standard street width of 26 feet; and WHEREAS, on through streets with higher traffic volumes such as Strawberry Lane, the city standard street width of 26 feet does not accommodate for parking on both sides of the roadway while also providing a safe and effective route for the general public, pedestrians, school buses, snow removal, and emergency response vehicles; and WHEREAS, the east side of Strawberry Lane included the construction of a sidewalk adjacent to the back of curb. Providing on-street parking adjacent to the sidewalk best accommodates parking vehicles and pedestrians and creates an additional buffer from vehicle traffic to the pedestrians; and NOW THEREFORE, IT RESOLVED: by the City Council of the City of Shorewood hereby approve the resolution to sign and enforce no parking along the west side of nd Strawberry Lane from the intersection of Smithtown Road to West 62 Street. th ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 13 day of November, 2023. __________________________ Jennifer Labadie, Mayor Attest: ___________________________ Sandie Thone, City Clerk CITY OF SHOREWOOD COUNTY OF HENNEPIN STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 23-117 A RESOLUTION TO PROHIBIT PARKING ON THE NORTH SIDE OF BIRCH BLUFF ROAD AND THE WEST SIDE OF GRANT LORENZ ROAD; CITY PROJECT 21-01 WHEREAS, the City reconstructed Birch Bluff Road, the north portion of Grant Lorenz Road, and Lee Circle as an urban roadway with curb & gutter at the city standard street width of 26 feet; and WHEREAS, on through streets with higher traffic volumes such as Birch Bluff Road and Grant Lorenz Road, the city standard street width of 26 feet does not accommodate for parking on both sides of the roadway while also providing a safe and effective route for the general public, pedestrians, school buses, snow removal, and emergency response vehicles; and WHEREAS, the south side of Birch Bluff Road and the east side of Grant Lorenz Road from Birch Bluff Road to Edgewood Road has less driveways than the opposite sides of the roadways and therefore can accommodate more on-street parking; and NOW THEREFORE, IT RESOLVED: by the City Council of the City of Shorewood hereby approve the resolution to sign and enforce no parking along the north side of Birch Bluff Road from the eastern city limits with Tonka Bay the intersection of Grant Lorenz Road and the west side of Grant Lorenz Road from the intersection of Birch Bluff Road to Edgewood Road. th ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 13 day of November, 2023. __________________________ Jennifer Labadie, Mayor Attest: ___________________________ Sandie Thone, City Clerk 8A MEETING TYPE Regular City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item Meeting Title/Subject: Public Hearing – Certification of Assessments for unpaid charges Meeting Date: November 13, 2023 Prepared by: Joe Rigdon, Finance Director Reviewed by: Michelle Nguyen, Senior Accountant Attachments: 2023 Certification Listing (Preliminary) Background Pursuant to Shorewood City Code 903.09, Subdv. 3(e) Tax Assessments, all delinquent accounts may be certified by the clerk who shall prepare an assessment roll each year providing for assessment of the delinquent accounts against respective property served and delivered to the th city council for adoption prior to November 30 of each year. Upon adoption the clerk shall certify to the County Auditor the amount due, plus a certification fee as established in the Shorewood Master Fee Schedule and the County Auditor shall thereupon enter the amount as part of the tax levy on the premises to be collected during the ensuing year. The City of Shorewood is responsible for providing water, sewer, stormwater, recycling and other services to property owners within the city limits. The City has established fees for the provision of these services as delineated in the City’s Master Fee Schedule. All delinquent accounts were notified of the process pursuant to state statute and had sufficient time to make payment arrangements or pay the unpaid charges. In addition, all delinquent account holders were notified that property owners wishing to object to proposed assessments against their property should do so during the November 13, 2023 City Council meeting where council would consider the assessment levied against their property. Financial Considerations Assessing unpaid charges ensures that costs are recovered for services. Action Requested: Staff recommends the City Council hold the public hearing and consider any property owner objections to the proposed assessments. After the public hearing, staff recommends approval of the attached Resolution Certifying Unpaid Charges to the 2024 Hennepin County Tax Rolls. 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 23-118 A RESOLUTION CERTIFYING UNPAID CHARGES ON THE 2024 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY TAX ROLLS WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice given as required by law, the Shorewood City Council has met, heard, and passed upon all objections to the proposed certifications of unpaid charges for municipal fees and utilities; and WHEREAS, the delinquent amounts have been minimized through diligent collection efforts by city staff. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD AS FOLLOWS: Such proposed certification of unpaid charges, a copy of which is available in the City Clerk’s office and referred to as Exhibit 1 and made a part of the resolution hereof, is hereby accepted and shall continue a lien against the lands named therein. Such certification, which is due to the County Auditor no later than November 30, 2023, shall be payable over a period of one year on or before the first Monday in January. The owner of the affected party may, at any time prior to certification of unpaid charges to the County Auditor, pay the whole of the certified unpaid charges to the city clerk on such property, including the assessment fee of $50.00 payable to the City of Shorewood. The clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified copy of this certification roll to the County Auditor to be extended on the property tax lists of the county and such certified unpaid charges shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as property taxes. Hennepin County Special Assessment Division is hereby authorized to certify the unpaid charges, on the property tax rolls payable in 2024, for the following services: Water Levy # To be updated Sewer Levy # To be updated Stormwater Levy # To be updated Recycling Levy # To be updated Delinquent Fee Levy # To be updated Total Levy-City of Shorewood $68,632.44 ADOPTED BY THE SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL this 13th day of November 2023. ______________________________ ATTEST: Jennifer Labadie, Mayor ________________________________ Sandie Thone, City Clerk EMNEFIERM Barry Brown 4,050 Burlwood Ct. There are still a number of unanswered questions regarding the Buckthorn Removal Project. And there is conflicting information based on the community meeting held October 131h at Freeman Park. we were told that the stems of the cut buckthorn had to be sprayed within 2 hours. Project Proposal says Garlon is the herbicide that will be sprayed. But Garlon is a POST Emergent herbicide. According to manufacture of Garlon (Dow AgriSciences) and the Wisconsin Forestry Dept - Garlon must be applied during active growth periods which generally mean spring and summer months. Question: 1.) When will the contractor spray the Garlon herbicide? 2.) How close to pond & wetland will they spray? 3.) Will there be a silt fences around the pond and wetland? 4.) Wetland water by Shorewood Ponds runs directly to the 3 new Smithtown Ponds. I'm told those ponds replenish our aquifers and then runs directly into Lake Minnetonka. How does Triclopyr get treated in our drinking water system? 5.) Missing in the Financial Proposal a. What are the hard dollar cost for the fire dept b. What are the cost of Public Works employees c. No costs listed for silt fencing or silt bags around the wetland UUMMMUM14M.. Triclopyr - (Tree-Clo-Peer) This synthetic herbicide is not safe to be used near water since the potency can be toxic to aquatic animals and plants. (Eco Living UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY < WASHINGTON, DC 20460 0 114,111" PRO11.1- OFFICE OF CHEMICAL SAFETY AND POLLUTION PREVENTION May 13, 2022 Ili UM21,014MM Environmental Health Specialist - Pesticides Branch Hawai'i Departments of Agriculture 1428 S. King St. Honolulu, HI 96814 Subject: FIFRA 24(c) Registration —Amended SLN Acknowledgment Letter SLN Registration Number: HI 120001 EPA Decision Number: 582244 SLN Expiration Date: 3/14/2027 Parent EPA Reg. No.: 62719-527 Product Name: HBT-G4U200 with Garton 4 Ultra Dear Ms. Riechert: This letter acknowledges receipt for the above -listed Special Local Need (SLN) registration pursuant to Section 24(c) of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act, as amended. This SLN registration permits use of the product HBT-G4U200 with Garton 4 Ultra (triclopyr) in/on forested watersheds and natural areas to control miconia (Aliconia calvescens) and strawberry guava (Psidium cattleianum) for another month. This SLN will expire 3/14/2027. The Agency has completed a review of this use and acknowledges the State's SLN registration. Please inform the registrant that we have placed a copy of the SLN label in our files. If you have any questions, please contact Maya Wheeler by phone at (202)-566-2957 or via email at wheeler.maya.bCa)epa.gov. 0 K06VA- o-ee'u-i-I Ruthanne Louden, Acting Senior Regulatory Specialist Emergency Response Team Minor Use and Emergency Response Branch Registration Division Office of Pesticide Programs CC: Patti TenBrook, USEPA Region 4 Coordinator and Tribal Coordinator HBT-G4U200 With Garlon@ 4 Ultra, page I of 4 Wool III @ 111,0011 TRICLOPYR GIROUF HERBICIDE Revised: February 14, 2022 1 FIFRA Sec 24(c) Special Local Need HBT-G4U200 With Garlon@ 4 Ultra, EPA Reg. No. 62719-527 FOR DISTRIBUTION AND USE ONLY WITHIN THE STATE OF HAWAII FOR INDIVIDUAL PLANT TREATMENT WITHIN FORESTED WATERSHEDS AND NATURAL AREAS USING SPHERICAL POLYSACCHARIDE CAPSULES CONTAINING ACCEPTEED'i GARLON@4 ULTRA i ACTIVE INGREDIENTS: March 15, 20226 Triclopyr: 3,5,6-trichloro-2-pyridinyloxyacetic acid, butoxyethyl ester ....... - ................................ 1 O.43% - OTHER INGREDIENTS ............................ .......................................................... .................. ........ 89.57% Under Hawaii Pesticides Law 1_00 _00% as Supplement to Product No. X• # �,** �AIW 111IMPI-ma- WITITimn possession of the user at the time of pesticide application. CAUTION/PRECAUCION KEEP OUT OF REACH OF CHILDREN Si usted no entiende [a etiqueta, busque a a1guien parar que se la explique a usted en detalle. (if you do not understand this label, find someone to explain it to you in detail). FIRST AID If swallowed: -Call a poison control center or doctor immediately for treatment advice. -Have person sip a glass of water if able to swallow. -Do not induce vomiting unless told to do so by a poison control center or doctor. -Do not give anything by mouth to an unconscious person. If in eyes: -Hold eyes open and rinse slowly and gently with water for 15-20 minutes. -Remove contact lenses, if present, after the first 5 minutes, then continue rinsing eye. -Call a poison control center or doctor for treatment advice. If on skin or -Take off contaminated clothing. clothing: -Rinse skin immediately with plenty of water for 15-20 minutes. -Call a poison control center or doctor for treatment advice. If inhaled' -Move person to fresh air, -If person is not breathing, call 911 or an ambulance, then give artificial respiration, preferably by mouth-to-mouth, if possible. -Call a poison control center or doctor for further treatment advice. HOT LINE NUMBER Have the product container or label with you when calling a poison control center or doctor, or going for treatment. Youl may also contact CHEMTREC (800-424-9300) N ztffg E 10*1141YAJ 11 LIPPM NTI-M 1911 WN FUMT-M R71 Revised: February 14, 2022 HAZARDS TO HUMANS AND DOMESTIC ANIMALS CAUTION: Harmful if swallowed, causes moderate eye irritation. Avoid contact with eyes or clothing. Prolonged or frequently repeated skin contact may cause allergic reactions in some individuals. Some materials that are chemical -resistant to this product are barrier laminate, butyl rubber, or polyethylene. If you want more options, follow the instructions for category E on an EPA chemical -resistance category selection chart. Safety Glasses-, D) Chem ical-resistant gloves (>14 mils) such as barrier laminate, nitrile rubber, neoprene rubber, or viton. Follow manufacturer's instructions for cleaning/maintainin 9nd hot water. Keep and wash PPE separately from other laundry. Discard clothing or other absorbent materials that have W-een drenched or heavily contaminated with this product's concentrate. Do not reuse them. ErV11ROA,111ENTAL HAZARDS This product is toxic to fish. Do not apply directly to water, or to areas where surface water is present, or to inter -tidal areas 4el�w tl�e mtam �Jg�i wattr mark. Xg ei*t c&,itaimi��atdA.t_-r wl�idm cld�-nim4g &Avipffient iif-dislilinsing V evwiAmer#-waslytratars. This chemical has properties and characteristics associated with chemicals detected in groundwater. The use of this chemical in areas where soils are permeable, particularly where the water table is shallow, may result in groundwater contamination. See DIRECTIONS FOR USE for addition precautions and requirements. USER SAFETY RECOMMENDATIONS Users should: 1) Wash hands with plenty of soap and water before eating, drinking, chewing gum, using tobacco or using the toilet. 2) Remove clothing/PPE immediately if pesticide gets inside. Then wash thoroughly and put on clean clothing. 3) Remove PPE immediately after handling this product. Wash the outside of gloves before removing. As soon as possible, wash thoroughly and change into clean clothing. DIRECTIONS FOR USE g by an HDOA-approved HBT-G4U200 SOP manual. Read the container label and HBT-G4U200 SOP manual prior to use. The applicator is responsible for following the directions contained within both the container label and the SOP manual, Do not apply this product in a way that will contact workers or other persons, either directly or through drift. Only protected handlers may be in the area during application. Do not use HBT-G4U200 With Garlon@ 4 Ultra other than in accordance with the instructions set forth on this label and the HBT-G4U200 with Garlon@ 4 Ultra SOP Manual, Keep containers closed to avoid spills and contamination. NON-AGRICULTURAL USE REQUIREMENTS The requirements in the box apply to uses of this product that are NOT within the scope of the Worker Pro� �ection VrIlf llbelilli� section of this label for a de�c' ription of noncrop sites. PRODUCT INFORMATION HBT-G4U200 With Garlon@.4 Ultra is a ready -to -use herbicide that is encapsulated in spherical capsules and designed for individual plant treatment within forested watersheds and natural areas. Herbicidal Activity: HBT-G4U200 With Garlon@ 4 Ultra is readily absorbed through leaves, stems, and roots and is translocated rapidly throughout the plant, with accumulation in the meristematic regions. Treated plants stop growing soon after spray application. Chlorosis appears first in the newest leaves, and necrosis spreads from this point. In perennials, the 71 0 -7 / 3 UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACENCY Washington, D.C. 20460 OFFICE OF CHEMICAL SAFETY AND POLLUTION PREVENTION Nmykml� Tami Jones -Jefferson Dow AgroSciences LLC 9330 Zionsville Road Indianapolis, IN 46268-1054 Subject: Label Amendment (minor edits, warranty section, trademarks) Garlon 4 EPA Reg. No. 62719-40 Application Dated April 14, 2014 The labeling referred to above, submitted in connection with registration under thm Federal Inseciicide,F_Un4_i_6ide_, a n'd kodenticide Act (FIFRA), as amended, -is acceptable. A stamped copy of your labeling is enclosed for your records. This labeling supersedes all previously accepted labeling. You must submitoner (1) copy of the final printed labeling before you release the product for shipment with the new labeling. In accordance with 40 CFR 152.130(c), you may distribute or sell this Product under the previously approved labeling for 18 months from - the date of this letter. After 18 months, you may only distribute or sell this product if it bears this new revised labeling or subsequently approved labeling. "To distribute or sell" is. defined 'Under FIFRA section 2(gg) and its implementing regulation at 40 CFR 152.3. (emphasis added) If you have any questions, please contact Mindy Ondish at (703)605-0723 or ondish.mindy@epa.gov. i bn4�_ � E - 707 " !�: "!!b IN Kable Bo Davis Product Manager 25 Herbicide Branch A304TFFIRMN-14 [74-0 1= C Y-� LiA / Garion 4 / MSTR / Amend / 07-29-14 Page 2 User Safety Recommendations Users should: • Wash hands before eating, drinking, chewing gum, using tobacco, or using the toilet. • Remove clothing immediately if pesticide gets inside. Then wash thoroughly and put on clean clothing._ - First Aid If in eyes: Hold eye open and rinse slowly, and gently with water for 15-20 minutes. Remove contact lenses, if present, after the first 5-minutes, then continue rinsing eye. Call a poison control center or doctor for treatment advice. If swallowed: immediately call a poison control center or doctor. Do not induce vomiting unless told to do so by a poison control center or doctor. Do not give any liquid to the person. Do not give anything by mouth to an unconscious person.' . Note to Physician: This product may pose an aspiration pneumonia hazard. Contains petroleum distillates. Have the product container or label with you when calling a poison control center or doctor, or going for treatment. You may also contact 1-800-992-5994 for emergency medical treatment information. " Environmental Hazards -This pesticide is toxic to fish. Do not apply directly to water, or to areas where surface water is present or to intertidal areas below the mean high water mark. Do not contaminate water when disposing of equipment-washwater or.rinsatd. This chemical has properties and characteristics associated with chemicals detected in groundwater. The use of this chemical in areas where soils are permeable, particularly where the water table is shallow, may result in groundwater contamination. Physical or Chemical Hazards Combustible. Do not use or store the product near heat or open flame. Agricultural Use Requirements Use this product only in accordance with its labeling and with the Worker Protection Standard, 40 CFR Part 170. Refer to label booklet under "Agricultural Use Requirements" in the Directions for Use section for information about this standard. (Storage and Disposal for rigid containers 6 gal or less) Storage and Disposal Do not contaminate water, food, or feed by storage and disposal. Pesticide Storage: Store above 28°F or agitate before use. Pesticide Disposal: Wastes resulting from.the use of this product must be disposed of on site or at an approved waste disposal facility. Container Handling: Nonrefillable container. Do not reuse or refill this container. Offer for recycling if available. Triple rinse or pressure rinse container (or equivalent) promptly after emptying. Triple rinse as follows: Empty the remaining contents into application equipment or a mix tank and drain for 10 seconds after the flow begins to drip. Fill the container 1/4 full with water and recap. Shake for 10.seconds. Pour rinsate into application equipment or a mix tank or store rinsate for later use or disposal. Drain for 10 seconds after the flow begins to drip. Repeat this procedure two more times. Pressure- rinse as follows: Empty the remaining contents into application equipment or a mix tank and continue to drain for 10 seconds after the flow begins to drip. Hold container upsidedown over application .equipment or mix tank or - L1A / Garlon 4 / MSTR / Amend / 07-29-14 Page 10 When applying this product in tank mix combination, follow all applicable use directions, precautions, and limitations on each manufacturer's label. Chernigation: Do not apply this product through any type of irrigation system. Apply no more than 1/2 gallon of Garlon 4 (2 lb ae of triclopyr) per acre per growing season on range and pasture sites, including rights -of -way, fence rows or any area where grazing or harvesting is allowed. On forestry sites, Garlon 4 may be used at rates up to 6 quarts (6 lb ae of triclopyr) per acre per year. Garlon 4 may be used at rates up to 8 quarts (8 lb ae of triclopyr) per acre per year on non -cropland industrial manufacturing and storage sites, rights -of -way such as electrical power lines, communication lines, pipelines, roadsides and railroads, fence rows, non -irrigation ditch banks. Portions of grazed areas that intersect treated non -cropland, rights -of -way and forestry sites may be treated at up to 8 lb ae per acre if the area to be treated on the day of application comprises no more than 10% of the total grazable area. Do not apply Garlon 4 directly to, or otherwise permit it to come into direct contact with, cotton, grapes, peanuts, soybeans, tobacco, vegetable crops, flowers, citrus, or other desirable broadleaf plants. Do not permit spray mists containing Garlon 4 to drift onto such plants. -irrigation ditch banks, seasonally dry wetlands (such as flood plains, deltas, At is permissible - to treat non ffii—riFei�—siWa-mps, or bogs) and transitional areas between upland and lowland sites where surface water is not present except in isolated pockets due to uneven or unlevel conditions. Do not apply to open water (such as lakes, reservoirs, rivers, streams, creeks, salt water bays, or estuaries). Do not apply on ditches currently being used to transport irrigation water. Do not apply where runoff or irrigation water may flow onto agricultural land as injury to crops may result. Do not apply this product using mist blowers unless a drift control additive, high viscosity inverting system, or equivalent is used to control spray drift. Sprays applied directly to Christmas trees may result in conifer injury. When treating unwanted vegetation in Christmas tree plantations, care should be taken to direct sprays away from conifers. Garlon 4 is formulated as a low volatile ester. However, the combination of spray contact with impervious surfaces, such as roads and rocks, and increasing ambient air temperatures, may result in an increase in the volatility potential for this herbicide, increasing a risk for off -target injury to sensitive crops such as grapes and tomatoes. Grazing and Haying Restrictions Except for lactating.dairy animals, there are no grazing restrictions following application of this product. Grazing Lactating Dairy Animals: Do not allow lactating dairy animals to graze treated areas until the next growing season following application of this product. Do not harvest hay for 14 days after application. Portions of grazed areas that intersect treated non -cropland, rights -of -way and forestry sites may be treated at up to 8 lb ae per acre if the area to be treated on the day of application comprises no more than 10% of the total grazable area. Slaughter Restrictions: During the season of application, withdraw livestock from grazing treated grass at least 3 days before slaughter. I L \ ` /�_/ /.� / L1A/Garton 4/K8STR/Amend /D7-3Q'f4 Page 9 Container Handling: Nonrefillable container. Do not reuse or refill this container. Offer for recycling if Triple rinse or pressure rinse container (or equivalent) promptly after emptying. Triple rinse as follows: Empty the remaining contents into application eqyipment or a mix tank and drain for 10 -seconds after the flow begins to drip. Fill the container 1/4 full with water and recap. Shake for 10 seconds. Pour rinsate into application equipment or a mix tank or store rinsate for later use or disposal. Drain for 10 seconds after the flow begins to drip. Repeat this procedure two more times. Pressure rinse as follows: Empty ithe remaining contents into application equipment or a mix tank and continue to drain for 10 seconds �after the flow begins to drip. Hold container upside down over application equipment or mix tank or collect rinsate for later use or disposal. Insert pressure rinsing nozzle in the side of the container, and 'rinse at about 40 psi for at least 30 seconds. Drain for 10 seconds after the flow begins to drip. Refillable containers 5 gallons or larger: Container Handling: Refillable container. Refill this container with pesticide only. Do not reuse this container for any other purpose. Cleaning the container before final disposal is the responsibility of the person disposing of the container. Cleaning before refilling is the responsibility of the refiller. To clean the container before final disposal, empty the remaining contents from this container into application equipment or a mix tank. Fill the container about 10% full with water and, if possible, spray all sides while adding water. If practical, agitate vigorously or recirculate water with the pump for two minutes. Pour or pump rinsate into application equipment or rinsate collection system. Repeat this rinsing procedure two more times. Nonrefillable containers 6 gallons or larger: Container Handling: Nonrefillable container. Do not reuse or refill this container. Offer for recycling if Triple rinse or pressure rinse container (or equivalent) promptly after emptying. Triple rinse as follows: Empty the remaining contents into application equipment or a mix tank. Fill the container 1/4 full with water. Replace and tighten closures. Tip container on its side and roll it back and forth, ensuring at least one complete revolution, for 30 seconds. Stand the container on its end and tip it back and forth several times. Turn the container over onto its other end and tip it back and forth several times. Empty the rinsate into application equipment or a mix tank or store rinsate for later use or disposal. Repeat this procedure two more times. Pressure rinse as follows: Empty the remaining contents into application equipment or a mix tank and continue to drain for 10 seconds after the flow begins to drip. Holdcontainei ,upside down over application equipment or mix tank or collect rinsate for later use br disposal. Insert pressure rinsing nozzle in the side of the container, and rinse at about 40 psi for at least 30 seconds. Drain for 10 seconds after the flow be�ins to drip. - . Use Garlone 4 specialty herbicide for the control of woody plants and annual and perennial broadleaf weeds in non -crop industrial manufacturing and storage sites,'rights-of-way such as electrical power ' lines, communication lines, pipelines, roadsides, railroads, rangeland, perrnanent grass pastures, and conservation reserve program (CRP)acres (including fence rows and non -irrigation ditch banks within these areas); forests and inthe establishment and maintenance ofwildlife openings. Use onthese sites may include application tograzed areas. Garton 4k$anoil soluble, emulsifiable liquid product containing the herbicide tholopyc Garton 4may be applied to woody or herbaceous broadleaf plants as a foliar spray or as a basal bark or cut stump application towoody plants. Amefdiar spray, Garton 4controls only herbaceous plants that have emerged from the soil or woody plants that are in full leaf at the time of application. Small amounts of Garton 4can kill orinjure many broadleaf plants. Toprevent damage tocrops and other desirable plants, follow all directions and precautions,