HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014/11/03 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - Regular AGENDA
NOVEMBER 3, 2014
6:00 p.m. SPECIAL STUDY SESSION – Council Chambers
Discussion Items
1. 6:00 p.m. PLACE Property Acquisition Update and Potential EDA Involvement
2. 6:45 p.m. Oppidan/Bally's Affordable Housing Proposal
7:25 p.m. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY -- Council Chambers
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Minutes
3a. Economic Development Authority Meeting Minutes October 6, 2014
4. Approval of Agenda
5. Reports
5a. Approval of EDA Disbursements
6. Old Business – None
7. New Business -- None
8. Communications -- None
9. Adjournment
7:30 p.m. CITY COUNCIL MEETING – Council Chambers
1. Call to Order
1a. Pledge of Allegiance
1b. Roll Call
2. Presentations
2a. Recognition of Donations
3. Approval of Minutes
3a. Special Study Session Meeting Minutes October 6, 2014
3b. City Council Meeting Minutes October 6, 2014
3c. Study Session Meeting Minutes October 13, 2014
3d. Closed Executive Session Meeting October 20, 2014
4. Approval of Agenda and Items on Consent Calendar
NOTE: The Consent Calendar lists those items of business which are considered to be routine and/or which
need no discussion. Consent items are acted upon by one motion. If discussion is desired by either a
Councilmember or a member of the audience, that item may be moved to an appropriate section of the regular
agenda for discussion. The items for the Consent Calendar are listed on the last page of the Agenda.
Recommended Action: Motion to approve the Agenda as presented and items listed on the
Consent Calendar; and to waive reading of all resolutions and ordinances. (Alternatively:
Motion to add or remove items from the agenda, or move items from Consent Calendar to
regular agenda for discussion.)
Meeting of November 3, 2014
City Council Agenda
Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. To make arrangements, please call
the Administration Department at 952/924-2525 (TDD 952/924-2518) at least 96 hours in advance of meeting.
5. Boards and Commissions -- None
6. Public Hearings
6a. Consolidated Public Hearing
(1) 2015 Budget & Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 1
Recommended Action: Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to Adopt Resolution
setting the 2015 Budget and Property Owner Service Charge for Special Service
District No. 1 and directing staff to certify the annual service charges to Hennepin County.
(2) 2015 Budget & Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 2
Recommended Action: Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to Adopt Resolution
setting the 2015 Budget and Property Owner Service Charge for Special Service
District No. 2 and directing staff to certify the annual service charges to Hennepin County.
(3) 2015 Budget & Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 3
Recommended Action: Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to Adopt Resolution
setting the 2015 Budget and Property Owner Service Charge for Special Service
District No. 3 and directing staff to certify the annual service charges to Hennepin County.
(4) 2015 Budget & Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 4
Recommended Action: Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to Adopt Resolution
setting the 2015 Budget and Property Owner Service Charge for Special Service
District No. 4 and directing staff to certify the annual service charges to Hennepin County.
(5) 2015 Budget & Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 5
Recommended Action: Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to Adopt Resolution
setting the 2015 Budget and Property Owner Service Charge for Special Service
District No. 5 and directing staff to certify the annual service charges to Hennepin County.
(6) 2015 Budget & Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 6
Recommended Action: Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to Adopt Resolution
setting the 2015 Budget and Property Owner Service Charge for Special Service District
No. 6 and directing staff to certify the annual service charges to Hennepin County.
6b. Groves Academy - Private Activity Revenue Bonds Host Approval Resolution
Recommended Action: Mayor to open the public hearing, solicit comments, and close
the public hearing. Motion to Adopt Resolution giving host approval to the issuance of
educational facilities revenue bonds for the Groves Academy Project.
7. Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public -- None
8. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions and Discussion Items
8a. Authorize Pre-Sale of 2014 G.O. Bonds for Sidewalks, Trails and Utilities
Recommended Action: Motion to Adopt Resolution Providing for the Sale of
$10,000,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2014A.
8b. Ownership of Residential Water Service Lines
Recommended Action: Motion to Approve 1st Reading of Ordinance accepting partial
ownership of residential water service lines and set Second Reading for November 17.
9. Communications -- None
Meeting of November 3, 2014
City Council Agenda
CONSENT CALENDAR
4a. Adopt Resolution to disburse remaining Westwood Villa HIA Project Fund Balance of
$139,749.56 to the Westwood Villa Association’s replacement reserve fund.
4b. Approve second reading, Adopt Ordinance amending the Business Park zoning district
regulations, and authorize summary publication.
4c. Approve second reading and Adopt Ordinance imposing a franchise fee on CenterPoint
Energy Resources Corp and authorize publication.
4d. Approve second reading and Adopt Ordinance imposing a franchise fee on Northern
States Power Company and authorize publication in full.
4e. • Approve second reading and Adopt Ordinance amending the St. Louis Park Code of
Ordinances Section 30-158 relating to the Snow Removal Program and authorize
publication.
• Adopt Resolutions relating to the City’s Snow Removal Program.
4f. Adopt Resolution authorizing special assessments for the replacements of various water
service lines.
4g. Adopt Resolution approving the cooperative agreement with the Minnehaha Creek
Watershed District (MCWD) for the construction of a stormwater diversion pipe along
Powell Road.
4h. Adopt Resolution and authorize the Mayor and City Manager to execute the Hennepin
County Chiefs of Police Mutual Aid Pact agreement.
4i. Adopt Resolution approving acceptance of monetary donations from Golden Kiwanis in
the amount of $50 and from Leslie Marcus in the amount of $100 for Westwood Hills
Nature Center programs.
4j. Adopt 3 Resolutions authorizing the submission of grant applications to Hennepin County
Environmental Services for an Environmental Response Fund Grant, to the Department
of Employment and Economic Development (DEED) for Contamination Cleanup Grant
and to the Metropolitan Council for the LCA Livable Communities Demonstration
Account and Tax Base Revitalization Account Transit Oriented Development Fund.
These grants will assist in additional site assessment and a Response Action Plan (RAP)
on the site of the proposed Community Center project.
4k. Adopt Resolution authorizing installation of restricted parking - loading zone on
Excelsior Boulevard, west of Meridian Lane.
4l. Adopt Resolution rescinding the installation of restricted parking - loading zone on
Webster Avenue, just north of 36th Street.
4m. Accept for filing City Disbursement Claims for the period of September 27 through
October 24, 2014.
4n. Approve for filing Telecommunications Commission Minutes of June 25, 2014.
4o. Approve for filing Planning Commission minutes of August 6, 2014.
St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority and regular City Council meetings are carried live on Civic TV cable channel 17 and
replays are frequent; check www.parktv.org for the schedule. The meetings are also streamed live on the internet at www.parktv.org, and
saved for Video on Demand replays. The agenda is posted on Fridays on the official city bulletin board in the lobby of City Hall and on
the text display on Civic TV cable channel 17. The agenda and full packet are available by noon on Friday on the city’s website.
Meeting: Special Study Session
Meeting Date: November 3, 2014
Discussion Item: 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: PLACE Property Acquisition Update and Potential EDA Involvement
RECOMMENDED ACTION: No action at this time. Staff desires direction on the policy
question noted below.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: If the Council/EDA continues to support the PLACE proposed
project, does the EDA wish to help secure the 5725 Highway 7 property (former McGarvey
Coffee property) or provide the adjacent City and EDA land as a site for the PLACE project?
SUMMARY: In November 2013, PLACE, met with the City Council and proposed to redevelop
the 5725 Highway 7 property (former McGarvey Coffee site) and the adjacent EDA/City land.
The proposed project consisted of a landmark mixed-use, mixed-income community that
integrated affordable housing, micro-business space, urban agriculture and aquaponics, and a
mix of renewable energy sources including anaerobic digestion. The City has supported
PLACE’s efforts to pursue the project including modifying our zoning ordinance to allow
anaerobic digesters for energy generation, meeting with potential project funders and securing a
Met Council Livable Communities Development Act Transit Oriented Development Grant to
help with pre-development project expenses. The proposed PLACE Community concept is a
work in progress, but currently includes approximately 300 housing units, consisting of a mix of
market-rate, affordable, cooperative space and live-work units, as well as a GreenPark parking
structure.
PLACE had secured the 5725 Hwy 7 property with a Master Lease/Option to Purchase in 2013.
PLACE has been unsuccessful in its efforts to exercise its purchase rights and no longer controls
the site. PLACE needs a site in order to pursue its project. The 5725 Hwy 7 owner is willing to
entertain EDA purchase of the property if an acceptable agreement can be reached quickly.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: If the EDA wishes to secure the 5725
Highway 7 property, whether by an EDA purchase or City participation with other agencies,
funds would be needed to enter into a Contract for Deed or Purchase Agreement.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
1. St. Louis Park is committed to being a leader in environmental stewardship. We will
increase environmental consciousness and responsibility in all areas of city business.
2. St. Louis Park is committed to providing a well-maintained and diverse housing stock.
3. St. Louis Park is committed to promoting and integrating arts, culture and community
aesthetics in all City initiatives, including implementation where appropriate.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Map of Wooddale Station Area and TSAAP Plan
Prepared by: Ryan Kelley, Associate Planner
Greg Hunt, Economic Development Coordinator
Reviewed by: Kevin Locke, Community Development Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, EDA Executive Director and City Manager
Special Study Session Meeting of November 10, 2014 (Item No. 1) Page 2
Title: PLACE Property Acquisition Update and Potential EDA Involvement
DISCUSSION
PLACE Update
Evolution of the PLACE Concept. The PLACE project concept was introduced to the Council
November 25, 2013 where it received a favorable reception. PLACE is proposing a sustainable,
transit-oriented development on the former McGarvey Coffee property (5725 Highway 7) and
adjacent EDA/City properties into a landmark mixed-use, mixed-income community that
integrates affordable housing, micro–business space, urban agriculture and aquaponics, and a
mix of renewable energy sources including anaerobic digestion. PLACE plans to construct the
project to LEED standards.
The proposed PLACE Community concept has evolved since the concept that was discussed
with the City Council in 2013. At the time PLACE proposed a total of approximately 200
housing units. Currently PLACE is proposing a total of approximately 300 housing units. About
200 of the units would be affordable and affordable live/work units at the 60% AMI standard.
Ultimately, the project components and corresponding sizes will depend upon the development
site, size, and performance standards under current and proposed zoning regulations.
The project buildings would be oriented towards the adjacent Cedar Lake Trail and future
Wooddale SWLRT Station. Structures envisioned at this time include a high-rise (12 stories)
building as well as low rise buildings for commercial, digester/aquaponics/energy generation and
potential hotel and athlete training facility. The precise building program will be market tested
and prepared through the pre-development work.
PLACE was recently awarded a $100,000 pre-development grant from the Metropolitan Council
to further develop the project concept. The principal activities of the LCA-TOD grant include:
project design work, market studies, and project impact analyses.
McGarvey/EDA/City potential site for PLACE. To proceed further with its project development
process, PLACE needs to identify a site for the project. They would prefer the southeast quadrant
of Highway 7 and Wooddale Ave. location (the McGarvey site and EDA land) that has been the
intended site from the beginning. The site’s visibility along Highway 7 and its proximity to the
future Wooddale SWLRT Station and its industrial past make it well suited to the PLACE
concept. This site would require the assembly of three properties: 5725 Highway 7 (former
McGarvey Coffee property) owned by DMD Properties, 5925 Highway 7 (remnant property left
over from the Highway 7/Wooddale Ave interchange project) owned by the EDA, and 5815
Highway 7 (remnant property bisected by the Highway 7 Frontage Rd) owned by the City.
Together these parcels would create a redevelopment site of approximately 3.5 acres. To
assemble this site, the 5725 Hwy 7 parcel, the former McGarvey site, needs to be secured by
someone. Most likely the only way that can happen at this point is if the City/EDA steps in to
acquire the site. It should also be noted that the estimated 3.5 acres of developable land at this
site is somewhat less than what was originally believed to be available. The size estimates have
been adjusted down to reflect the land needed as right-of-way for the Hwy 7 on-ramp and the
frontage road that cut through the City and EDA parcels. The smaller land area for development
means an increasing challenge to accommodate the full PLACE development program on the
site. Hence the density of development PLACE is proposing is greater and the buildings taller
than what was anticipated when the project was discussed in 2013.
Special Study Session Meeting of November 10, 2014 (Item No. 1) Page 3
Title: PLACE Property Acquisition Update and Potential EDA Involvement
EDA/HCRRA potential site for PLACE. An alternative location for PLACE’s development would
be the EDA, HCRRA and City parcels that front on Wooddale Ave and straddle the
railroad/LRT/trail corridor. This scenario would also consist of several properties. The first
would be the 5925 Highway 7 property owned by the EDA (same as above) on the north side of
the tracks. The second property would be 3565 Wooddale Ave on which a small commercial
building leased to Nash Frame Design is located. This .6 AC parcel located immediately south of
the tracks is owned by the Hennepin County Regional Rail Authority (HCRRA). The third
property would be 3565 Wooddale Ave which is a long narrow strip adjacent to the rail corridor
also owned by HCRRA. The fourth property is actually four parcels to the south of the HCRRA
land that is owned by the City used as a public parking lot (corner of 36th and Wooddale). Upon
assemblage, this alternative would provide approximately 3.25 acres for development - roughly
1.5 acre site to the north of the rail/lrt/trail corridor and a 1.75 acre redevelopment site to the
south. Given the reduced acreage, this would result in a slightly smaller project. All of these sites
are in public ownership; however the City/EDA would need to work cooperatively with
Hennepin County possibly through a joint agreement to secure the HCRRA property.
Access and Traffic Considerations. With anticipated increases in traffic on Wooddale Ave and
the surrounding area streets due to SWLRT, it is contemplated that access to the Highway 7
Frontage Rd from Wooddale Ave will need to convert to a right-in/ right-out only configuration
to reduce traffic congestion. This would restrict access to the proposed redevelopment site and to
the current Cityscape Apartments. To restore full access to these properties it has been
contemplated that Xenwood Ave (currently south of these properties) would be extended under
the rail/LRT/trail corridor to the Highway 7 Frontage Rd. This project will entail reconstruction
of significant portions of the Highway 7 Frontage Rd in addition to the Xenwood extension
itself. The cost of these road improvements will be substantial and will require multiple funding
sources. The primary source of funds is anticipated to be the tax increment generated from the
PLACE project itself. In order to generate the necessary tax increment there would need to be
significant value generated from the PLACE project. Therefore whatever redevelopment is
envisioned on the McGarvey/EDA/City property assemblage needs to be of considerable market
value in order to offset the infrastructure costs necessary to provide access to the project and the
Cityscape property. More detailed background information and discussion of the traffic issues,
costs and solutions is scheduled for a future City Council Study session later this year.
PLACE Efforts to Secure the 5725 Hwy 7 Property. Below is a summary of PLACE’s efforts to
acquire the McGarvey site
1. Master Lease w/ Option to Purchase (2013). — PLACE executed a 7-year master lease
with a three year option to buy. The master lease was conditional on PLACE securing an
organics contract with Hennepin County. When an organics contract could not be secured
with either the county or the City of St. Louis Park, the master lease expired in April of
2014.
2. Purchase Agreement (2014). — PLACE exercised its option to purchase the site at $2.76
million.
3. Allianz Loan Agreement. — PLACE got preliminary lender approval from Allianz for
80% of appraised value. An appraisal for the combined site (McGarvey and EDA sites)
indicated an “as is” value of $3,900,000. Appraisal indicated future value of $5.9 million
if rezoned and made a contiguous site.
4. Twin Cities Community Land Bank Purchase Agreement — The Land Bank said it
would be interested in purchasing the site on PLACE’s behalf. The Land Bank made an
offer of $1.8 million which was immediately rejected.
Special Study Session Meeting of November 10, 2014 (Item No. 1) Page 4
Title: PLACE Property Acquisition Update and Potential EDA Involvement
5. Allianz Loan Too Low. — Allianz said that they could not loan on combined site value,
and were required to loan on the appraised value of each site as is. McGarvey site “as is”
appraised value was estimated at $1,650,000. Allianz agreed to loan PLACE $1.32
million for 100% security in the site. PLACE had no source for the additional unsecured
funds to purchase the site.
6. Once PLACE has its project funding in place it can purchase the site. That won’t occur
until the pre-development work is complete including finalizing the redevelopment plans
and securing the projects entitlement approvals (zoning approval, executed
redevelopment contracts, etc).
Options for Securing the 5725 Hwy 7 Property
Staff has met or spoken with the current owner of the former McGarvey property (Don Kasbohm
with DMD Properties, LLC) several times. He is supportive of the PLACE project and would
like to see it proceed on his property; however he can no longer allow PLACE to control the
property without financial consideration. Recently, Mr. Kasbohm received an offer to purchase
from CPM Company, a Minneapolis multi-family developer and management firm. As a result
of several discussions with Staff in mid-October, Mr. Kasbohm has agreed to delay acting on the
purchase agreement from CPM and allow the City approximately 30 days to determine if it
wishes to actively pursue the property in some fashion. Potential acquisition options include:
Outright Purchase: The EDA could negotiate a purchase agreement with the current property
owner. Such an agreement would require a purchase price of approximately $2.75 million. On a
unit per acre basis this appears to be a reasonable asking price and is comparable to other current
and pending projects in the marketplace. This approach would allow the EDA total control over
the property and provide the flexibility to work with PLACE or some other developer that
share’s the City’s vision for the property.
Contract for Deed: Under a Contract for Deed, the EDA would be required to put roughly 10-
20% down ($275,000 - $550,000) and make agreed upon regular monthly payments (approx.
$21,200 per month) with the balance due in a balloon payment at the end of a specified term
such as 4 to 5 years. The benefit of this approach is a lower upfront cash outlay from the EDA
and it would provide the time necessary for the EDA/City to secure potential funding
commitments from other agencies and for PLACE (or another developer with a similar
redevelopment plan) to assemble a financially viable project. Prior to the end of the contract
term, the EDA could be made financially whole by the proposed PLACE project or it would
have to choose whether to purchase the property or find another developer to assume its
obligations.
Not Pursue Acquisition: There are developers interested in the former McGarvey site for market
rate residential projects. All indications to date are that the interested developers would pursue a
project similar to what Don Kasbohm originally proposed for the site which was a four story
approximately 130 unit apartment building. For any residential or mixed-use project to occur on
the former McGarvey site the property would need to be re-guided on the Comprehensive Plan
Land Use map and rezoned. Both actions are fully at the discretion of the City Council.
Should the EDA choose to pursue the property, it is possible that other entities such as Allianz,
Hennepin County, Metropolitan Council and/or others would contribute or provide grants toward
the property acquisition under certain conditions. PLACE has stated that it could purchase the
site with project financing.
Special Study Session Meeting of November 10, 2014 (Item No. 1) Page 5
Title: PLACE Property Acquisition Update and Potential EDA Involvement
Map of Wooddale Station Area and TSAAP Plan
Meeting: Special Study Session
Meeting Date: November 3, 2014
Discussion Item: 2
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Oppidan/Bally's Affordable Housing Proposal
RECOMMENDED ACTION: No action at this time. To help inform the study session discussion,
this report provides information regarding proposed changes to Oppidan’s redevelopment proposal
and challenges related to achieving the City Council’s affordable housing goals, and potential zoning
code changes that would provide the City more flexibility to allow the proposed development.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: In this report staff describes three potential options for code
amendments that would allow higher residential densities, such as Oppidan’s redevelopment
proposal. Staff requests policy direction on two key questions:
• Does City Council support potential changes to the zoning ordinance to allow higher
density residential development under certain conditions?
• Does City Council support staff’s recommendation to pursue Option #1 – Requiring any
new or amended PUD to be approved as a rezoning by ordinance, rather than a
resolution, in order to give City Council more discretion regarding modifications?
SUMMARY: City Council was presented a development proposal and tax increment financing
(TIF) request from Oppidan Investment Company at a Study Session on July 28, 2014. City
Council expressed support for working with Oppidan on the proposed mixed-use development
for the Bally/EDA block. A key direction from the City Council was that a significant number of
affordable units should be added to the development.
Oppidan subsequently submitted a revised concept plan that may allow the project to provide 20
affordable apartment units at 60% AMI (area median income). This would be consistent with
continuing City Council policy discussions regarding requiring affordable housing for TIF
supported projects.
The changes present challenges for meeting zoning requirements on this site relating primarily to
density. The revised concept plan would add a level to the building making it 5-stories tall, and
increase the total number of apartments to between 175 and 185 units, or 110- 116 units per acre.
A building of that height would not be out of character with the neighboring Excelsior & Grand
development, but the density would be greater than permitted under our current code.
For Oppidan’s proposal to move forward with 20 affordable units, it appears the City will need
to amend its zoning ordinance to allow an increased density under certain specific situations.
Oppidan’s proposal demonstrates the viability of allowing increased density as a means to
generate affordable housing units. Discussions with affordable housing developers confirm that
allowing higher densities can be a means of enticing a developer to provide affordable units.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a well-maintained and
diverse housing stock.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Prepared by: Sean Walther, Senior Planner
Reviewed by: Michele Schnitker, Housing Supervisor
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Special Study Session Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 2) Page 2
Title: Oppidan/Bally's Affordable Housing Proposal
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: City Council was presented a development proposal and TIF request from
Oppidan Investment Company at a Study Session on July 28, 2014. City Council expressed
support for working with Oppidan on the proposed mixed-use development for the Bally/EDA
block. A key direction from the City Council was that a significant number of affordable units
should be added to the development.
Oppidan’s revised proposal may allow the project to achieve a better unit mix and provide 20
affordable apartment units at 60% AMI. This would be consistent with continuing City Council
policy discussions regarding requiring developments receiving TIF assistance to provide in the
range of 10% or more units affordable at 60% of AMI.
Oppidan’s revised development proposal adds one level to the building making it 5-stories tall,
and increases the total number of residential apartments to between 175 and 185 units. A
building of that scale would not be out of character with the neighboring Excelsior & Grand
development. The development site, including the Bally Total Fitness and EDA parcels, is 1.6
acres. The residential density would be 110-116 units per acre.
The parcels are zoned a combination of MX – Mixed Use and RC – High Density Multiple
Family Residence districts. These two zoning districts allow 50 units per acre. Both districts
allow the density to be increased to 75 units per acre with a PUD.
The current PUD allows an additional 10% increase above and beyond 75 units per acre, or more
if there is specific guidance in the Comprehensive Plan. In this case, there is no specific
Comprehensive Plan language that would indicate a higher density could be allowed. Also, this
provision has rarely been used. Even with a PUD, the proposed density would not be allowed
under the City’s current code.
In the City Council’s affordable housing policy discussions, the Council has discussed the use of
density bonuses or parking reductions in order to achieve affordable housing goals on a case-by-
case basis. Staff has identified a few potential zoning ordinance amendments that would allow
City Council the flexibility to entertain proposals for higher residential densities in order to
achieve its policy goals, including affordable housing. These changes would provide this
flexibility for not only Oppidan’s proposal, but also future development proposals elsewhere in
the City.
PRESENT CONSIDERATIONS:
Three potential options that would give City Council additional flexibility to allow higher
densities include:
• Require any new or amended PUD to be approved as a rezoning by ordinance, rather than
a resolution.
• Edit the current PUD zoning ordinance text to allow greater modifications to the density.
This could be tied specifically to inclusion of affordable housing or allow greater
flexibility more generally.
• Allow higher densities within the RC and MX zoning districts only.
Option 1: Staff recommends requiring any new or amended PUD to be approved as an ordinance,
rather than a resolution. Procedurally, PUD approvals would become more similar to a rezoning
Special Study Session Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 2) Page 3
Title: Oppidan/Bally's Affordable Housing Proposal
than a conditional use permit (CUP). Essentially, any development approved through this
process would become its own stand-alone zoning district, with all zoning requirements for the
development provided in the ordinance approving the development. This approach has a few
unique benefits.
An ordinance to rezone property is a legislative decision that gives the City Council more
discretion to approve or deny an application. The City Attorney has previously suggested to staff
that he would prefer the City use this process to approve PUDs in general. Based on the City
Attorney’s advice, staff has already been working on this proposed ordinance language for
several months. As currently drafted, this ordinance would give the City Council broader
discretion to increase the density and set other requirements based on the site plans and uses for
each PUD. This approach eliminates the need to process a separate rezoning and any variances,
since the PUD is established by an ordinance.
This option has an advantage because staff already has been preparing an ordinance for several
months and it has been reviewed by the City Attorney. However, staff will need to develop
some administration systems before the changes go into effect.
If another option is preferred by City Council, staff would still propose a change to the PUD
ordinance in the near future, but perhaps follow a different schedule from Oppidan’s
redevelopment proposal and the affordable housing policy discussions.
Option #2: A slightly less complicated text amendment to the existing PUD ordinance is another
option. The City currently limits the degree to which the residential density may be increased.
City Council could eliminate this limitation or boost the maximum density increase in the PUD
section of the code. This could either be allowed broadly, or tied to specific conditions, such as a
provision of affordable housing.
While this option may be somewhat less complex than Option #1 above, it also has ripple effects
to other chapters in the ordinance that would need to be identified and amended to be consistent
with the PUD section. Staff views this as workable, but still a temporary fix to a structural issue
in the PUD section of the code.
Option #3: Another change could be made that affects only the RC and MX zoning districts and
allows higher densities to all properties in these districts. An advantage of this approach is that
the City has already deemed these areas appropriate for high density residential uses.
The City made a similar change to the Office zoning district in 2010. These code changes
allowed the Flats at West End and Millennium at West End to develop at densities of 112 and 99
units per acre respectively with a PUD.
Common Issues: All of the above options could be further tailored to allow higher densities only
under certain conditions (to be determined), only with a PUD and at City Council’s discretion, as
a specific density bonus for affordable housing only, or some combination of all of these.
Staff will need to identify any potential conflicts with other ordinance provisions, especially for
Option #3, because these changes could generate unnecessary and unwarranted variance
requests.
Special Study Session Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 2) Page 4
Title: Oppidan/Bally's Affordable Housing Proposal
It will take at least two months to adopt any of these zoning ordinance amendments. It is not
uncommon for such amendments to take longer, as debate about the policy variables above can
take time.
In the meantime, Oppidan may be uncomfortable waiting for the ordinance process to conclude
to submit its development proposal. Staff anticipates Oppidan will request that their proposal be
allowed to begin the zoning review process, based on the direction of these changes, after the
process has started and before the process has concluded. While this would entail some added
risk to Oppidan, it would compress the schedule for review of their plans by a month or more.
Finally, the changes to the maximum densities allowed in the zoning districts may need to be
paired with an amendment to the Land Use chapter of the Comprehensive Plan. This process is
similar in duration to the zoning amendments and can be done concurrently.
Meeting: Economic Development Authority
Meeting Date: November 3, 2014
Minutes: 3a
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
OCTOBER 6, 2014
1. Call to Order
President Mavity called the meeting to order at 7:25 p.m.
Commissioners present: President Anne Mavity, Tim Brausen, Steve Hallfin, Jeff Jacobs, Gregg
Lindberg, Susan Sanger, and Jake Spano.
Commissioners absent: None.
Staff present: Executive Director (Mr. Harmening) and Recording Secretary (Ms. Hughes).
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Minutes
3a. Economic Development Authority Meeting Minutes September 15, 2014
The minutes were approved as presented.
4. Approval of Agenda
The agenda was approved as presented.
5. Reports
5a. Approval of EDA Disbursements
It was moved by Commissioner Lindberg, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs, to accept
for filing EDA disbursements for the period August 23 through September 26, 2014.
The motion passed 7-0.
6. Old Business - None
7. New Business - None
8. Communications - None
9. Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 7:26 p.m.
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Secretary President
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: November 3, 2014
Consent Agenda Item: 5a
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Approval of EDA Disbursements
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to accept for filing EDA Disbursement Claims for the
period of September 27 through October 24, 2014.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the EDA desire to approve EDA disbursements in
accordance with Article V – Administration of Finances, of the EDA Bylaws?
SUMMARY: The Accounting Division prepares this report on a monthly basis for the EDA to
review and approve. The attached reports show both EDA disbursements paid by physical check
and those by wire transfer or Automated Clearing House (ACH) when applicable.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Review and approval of the information
follows the EDA’s Bylaws and provides another layer of oversight to further ensure fiscal
stewardship.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: EDA Disbursements
Prepared by: Connie Neubeck, Account Clerk
Reviewed by: Brian A. Swanson, Controller
10/27/2014CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:22:15R55CKS2 LOGIS400
1Page -Council Check Summary
- 10/24/20149/27/2014
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
56.00CAMPBELL KNUTSON PROF ASSOC ELIOT PARK TIF DIST G&A LEGAL SERVICES
80.00DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A LEGAL SERVICES
136.00
58.85CENTERPOINT ENERGY 4601 HWY 7 PROP ACQUISITION HEATING GAS
58.85
9,240.00CODAMETRICSDEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A PLANNING
9,240.00
102.50EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC BRIDGEWATER OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
102.50CSM TIF DIST G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
205.00WOODDALE POINTE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
410.00
2,558.00ELNESS SWENSON GRAHAM ARCHITECTS INC SWLRT DEVELOPMENT PLANNING
2,558.00
84.00GREEN HORIZONS 7015 WALKER-REYNOLDS WELD PROP LAND MAINTENANCE
176.004601 HWY 7 PROP ACQUISITION LAND MAINTENANCE
84.00PARK COMMONS G&A LAND MAINTENANCE
344.00
68.00KENNEDY & GRAVEN MCGARVEY COFFEE SITE LEGAL SERVICES
126.00WEST END TIF DIST G&A LEGAL SERVICES
221.00DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A LEGAL SERVICES
505.99PARK COMMONS G&A LEGAL SERVICES
80.00WOODDALE POINTE LEGAL SERVICES
1,000.99
2,442.75LHB ENGINEERS & ARCHITECTS BALLY'S REDEVELOPMENT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
5,183.00BRIDGEWATEROTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
375.50ELIOT PARK TIF DIST G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
2,524.50DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A PLANNING
10,525.75
24,000.00MYKLEBUST + SEARS PUBLIC ART OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
24,000.00
76,738.86ST LOUIS PARK CONV & VISITORS BUREAU CONVENTION & VISITORS BUREAU COST REIMBURSEMENT-CVB
76,738.86
Economic Development Authority Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approval of EDA Disbursements
Page 2
10/27/2014CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:22:15R55CKS2 LOGIS400
2Page -Council Check Summary
- 10/24/20149/27/2014
AmountVendorObjectBU Description
87.50XCEL ENERGY 4601 HWY 7 PROP ACQUISITION HEATING GAS
87.50
Report Totals 125,099.95
Economic Development Authority Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approval of EDA Disbursements Page 3
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: November 3, 2014
Presentation: 2a
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Recognition of Donations
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Mayor to announce and give thanks and appreciation for the
following donation being accepted at the meeting and listed on the Consent Agenda:
From Amount For
Golden Kiwanis $50 Westwood Hills Nature Center Programs
Leslie Marcus $100 Westwood Hills Nature Center Programs
Prepared by: Debbie Fischer, Office Assistant
Approved by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: November 3, 2014
Minutes: 3a
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL STUDY SESSION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
OCTOBER 6, 2014
The meeting convened at 6:48 p.m.
Councilmembers present: Mayor Jeff Jacobs, Tim Brausen, Steve Hallfin, Gregg Lindberg,
Anne Mavity, Susan Sanger, and Jake Spano.
Councilmembers absent: None.
Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), Director of Operations & Recreation (Ms.
Walsh), Police Chief (Mr. Luse), Police Lieutenant (Mr. Kraayenbrink), Operations
Superintendent (Mr. Hanson), Streets Field Supervisor (Mr. Wolff), Communications &
Marketing Coordinator (Mr. Zwilling), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Hughes).
1. Snow Removal Program
Mr. Harmening presented the staff report and recommended changes to the City’s snow removal
program.
Mr. Luse stated it appears the City’s exempt zones are creating the most confusion for residents
and the proposed revision to the exempt zones provides that the City will temporarily post “no
parking” on one side of the street to allow for cleanup. He discussed the proposed changes
regarding declaration of a snow emergency and stated the proposed revisions synchronize with
neighboring communities and staff believes the proposed changes will make more sense to
residents.
Councilmember Mavity stated the City currently uses a 3” threshold for when a parking ban
takes place and asked if the City would continue to use a 3” threshold of snow when declaring a
snow emergency.
Mr. Harmening stated when 3” of snow occurs, residents are supposed to move their cars off the
street and that policy will remain the same and the City now intends to proactively announce the
snow emergency so that there is no question when residents have to move their cars off the
street.
Councilmember Sanger stated she had no problem with the proposed changes for declaring a
snow emergency and requested further information about what was being communicated to
residents as to when their car must be off the street. She expressed concern about the manner in
which the Orthodox Jewish population responds to a snow emergency especially in a situation
where a storm is heavier than predicted on a Friday or Saturday and she did not want to have
residents upset that they did not know there was a snow emergency declared because they were
not watching television or listening to the radio.
Mr. Zwilling stated that the City intends to inform residents that a snow emergency is going into
effect at a specified time and that they must have their cars off the street by that time. He stated
the City would continue using the 3” snowfall threshold for declaring a snow emergency.
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 3a) Page 2
Title: Special Study Session Minutes of October 6, 2014
Councilmember Lindberg stated the proposed changes represent a common sense move that will
allow the City to communicate to residents in a consistent manner. He felt that residents needed
to have some personal accountability and he was willing to support City staff, adding that the
City does a really good job of keeping the City’s streets clear.
Councilmember Brausen agreed with Councilmember Lindberg and stated he was more than
willing to accept staff’s recommendations.
Councilmember Spano expressed support for the proposed changes and requested further
information about the various communication methods available to residents and whether
residents can receive text message alerts.
Mr. Zwilling stated the City does not have a separate text messaging service but those who sign
up for the reverse 911 system can choose up to six different methods for notification, including
phone, text, and email. He added that residents are also being encouraged to download the
MyStLouisPark app that would push out an alert to residents regarding snow emergencies.
Councilmember Hallfin expressed support for the proposed changes to the snow removal
program.
It was the consensus of the City Council to direct staff to proceed with the recommended
changes to the snow removal program.
The meeting adjourned at 7:10 p.m.
Written reports provided and documented for recording purposes only:
2. Comcast Franchise Transfer
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Nancy Stroth, City Clerk Jeff Jacobs, Mayor
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: November 3, 2014
Minutes: 3b
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
OCTOBER 6, 2014
1. Call to Order
Mayor Jacobs called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
Councilmembers present: Mayor Jeff Jacobs, Tim Brausen, Steve Hallfin, Gregg Lindberg,
Anne Mavity, Susan Sanger, and Jake Spano.
Councilmembers absent: None.
Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), City Attorney (Mr. Scott), City Clerk (Ms.
Stroth), Director of Engineering (Ms. Heiser), Planning/Zoning Supervisor (Ms. McMonigal),
Assistant Zoning Administrator (Mr. Morrison), Senior Engineering Project Manager (Mr.
Shamla), Housing Programs Coordinator (Ms. Olson), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Hughes).
1a. Pledge of Allegiance
1b. Roll Call
2. Presentations
2a. Recognition of Donation
Mayor Jacobs expressed thanks to Susan Slater for her $250 donation to be used for the
purchase of fire prevention materials and equipment.
3. Approval of Minutes
3a. Special Council Meeting Minutes August 8, 2014
Councilmember Spano requested that the first page of the minutes reflect his attendance
at the meeting.
The minutes were approved as amended.
3b. City Council Meeting Minutes September 2, 2014
Councilmember Sanger requested that the third line of the first paragraph on page 3 be
revised to state “two-bedroom units, and four two one-bedroom + den units along with
structured parking. He…”
The minutes were approved as amended.
3c. Study Session Meeting Minutes September 8, 2014
Councilmember Spano requested the addition of a paragraph on page 2 after the third
paragraph that states “Councilmember Spano was supportive of looking at a pedestrian
bridge over Highway 7 given the amount of foot traffic coming from the Blake Road
light rail station.”
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 3b) Page 2
Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of October 6, 2014
The minutes were approved as amended.
3d. Special Study Session Meeting September 15, 2014
The minutes were approved as presented.
3e. City Council Meeting Minutes September 15, 2014
The minutes were approved as presented.
4. Approval of Agenda and Items on Consent Calendar
NOTE: The Consent Calendar lists those items of business which are considered to be routine and/or which need no
discussion. Consent items are acted upon by one motion. If discussion is desired by either a Councilmember or a
member of the audience, that item may be moved to an appropriate section of the regular agenda for discussion.
4a. Adopt Resolution No. 14-109 authorizing final payment in the amount of $17,981.22
and accepting work for Project No. 2012-1500: Elevated Storage Tank No. 3
Rehabilitation and Recoating with Classic Protective Coatings, Inc., City Contract No.
48-13.
4b. Adopt Resolution No. 14-110 authorizing special assessments for the replacement of
various water service lines.
4c. Approve a Temporary On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor License for the Job’s Daughters
Foundation of Minnesota, Inc. for a wine tasting event to be held on October 18, 2014
at the Paul Revere Masonic Center, 6509 Walker Street in St. Louis Park.
4d. Adopt Resolution No. 14-111 appointing additional Election Judges needed to staff
the polls at the State General Election to be held November 4, 2014.
4e. Accept for filing City Disbursement Claims for the period of August 23 through
September 26, 2014.
4f. Adopt Resolution No. 14-112 authorizing calling for a Public Hearing on November
3rd on the issuance of educational facilities revenue bonds and authorizing the
publication of a notice of the hearing for the Groves Academy Project.
4g. Adopt Resolution No. 14-113 authorizing the special assessment for the repair of the
water service line at 2717 Louisiana Avenue South, P.I.D. 08-117-21-42-0063.
4h. Adopt Resolution No. 14-114 authorizing the special assessment for the repair of the
sewer service line at 3232 Edgewood Avenue South, P.I.D. 17-117-21-14-0037.
4i. Adopt Resolution No. 14-115 authorizing the special assessment for the repair of the
sewer service line at 3505 Pennsylvania Avenue South, P.I.D. 17-117-21-31-0010.
4j. Adopt Resolution No. 14-116 authorizing the special assessment for the repair of the
water service line at 9109 24th Street West, P.I.D. 07-117-21-24-0018.
4k. Adopt Resolution No. 14-117 accepting a $250 Donation from Susan Slater for the
purchase of fire prevention materials and equipment.
4l. Adopt Resolution No. 14-118 authorizing final payment in the amount of $21,102.51
for the Street Sealcoat Project (Area 6) with Allied Blacktop Company - Project No.
4014-1206, City Contract No. 42-14.
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 3b) Page 3
Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of October 6, 2014
4m. Include the installation of sidewalk along the north side of 42nd Street from
Princeton/Quentin Avenue to the St. Louis Park City limit as part of the 2014
Pavement Management Project and to Adopt Resolution No. 14-119 authorizing
installation of “No Parking” restrictions on a segment of 42nd Street.
4n. Approve and execute the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the City of St.
Louis Park for Design and Implementation of the Southwest Light Rail Transit Project
(SWLRT) in St. Louis Park.
4o. Approve for filing Planning Commission minutes of August 6, 2014.
Councilmember Spano requested that Consent Calendar item 4n be removed and placed
on the Regular Agenda.
Mr. Harmening informed Council that the resolution in Consent Calendar item 4m was
incomplete and should read, “NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City
Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, that the Engineering Director is hereby
authorized to install the following controls no parking restrictions on the north side of
42nd Street between Princeton Avenue and the St. Louis Park City limit.” He noted this
change has been made to the resolution.
It was moved by Councilmember Hallfin, seconded by Councilmember Sanger, to
approve the Agenda and items listed on the Consent Calendar as amended to move
Consent Calendar item 4n to the Regular Agenda as item 8c; and to waive reading of all
resolutions and ordinances.
The motion passed 7-0.
5. Boards and Commissions
It was moved by Councilmember Mavity, seconded by Councilmember Brausen, to
appoint the following citizen representatives:
Environment & Sustainability Commission:
Nancy Rose (term expiring December 31, 2016)
Karen Kaphingst (term expiring December 21, 2015)
Human Rights Commission:
David Hamm (term expiring December 31, 2017)
Anita Beaton (term expiring December 31, 2017)
Katherine Arnold (term expiring December 31, 2017)
The motion passed 7-0.
Councilmember Brausen stated opportunities are available for residents interested in
serving on a board or commission and encouraged interested residents to come forward.
Councilmember Mavity stated there are a number of vacancies for youth commissioners
on several commissions and encouraged any interested youth to apply.
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 3b) Page 4
Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of October 6, 2014
6. Public Hearings
6a. Zoning Determination Appeal – Mr. Martin Bell and Martin Bell Properties,
LLC, 2211 Florida Ave South. Resolution No. 14-120
Mr. Morrison presented the staff report and the appeal by Mr. Marty Bell and Martin Bell
Properties, LLC, appealing staff’s determination that outdoor storage is being conducted
and is not permitted in the Industrial Park zoning district as a principal use. He recited
the applicable provisions of the Ordinance regarding principal use and accessory use,
outdoor storage, and permitted uses and presented several pictures of the outdoor storage
area on the north half of the parcel, which was recently enclosed by a fence and contains
contractor trucks, boom trucks, dumpsters, landscaping materials, and remnants of trees.
He stated that since outdoor storage is the only use occurring on the appellant’s land, it is
considered a principal use and is not permitted. He advised that BOZA conducted a
hearing on July 24, 2014, and voted to uphold staff’s determination.
Mayor Jacobs opened the public hearing.
Mr. Martin Bell stated he has owned this property for 27 years and it is a unique piece of
property where there is no parking adjacent to the building and parking is across the
street. He disagreed with staff’s interpretation regarding “land” and stated the tenant at
2220 Florida Avenue uses the fenced-in area to park employee cars and uses the building
as their offices. He felt that Tim’s Tree Service was an essential member of the
community and deserves some consideration as to the use of the property. He did not
believe there was any violation of City Code and stated Tim’s Tree Service has cleaned
up the property and is only moving his trucks in and out and Tim’s Tree Service does not
do any wood chipping on the property and logs are loaded into containers and then
removed. He requested that the City Council recognize that the property is unique and
allow them to continue to have Tim’s Tree Service as an operator.
Councilmember Spano questioned Mr. Bell’s definition of land.
Mr. Bell stated the land has been used as an accessory piece of land to the building and
was permitted by the City to be used for parking and storage.
Councilmember Mavity requested further information about the principal use of the
parcel in question. She also asked if the City has any documentation regarding the permit
for parking referred to by Mr. Bell.
Mr. Morrison stated that previous city codes allowed accessory parking to occur on a
separate parcel from the principal use if there is not enough room for parking. He added
that written authorization was required and staff and the appellant have been unable to
locate any such documentation. He stated that while the assumption is made that the City
has allowed accessory parking, the parking is for customers and employees only and the
City cannot allow other accessory uses to come over onto that land. He added there is no
principal use of the land at this time and it is a vacant parcel.
Councilmember Mavity asked if a CUP is allowable for these types of uses.
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 3b) Page 5
Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of October 6, 2014
Mr. Morrison replied a CUP is allowed to permit accessory parking for employees and
customers on the parcel.
Mr. Scott explained the City Code does not define the term “land” in its Ordinance, but
the only rational way to interpret the term “land” in connection with the provision dealing
with accessory uses is that the accessory use has to be on the same parcel as the principal
use. He stated the City’s interpretation is that it has to be one parcel and contiguous piece
of land and in this case, the other parcel is located across the street. He stated the parcel
with the principal use is held by one entity and the other parcel is held by another entity
with separate tax ID numbers. He stated it was his understanding there has been some
use of the parcel across the street for parking in connection with the office warehouse but
there was never any official recognition of that. He pointed out this is an accessory use
involving a contractor’s yard with heavy equipment in a fenced-in area that is not used
for parking, which is only allowed as an accessory use on the same land and the City is
interpreting “land” to mean the same physical land where the principal use is located.
Councilmember Hallfin stated this is a flat, vacant piece of land that has been paved and
is zoned for industrial. He felt common sense should prevail and the current use of the
property seems fine for this particular area. He suggested that Council consider changing
the zoning of the land in question.
Councilmember Mavity asked if there was any other way to designate this property
within the current City Code in which the principal use would be for this storage.
Mr. Morrison stated that outdoor storage is not allowed in this zoning district as a
principal use, and the only alternative would be to change the City Code to allow outdoor
storage as a principal use, adding that this zoning change would be city-wide and would
impact all other industrial properties.
Mr. Bell stated when they bought the property it was zoned industrial and some of the
neighbors were uncomfortable so the businesses in the area got together with the City and
neighborhood and agreed to change the property to Industrial Park and it has been a
peaceful community with no problems and he felt this was the best use for the property.
He noted there are buses parked behind the property belonging to the bus company on the
other side and they do not have an office there and he felt this was no different than what
Tim’s Tree Service is doing and it seems the City is being inconsistent.
Mr. Morrison stated that the property referred to by Mr. Bell has outdoor storage as an
accessory use and it is not a principal use.
Councilmember Lindberg agreed that while common sense should prevail, he was
concerned about the problems created by any change in zoning.
Mayor Jacobs closed the public hearing.
It was moved by Councilmember Sanger, seconded by Councilmember Lindberg, to adopt
Resolution No. 14-120 Adopting Findings and Decision Upholding the Board of Zoning
Appeals (BOZA) Denial of Appeal of Martin Bell Properties, LLC.
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 3b) Page 6
Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of October 6, 2014
Councilmember Hallfin agreed Council should uphold BOZA’s decision but felt that the
appellant has a use that fits in this industrial area, and Mr. Bell may wish to pursue a
change in zoning.
Councilmember Brausen spoke in favor of Council reviewing the Ordinance to see if this
type of use should be allowed as a CUP on a case-by-case basis.
The motion passed 7-0.
6b. Public Hearing to Consider First Reading of 2015 Fee Ordinance
Ms. Stroth presented the staff report and proposed 2015 fee ordinance. She stated the fee
ordinance is reviewed each year based on comparison to other cities, changes in
regulations, and to cover the business costs for providing services. She noted the
proposed fee increases have been incorporated in the 2015 budget and if approved, the
fee increases will be effective January 1, 2015.
Mayor Jacobs opened the public hearing. No speakers were present. Mayor Jacobs
closed the public hearing.
It was moved by Councilmember Hallfin, seconded by Councilmember Brausen, to
approve First Reading of Ordinance Adopting Fees for Calendar Year 2015 and to set
Second Reading for October 20, 2014.
Councilmember Spano requested further information about the fees for false alarms.
Mr. Harmening stated the City’s false alarm fees are not out of line compared to
neighboring communities and acknowledged the City should have been incrementally
increasing these fees in the past. He stated the increases are intended to recover some of
the City’s costs and the false alarm fee for commercial properties was increased because
it takes longer to clear a commercial building versus a residential property.
The motion passed 7-0.
7. Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public – None
8. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions and Discussion Items
8a. First Reading of Construction Management Plan Ordinance
Ms. Olson presented the staff report and advised that the Construction Management Plan
(CMP) is intended to proactively address neighborhood concerns related to construction
projects would be applied to tear downs or demolitions where more than 50% of the
exterior walls are removed, new construction, or construction of a major addition to all
one and two family dwellings. She stated that written notification must be provided to
property owners within 200’ of the construction property at least seven calendar days
before construction begins and a neighborhood meeting and signage is required for
demolitions and new construction. She stated that staff has been speaking with permit
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 3b) Page 7
Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of October 6, 2014
applicants over the last two months about the proposed CMP and applicants have
indicated they understood the CMP and have voluntarily complied with the written
notification requirement.
Councilmember Lindberg requested confirmation that the neighborhood meeting is
intended to provide facts about the construction project in general and is not intended to
allow input or comment on the design of the project.
Ms. Olson replied that this was correct.
Councilmember Sanger asked why the CMP applied only to one and two family
properties. She felt that the process of notification should be applied to anyone building
an apartment complex or other kinds of buildings as well. She requested that the City
ensure that property owners of record pass along any written notification to renters living
in properties within the notification area.
Ms. Olson stated the City’s intent is to provide written notification to everyone living
within the notification area whether they are owners or renters.
Councilmember Sanger requested that this provision be clarified for Second Reading.
Mr. Harmening stated the CMP applies to one and two family dwellings because of the
scale of an addition to a single-family home, which is different than an apartment
building. He acknowledged this does not mean the City should not follow a process for
neighborhood input on apartment building projects but because those types of projects are
larger in scale, they typically require CUPs or PUDs where neighborhood meetings are
held and the public is generally more aware of these types of projects versus a project for
a single family home.
Councilmember Sanger requested that Council consider whether it should expand the
Ordinance to include larger properties or whether to further formalize the neighborhood
input process.
Councilmember Brausen agreed with Councilmember Sanger and felt the Ordinance
should extend the same requirements to all projects.
Councilmember Mavity felt the City does a good job of keeping the public informed and
she applauded this expansion of the Ordinance, but she also wanted to be careful about
going too far and did not want to make the regulations too unwieldy.
It was moved by Councilmember Lindberg, seconded by Councilmember Spano, to
approve First Reading of Ordinance Relating to Construction Management of
Demolition, New Construction and Additions to Single and Two Family Dwellings
Amending Chapter 6 of the St. Louis Park City Code of Ordinances and to set Second
Reading for October 20, 2014.
The motion passed 7-0.
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 3b) Page 8
Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of October 6, 2014
8b. Highway 7 and Louisiana Avenue Supplemental Agreement No. 1
Mr. Shamla presented the staff report and explained that the increase in cost is due to
additional contaminated soil on the site. He stated that 65,000 cubic yards of clean
material must be imported for a total price of approximately $671,000 and the overall
estimated cost of the project has been updated to $34,550,000. He advised the contractor
is projecting all roads and ramps will be open November 15, 2014, and final cleanup
completed in June 2015. He also introduced Mr. Mark Dierling from SEH, Inc.
It was moved by Councilmember Spano, seconded by Councilmember Hallfin, to approve
Supplemental Agreement No. 1 to Contract No. 65-13, Highway 7/Louisiana Interchange
Project – Project No. 2012-0100.
The motion passed 7-0.
8c. Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the City of St. Louis Park for
Design and Implementation of the Southwest Light Rail Transit Project
(SWLRT) in St. Louis Park
Councilmember Spano stated he pulled this item from the Consent Calendar in order to
make note of the actual passing of the MOU with Met Council and to point out that the
document looks slightly different than what was passed by the City Council in July. He
explained the City’s consent has not changed, the MOU has been reviewed by the City
Attorney, and the MOU aligns with the document passed this summer, and the only
change is to the format that was changed by Met Council to align with their template.
It was moved by Councilmember Sanger, seconded by Councilmember Brausen, to
approve and execute the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the City of St.
Louis Park for Design and Implementation of the Southwest Light Rail Transit Project
(SWLRT) in St. Louis Park.
Councilmember Mavity stated that Council’s #1 priority on the SWLRT project relates to
the unfunded capital improvements needed to make this project work well for the
community, including grade and trail separations at Beltline and Wooddale, and Council
will continue to work with Met Council on these capital improvements.
The motion passed 7-0.
9. Communications
Mayor Jacobs reminded residents about the 33rd annual Halloween party at Westwood
Hills Nature Center on October 17 and 18 and stated further information is available on
the City’s website.
10. Adjournment
Mayor Jacobs adjourned the meeting at 8:45 p.m.
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Nancy Stroth, City Clerk Jeff Jacobs, Mayor
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: November 3, 2014
Minutes: 3c
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
OCTOBER 13, 2014
The meeting convened at 6:30 p.m.
Councilmembers present: Mayor Jeff Jacobs, Tim Brausen, Gregg Lindberg, Anne Mavity,
Susan Sanger, and Jake Spano.
Councilmembers absent: Steve Hallfin.
Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), Deputy City Manager/Director of Human
Resources (Ms. Deno), Director of Engineering (Ms. Heiser), Chief Information Officer (Mr.
Pires), Controller (Mr. Swanson), Finance Supervisor (Mr. Heintz), Parks Superintendent (Mr.
Beane), Operations Superintendent (Mr. Hanson), Utilities Superintendent (Mr. Hall),
Communications & Marketing Coordinator (Mr. Zwilling), Accountant (Mr. Hemann), Human
Resources Coordinator (Ms. Timpone), Human Resources Office Assistant (Ms. Vail), and
Recording Secretary (Ms. Hughes).
1. Future Study Session Agenda Planning – October 27, 2014
Mr. Harmening presented the proposed study session agenda for October 27th.
Councilmember Spano requested that a future study session agenda include a discussion about
the City’s family leave policies and whether the policies should be enhanced to make the City
more competitive and attractive for future employees.
2. Review of Proposed 2015 Budget, Utility Rates, CIP and LRFMP
Mr. Swanson presented the staff report and advised that no changes have been made to the
proposed 2015 budget since September 15, 2014, when Council adopted the 2015 Preliminary
Property Tax Levy increase of 5.5% and the 2015 Preliminary HRA Levy increase of 0.41%. He
stated that increases in the Utility Funds have been consistent over the last several years and the
City will be issuing debt for both the Water and Storm Water Funds to cover increasing
infrastructure needs and address storm water management. He stated the proposed 2015 budget
includes a franchise fee increase of $0.75 per utility per month for a total increase of $18 per
year for residential customers. He reviewed the estimated City impact for 2015 for taxes,
utilities, and franchise fees based on a 5.5% levy increase and stated that a typical residential
homestead property valued at $217,600 would experience an overall increase of approximately
6% over 2014 or approximately $115 for the entire year or $9.58 per month.
Councilmember Sanger asked if the 2015 budget includes the cost of projects in the 2015
Connect the Park! project.
Mr. Swanson replied that the 2015 General Fund Budget does not specifically address this
project but the City has factored in Phase 1 of Connect the Park! through the issuance of $5
million in bonds.
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 3c) Page 2
Title: Study Session Minutes of October 13, 2014
Councilmember Sanger asked if staff was comfortable with the projections in the Cable TV
Fund.
Mr. Swanson advised that the franchise agreement ends in 2020 and the Cable TV Fund is
projected to remain solvent until 2022. He stated that Comcast may be looking to extend their
franchise agreements but if no progress is made on a new franchise agreement, staff would begin
looking at this Fund in 2017 to determine how Cable TV is handled in the future.
Councilmember Spano reemphasized his concern about the need to start saving money for
SWLRT infrastructure needs. He also requested that Council have a future study session
discussion about the Cable TV fund and the ways in which people are getting their home
entertainment as more and more people remove themselves from traditional cable services.
Ms. Heiser presented a map of the 2015 CIP projects and advised that the Bass Lake Preserve
project is split among three years and the City hopes to do some vegetation management project
later this year, with dredging and sediment removal in 2015, and restoration in the summer of
2016. She stated that the Highway 100 project will intensify starting in April 2015 with
significant utility construction including a new water main. She advised that the City has
decided to complete the project on 36th and Wooddale in 2016 and will also be installing the
signal on 36th and Xenwood at the same time to achieve economies of scale and avoid creating
additional delays in this area, adding that these improvements will be in place by the time the
Highway 7 bridge is being reconstructed in 2016 as a part of the TH100 project.
Councilmember Mavity stated it was her understanding the City would be adding signal lights to
the exit and entrance ramps on Highway 7 as part of the 36th and Wooddale project.
Ms. Heiser explained these are Mn/DOT controlled ramps and Mn/DOT will be performing
traffic counts when the Highway 7 and Louisiana Avenue project is completed and the City
should have that analysis in December.
Councilmember Mavity felt that these signals lights should be a top priority for the City.
Mr. Beane discussed the proposed Wolfe Park improvements and advised that Park Nicollet has
indicated a willingness to pay for some of the improvements on the southwest corner of the walk
bridge. He stated that the playground equipment at Peter Hobart School and Nelson Park is due
for replacement in 2015 and staff will work with the School District on replacement and engage
in a public process on selecting equipment.
Mr. Harmening requested comment about the condition of the City’s water mains and whether
the City could experience a major water main break similar to the break that occurred in
Robbinsdale.
Mr. Hall explained that the City is currently locating all the valving to shut off the water in the
event of a break. He stated that the Highway 100 project includes replacing the water lines and
will include valves on each side that can be shut down in the event of a break. He stated that the
water mains in the City’s residential areas are older when compared to the water mains along the
highways.
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 3c) Page 3
Title: Study Session Minutes of October 13, 2014
Mr. Pires reviewed the 2015 projects in the Cable TV Fund including the work proposed to be
done in the Community Room that would allow City Council meetings to be cablecast live. He
stated the 2015 CIP includes the fiber conduit project at the West End that will complete the loop
around the entire development. He advised that the City had a significant fiber relocation project
this year at 28th Street and will have another relocation project in 2015 around Highway 7. He
explained that the CIP also includes a program to convert the City’s microfilm documents into
digital format and well as expanding the document management system to include things like
email. He stated that other projects include portable webcams that could provide views of
construction projects such as Highway 100 or SWLRT.
Councilmember Sanger requested that staff provide Council with an overview of the fiber
connections throughout the City. She also felt the City needed to adopt a privacy policy as it
relates to use of webcams and requested this item be placed on a future study session agenda.
Mr. Pires explained that cameras that have been installed so far are used for security purposes
only and the vast majority of the cameras are not actively monitored. He stated that the City has
planned fiber conduit along the entire SWLRT corridor and making sure the City can bring fiber
extensions to the light rail stations. He noted that the security facilities along with wi-fi and fiber
were installed this year at Nelson, Browndale, and Fern Hill Parks and similar projects are
planned in 2015 for Birchwood, Wolfe, and Louisiana Oaks Parks.
Mr. Heintz presented the Long Range Financial Management Plan (LRFMP) and introduced
Coty Hemann, the staff accountant who worked on the LRFMP. He reviewed the Cable TV
Fund and stated this Fund has a positive fund balance through 2022. He stated the Police and
Fire Pension Fund includes one-time money for police and fire purposes and this Fund is
sustainable through 2023 with a large capital expense projected in 2024. He stated the Housing
Rehabilitation Fund is funded through private activity revenue bonds and this Fund has some
significant challenges after 2021 and will most likely need some infusion of dollars. He
reviewed the Development Fund, which shows a projected $2.1 million in 2015 from proceeds
from the sale of land. He also reviewed the HRA Levy Fund that is paying for the Highway 7
and Louisiana Avenue project and stated this Fund will use a $4.5 million loan from the
Development Fund to cover the rest of the Highway 7 and Louisiana Avenue project that will be
paid off in 2021. He also discussed the Park Improvement Fund and noted that $900,000 has
been earmarked in 2015 for the next stage of community center planning. He stated that this
Fund also has projected capital outlay in 2016 of over $5 million related to replacement of the
refrigeration at the ice arena. He reviewed the Pavement Management Fund and stated this Fund
is sustainable based on current capital needs in the program. He discussed the Sidewalks and
Trails Fund that includes $654,000 for future debt service needs, $5 million in bond proceeds for
2014, and $100,000 for fiber. He indicated this Fund has $8 million in bonds for 2017 and 2019
for Connect the Park! and $5 million in 2021 to pay for the remainder of the program. He
discussed the Capital Replacement Fund and stated this Fund has challenges in the middle years
and staff will continue to closely monitor this Fund. He reviewed the Water Utility Fund and
stated the revenue amounts have been revised based on a decrease in usage, primarily related to
the Nestlé site and a decrease in residential usage. He also reviewed the Sewer Utility Fund,
Solid Waste Utility Fund, and Storm Water Utility Fund as well as the Uninsured Loss Fund and
Benefits Administration Fund.
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 3c) Page 4
Title: Study Session Minutes of October 13, 2014
Councilmember Spano requested further information about the City’s ability to use the
Development Fund to finance projects.
Mr. Swanson distributed a list of active and potential unfunded CIP projects and potential
funding sources and stated that all of the SWLRT improvements identified by the City are listed
on this document along with the potential cost to the City.
Mr. Swanson advised that the City’s debt limit is $150 million and the City only has
approximately $11 million of G.O. debt outstanding.
It was the consensus of the City Council to set the 2015 Final Property Tax Levy at $26,985,377,
an increase of $1,407,469 or approximately 5.5% over the 2014 Final Property Tax Levy. It was
also the consensus of the City Council to levy the maximum HRA Levy allowed of $953,238, an
increase of $3,879 or approximately 0.41% over the 2014 Final HRA Levy. It was also the
consensus of the City Council to proceed with the 2015 proposed utility rate adjustments.
3. 2015 Employer Benefits Contribution and Wellness Incentive Program
Ms. Deno presented the staff report and introduced Ms. Timpone and Ms. Vail. She discussed
the process used to educate employees and to obtain information on what is important on the
benefit program from the employee perspective. Ms. Deno noted that benefits are a major topic
for employees and the unions, and they wanted to provide input for 2015. She discussed the
process used and the meetings that were held. The task force that was created consisted of
representation from all employee groups and unions and was a representative sample of staff in
direct proportion to their health insurance enrollment status. She stated that the majority of the
group favored providing more funding for families and moving away from the one amount for
all, as long as those choosing “employee only” coverage did not get a reduction in benefits
contribution. The second recommendation was to use or encourage the high deductible
programs.
She presented the recommendations for the 2015 employer contribution that moves to a 65%
employer contribution on the high deductible premium for anyone who takes employee + spouse,
employee + child(ren) or family coverage as well as 65% funding on the VEBA and freezing
some of the premiums. She advised that the City is prepping this design philosophy for when the
City goes out to bid to see if the City can bring in a higher deductible plan with five copays.
Councilmember Sanger expressed her opposition to the recommendations and felt it violated the
concept of equal pay for equal work, adding she did not agree with paying someone extra
because of their coverage choices. She stated she did not see any legal or policy reason to
provide an extra amount per month to certain employees and not to other employees based on
their non-work related choices.
Councilmember Lindberg felt that the proposed plan made sense from a competitive perspective
and felt the proposed plan was reasonable from a cost perspective, adding that from a policy
perspective, he wanted to make sure the City continues to attract, retain, and motivate staff.
Mayor Jacobs and Councilmember Mavity agreed.
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 3c) Page 5
Title: Study Session Minutes of October 13, 2014
Ms. Deno stated that wages are not the primary issue with employees and the recommendations
from the task force were to put more money to those who have employee+ coverage and
encourage the high deductible plan, adding that the unions support the recommendations as well.
Councilmember Mavity stated that staff took the time to consider this issue and the group was
very thoughtful in their thinking and in coming up with their recommendations and she did not
want to micromanage that process, adding she felt this was the right direction for the City.
Staff will bring benefits and wellness to the next regular City Council meeting.
Ms. Deno presented the information on the Wellness Incentive Program for 2015 and recommended
the same incentive level as 2014, with some program changes. Councilmember Sanger asked if
the City has any plan to include wellness benefits for chemical abuse and mental health.
Ms. Deno replied these would not be included in the wellness incentive but are included in the
overall health plan design, adding that the high deductible plan includes benefits for mental
health with no deductible or copay.
Mayor Jacobs thanked Ms. Deno, Ms. Timpone, Ms. Vail, and the employee task force for all
their work on this matter.
Communications/Meeting Check-In (Verbal)
Mr. Harmening advised that the City will be conducting liquor compliance checks in the near
future and letters have been sent to all liquor license holders informing them about the upcoming
compliance checks. He stated that the neighborhood meeting regarding the 40th and France
property is scheduled for tomorrow at 7:00 p.m. at Susan Lindgren School.
Commenting on Agenda Item 7 written report Park the Street! Recap, Councilmember Brausen
stated that it was a great event and congratulated all of the staff involved, especially Admin
Intern Bill Chang. He noted that the distance of the event was perfect, and commended staff on
the use of the event to promote HIP and CERTs. He proposed holding the events in spring, and
to include community outreach to churches and other faith communities. He suggested these
pop-up events be planned on many other streets and neighborhoods, especially in Wards 3 and 4,
including near Texas and Minnetonka Blvd.; 36th Street behind Knollwood; West End; and on
Cedar Lake Road/Louisiana. He suggested more vendors be recruited, especially those pertaining
to physical activities.
The meeting adjourned at 9:02 p.m.
Written reports provided and documented for recording purposes only:
4. East Triangle Neighborhood Redevelopment
5. Series 2014 G.O. Bonds for Sidewalks and Trails Program and Utility Projects
6. Update on Bass Lake Preserve Restoration Project
7. Park the Street! Recap
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Nancy Stroth, City Clerk Jeff Jacobs, Mayor
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: November 3, 2014
Minutes: 3d
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL CLOSED EXECUTIVE SESSION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
OCTOBER 20, 2014
Mayor Pro Tem Hallfin called the meeting to order at 6:56 p.m.
Councilmembers present: Mayor Pro Tem Steve Hallfin, Tim Brausen, Gregg Lindberg, Anne
Mavity, Susan Sanger, and Jake Spano.
Councilmembers absent: Mayor Jeff Jacobs.
Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), City Attorney (Mr. Scott), and Director of
Community Development (Mr. Locke).
Highway 7 and Louisiana Avenue
The City Council met in closed executive session with the City Attorney to discuss pending
condemnation action involving the Clear Channel parcels at Highway 7 and Louisiana Avenue
and to consider an offer for purchase of the Clear Channel parcels.
Mayor Pro Tem Hallfin adjourned the meeting at 7:26 p.m.
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Nancy Stroth, City Clerk Steve Hallfin, Mayor Pro Tem
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: November 3, 2014
Consent Agenda Item: 4a
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Resolution to Disburse Remaining Westwood Villa Housing Improvement Area (HIA)
Project Fund Balance
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution to disburse remaining Westwood
Villa HIA Project Fund Balance of $139,749.56 to the Westwood Villa Association’s
replacement reserve fund.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the Council support Westwood Villa Association’s
request to allow remaining HIA project funds of $139,749.56 to be deposited into the
Association’s replacement reserve fund, consistent with the Development Agreement?
SUMMARY: The Westwood Villa HIA was established in May 2012 and a Development
Agreement between the City and Association was executed in July 2012. The final HIA project
costs were $1,578,599 for common area improvements. 14 of the 66 owners pre-paid the fee and
the remaining owners will repay the fee over a twenty year period via property taxes.
The improvements included: Building Exterior: Replace flat roof, replace mansard roof and
replace decks. Replace the chiller system including removal, purchase and replacement of the
roof mounted chiller, the evaporator tube bundle in the boiler room, the two roof mounted
cooling air units, the hydronic piping insulation and valve replacement in the garage. Garage
repair: mold removal on the garage pipes and replace the pipe risers from the garage to the fan
coils in each unit. Repair garage floor. Replace bathroom vents on the roof. Interior: Replace
elevator hydraulic jack and bring elevator to state code. Fill in spa, remove piping and electrical
wiring.
The Development Agreement allows for the Project Fund balance to be deposited in the
Replacement Reserve Fund for future common area improvements. The Board submitted their
final disbursement request April 30, 2014 and in October 2014 requested the payout of the
remaining balance which is $139,749.56.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The project fund has been held by the City
and funds have been disbursed for all construction and all soft costs including the City’s
administrative fee of $6,231. The disbursement of the remaining project funds to Westwood
Villa Association’s reserve replacement fund has no impact on the City’s budget and will be
required to be repaid to the City as part of the larger loan the City provided to the Association
and its residents.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a well-maintained and
diverse housing stock.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution
Prepared by: Marney Olson, Housing Programs Coordinator
Reviewed by: Michele Schnitker, Housing Supervisor
Brian Swanson, Controller
Approved by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4a) Page 2
Title: Resolution to Disburse Remaining Westwood Villa HIA Project Fund Balance
RESOLUTION NO. 14 - ____
RESOLUTION APPROVING DISBURSEMENT OF REMAINING PROJECT FUND
BALANCE IN THE AMOUNT OF $139,749.56 TO THE WESTWOOD VILLA
ASSOCIATION’S REPLACMENT RESERVE FUND
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park as follows:
WHEREAS, The City of St. Louis Park ("City") is authorized under Minnesota Statutes,
Sections 428A.11 to 428A.21 to establish by ordinance a housing improvement area within which
housing improvements are made or constructed and the costs of the improvements are paid in whole
or in part from fees imposed within the area; and
WHEREAS, by Ordinance No. 2413-12 adopted May 7, 2012, the St. Louis Park City
Council (the “Council”) established Westwood Villa Association Housing Improvement Area in
order to facilitate certain improvements (the “Improvements”) to property known as Westwood
Villa; and
WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 12-066 adopted May 7, 2012, the Council imposed
housing improvement fees on housing units in the Westwood Villa Housing Improvement Area in
order to finance the Improvements; and
WHEREAS, the City and Westwood Villa Association (the “Association”) entered into a
Development Agreement (the “Agreement”) on July 1, 2012, establishing a Project Fund for the
Improvements and providing for the application of any Project Fund balance upon completion of
the Improvements; and
WHEREAS, the improvements have been completed and there is an excess balance of
$139,749.56 in the Project Fund; and
WHEREAS, Section 3.5 (b) of the Agreement provides that the Council by resolution may
disburse all or any portion of such excess Project Fund balance to the Association for deposit into
the replacement fund maintained by the Association (the “Replacement Reserve Fund”); and
WHEREAS, the Association has requested that the remaining Project Fund balance be
disbursed to the Replacement Reserve Fund pursuant to the Agreement.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park
that disbursement of the Westwood Villa Association’s remaining Project Fund balance of
$139,749.56 to the Replacement Reserve Fund maintained by the Association is hereby approved.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council November 3, 2014
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: November 3, 2014
Consent Agenda Item: 4b
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Business Park Zoning Amendments – 2nd Reading
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to approve second reading, Adopt Ordinance amending
the Business Park zoning district regulations, and authorize summary publication.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to approve zoning ordinance
amendments intended to better accommodate uses in the Business Park district?
SUMMARY: Changes to the Business Park (BP) zoning district have been discussed over the
past 6-9 months with property owners and the Planning Commission. As the new district has
been implemented, property owners have been able to provide feedback on changes to the
district to better meet market needs. The proposed amendments are attached for your
consideration.
Business Park is a zoning district that was created to facilitate a changing industrial market to
allow additional uses, make viable existing industrial spaces, and prohibit new uses that have
heavy truck traffic, heavy manufacturing, and outdoor storage.
The principal changes are:
• Change both Light Assembly and Warehouse/Storage from “Conditional Use Permit” to
“Permitted with Conditions.” This enables users to simply obtain building permits (vs. a
two-month application process) if all of the conditions are met.
• Increases in the percent of building area that may be used for certain uses, such as Group
daycare; Indoor entertainment and Studios to facilitate better use of existing spaces,
particularly in the current market conditions where redevelopment is not yet imminent
and the buildings are not ideally suited for industrial uses.
The first reading was approved by the City Council on October 20, 2014.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Ordinance
Summary for Publication
Prepared by: Meg McMonigal, Planning and Zoning Supervisor
Sean Walther, Senior Planner
Reviewed by: Michele Schnitker, Housing Supervisor
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4b) Page 2
Title: Business Park Zoning Amendments – 2nd Reading
ORDINANCE NO. ____-14
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ST. LOUIS PARK
CITY CODE RELATING TO
ZONING SECTIONS 36-232 AND 36-233
BUSINESS PARK DISTRICT REGULATIONS
THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DOES ORDAIN:
Sec. 1. The City Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the
Planning Commission (Case No. 14-13-ZA).
Sec. 2. The St. Louis Park Zoning Ordinance, Sections 36-232 and 36-233 are
hereby amended by deleting stricken language and adding underscored language.
DIVISION 7. BUSINESS PARK DISTRICT REGULATIONS
Sec. 36-231. Purpose of division.
The provisions of this division deal with business park uses of land and structures in the city.
Sec. 36-232. Business Park (BP) district restrictions and performance standards.
No structure or premises within any BP district shall be used for any use allowed as permitted,
permitted with conditions, Conditional Use Permit, or Planned Unit Development, unless it
complies with the following regulations:
(1) All activities conducted in a BP district shall be conducted wholly within an enclosed
structure except as specifically permitted elsewhere in this chapter.
(21) Outdoor storage shall be prohibited in the BP district.
(32) All delivery service entrances to a building in the BP district shall be from a public
alley, service alley, or off-street parking lot.
(43) No vehicular curb-cuts shall be permitted within a distance of 50 feet from any
intersection, unless the City Engineer determines that such a curb-cut is necessary and
will be safe for pedestrians or bicyclists using nearby trails, sidewalks, or roadways.
(54) Structures shall not generate significant traffic on local residential streets. Where
possible, structures shall be accessed from a roadway identified in the Comprehensive
Plan as a collector or arterial.Access shall be to a roadway identified in the
comprehensive plan as a collector or arterial or shall be otherwise located so that access
can be provided without generating significant traffic on local residential streets.
(65) Off-street parking shall not be located between any buildings and an adjacent
residential property line.
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4b) Page 3
Title: Business Park Zoning Amendments – 2nd Reading
(76) The Zoning Administrator shall review plans for all loading docks, which to the
greatest extent possible should be screened from the right-of-way and should not be
located between the principal building and any adjacent residential property line.
(87) Truck activity routes shall be reviewed to account for the expected level of pedestrian
traffic. Such routes should be designed to minimize impacts to pedestrian and bicycle
routes and safety issues during periods of truck activity.
(98) The processes and equipment used to conduct the business of a primary use on any site
in the BP district shall meet the following requirements:
a. Vibration. Any vibration discernible beyond the property line to the human sense
of feeling for three minutes or more duration (cumulative) in any one hour and
any vibration producing a particle velocity of more than 0.035 inch per second are
prohibited.
b. Glare or heat. Any operation producing intense glare or heat shall be performed
within an enclosure so as not to be perceptible at the property line.
c. Noise. Noise levels both inside and outside of buildings must meet federal, state
and local requirements which may be amended from time to time.
d. Air pollution. All emissions shall meet federal, state and local requirements which
may be amended from time to time.
(109) Uses located upon parcels located adjacent to a parcel zoned, guided or used for
residential purposes may operate only between the hours of 7:00 AM and 10:00 PM.
The Zoning Administrator may, in writing, waive this performance standard if it can be
demonstrated that overnight operations will have no negative effects on adjacent
properties.
(1110) Sidewalks at least five feet in width shall be provided along all sides of the lot that
abut a public street.
Sec. 36-233. BP business park district.
(a) Purpose / effect. The purposes of the BP business park district are to:
(1) Encourage the creation of significant employment centers that accommodate a diverse
mix of office and light industrial uses and jobs.
(2) Allow for redevelopment and intensification of sites to provide a greater diversity of
employment opportunities within the community, increase development densities and
jobs per acre, and improve overall site aesthetics and building design.
(3) Shape redevelopment to meet the requirements of the market to provide efficient
building types with sufficient access, high clear heights, truck courts, and aesthetically
pleasing building exteriors and sites.
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4b) Page 4
Title: Business Park Zoning Amendments – 2nd Reading
(4) Encourage and support the appropriate evolution and expansion of individual
businesses to improve the climate for business growth and foster conditions favorable
to increasing the amount of finished square footage and the number of jobs per acre in
BP areas.
(5) Protect planned Business Park areas from encroachment from non-affiliated or
incompatible uses, while enhancing their compatibility with nearby residential areas.
(6) Promote and support the redevelopment or rehabilitation of physically and
economically obsolete or underutilized buildings and sites.
(7) Promote business park developments that utilize efficient land use and building
designs, including multi-story buildings, multi-tenant buildings, and structured parking.
(8) Encourage and support new business park developments that are designed as
employment centers that are integrated in to the community with strong connections to
adjacent public streets and spaces, natural features, transit, and other community
amenities.
(9) Encourage shared parking between uses, including flexible parking arrangements to
allow for multi-modal use of available transit and regional trail facilities.
(10) Regulate the trade and commerce of the community.
(1110)Provide opportunities for multi-modal activity on streets and an improved, desirable
environment for pedestrians and other non-motorized modes of transportation.
(b) Permitted uses. The following uses with a floor area ratio (FAR) of less than 1.0 are
permitted in the BP district:
(1) Banks.
(2) Business / trade school.
(3) College / University.
(4) Libraries.
(5) Medical and dental office or laboratory.
(6) Museums/art galleries.
(7) Offices.
(8) Parks and open spaces.
(9) Parks and recreation.
(10) Police and fire stations.
(11) Research and Development.
(12) Transit stations.
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4b) Page 5
Title: Business Park Zoning Amendments – 2nd Reading
(c) Uses permitted with conditions. A structure or land in any BP district may be used for
one or more of the following uses if it has a floor area ratio (FAR) of less than 1.0 and complies
with the performance standards as stated in Section 36-232 and the conditions stated below:
(1) Adult Day Care. The conditions are as follows:
a. The use must have a minimum of 150 square feet of outdoor area per adult under
care dedicated to outdoor activity or be within ¼ mile of a city park.
(2) Brewery. The conditions are as follows:
a. The brewery shall not produce more than 3,500 barrels of malt liquor per year.
b. Up to 25% of the gross floor area of the Brewery may be used for any
combination of retail and a taproom.
(3) Catering. The conditions are as follows:
a. Any exhaust system venting to the outdoors shall be located away from residential
areas.
b. Outside storage of catering vehicles or associated equipment is prohibited.
(4) Communication Antennas. The conditions are as follows:
a. Antennas must be attached to an existing structure.
b. Antennas shall be subject to all provisions of Section 36-368, “Communication
Towers and Antennas”.
(5) Educational. Educational uses for students grades K-12, subject to conditions as
follows:
a. The use must have a minimum of 40 square feet of outdoor area per student
dedicated to outdoor student activity or be within ¼ mile of a city park.
b. The use may not exceed 25% of the gross floor area of a single story building or
50% of the ground floor in a multi-story building.
(6) Group Day Care/Nursery Schools. The conditions are as follows:
a. The use must have a minimum of 40 square feet of outdoor area per child pupil
dedicated to outdoor activity or be within ¼ mile of a city park.
b. The use may not exceed 2550% of the gross floor area of a single story building
or 50% of the ground floor in a multi-story building.
c. Provision shall be made for drop-off and pick-up of children or students.
(7) Indoor Entertainment. The conditions are as follows:
a. The use may not exceed 1025% of the gross floor area of a multi-use building.
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4b) Page 6
Title: Business Park Zoning Amendments – 2nd Reading
b. The use must be so located as to be visible and easily accessible to pedestrians
from the public right-of-way.
(8) Public Service Structures. The conditions are as follows:
a. All structures shall be located a minimum of ten feet from any parcel that is zoned
residential.
b. All service drives shall be paved.
(9) Restaurants, Retail or Service. The conditions are as follows:
a. The uses may not exceed of 25% of the gross floor area of a single-story multi-
use building or 50% of the ground floor area in a multi-story building, whichever
is greater.
b. The uses must be so located as to be visible and easily accessible to pedestrians
from the public right-of-way.
(10) Studios. The conditions are as follows:
a. The use may not exceed 2550% of the gross floor area of a multi-use building.
(11) Light Assembly or Low Impact Manufacturing and Processing up to 60% of building.
a. All outdoor activities such as loading and unloading shall be located a minimum of
100 feet from any parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for
residential, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to
schools, religious institutions and community centers, and where possible shall be
located on the side of the building farthest from any parcel that is zoned or used for
residential, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to
schools, religious institutions and community centers.
(12) Warehouse/Storage up to 60% of building.
a. All outdoor activities such as loading and unloading shall be located a minimum of
100 feet from any parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for
residential, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to
schools, religious institutions and community centers, and where possible shall be
located on the side of the building farthest from any parcel that is zoned or used for
residential, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to
schools, religious institutions and community centers.
(d) Uses permitted by conditional use permit. No structure or land in a BP district shall be
used for the following uses except by conditional use permit. These uses shall comply with all
standards of the Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 36, and shall only be permitted if findings are
produced indicating that there are no adverse impacts upon the health, safety, and welfare of the
community.
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4b) Page 7
Title: Business Park Zoning Amendments – 2nd Reading
(1) Uses allowed as “Permitted” or “Permitted with Conditions” in the BP district with a
floor area ratio (FAR) equal to or greater than 1.0.
(2) Light Assembly or Low Impact Manufacturing and Processing.
(23) More than one principal building.
a. Uses where more than one principal building is located on a single lot.
(3(4) Parking Ramps.
a. A minimum of 40% of the street level frontage of a parking ramp located adjacent
to a street designated as a “Collector” or higher in the Comprehensive Plan shall
be dedicated to non-parking uses. This requirement may be adjusted at the
direction of the Planning Commission based on specific reasons related to site
design.
b. Parking ramps shall be designed so that vehicles are not visible from the sidewalk
and the only openings at street level are those to accommodate vehicle ingress and
egress.
c. Snow removal areas shall not be located in the front yard or side yard abutting a
street.
(e) Uses permitted by PUD. A structure or land in a BP district may be dedicated to non-
residential uses meeting the purpose and effect of the Zoning District through the PUD process,
if such uses are primarily dedicated to increasing employment density and furthering the goals of
the Comprehensive Plan. Such uses shall comply with the requirements of the performance
standards in Section 36-232. Provisions for the PUD and modifications to dimensional standards
and densities are provided under section 36-367.
(f) Accessory uses. Within any BP district, the following shall be permitted accessory uses,
subject to any required conditions:
(1) Food Service. The conditions are as follows:
a. The use must be located on the ground floor.
b. The use may not exceed 25% of the building’s total floor area.
(2) Incidental Repair or Processing ancillary to the principal use that does not exceed 5
percent of the gross floor area, subject to the following conditions:
a. The use shall be located to the rear of the principal structure.
b. The use shall meet all conditions of Sections 36-232 (8) (a) and (b).
(3) Large Item Retail Sales. The conditions are as follows:
a. The use may not exceed 15% of the building’s total floor area.
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4b) Page 8
Title: Business Park Zoning Amendments – 2nd Reading
(4) Outdoor seating and service of food and beverages is permitted as an accessory use
with the following conditions:
a. The use must be separated from any adjacent residential use by a building wall or
six foot fence. This provision will not apply if the residential use is located on an
upper story above the principal use.
b. No speakers or other electronic devices which emit sound are permitted if the use
is located within 500 feet of a residential use.
c. The hours of operation shall be limited to 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. if the use is
located within 500 feet of a residential use.
d. Additional parking will not be required if the outdoor seating area does not
exceed 500 square feet or ten percent of the gross floor area of the principal use,
whichever is less. Parking will be required at the same rate as the principal use for
that portion of outdoor seating area in excess of 500 square feet or ten percent of
the gross building area, whichever is less.
(5) Parking ramps, subject to the following conditions:
a. A minimum of 40% of the street level frontage of a parking ramp located adjacent
to a street designated as a “Collector” or higher in the Comprehensive Plan shall
be dedicated to non-parking uses. This requirement may be adjusted at the
direction of the Planning Commission based on specific reasons related to site
design.
b. Parking ramps shall be designed so that vehicles are not visible from the sidewalk
and the only openings at street level are those to accommodate vehicle ingress and
egress.
c. Snow removal areas shall not be located in the front yard or side yard abutting a
street.
(6) Parking Lots.
(7) Post Office Customer Service.
(8) Showroom.
(9) Warehouse / Storage.
(g) Dimensional standards. The dimensional standards are as follows:
(1) The height of structures or buildings on sites within the BP zoning district shall be
limited as follows:
a. Sites located immediately adjacent to property zoned R-1 or R-2 shall be limited
to the lesser of four (4) stories or 55 feet in height.
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4b) Page 9
Title: Business Park Zoning Amendments – 2nd Reading
b. Sites separated by a public right-of-way or not immediately adjacent to property
zoned R-1 or R-2 shall be limited to the lesser of eight (8) stories or 110 feet in
height.
(2) The floor area ratio for structures or buildings within the BP district shall not exceed
2.0, nor shall the floor area ratio be less than 0.4.
(3) Required yard depth (building setbacks) shall follow the requirements of Table 36-233
(a) except when superseded by the following:
a. No building shall be located closer than 30 feet or the building height, whichever
is greater, to a single family residential property line.
b. The maximum front yard or side yard abutting a street (build-to line) may be
increased to 25 feet from the property line if a courtyard, plaza, or seating area is
incorporated into the development adjacent to the public street.
c. The maximum yard (build-to line) requirement shall apply to at least 50% of a
structure’s elevation along the front yard or side yard abutting a street.
(4) Each lot shall contain designed outdoor recreation area (DORA) at the ratio of 0.12
times the gross lot area, with the following exceptions and conditions:
a. DORA shall not be required for any building or portion of a building dedicated to
warehouse, showroom, parking ramp, or parking lot uses.
b. DORA may be reduced by up to 25% if it is connected to and located within a
quarter-mile of the regional trail system.
c. DORA shall be developed into functional and aesthetic yard areas, plazas,
courtyards, and/or pedestrian facilities compatible with or enlarging upon existing
pedestrian links and open space.
d. DORA shall be sited to enhance ecological habitat and increase opportunities for
shared public use with the City’s system of parks and open space whenever
possible.
Sec. 3 The contents of Planning Case File 14-13-ZA are hereby entered into and
made part of the public hearing record and the record of decision for this case.
Sec. 4. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen days after its publication.
Table 36-233 (a)
Front Rear Side Side yard abutting a street
Minimum yard 5 feet 10 feet 5 feet 5 feet
Maximum yard 10 feet None None 10 feet
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4b) Page 10
Title: Business Park Zoning Amendments – 2nd Reading
Public Hearing September 17, 2014
First Reading October 20, 2014
Second Reading November 3, 2014
Date of Publication November 13, 2014
Date Ordinance takes effect November 28, 2014
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council November 3, 2014
City Manager Mayor
Attest: Approved as to Form and Execution:
City Clerk City Attorney
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4b) Page 11
Title: Business Park Zoning Amendments – 2nd Reading
SUMMARY
ORDINANCE NO.____-14
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTIONS 36-232 AND 36-233
BUSINESS PARK DISTRICT REGULATIONS
This ordinance regards changes to allow Light Assembly and Warehouse Storage uses with
conditions in the Business Park zoning district. It also increases the percentage of building area
that may be used for certain uses.
This ordinance shall take effect 15 days after publication.
Adopted by the City Council November 3, 2014
Jeffrey W. Jacobs /s/
Mayor
A copy of the full text of this ordinance is available for inspection with the City Clerk.
Published in St. Louis Park Sailor: November 13, 2014
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: November 3, 2014
Consent Agenda Item: 4c
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Second Reading of Ordinance Imposing a Franchise Fee on CenterPoint Energy Resources
Corporation
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to approve second reading and Adopt Ordinance
imposing a franchise fee on CenterPoint Energy Resources Corp and authorize publication in
full.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council desire to increase the franchise fees for
CenterPoint Energy to assist in funding the City’s Pavement Management Program?
SUMMARY: The City has imposed franchise fees on CenterPoint Energy (CPE) since 2004.
The fees were increased in 2011 from $1.25/month to $2/month. Keeping with Council direction
of reviewing the fees every other year, the fees were increased to $2.50/month in 2013. Staff
recommends the fees are increased to $3.25/month for 2015. Staff is proposing, and CPE
supports, that their franchise fee be consistent with the franchise fee imposed on Xcel Energy.
Based on this schedule, the franchise fee increase would be effective February 1, 2015.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The City’s Pavement Management
Program is currently funded by franchise fee revenues, collected by both Xcel and CPE. Based
on the current fees, total franchise fees generate approximately $1.61 million annually (CPE -
$615,144; Xcel - $996,578). The proposed increase in the CPE franchise fee would add
approximately $274,000 in additional annual revenue to the Pavement Management Program,
and provide greater sustainability into the future. By implementing this proposed franchise fee
increase for 2015, St. Louis Park would still be competitive with other cities in the area.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Franchise Fee Estimate
Franchise Fee Ordinance
Prepared by: Coty Hemann, Accountant I
Steve Heintz, Finance Supervisor
Reviewed by: Brian A. Swanson, Controller
Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4c) Page 2
Title: Second Reading Ordinance Imposing a Franchise Fee on CenterPoint Energy Resources Corporation
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: In early 2003 the City adopted an ordinance granting CenterPoint Energy
(CPE) a natural gas utility franchise in the city. That ordinance allowed the City to impose a
franchise fee on CPE. The City Council acted to impose a franchise fee of $1.25/month for a
residential customer on CPE which went into effect in January of 2004. These franchise fees
were increased by the Council $0.75/month per utility for a residential customer in 2011. This
increase took effect on February 1, 2011, which changed the fee to $2.00/month per utility for a
residential customer. The fee was increased again in 2013 to $2.50/month.
Franchise fees in St. Louis Park are used in their entirety to assist in funding the cost the City
experiences to maintain, reconstruct and repair the street system via the City’s Pavement
Management Program. Special assessments to property owners have never been used to help
fund this program and, starting in 2013, property tax dollars have not been used either. The
franchise fee is essentially a user fee collected from customers on their utility bill and paid to
CPE. The utility then functions essentially as a pass through entity with the franchise fee
revenue being remitted to the City of St. Louis Park. Given funding deficits projected for the
City’s Pavement Management Fund over the next ten years, in 2009 the City Council reviewed
and determined the City would need to increase franchise fees from time to time to ensure the
Pavement Management Program could be continued and fully funded. Council directed staff to
reviews the fees every other year. This increase is a part of that plan.
PRESENT CONSIDERATIONS: As discussed with the Council most recently on August 25,
2014, staff is proposing a $0.75/month fee increase to residential customers for 2015 to continue
funding the Pavement Management Program. Based on customer class, customers would see
increases ranging from $0.75/month per utility for residential customers to $28.00/month per
utility for large commercial/industrial customers (please see attachment - Franchise Fee
Estimate). Residential customers make up approximately 90% of the total customers. It was
desired by the City to adopt an ordinance that would allow for automatic annual or alternating
year fee increases, but that is not allowed by the Public Utilities Commission. The City also
imposes an equivalent franchise fee on Xcel Energy. Staff is also proposing (under separate
action) to increase Xcel’s current basic Franchise Fee by $0.75/month per utility for residential
customers.
Per the City’s Long Range Financial Management Plan, by increasing franchise fees in 2015, it
is projected that the Pavement Management Program could be funded entirely by franchise fees
making the fund sustainable in the long-term.
Based on recent discussions with CPE staff, they do not oppose this proposed increase in the
franchise fee.
NEXT STEPS: The following steps outline the adoption process to be followed:
1. Ordinances must contain all the terms and conditions of the franchise
2. Franchise ordinances require a public hearing
3. At least seven days must pass between first reading (public hearing) and 2nd reading
4. At second reading motion will be “Motion to adopt the ordinance, approve and authorize
publication”
5. Ordinance becomes effective 90 days following adoption
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4c) Page 3
Title: Second Reading Ordinance Imposing a Franchise Fee on CenterPoint Energy Resources Corporation
Based on the above process, staff has developed the following steps and schedule for adopting
the franchise ordinance and franchise fee ordinance:
First Reading of Ordinances 10/20/2014
Second Reading of ordinances 11/3/2014 60 days after notifying utilities
Ordinance takes effect 2/1/2015 90 days after 2nd reading
Utilities begin collection 2/1/2015
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4c) Page 4
Title: Second Reading Ordinance Imposing a Franchise Fee on CenterPoint Energy Resources Corporation
City of St Louis Park, Minnesota
Franchise Fee Estimate
Variable Increases Proposed for 2015
Beginning in 2015 and Every Other Year After an Increase of $0.75 For
All Non Large C/I, With Large C/I Increase of $28.00.
Xcel - Electric
CUSTOMER CLASS
AVERAGE
MONTHLY
CUSTOMER
COUNT
ESTIMATED
ANNUAL
FRANCHISE
FEE
REVENUES
2015 New
Revenue
Estimate
Current
MONTHLY
FLAT FEE
2015 New
Fee
Proposal
Residential* 22,242 $667,260 $667,260 $2.50 $3.25
Small C&I – Non-Demand* 1,350 $72,900 $72,900 $4.50 $6.50
Small C&I – Demand 699 $115,335 $115,335 $13.75 $30.00
Large C&I 149 $137,676 $137,676 $77.00 $105.00
Public Street Lighting 75 $0
Municipal Pumping – Non-Demand 21 $1,139 $1,139 $4.50 $6.00
Municipal Pumping – Demand 18 $2,268 $2,268 $10.50 $30.00
Total 24,554 $996,578 $1,420,116
Net Increase
$423,539
CenterPoint - Heating Gas
CUSTOMER CLASS
AVERAGE
MONTHLY
CUSTOMER
COUNT
ESTIMATED
ANNUAL
FRANCHISE
FEE
REVENUES
2015 New
Revenue
Estimate
Current
MONTHLY
FLAT FEE
New Fee
Proposal
Residential 16,382 $491,460 $638,898 $2.50 $3.25
Commercial B 407 $21,978 $31,746 $4.50 $6.50
Commercial C 519 $85,635 $186,840 $13.75 $30.00
SVDF A & B 75 $12,375 $27,000 $13.75 $30.00
LVDF 4 $3,696 $5,040 $77.00 $105.00
Total 17,387 $615,144 $889,524
Net Increase
$274,380
Total $697,919
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4c) Page 5
Title: Second Reading Ordinance Imposing a Franchise Fee on CenterPoint Energy Resources Corporation
ORDINANCE NO. ______-14
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
AN ORDINANCE IMPLEMENTING A GAS ENERGY FRANCHISE FEE ON
CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNESOTA GAS (“CENTERPOINT ENERGY”) FOR
PROVIDING GAS ENERGY SERVICE WITHIN THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK,
MINNESOTA.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, HENNEPIN COUNTY,
MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
SECTION 1. DEFINITIONS.
For purposes of this Ordinance, the following capitalized terms listed in alphabetical order shall
have the following meanings:
1.1 City. The City of St. Louis Park, County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota.
1.2 Company. CenterPoint Energy Minnesota Gas (“CenterPoint Energy”), its successors and
assigns.
1.3 Franchise Ordinance. The franchise ordinance adopted by the City - City Ordinance 2236-03.
1.4 Notice. “Notice” means a writing served by any party or parties on any other party or parties.
Notice to Company shall be mailed to CenterPoint Energy, Minnesota Division Vice President,
800 LaSalle Avenue, Minneapolis, MN 55402. Notice to City shall be mailed to the City
Manager, City of St. Louis Park, 5005 Minnetonka Boulevard, St. Louis Park, MN 55416.
SECTION 2. GAS FRANCHISE FEE.
2.1 Purpose. The St. Louis Park City Council has determined that it is in the best interest of the
City to impose a franchise fee on those public utility companies that provide natural gas and
electric services within the City. Pursuant to the Franchise Ordinance, the City has the right to
impose a franchise fee on Company.
2.2 Franchise Fee Statement and Schedule. A franchise fee is hereby imposed on Company
commencing with the February 2015 billing month, and in accordance with the following fee
schedule:
Customer Classification Amount per Account per Month ($)
Residential $3.25 per month
Firm A $3.25 per month
Firm B $6.50 per month
Firm C $30.00 per month
Small Volume, Dual Fuel A (“SVDF A”) $30.00 per month
Small Volume, Dual Fuel B (“SVDF B”) $30.00 per month
Large Volume, Dual Fuel (“LVDF”) $105.00 per month
2.3 Account Fee. is fee is an account based fee and not a meter-based fee. In the event that
an entity covered by this ordinance has more than one meter, but only one account, only one
fee shall be assessed to that account. In the event any entities covered by this ordinance have
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4c) Page 6
Title: Second Reading Ordinance Imposing a Franchise Fee on CenterPoint Energy Resources Corporation
more than one account, each account shall be subject to the appropriate fee. In the event a
question arises as to the proper fee amount for any account, the Company’s manner of billing
for energy used at all similar premises in the City will apply.
2.4 Payment. Franchise fees are to be collected by the Company and submitted to the City as
follows:
January – March collections due by April 30.
April – June collections due by July 31.
July – September collections due by October 31.
October – December collections due by January 31.
2.5 Record Support for Payment. The Company shall make each payment when due and, if
required by the City, shall provide a statement summarizing how the franchise fee payment
was determined, including information showing any adjustments to the total made to account
for any non-collectible accounts, refunds or error corrections. The Company shall permit the
City, and its representatives, reasonable access to the Company’s records for the purpose of
verifying such statements.
2.6 Payment Adjustments. Payment to the City will be adjusted where the Company is unable
to collect the franchise fee. This includes non-collectible accounts.
2.7 Surcharge. The City recognizes that the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission may allow
the Company to add a surcharge to customer rates of City residents to reimburse the Company
for the cost of the fee.
2.8 Relation to Franchise Ordinance. This ordinance is enacted in compliance with the
Franchise Ordinance and shall be interpreted as such.
2.9 Periodic Review. The City Council shall review this ordinance every two years in
whatever manner the City Manager then determines to be appropriate. Failure to review this
ordinance shall not in any way invalidate or limit it.
SECTION 3. PREVIOUS FRANCHISE FEE ORDINANCE SUPERSEDED.
This Gas Franchise Fee Ordinance supersedes Ordinance No. 2423-12.
SECTION 4: EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance shall take effect ninety (90) days after its
passage.
ADOPTED this 3rd day of November, 2014, by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park.
Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council November 3, 2014
City Manager Mayor
Attest: Approved as to Form and Execution:
City Clerk City Attorney
Date Published:____________________
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: November 3, 2014
Consent Agenda Item: 4d
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Second Reading of an Ordinance Imposing a Franchise Fee on Northern States Power
Company (D/B/A Xcel Energy)
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to approve second reading and Adopt Ordinance
imposing a franchise fee on Northern States Power Company and authorize publication in full.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council desire to increase the franchise fees for
Xcel Energy to assist in funding the City’s Pavement Management Program?
SUMMARY: The City has imposed franchise fees on Xcel since 2004. The fees were
increased in 2011 from $1.25/month to $2/month. Keeping with Council direction of reviewing
the fees every other year, the fees were increased to $2.50/month in 2013. Staff recommends the
fees are increased to $3.25/month for 2015. Staff is proposing, and Xcel supports, that their
franchise fee is consistent with the franchise fee imposed on Centerpoint Energy.
Based on this schedule, the franchise fee increase would be effective February 1, 2015.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The City’s Pavement Management
Program is currently funded by franchise fee revenues, collected by both Xcel and Centerpoint.
Based on the current fees, total franchise fees generate approximately $1.61 million annually
(Centerpoint - $615,144; Xcel - $996,578). The proposed increase in the Xcel franchise fee
would add approximately $423,529 in additional annual revenue to the Pavement Management
Program, and provide greater sustainability into the future. By implementing this proposed
franchise fee increase for 2015, St. Louis Park would still be competitive with other cities in the
area.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Franchise Fee Estimate
Franchise Fee Ordinance
Prepared by: Coty Hemann, Accountant I
Steve Heintz, Finance Supervisor
Reviewed by: Brian A. Swanson, Controller
Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4d) Page 2
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Imposing Franchise Fee on Northern States Power Co. (dba Xcel Energy)
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: In 1993 the City adopted an ordinance granting Northern States Power
Company (D/B/A Xcel Energy) an electrical services utility franchise in the city. That
ordinance allowed the City to impose a franchise fee on Xcel. The City Council acted to impose
a franchise fee of $1.25/month for a residential customer on Xcel which went into effect in
January of 2004. These franchise fees were increased by the Council $0.75/month per utility for
a residential customer in 2011. This increase took effect on February 1, 2011, which changed
the fee to $2.00/month per utility for a residential customer. The fee was increased again in 2013
to $2.50/month.
Franchise fees in St. Louis Park are used in their entirety to assist in funding the cost the City
experiences to maintain, reconstruct and repair the street system via the City’s Pavement
Management Program. Special assessments to property owners have never been used to help
fund this program and, starting in 2013, property tax dollars have not been used either. The
franchise fee is essentially a user fee collected from customers on their utility bill and paid to
Xcel. The utility then functions essentially as a pass through entity with the franchise fee
revenue being remitted to the City of St. Louis Park. Given funding deficits projected for the
City’s Pavement Management Fund over the next ten years, in 2009 the City Council reviewed
and determined the City would need to increase franchise fees from time to time to ensure the
Pavement Management Program could be continued and fully funded. Council directed staff to
reviews the fees every other year. This increase is a part of that plan.
PRESENT CONSIDERATIONS: As discussed with the Council most recently on August 25,
2014, staff is proposing a $0.75/month fee increase to residential customers for 2015 to continue
funding the Pavement Management Program. Based on customer class, customers would see
increases ranging from $0.75/month per utility for residential customers to $28.00/month per
utility for large commercial/industrial customers (please see attachment - Franchise Fee
Estimate). Residential customers make up approximately 90% of the total customers. It was
desired by the City to adopt an ordinance that would allow for automatic annual or alternating
year fee increases, but that is not allowed by the Public Utilities Commission. The City also
imposes an equivalent franchise fee on Centerpoint Energy. Staff is also proposing (under
separate action) to increase Centerpoint’s current basic franchise fee by $0.75/month per utility
for residential customers.
Per the City’s Long Range Financial Management Plan, by increasing franchise fees in 2015, it
is projected that the Pavement Management Program could be funded entirely by franchise fees
making the fund sustainable in the long-term.
Based on recent discussions with Xcel staff, they do not oppose this proposed increase in the
franchise fee.
NEXT STEPS: The following steps outline the adoption process to be followed:
1. Ordinances must contain all the terms and conditions of the franchise
2. Franchise ordinances require a public hearing
3. At least seven days must pass between first reading (public hearing) and 2nd reading
4. At second reading motion will be “Motion to adopt the ordinance, approve and authorize
publication”
5. Ordinance becomes effective 90 days following adoption
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4d) Page 3
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Imposing Franchise Fee on Northern States Power Co. (dba Xcel Energy)
Based on the above process, staff has developed the following steps and schedule for adopting
the franchise ordinance and franchise fee ordinance:
First Reading of Ordinances 10/20/2014
Second Reading of ordinances 11/3/2014 60 days after notifying utilities
Ordinance takes effect 2/1/2015 90 days after 2nd reading
Utilities begin collection 2/1/2015
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4d) Page 4
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Imposing Franchise Fee on Northern States Power Co. (dba Xcel Energy)
City of St Louis Park, Minnesota
Franchise Fee Estimate
Variable Increases Proposed for 2015
Beginning in 2015 and Every Other Year After an Increase of $0.75 For
All Non Large C/I, With Large C/I Increase of $28.00.
Xcel - Electric
CUSTOMER CLASS
AVERAGE
MONTHLY
CUSTOMER
COUNT
ESTIMATED
ANNUAL
FRANCHISE
FEE
REVENUES
2015 New
Revenue
Estimate
Current
MONTHLY
FLAT FEE
2015 New
Fee
Proposal
Residential* 22,242 $667,260 $667,260 $2.50 $3.25
Small C&I – Non-Demand* 1,350 $72,900 $72,900 $4.50 $6.50
Small C&I – Demand 699 $115,335 $115,335 $13.75 $30.00
Large C&I 149 $137,676 $137,676 $77.00 $105.00
Public Street Lighting 75 $0
Municipal Pumping – Non-Demand 21 $1,139 $1,139 $4.50 $6.00
Municipal Pumping – Demand 18 $2,268 $2,268 $10.50 $30.00
Total 24,554 $996,578 $1,420,116
Net Increase
$423,539
Centerpoint - Heating Gas
CUSTOMER CLASS
AVERAGE
MONTHLY
CUSTOMER
COUNT
ESTIMATED
ANNUAL
FRANCHISE
FEE
REVENUES
2015 New
Revenue
Estimate
Current
MONTHLY
FLAT FEE
New Fee
Proposal
Residential 16,382 $491,460 $638,898 $2.50 $3.25
Commercial B 407 $21,978 $31,746 $4.50 $6.50
Commercial C 519 $85,635 $186,840 $13.75 $30.00
SVDF A & B 75 $12,375 $27,000 $13.75 $30.00
LVDF 4 $3,696 $5,040 $77.00 $105.00
Total 17,387 $615,144 $889,524
Net Increase
$274,380
Total $697,919
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4d) Page 5
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Imposing Franchise Fee on Northern States Power Co. (dba Xcel Energy)
ORDINANCE NO. ______ -14
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
AN ORDINANCE IMPLEMENTING AN ELECTRIC SERVICE FRANCHISE FEE
ON NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY, A MINNESOTA CORPORATION,
D/B/A XCEL ENERGY, ITS SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS, FOR PROVIDING
ELECTRIC SERVICE WITHIN THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, HENNEPIN COUNTY,
MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
SECTION 1. DEFINITIONS.
For purposes of this Ordinance, the following capitalized terms listed in alphabetical order shall
have the following meanings:
1.1 City. The City of St. Louis Park, County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota.
1.2 Company. Northern States Power Company, a Minnesota corporation, d/b/a Xcel Energy,
its successors and assigns.
1.3 Franchise Ordinance. The franchise ordinance adopted by the City - City Ordinance 1907-93.
1.4 Notice. A written notice served by one party on the other party referencing one or more
provisions of this Ordinance. Notice to Company shall be mailed to the General Counsel, 414
Nicollet Mall, 5th Floor, Minneapolis, MN 55401. Notice to the City shall be mailed to the City
Manager, City Hall, 5005 Minnetonka Blvd., St. Louis Park, MN 55416. Either party may
change its respective address for the purpose of this Ordinance by written notice to the other party.
SECTION 2. ELECTRIC FRANCHISE FEE.
2.1 Purpose. The St. Louis Park City Council has determined that it is in the best interest of the
City to impose a franchise fee on those public utility companies that provide natural gas and
electric services within the City. Pursuant to the Franchise Ordinance the City has the right to
impose a franchise fee on Company.
2.2 Franchise Fee Statement and Schedule. A franchise fee is hereby imposed on Company
commencing with the February 2015 billing month, and in accordance with the following fee
schedule:
Customer Classification Amount per Account per Month ($)
Residential $3.25 per month
Small C & I with no demand charge $6.50 per month
Small C & I with demand charge $30.00 per month
Large C & I $105.00 per month
Municipal pumping with no demand charge $6.00 per month
Municipal pumping with demand charge $30.00 per month
2.3 Account Fee. This fee is an account based fee and not a meter-based fee. In the event
that an entity covered by this ordinance has more than one meter, but only one account, only
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4d) Page 6
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Imposing Franchise Fee on Northern States Power Co. (dba Xcel Energy)
one fee shall be assessed to that account. In the event any entities covered by this ordinance
have more than one account, each account shall be subject to the appropriate fee. In the
event a question arises as to the proper fee amount for any account, the Company’s manner
of billing for energy used at all similar premises in the City will apply.
2.4 Payment. Franchise fees are to be collected by the Company and submitted to the City as
follows:
January – March collections due by April 30.
April – June collections due by July 31.
July – September collections due by October 31.
October – December collections due by January 31.
2.5 Record Support for Payment. The Company shall make each payment when due and, if
required by the City, shall provide a statement summarizing how the franchise fee payment
was determined, including information showing any adjustments to the total made to account
for any non-collectible accounts, refunds or error corrections. The Company shall permit the
City, and its representatives, reasonable access to the Company’s records for the purpose of
verifying such statements.
2.6 Payment Adjustments. Payment to the City will be adjusted where the Company is unable
to collect the franchise fee. This includes non-collectible accounts.
2.7 Surcharge. The City recognizes that the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission may allow
the Company to add a surcharge to customer rates of City residents to reimburse the Company
for the cost of the fee.
2.8 Relation to Franchise Ordinance. This Ordinance is enacted in compliance with the
Franchise Ordinance and shall be interpreted as such.
2.9 Periodic Review. The City Council shall review this ordinance every two years in
whatever manner the City Manager then determines to be appropriate. Failure to review this
ordinance shall not in any way invalidate or limit it.
SECTION 3. PREVIOUS FRANCHISE FEE ORDINANCE SUPERSEDED.
This Electric Franchise Fee Ordinance supersedes Ordinance No. 2424-12.
SECTION 4: EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance takes effect ninety (90) days after its passage.
ADOPTED this 3rd day of November, 2014, by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park.
Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council November 3, 2014
City Manager Mayor
Attest: Approved as to Form and Execution:
City Clerk City Attorney
Date Published:____________________
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: November 3, 2014
Consent Agenda Item: 4e
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Second Reading of Snow Removal Program Ordinance
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
• Motion to approve second reading and Adopt Ordinance amending the St. Louis Park Code
of Ordinances Section 30-158 relating to the Snow Removal Program and authorize
publication.
• Motion to Adopt Resolutions relating to the City’s Snow Removal Program
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Will the proposed changes improve the manner in which the
City undertakes its snow removal program?
SUMMARY: Staff is suggesting modifications to our snow removal program as an enhancement
to our current efforts. Staff reviews the snow removal program on a regular basis to determine if
there are opportunities to improve delivery of service, operational efficiencies and
communication with residents. Over the past year staff has incorporated operational changes that
had successful outcomes with snow removal and service delivery. Earlier this summer
Operations staff along with Police and Fire met to continue to discuss what is working and
review Ordinance 30-158 Snow Removal Parking Restrictions. Staff determined there were
several sections of the Ordinance that should be updated to enhance operational improvements
and winter parking enforcement. These included:
• Exempt parking zones
• Permit parking
• Snow emergency declaration (this is an enhancement to our current system to provide
clarity)
• Communication plan
If approved, all changes will go into effect for the 2014-15 Winter and beyond.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The proposed changes have nominal if any
financial impacts.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Ordinance Section 30-158
Ordinance Summary for Publication
Resolutions
Winter Parking Exemption Maps (2)
Examples of Current and Proposed Permits
Prepared by: Mark Hanson, Public Works Superintendent
Reviewed by: Cindy Walsh, Director of Operations and Recreation
John Luse, Police Chief
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4e) Page 2
Title: Second Reading of Snow Removal Program Ordinance
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: The snow removal process is reviewed by staff on a regular basis to
determine if there are opportunities to improve delivery of service and communication with
residents. Earlier this summer Operations staff along with Police and Fire met to discuss what is
working and ideas for possible improvements with snow removal operations, winter parking
enforcement, and overall service delivery to our residents. Upon review, it was determined that
improvements could be made in the following areas:
• Designation of some exempt/high density areas
• Permits and their display location
• Declaring a snow emergency
• Communications plan for winter parking updates
At the October 6, 2014, Study Session, staff reviewed the above enhancements with Council
(report attached). First reading of this item was presented to Council October 20, 2014. Council
fully supported the recommended enhancements and asked staff to proceed with the necessary
administrative actions to implement them.
SUMMARY OF PROPOSED ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS:
Amendments to Ordinance 30-158 Snow Removal Parking Restrictions: The primary
updates include moving to a declared snow emergency instead of waiting for three inches of
snow to accumulate; authorizing the City Manager to exempt streets from snow emergencies;
and authorizing the City Manager to issue winter parking permits (with fees set by the annual fee
schedule).
Rescind Resolution 03-153: Once the updates to Ordinance 30-158 are in place, there is no
longer a need to maintain a separate resolution setting the winter parking permit fees.
Rescind Resolution 03-180: Once the updates to Ordinance 30-158 are in place, the City
Manager will have the authority to exempt certain streets from snow emergencies so there is no
longer a need to maintain this resolution.
Resolution Amending and Restating Resolution 04-115: Updates some of the terminology to
current naming conventions.
Changes in designation of some exempt/high density areas: The ordinance allows for areas of
the city to be considered “exempt” for the first 24 hours of the snow parking ban in higher
density residential areas with limited parking. There are also main roadways in the city that were
marked as exempt (see map). Proposed revisions to the exempt zones/process are intended to
create efficiencies in operations and enforcement. This also provides clarity to residents so they
know where they can park. The revisions are as follows:
1. Eliminate the designation of our main roadways listed as exempt. In review of the
existing exempt designations, it was determined that main roads do not need the exempt
status since operationally they are cleared first. There has not been a need to exempt these
streets from our snow removal program due to the nature of the roadways.
2. Change ordinance to authorize the City Manager or designee to establish the listing of the
public streets which are exempt. This creates efficiencies in operations by eliminating the
step where Council must approve exempt streets by council resolution.
City Council Meeting November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4e) Page 3
Title: Second Reading of Snow Removal Program Ordinance
3. Continue the designation of our exempt/high density area zones without signage. These
exempt/high density area zones, however, would now be exempt the entire snow event,
not just the first 24 hours. Staff would continue, as in the past, to work with
landlords/apartment owners to communicate the exempt zones to their tenants. This
system has been successful and therefor no change in this practice is recommended. It is
believed that if signs were placed signifying exempt parking area, others may want to use
this area allowing for fewer spaces to be used by those in the adjacent high density areas
who need the space for parking.
4. To improve clearing of snow in the exempt areas and when plowing is needed curb to
curb, staff would temporarily post one side of the street as “No Parking”, allowing for
parking on the other side while the posted side is being cleared to the curb. The same
procedure would occur the next day for the other side. This operational change will
improve the time it takes for snow removal and also allow parking in the high density
area when snow removal is taking place in the parking lots of the apartment complex.
This process will also help with clearing up confusion of residents and improve
communication by posting temporary snow removal signs as needed and assists public
safety with enforcement.
Declare Snow Emergency: There continues to be confusion as to the exact time when the 3”
snow ban has been in effect. We receive numerous calls each winter that residents are confused
by the term “snow ban.” Residents and staff would all like to better understand when a snow
parking ban takes place. Many cities designate a “snow emergency” to help communicate that
there is a parking ban. This suggested change is an enhancement to our current system. This
enhancement would not change how or when we plow. Using a formal snow emergency
approach to communicate a parking ban will improve communication to our residents,
businesses and staff, help eliminate confusion and provide flexibility on when the parking ban
goes into effect. Staff would be able to review conditions and work to provide timely
communication to residents. This approach also works well when the snow event lasts more than
one day or when we have a heavy spring snow fall where we really don’t want to ban parking
and tag and tow if we know the snow will be melting off in the next day. We will continue to use
a guideline of 3 – 4” of snow along with weather conditions and storm longevity in making a
determination and communicating a snow emergency. We still want cars off the street prior to a
snow event so we can do a better job of plowing. Declaring a snow emergency is meant to
provide additional advanced notice and clarity.
Permits: Permits exempting single family residents from the winter parking restrictions are
issued only to residents that do not have adequate off-street parking available to them. Staff
recommends keeping the same permit process that is already in place. This process is managed
by Operations staff and is working successfully. The process allows administrative approval of
up to two no-fee permits allowing on-street parking in front of a permittee’s home when the
parking ban is in effect. We also recommend keeping the process of issuing up to two additional
parking permits for a fee and/or one Caretaker permit. The recommended change to the
ordinance is to authorize the City Manager or designee to issue the fee permits. Current
ordinance requires approval by Council resolution. Allowing the City Manager or designee to
authorize no more than two fee permits and the caretaker permit creates efficiencies in this
process for our residents. Permit fees would continue to be set annually by Council in the fee
schedule.
City Council Meeting November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4e) Page 4
Title: Second Reading of Snow Removal Program Ordinance
Permit Display: To help with identification and enforcement, staff is recommending changing
the vehicle permit from a mirror hanger to a small sticker. When gathering information from our
Officers, it was found that having the permit hang from the rear view mirror has been
problematic for parking enforcement. As we know, when we have snow, it covers the windows
of a vehicle. Many times officers are not able to see if a vehicle has a permit and would have to
stop at each vehicle, remove snow, and determine if the vehicle has the appropriate permit before
enforcement action is taken. Also, some vehicles do not have the type of rear view mirror that
would allow hanging of any type of permit or people would forget to hang a permit. In order to
create efficiencies in identification, Police have recommended changing the permit to a small
sticker to attach to the rear bumper on the driver’s side. This type of permit is currently being
used successfully by our Engineering Department for other types of permit parking. Changing to
this type of permit for identification would help increase efficiencies with parking enforcement
during a snow event (example permits attached).
Communication: Declaring a snow emergency will allow the City to enhance communications
to our residents. The following list describes the current communication tools and how their
effectiveness will be enhanced by declaring a snow emergency:
• Website/Social Media – While the city proactively reminds residents using these tools
that snow is in the forecast, the city is not able to announce that a parking ban is in effect
until the three-inch threshold is reached. This means that the website and social media
sites are often not updated until the middle of the night when residents are not looking at
them. Enhancement: The city’s website and social media accounts would be able to post
information several hours before the snow emergency begins. Analytic data shows us that
most people are using our social media sites, including Nextdoor, between the hours of 8
p.m. and 11 p.m. The new system would allow our messages to be present during these
times.
• News media – Broadcasting the city’s parking ban through local TV stations has been
particularly difficult in the last several years. The local affiliates have standardized
language around “snow emergencies” as it is the common term used by metro-area
communities. So when St. Louis Park sends its news releases referring to a winter
parking ban, the station makes one of two decisions: call St. Louis Park’s ban a snow
emergency too or leave it out of their notification tools (which includes screen crawls and
email notification). Unfortunately, they often leave it out altogether. Additionally, like
the website and social media, the city is often unable to notify the TV stations that a ban
is in effect until the middle of the night, meaning that the first time they can broadcast the
information is during the morning newscasts when it’s possible that city crews have
already been plowing for several hours. Enhancement: The news media would be
notified prior to the snow emergency taking effect meaning that it will be able to
broadcast this information on its nightly newscasts. Additionally, referring to it as a snow
emergency will ensure that the stations will broadcast it and utilize the additional tools
(like email services) that they offer to viewers.
• ParkAlert – The City Council directed staff that a winter parking ban should be
considered an emergency, which allows the city to call all listed phone numbers in the St.
Louis Park white pages. However, the city is only to use this notification system during
reasonable hours. So in the past, the city has utilized this tool only to remind people of
the winter parking rules, and only when it is clear that a significant amount of snow is
forecast (usually five inches or more). When a ban goes in to effect overnight, the city
has not used the system in the morning to announce the ban because it is likely many
City Council Meeting November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4e) Page 5
Title: Second Reading of Snow Removal Program Ordinance
streets will already have been plowed. The city has utilized the system for only about half
of its winter storm events over the last three years. Enhancement: The city would be able
to utilize ParkAlert for every snow emergency and proactively provide specific
information about when vehicles must be off the streets.
• Snow information line – Like social media and the news media, the line is updated when
the snowfall reaches three inches or more, likely in the middle of the night.
Enhancement: Like the website and social media, the snow information line would be
updated prior to the storm to state the specific time that a snow emergency would begin.
In addition to these enhancements, the additional notification time will also enable the city to
enhance communications by beginning to use its MyStLouisPark app and its Constant Contact
email service to alert residents to the snow emergency in the hours leading up to it.
Cooperative enforcement through communication and connections: Staff will continue to work
cooperatively on proactive identification of illegally parked “snow birds” to get them removed so
the roads can be cleared to the curb. Plow operators are typically aware of the vehicles that have
not moved during the snow clearing process so they are able to notify Police of any “snow birds”
so they can be appropriately enforced. This process will be further developed so that any staff in
the field could assist in providing information to Police to help with additional enforcement and
related efficiencies in clearing snow.
Public Safety Parking Restrictions: Our Fire Department has been in charge of designating and
implementing the process where during winter months streets need to be temporarily designated
No Parking due to public safety concerns with narrow streets. This process has worked
successfully in the past and will continue to be used when snow accumulation is excessive and
streets become a safety concern relating to equipment access.
City Council Meeting November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4e) Page 6
Title: Second Reading of Snow Removal Program Ordinance
ORDINANCE NO. ____-14
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO SNOW REMOVAL
PARKING RESTRICTIONS, AMENDING
SECTION 30-158 OF THE ST. LOUIS PARK CITY CODE
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK ORDAINS:
SECTION 1. Section 30-158 of the St. Louis Park City Code is amended to read as follows:
(1) Definition of Street: Street as used in this section shall mean the entire right-of-
way, including sidewalks, boulevards, curb and gutter as well as the traveled portion of any City
street, alley, highway, thoroughfare, county road, or state highway within the City of St. Louis Park.
(2) Snow Fall Parking Restrictions:
a. Except as provided in Subparagraph (b) and (c) herein, no person shall park a vehicle
on any public street at any time when the city declares a snow emergency, until the
snow emergency has been cancelled by the city or the street has been plowed to the curb.
b. The City Manager or designee is authorized to establish and maintain a listing of the
public streets which are not subject to the snow emergency parking ban. The exempted
streets will generally be high density residential streets without or very limited off-
street parking.
c. The City Manager or designee is authorized to issue parking permits allowing on-street
parking in front of the permittee’s residence when the snow emergency parking ban is
in effect. The permits may only be issued to City residents who do not have off-street
parking available to them. No more than two no fee vehicle permits will be issued for
each residential dwelling unit.
The City Manager or designee may authorize the issuance of up to two additional
parking permits for a fee, as set by Council, when either the residential dwelling does
not have adequate off-street parking or does not have any off-street parking and the
permits for more than two vehicles is determined to be appropriate. One parking permit
for a caregiver vehicle may be approved in accordance with this section. Each permit
issued under this section will be for an identified vehicle and must be displayed on such
vehicle. Vehicles with permits must be parked in front of the permittee’s residence.
(3) Obstruction of Street by Private Snow Plowing Removal Prohibited. No person shall
deposit any snow or ice, plowed or removed from private property, onto a public street.
(4) Parking Interference with Clean-Up Snowplowing. No person shall park any vehicle
on a public street within 50 feet of any area of a public street which is unplowed after
City equipment has previously plowed snow and ice from other portions of said street,
nor otherwise park in such a manner as to interfere with City clean-up snowplowing
operations.
City Council Meeting November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4e) Page 7
Title: Second Reading of Snow Removal Program Ordinance
(5) Off-Street Parking Areas and Private Streets. No person who is an owner or manager
of the premises shall allow or permit snow and ice accumulation in an area of required
off-street parking under the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance or a special permit
issued thereunder or private streets established under a special permit in such a manner
as to reduce such private street area or the number of parking stalls available for such
use, commencing 24 hours after the cessation of snowfall.
(6) Special Posted Snow Removal Parking Restrictions. In addition to the snow emergency
parking ban set forth in Subsection (2) herein, the City Manager or designee is
authorized to post no parking signs for snow removal along public streets of the City
where snow removal operations will require the use of the entire width of the street by
snow plowing and snow removal equipment. Such signs shall be posted at frequent
intervals at least four (4) hours prior to the time when snow removal commences on the
street so posted, and such signs shall be removed promptly after completion of the snow
removal operation. Snow removal shall be done on any street so posted as soon as
possible following a lapse of four (4) hours after posting the signs. No person shall
park any vehicle, nor leave any vehicle which was parked at the time of posting for a
period of more than two (2) hours thereafter, of any block on any street so posted
during the time the said signs are posted thereon, and it shall be unlawful for any person
other than an authorized representative of the City or Police Department of the City to
remove said signs.
(7) Public Safety Parking Restrictions. The City Manager or designee is authorized to
impose parking restrictions on City streets as necessary in the event curbside snow
accumulations cause streets to become impassable to emergency vehicles or snow
removal equipment in conjunction with on-street parking.
(8) Towing of Vehicles. In addition to the penalty provision imposed for a violation of this
section, vehicles parked on a public street in violation of any provision of this section
may be towed and impounded.
SECTION 2. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen (15) days after its passage and
publication.
ADOPTED this 3rd day of November, 2014 by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park.
First Reading October 20, 2014
Second Reading November 3, 2014
Date of Publication November 13, 2014
Date Ordinance takes effect November 28, 2014
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council November 3, 2014
City Manager Mayor
Attest: Approved as to Form and Execution:
City Clerk City Attorney
City Council Meeting November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4e) Page 8
Title: Second Reading of Snow Removal Program Ordinance
SUMMARY
ORDINANCE NO. _____-14
AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO SNOW REMOVAL
PARKING RESTRICTIONS, AMENDING
SECTION 30-158 OF THE ST. LOUIS PARK CITY CODE
This ordinance amends the snow removal program for the City of St. Louis Park enhancing
operational improvements and winter parking enforcement which includes exempt parking
zones, permit parking, clarity of snow emergency declaration, and a communication plan. This
ordinance shall take effect 15 days after publication.
Adopted by the City Council November 3, 2014
Jeffrey W. Jacobs /s/
Mayor
A copy of the full text of this ordinance is available for inspection with the City Clerk.
Published in St. Louis Park Sailor: November 13, 2014
City Council Meeting November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4e) Page 9
Title: Second Reading of Snow Removal Program Ordinance
RESOLUTION NO. 14-_____
RESOLUTION RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 03-153
REGARDING THE ISSUANCE OF AND
ESTABLISHMENT OF FEES FOR PARKING PERMITS
IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 30-158 OF THE CITY CODE
WHEREAS, the City Council approved amendments to Ordinance 30-158 on October
20, 2014; and
WHEREAS, the winter parking permit fee is now set by the annual fee schedule; and
WHEREAS, due to these changes in administrative processes, Resolution 03-153 is no
longer current or valid.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park, that the City hereby:
Rescinds Resolution 03-153, Resolution Authorizing the Issuance of and Establishment
of Fees for Parking Permits
Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council November 3, 2014
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
City Council Meeting November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4e) Page 10
Title: Second Reading of Snow Removal Program Ordinance
RESOLUTION NO. 14-____
RESOLUTION RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 03-180
REGARDING EXEMPTING STREETS FROM THE
SNOWFALL PARKING BAN
WHEREAS, the City Council approved amendments to Ordinance 30-158 on October
20, 2014; and
WHEREAS, the City Manager is now authorized to established a list of streets exempt
from the snowfall parking ban; and
WHEREAS, due to these changes in administrative processes, Resolution 03-180 is no
longer current or valid.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park, that the City hereby:
Rescinds Resolution 03-180, Resolution Exempting Streets from the Snowfall Parking
Ban.
Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council November 3, 2014
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
City Council Meeting November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4e) Page 11
Title: Second Reading of Snow Removal Program Ordinance
RESOLUTION NO. 14-____
RESOLUTION AMENDING AND RESTATING RESOLUTION 04-115
SNOW AND ICE REMOVAL ENFORCEMENT POLICY
RELATING TO PUBLIC STREETS IN THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
WHEREAS, The City Council has amended Ordinance Section 03-158 Snow removal
parking restrictions; and
WHEREAS, The City Council wishes to ensure safe, efficient and cost effective snow
removal operations on public streets in St. Louis Park.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the St. Louis Park Police Department,
in cooperation/coordination with the Operations Department, is directed as follows:
• To begin issuing citations for vehicles parked illegally on-street when snow emergency
has been declared. A citation may be issued whether or not the vehicle has been “plowed
in”.
• To coordinate the towing of vehicles with the City’s private contractor for vehicles that
have been issued a citation and have not been moved. Towing should begin within 24
hours from when a citation has been issued.
• To use discretion in the issuance of citations due to unusual or extenuating circumstances
related to a snow event (this includes, but is not limited to, other calls for service to the
Police Dept. such as accidents or medical calls).
• Overtime costs associated with enforcement should be held within reasonable limits and
in alignment with annual budgetary considerations.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this policy becomes effective immediately upon
passage of this resolution.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council November 3, 2014
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4e) Title: Second Reading of Snow Removal Program Ordinance Page 12
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4e) Title: Second Reading of Snow Removal Program Ordinance Page 13
Examples of Current and Proposed Permits:
Current “Hanging” Permit
(hung from rear view mirror)
Proposed “Bumper Sticker” Permit
(placed on driver’s side rear
bumper as shown below)
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4e)
Title: Second Reading of Snow Removal Program Ordinance Page 14
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: November 3, 2014
Consent Agenda Item: 4f
TITLE: Special Assessment - Water Service Line Replacements Project #2013-1000
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution authorizing special assessments for
the replacements of various water service lines.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: The proposed action is consistent with policy previously
established by the City Council.
SUMMARY: The owners of the single family residences listed below have petitioned the City to
replace their water service lines located within the city right of way and assess the cost against their
property in accordance with the City’s special assessment policy.
These owners have requested this work be done in conjunction with the 2014 Pavement Management
Project, City Project #2013-1000, as a cost saving measure for all involved. Based on the completed
work, these replacements qualify for the City’s special assessment program. These property owners
have each signed an agreement petitioning the City to perform and to special assess the cost of this
work. The owners, locations, and total eligible costs of this work have been determined to be as
follows:
PID Street Address,
St. Louis Park, Mn 55416
Cost
07-028-24-32-0042 4156 Toledo Ave So $ 660.70
07-028-24-32-0179 4248 Toledo Ave So $ 723.30
07-028-24-23-0061 4048 Toledo Ave So $ 660.70
07-028-24-23-0107 4076 Toledo Ave So $ 754.60
07-028-24-23-0052 4081 Toledo Ave So $ 1,224.10
The City supports the repair or replacement of service lines to promote the general public health,
safety and welfare within the community. The special assessment policy for the repair or replacement
of water or sewer service lines for existing homes was adopted by the City Council in 1996. This
program was put into place because sometimes property owners face financial hardships when repairs
like this are required.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The City has funds in place to finance the
cost of this special assessment.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
Attachments: Resolution
Prepared by: Jack Sullivan, Senior Engineering Project Manager
Reviewed by: Debra Heiser, Engineering Director
Brian Swanson, Controller
Approved by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4f) Page 2
Title: Special Assessment - Water Service Line Replacements Project #2013-1000
RESOLUTION NO. 14-____
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT
FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF VARIOUS WATER SERVICE LINES IN
ST. LOUIS PARK, MN
WHEREAS, the following Property Owners have petitioned the City of St. Louis Park to
authorize a special assessment for the replacement of their water service lines for their single
family residences; and
PID Street Address,
St. Louis Park, Mn 55416
07-028-24-32-0042 4156 Toledo Ave So
07-028-24-32-0179 4248 Toledo Ave So
07-028-24-23-0061 4048 Toledo Ave So
07-028-24-23-0107 4076 Toledo Ave So
07-028-24-23-0052 4081 Toledo Ave So
WHEREAS, these Property Owners have agreed to waive their right to a public hearing,
right of notice and right of appeal pursuant to Minnesota Statute, Chapter 429; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park has received a report from the
City Engineer, or designee, related to the replacement of these water service lines.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park, Minnesota, that:
1. The petition from these Property Owners requesting their water service lines be replaced by
the city and specially assessed to the property is hereby accepted.
2. These water service line replacements were done in conformance with the plans and
specifications approved by the Engineering Department and are hereby accepted.
3. The owners, locations, and total eligible costs of this work have been determined to be as
follows:
PID Street Address,
St. Louis Park, Mn 55416 Cost
07-028-24-32-0042 4156 Toledo Ave So $ 660.70
07-028-24-32-0179 4248 Toledo Ave So $ 723.30
07-028-24-23-0061 4048 Toledo Ave So $ 660.70
07-028-24-23-0107 4076 Toledo Ave So $ 754.60
07-028-24-23-0052 4081 Toledo Ave So $ 1,224.10
4. These Property Owners have each agreed to waive their right to a public hearing, notice and
appeal from the special assessment; whether provided by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, or
by other statutes, or by ordinance, City Charter, the constitution, or common law.
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4f) Page 3
Title: Special Assessment - Water Service Line Replacements Project #2013-1000
5. These Property Owners have each agreed to pay the City for the total cost of the above
improvements through a special assessment over a three (3) year period at the interest rate of
5.85 %.
6. These Property Owners have each executed an agreement with the City and all other
documents necessary to implement the replacement of their water service lines and the
special assessment of all costs associated therewith.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council November 3, 2014
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: November 3, 2014
Consent Agenda Item: 4g
TITLE: Approve Cooperative Agreement with MCWD for the Powell Road Stormwater
Diversion Project
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution approving the cooperative
agreement with the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) for the construction of a
stormwater diversion pipe along Powell Road.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: This agreement is consistent with the City of St. Louis Park’s
commitment to improving stormwater quality.
SUMMARY: The MCWD Board of Managers authorized design of the Powell Road
Stormwater Diversion Project April 24, 2014. This project proposes to divert drainage from the
area south of 325 Blake Road (216.9 acres) on Powell Road through a new storm sewer that
would be tunneled under the existing railroad (see watershed map). The Powell Diversion Project
connects to city storm sewer and crosses both Hopkins and St. Louis Park right of way, private
property, Railroad property, and Hennepin County Regional Rail Authority land. Easement
agreements have been approved by the MCWD Board and executed with the various property
owners.
The MCWD has drafted agreements with the City of St. Louis Park and the City of Hopkins
regarding construction rights, operation and maintenance. For this project, the City of Hopkins
has agreed to take on maintenance responsibilities for the pipe. The agreement with St. Louis
Park is to allow the project to be built within the City’s right of way and assume ownership of
the infrastructure once the project is completed.
The City Attorney, Mr. Tom Scott, has reviewed the proposed Cooperative Agreement and
authorized its submittal to the City Council for consideration. Construction is anticipated to
begin in March of 2015
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The proposed project is being funded by
MCWD. Long term operation and maintenance of the pipe within St. Louis Park will come out
of the general operating budget.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a leader in environmental
stewardship. We will increase environmental consciousness and responsibility in all areas of city
business.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution
Cooperative Agreement
Location Map
Watershed Map
Prepared by: Phillip Elkin, Senior Project Manager
Reviewed by: Debra Heiser, Engineering Director
Approved by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4g) Page 2
Title: Approve Cooperative Agreement with MCWD for the Powell Road Stormwater Diversion Project
RESOLUTION NO. 14-___
POWELL ROAD STORMWATER DIVERSION PROJECT
COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT
WHEREAS, the City of St. Louis Park is committed to being a leader in environmental
stewardship, and;
WHEREAS, Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) has focused strategically on
improving the water quality of the portion of Minnehaha Creek between West 34th Street and
Meadowbrook Lake referred to as the Urban Creek Corridor, and;
WHEREAS, MCWD has designed the Powell Road Stormwater Diversion project which
includes the construction of new storm pipe within the City of St. Louis Park, and;
WHEREAS, the project will be paid for by MCWD, and;
WHERAS, the pipe within the St. Louis Park city limits will be owned and maintained
by the City of St. Louis Park;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park, Minnesota, that the City of St. Louis Park enter into a Cooperative Agreement with the
with the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District for the following purpose:
To establish terms for construction of a modification to the City’s storm sewer system, with
associated structural appurtenances, that would divert stormwater presently discharged directly
to Minnehaha Creek to a stormwater basin on 325 Blake Road. This project is on and under City
right-of-way, private property and both public and private rail right-of-way.
BE IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor and the City Manager are authorized
to execute the Agreement and any amendments to the Agreement.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council November 3, 2014
City Manager
Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4g) Page 3
Title: Approve Cooperative Agreement with MCWD for the Powell Road Stormwater Diversion Project
COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT
City of St. Louis Park and Minnehaha Creek Watershed District
POWELL ROAD STORMWATER DIVERSION PROJECT
This Cooperative Agreement (“Agreement”) is made by and between the Minnehaha Creek
Watershed District, a watershed district with purposes and powers as set forth at Minnesota Statutes
Chapters 103B and 103D (District), and the City of St. Louis Park, a home rule charter city in the State
of Minnesota (“St. Louis Park”).
Recitals
A. The City of Hopkins (“Hopkins”) owns and operates a municipal system to collect and convey
stormwater from a catchment of 217 acres more or less, principally within the Hopkins, as delineated
on Attachment A hereto. The conveyance passes into St. Louis Park, where it conducts the
stormwater without flow management or water quality treatment to an outfall into Minnehaha
Creek. St. Louis Park holds the authority to maintain that part of the conveyance within its
boundaries.
B. The District owns a parcel of land of about 17 acres within Hopkins and adjacent to Minnehaha
Creek (the “Property”). The District is performing feasibility work to assess the siting of a stormwater
infiltration basin or similar practice that would provide water quality treatment for stormwater runoff
from an area including this catchment, manage stormwater peak flow and volume, and reduce
sediment discharge into the creek from bank erosion and downstream flooding.
C. The District and Hopkins have entered or will enter into a project agreement in which the
responsibility is allocated between them for design, construction and maintenance of proposed
improvements consisting of modification to the stormwater conveyance system, with associated
structural appurtenances, to divert stormwater presently discharged directly to Minnehaha Creek
to the stormwater practice on the Property (the “Project”).
D. St. Louis Park supports the Project and concurs that it will benefit St. Louis Park by reducing the
discharge of pollutants from the conveyance that it owns and operates into receiving waters
located within St. Louis Park.
E. The purpose of this Agreement is to establish terms for cooperation in the Project. The Project
will lie on and under Powell Road, private property and both public and private rail right-of-way.
THEREFORE St. Louis Park and the District agree as follows:
1.0 DESIGN
1.1 The District may proceed with Project design and to that end will retain a professional
engineering consultant to prepare plans and specifications for the Project. The design will provide
for connection of a diversion pipe to the conveyance within the Powell Road right-of-way in Hopkins,
with a pump and other appurtenances, so that lower flows will be diverted from the conveyance but
high flows will continue to flow north as presently into that part of the conveyance maintained by St.
Louis Park. Attachment A depicts the alignment of the present conveyance and proposed diversion.
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4g) Page 4
Title: Approve Cooperative Agreement with MCWD for the Powell Road Stormwater Diversion Project
1.2 During the design process, St. Louis Park, in a timely fashion, will:
(a) Specify reasonable terms and conditions for work in and adjacent to its Powell Road right-
of-way;
(b) Give the District all information it possesses regarding subsurface conditions and rights of
third parties within and adjacent to the affected right-of-way; facilitate coordination with
such third parties; and facilitate resolution of any actual or potential concerns as to the effect
of Project construction or maintenance on third party rights and facilities;
(c) Otherwise advise the District of any requirements or interests that may affect the plans,
specifications and construction including any technical considerations for the stormwater
conveyance system.
1.3 The District will obtain easements, permits and other approvals necessary to construct and
maintain the Project. St. Louis Park will process any permits or approvals it requires promptly and will
not impose on the District any fees for those permits or approvals.
1.4 St. Louis Park will be given the opportunity to review and comment on 90 percent plans and
will do so promptly.
2.0 CONSTRUCTION
2.1 The District may award a contract to construct the Project and proceed with construction. The
District will manage the construction contract, but will give St. Louis Park advance notice of all formal
pre-construction and construction meetings, which St. Louis Park may attend. St. Louis Park will not
direct the contractor.
2.2 For work within the St. Louis Park right-of-way, the District’s contract will require that:
(a) The contractor name St. Louis Park as an additional insured for general liability, on a
primary basis and for both ongoing work and completed operations;
(b) The contractor will indemnify St. Louis Park for the contractor’s negligent acts and those
of its subcontractors;
(c) The contractor will be responsible to locate and protect all utilities;
(d) The contractor will provide a performance bond for the completion of the Project;
(e) The contractor will comply with local traffic and site control requirements; and
(f) The contractor will restore or repair any damage to St. Louis Park’s lands, equipment or
facilities resulting from the contractor’s activities.
2.3 Until Hopkins accepts the Project per subsection 3.1, below, the District and its contractor may
occupy St. Louis Park right-of-way within areas so designated in the plans and specifications,
including to stage and operate equipment and vehicles, stockpile excavation and fill materials, store
materials, maintain erosion and sediment control practices, and otherwise as necessary or convenient
to construct the Project.
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4g) Page 5
Title: Approve Cooperative Agreement with MCWD for the Powell Road Stormwater Diversion Project
2.4 In performing its responsibilities under this section 2.0, including its securing of any work in
progress insurance, the District is not assuming the role or authority of an owner of St. Louis Park
right-of-way or an operator of St. Louis Park’s stormwater infrastructure. The District assumes no
responsibility for any pre-existing environmental condition within St. Louis Park right-of-way
disturbed by the Project.
3.0 MAINTENANCE
3.1 The project agreement referenced in recital C above provides that on certification of Project
substantial completion by the District’s engineer and the delivery of record drawings to Hopkins,
Hopkins will provide written acceptance of same and at that time will assume ownership of the
Project infrastructure, including but not limited to all pumps, manholes and other appurtenances,
and the responsibility to maintain that infrastructure. The District will monitor this maintenance
responsibility so that there is no hydraulic obstruction in the diversion that risks damage to St. Louis
Park’s portion of the conveyance north of the diversion or increased maintenance cost for St. Louis
Park related thereto.
3.2 St. Louis Park will maintain its portion of the conveyance north of the diversion so as not to
impair the design function of the diversion.
3.3 The District may temporarily occupy St. Louis Park right-of-way to inspect and repair any part
of the Project located in or adjacent to it. The District will coordinate with St. Louis Park in advance
of any such work to minimize disruption to other uses of the right-of-way. The District may assign
rights and responsibilities under this paragraph to Hopkins.
4.0 COST RESPONSIBILITIES and REMEDIES
4.1 St. Louis Park will bear its own administrative costs to perform its roles under this Agreement
and its costs of maintenance under subsection 3.2.
4.2 St. Louis Park does not otherwise bear any cost related to the design, construction or
maintenance of the Project.
4.3 Each party holds harmless, and agrees to defend and indemnify, the other party from and
against that portion of any and all liability, loss, claim, damage or expense (including reasonable
attorney fees, costs and disbursements) that the indemnified party may incur as a result of the
performance of this Agreement due to any negligent act or omission of the indemnifying party or any
other act or omission that subjects the indemnifying party to liability in law or equity.
4.4 St. Louis Park holds the District harmless from and against that portion of any and all liability,
loss, claim, damage or expense (including reasonable attorney fees, costs and disbursements) arising
from a pre-existing environmental condition on St. Louis Park right-of-way.
4.5 Notwithstanding subsections 4.3 and 4.4, this Agreement creates no right in and waives no
immunity, defense or liability limit with respect to any third party or the other party to this
Agreement. This Agreement is not a joint powers agreement under Minnesota Statutes §471.59 and
nothing herein constitutes either party’s agreement to be responsible for the acts or omissions of the
other party pursuant to subdivision 1a of that statute.
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4g) Page 6
Title: Approve Cooperative Agreement with MCWD for the Powell Road Stormwater Diversion Project
4.6 Only contractual remedies are available for the failure of a party to fulfill the terms of this
Agreement.
5.0 PROJECT REPRESENTATIVES
5.1 Each communication under this Agreement will be made to the following representatives:
MCWD:
Project Manager, Powell Road Project
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District
15320 Minnetonka Boulevard
Minnetonka MN 55345-1503
City:
[etc.]
A party may change its contact by written notice to the other party.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties execute this Agreement by their authorized officers.
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
By _________________________________ Date:
Its Mayor
By _________________________________ Date:
Its City Manager
MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT
By _________________________________ Date:
Its President
Approved for form and execution:
____________________________________
MCWD Counsel
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4g)
Title: Approve Cooperative Agreement with MCWD for the Powell Road Stormwater Diversion Project Page 7
Drainage Area Map
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4g)
Title: Approve Cooperative Agreement with MCWD for the Powell Road Stormwater Diversion Project Page 8
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: November 3, 2014
Consent Agenda Item: 4h
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Hennepin County Chiefs of Police Mutual Aid Pact
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution and authorize the Mayor and City
Manager to execute the Hennepin County Chiefs of Police Mutual Aid Pact agreement.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to authorize participation by the St.
Louis Park Police Department in the attached mutual aid pact which prescribes how resources
may be shared among participants in Hennepin County?
SUMMARY: The attached mutual aid pact will be effective January 1, 2015, and will replace
the mutual aid pact currently in effect. The existing pact was in need of updating, and the new
pact more accurately reflects both procedures and issues related to the sharing of equipment and
personnel among the participants. Although not frequently used, this agreement formalizes the
teamwork which most typically involves neighboring agencies during appropriate
circumstances. The pact has been reviewed by our City Attorney.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: None anticipated.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution
Hennepin County Chiefs of Police Assoc. Mutual Aid Pact
Prepared by: John Luse, Chief of Police
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4h) Page 2
Title: Hennepin County Chiefs of Police Mutual Aid Pact
RESOLUTION NO. 14-____
RESOLUTION APPROVING JOINT AND COOPERATIVE
AGREEMENTFOR USE OF LAW ENFORCEMENT
PERSONNEL AND EQUIPMENT
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59 authorizes governmental units by
agreement of their governing bodies to jointly or cooperatively exercise any power common
to them;
WHEREAS, the Hennepin County Chiefs of Police Association previously developed a
Mutual Aid Pact to foster the sharing of law enforcement resources among agencies in
Hennepin County;
WHEREAS, the Hennepin County Chiefs of Police Association has revised its Mutual
Aid Pact to clarify and update the language of the Joint and Cooperative Agreement for the
Use of Law Enforcement Personnel and Equipment (the Agreement);
WHEREAS, the Agreement allows other governmental units and municipalities to
become a party to the Agreement by the adoption of a resolution and sending notice to the
Hennepin County Sheriff;
WHEREAS, the governing body of the City of St. Louis Park considers it to be in its
best interests to become a Party to the Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of St. Louis Park:
1. Authorizes the City of St. Louis Park to be a Party to the Joint and Cooperative
Agreement for the Use of Law Enforcement Personnel and Equipment developed by the
Hennepin County Chiefs of Police Association.
2. The City Manager is directed to send a copy of the signature page of the Agreement and
this Resolution to the Hennepin County Sheriff; and
3. The City of St. Louis Park agrees to comply with all terms of the Agreement.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council November 3, 2014
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Hennepin County Chiefs of Police Association Mutual Aid Pact - 1 -
HENNEPIN COUNTY
CHIEFS OF POLICE ASSOCIATION
MUTUAL AID PACT
Effective January 1, 2015
TABLE OF CONTENTS
FOREWORD 2
JOINT AND COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT FOR USE OF
LAW ENFORCEMENT PERSONNEL AND EQUIPMENT 4
I. GENERAL PURPOSE 4
II. DEFINITION OF TERMS 4
III. PARTIES 5
IV. PROCEDURE 5
V. LIABILITY 7
VI. EFFECTIVE DATE 9
VII. WITHDRAWAL AND TERMINATION 9
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4h)
Title: Hennepin County Chiefs of Police Mutual Aid Pact Page 3
Hennepin County Chiefs of Police Association Mutual Aid Pact - 2 -
HENNEPIN COUNTY
CHIEFS OF POLICE ASSOCIATION
MUTUAL AID PACT
FOREWORD
The Mutual Aid Committee of the Hennepin County Chiefs of Police Association was tasked
with revising and updating the mutual aid pact among all the police agencies of Hennepin
County. The original pact was created in 1968 with the various agencies joining the pact
throughout the years. Many provisions of the original pact were continued into the new pact.
The Joint and Cooperative Agreement for Use of Law Enforcement Personnel and
Equipment (“Joint Powers Agreement”) was updated to reflect accurately the procedures,
address current issues and enhance the ability of departments to share resources with each
other.
The general purpose of the pact is to permit agencies to share law enforcement resources
with other agencies in Hennepin County. The Joint Powers Agreement specifically allows a
requesting party to select the resources that best meets the needs of a given situation. A
requesting party may call upon any other participating party for mutual aid. There is no
requirement to make requests through a particular party. In addition, the Joint Powers
Agreement should not be interpreted as restrictive in providing resources to deal with only
major catastrophic situations. Participating parties can utilize the resources for many
reasons including routine circumstances such as training efforts and back-up patrol service.
This pact provides the flexibility for all agencies to use the resources located among all
participating parties in Hennepin County.
The decision as to when to invoke mutual aid and whether to respond is left to the discretion
of the requesting or sending party. Each agency should acquaint supervisory personnel with
any internal procedures used for mutual aid. While the Joint Powers Agreement does not
require particular words or actions to initiate mutual aid, agencies should be clear about
whether mutual aid was requested and what type of assistance is being provided. Parties
should not self-deploy.
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4h)
Title: Hennepin County Chiefs of Police Mutual Aid Pact Page 4
Hennepin County Chiefs of Police Association Mutual Aid Pact - 3 -
Furthermore, each officer within a department should have a basic familiarity with mutual aid,
the responsibilities when reporting to another agency and the protections afforded under the
agency’s worker’s compensation.
For liability reasons, management of a mutual aid situation is under the control of the
requesting party. However, the sending party has discretion whether to provide personnel or
equipment and can recall such assistance at any time.
Time commitments for mutual aid requests: While there is no hard and fast time limit, the
commitment of resources can be taxing on agencies. In addition, in some situations, an
advantage can be gained by ending a mutual aid request and entering into some contractual
assistance, especially when the law enforcement costs need to be tracked or can be
recovered from other sources.
The Hennepin County Sheriff’s Office (“Sheriff”) has again volunteered to serve as the
administrative coordinator of the pact. As communities adopt the Joint Powers Agreement,
the appropriate documentation and signature page need to be forwarded to the Sheriff.
Each agency is responsible for entering and updating available agency resources.
Previously the parties used the Regional Automated Property Information (RAPID) database.
Resources will now be listed online in a mutually agreed upon resource management
database. The parties to this agreement are solely responsible to update their available
resources in the agreed upon database.
The effective date for the new Joint Powers agreement is January 1, 2015. This date was
established to allow enough time for agencies to receive the appropriate authority and to
provide some finality between the old pact and the new pact. The former pact will expire at
midnight on December 31, 2014. Failure to execute the new agreement by December 31,
2014 will terminate a party’s participation in the pact. Participation can be resumed upon
execution of the new agreement. Agencies that elect not to participate in the new agreement
may be bound by other existing mutual aid agreement or state statutes.
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4h)
Title: Hennepin County Chiefs of Police Mutual Aid Pact Page 5
Hennepin County Chiefs of Police Association Mutual Aid Pact - 4 -
JOINT AND COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT FOR
USE OF LAW ENFORCEMENT PERSONNEL AND EQUIPMENT
I. GENERAL PURPOSE
The general purpose of this Joint and Cooperative Agreement for Use of Law
Enforcement Personnel and Equipment (“Agreement”) is to provide a means by which
a Party to this Agreement may request and obtain Law Enforcement Assistance from
other Parties when a Party deems such Law Enforcement Assistance necessary. This
Agreement is made pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59, which authorizes
the joint and cooperative exercise of powers common to the Parties.
II. DEFINITION OF TERMS
For the purposes of this Agreement, the terms defined in this section shall have the
following meanings:
Subd. 1. "Eligible Party” means a “governmental unit” as defined by Minnesota
Statues, Section 471.59, subd. 1 or a “municipality” as defined by Minnesota Statutes,
Section 466.01, subd. 1, that is authorized to exercise police powers in Hennepin
County, Minnesota.
Subd. 2. "Law Enforcement Assistance” means equipment and personnel, including
but not limited to, licensed peace officers and non-licensed personnel.
Subd. 3. "Party” means an “Eligible Party” that elects to participate in this Agreement
by the authorization of its governing body. “Parties” means more than one Party to
this Agreement.
Subd. 4. "Requesting Official” means a person who is designated by the Requesting
Party to request Law Enforcement Assistance from other Parties.
Subd. 5. "Requesting Party” means a Party that requests Law Enforcement Assistance
from other Parties.
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4h)
Title: Hennepin County Chiefs of Police Mutual Aid Pact Page 6
Hennepin County Chiefs of Police Association Mutual Aid Pact - 5 -
Subd. 6. "Sending Official” means a person who is designated by a Party to
determine whether and to what extent that Party should provide Law Enforcement
Assistance to a Requesting Party.
Subd. 7. "Sending Party” means a Party that provides Law Enforcement Assistance
to a Requesting Party.
Subd. 8. “Sheriff” means the Hennepin County Sheriff or designee.
III. PARTIES
The Parties to this Agreement shall consist of as many Eligible Parties that have
approved this Agreement by December 31, 2014. Additional Eligible Parties shall
become a Party on the date this Agreement is approved by the Party’s governing
body.
Upon approval by a Party, the executed signature page of this Agreement shall be
sent to the Sheriff along with a resolution approving this Agreement.
IV. PROCEDURE
Subd. 1. Each Party shall designate, and keep on file with the Sheriff, the name of the
person(s) of that Party who shall be its Requesting Official and Sending Official. A
Party may designate the same person as both the Requesting Official and the
Sending Official. Also, a Party may designate alternate persons to act in the absence
of an official.
Subd. 2. Whenever, in the opinion of a Requesting Official of a Party, there is a need
for Law Enforcement Assistance from other Parties, such Requesting Official may, at
his or her discretion, call upon the Sending Official of any other Party to furnish Law
Enforcement Assistance.
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4h)
Title: Hennepin County Chiefs of Police Mutual Aid Pact Page 7
Hennepin County Chiefs of Police Association Mutual Aid Pact - 6 -
Subd. 3. Upon the receipt of a request for Law Enforcement Assistance from a Party,
the Sending Official may authorize and direct personnel and equipment of the Sending
Party be sent to the Requesting Party. Whether the Sending Party provides such Law
Enforcement Assistance to the Requesting Party and, if so, to what extent such Law
Enforcement Assistance is provided shall be determined solely by the Sending Official
(subject to such supervision and direction as may be applicable within the
governmental structure of the Party by which they are employed). Failure to provide
Law Enforcement Assistance will not result in liability to a Party and each Party hereby
waives all claims against another Party for failure to provide Law Enforcement
Assistance.
Subd. 4. When a Sending Party provides Law Enforcement Assistance under the
terms of this Agreement, it may in turn request Law Enforcement Assistance from
other Parties as "back-up" during the time that such Law Enforcement Assistance is
provided.
Subd. 5. Whenever a Sending Party has provided Law Enforcement Assistance to a
Requesting Party, the Sending Official may at any time recall such Law Enforcement
Assistance or any part thereof, if the Sending Official in his or her best judgment
deems such recall necessary to provide for the best interests of the Sending Party’s
community. Such action will not result in liability to any Party and each Party hereby
waives all claims against another Party for recalling Law Enforcement Assistance.
Subd. 6. The Requesting Party shall be in command of all situations where Law
Enforcement Assistance is provided. The personnel and equipment of the Sending
Party shall be under the direction and control of the Requesting Party until the
Sending Party withdraws Law Enforcement Assistance or the Law Enforcement
Assistance is no longer needed.
Subd. 7. No charges will be levied by a Sending Party to this Agreement for Law
Enforcement Assistance rendered to a Requesting Party under the terms of this
Agreement unless that assistance continues for a period of more than eight (8) hours.
If Law Enforcement Assistance provided under this Agreement continues for more
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4h)
Title: Hennepin County Chiefs of Police Mutual Aid Pact Page 8
Hennepin County Chiefs of Police Association Mutual Aid Pact - 7 -
than eight (8) hours, the Sending Party may submit to the Requesting Party an
itemized bill for the actual cost of any Law Enforcement Assistance provided after the
initial eight (8) hour period, including salaries, overtime, materials and supplies and
other necessary expenses. The Requesting Party will reimburse the Sending Party
providing the Law Enforcement Assistance for that amount. Such charges are not
contingent upon the availability of federal or state government funds.
V. LIABILITY
Liability for Injury, Death or Damage to Sending Party’s Personnel or Equipment
Each Party shall be responsible for its own personnel and equipment and for injuries
or death to any such personnel or damage to any such equipment. Responding
personnel shall be deemed to be performing their regular duties for each respective
Sending Party for purposes of workers’ compensation.
Worker’s Compensation: Each Party will maintain workers’ compensation insurance or
self-insurance coverage, covering its own personnel while they are providing Law
Enforcement Assistance pursuant to this Agreement. Each Party, and where
applicable its insurer, waives the right to sue any other Party for any workers’
compensation benefits paid to its own employee or volunteer or their dependants,
even if the injuries or death were caused wholly or partially by the negligence of any
other Party or its officers, employees or volunteers.
Damage to Equipment: Each Party shall be responsible for damages to or loss of its
own equipment. Each Party, and where applicable its insurer, waives the right to sue
any other Party for any damages to or loss of its equipment, even if the damages or
losses were caused wholly or partially by the negligence of any other Party or its
officers, employees or volunteers.
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4h)
Title: Hennepin County Chiefs of Police Mutual Aid Pact Page 9
Hennepin County Chiefs of Police Association Mutual Aid Pact - 8 -
Liability for Injury or Death to Third Parties or Property Damage of Third Parties
For the purposes of the Minnesota Municipal Tort Liability Act (Minnesota Statutes,
Chapter 466), the employees and officers of the Sending Party are deemed to be
employees, as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 466.01, subd. 6, of the
Requesting Party.
The Requesting Party agrees to defend and indemnify against any claims brought or
actions filed against a Sending Party or any officers, employees, or volunteers of a
Sending Party for injury or death to any third person or persons or damage to the
property of third persons arising out of the performance and provision of Law
Enforcement Assistance pursuant to the Agreement, using legal counsel reasonably
acceptable to the Sending Party.
Under no circumstances shall a Requesting Party be required to pay, on behalf of
itself and other Parties, any amount in excess of the limits of liability established in
Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 466, applicable to any one Party. The limits of liability for
the Parties may not be added together to determine the maximum amount of liability
for a Party pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59, subd. 1a.
The purpose of creating this duty to defend and indemnify is to simplify the defense of
claims by eliminating conflicts among the Parties and to permit liability claims against
the Parties from a single occurrence to be defended by a single attorney. However,
the Sending party, at is option and its own expense, shall have the right to select its
own attorney or approve a joint attorney as appropriate, considering potential conflicts
of interest. Nothing in this Agreement is intended to constitute a waiver of any
immunities and privileges from liability available under federal law or the laws of
Minnesota.
If a court determines that the liability of a Party or Parties is not subject to the tort caps
and liability exceeds the tort cap maximum, a Party shall be subject to liability only for
the acts of its officers, employees and volunteers.
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4h)
Title: Hennepin County Chiefs of Police Mutual Aid Pact Page 10
Hennepin County Chiefs of Police Association Mutual Aid Pact - 9 -
No Party to this Agreement nor any official, employee or volunteer of any Party shall
be liable to any other Party or to any other person for failure of any Party to furnish
Law Enforcement Assistance or for recalling Law Enforcement Assistance.
VI. EFFECTIVE DATE
This Agreement shall become effective and operative beginning at 12:01 A.M., local
time on January 1, 2015.
The Sheriff shall maintain a current list of the Parties to this Agreement and, whenever
there is a change, shall notify the designated Sending Officials. Notice may be sent to
the Sending Officials via email or through the United States Postal Service.
VII. WITHDRAWAL AND TERMINATION
A Party may withdraw from this Agreement by action of its governing body.
Withdrawal is effective after thirty (30) days’ written notice is provided to the Sheriff.
The Sheriff shall thereupon give notice of such withdrawal, and the effective date
thereof to all other Parties. Parties that have withdrawn may rejoin by following the
procedure set forth in Section III of this Agreement. This Agreement will terminate
when the number of Parties to the Agreement falls below eleven (11). The Sheriff
shall notify the remaining parties that the Agreement has terminated.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties, by action of their respective governing bodies,
caused this Agreement to be approved on the dates below.
(Each Party must attach a dated and signed signature page
consistent with that Party’s method of executing contracts.)
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4h)
Title: Hennepin County Chiefs of Police Mutual Aid Pact Page 11
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: November 3, 2014
Consent Agenda Item: 4i
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Accept Monetary Donations from Golden Kiwanis and Leslie Marcus to Westwood
Hills Nature Center
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution approving acceptance of monetary
donations from Golden Kiwanis in the amount of $50 and from Leslie Marcus in the amount of
$100 for Westwood Hills Nature Center programs.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to accept the gift with restrictions
on its use?
SUMMARY: State statute requires City Council’s acceptance of donations. This requirement is
necessary in order to make sure the City Council has knowledge of any restrictions placed on the
use of each donation prior to it being expended.
Golden Kiwanis graciously donated $50 and Leslie Marcus graciously donated $100 to
Westwood Hills Nature Center. These donations are given with the restriction that they be used
for Westwood Hills Nature Center Programs.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: These donations will be used for
Westwood Hills Nature Center programs.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged
community.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution
Prepared by: Stacy M. Voelker, Administrative Secretary
Mark Oestreich, Manager Westwood Hills Nature Center
Reviewed by: Cindy Walsh, Director of Operations & Recreation
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4i) Page 2
Title: Accept Monetary Donations from Golden Kiwanis and Leslie Marcus to Westwood Hills Nature Center
RESOLUTION NO. 14-____
RESOLUTION APPROVING ACCEPTANCE OF DONATIONS
IN THE AMOUNTS OF $50 AND $100
TO BE USED FOR WESTWOOD HILLS NATURE CENTER PROGRAMS
WHEREAS, The City of St. Louis Park is required by State statute to authorize
acceptance of any donations; and
WHEREAS, the City Council must also ratify any restrictions placed on the donation by
the donor; and
WHEREAS, Golden Kiwanis donated $50 and Leslie Marcus donated $100 to
Westwood Hills Nature Center; and
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park that the gifts are hereby accepted with thanks to Golden Kiwanis and Leslie Marcus with
the understanding that they must be used for Westwood Hills Nature Center programs.
Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council November 3, 2014
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: November 3, 2014
Consent Agenda Item: 4j
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Resolutions Authorizing Submittal of Grant Applications for Additional Site
Assessment and a Response Action Plan (RAP) on Proposed Community Center Site
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt 3 Resolutions authorizing the submission of
grant applications to Hennepin County Environmental Services for an Environmental Response
Fund Grant, to the Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED) for
Contamination Cleanup Grant and to the Metropolitan Council for the LCA Livable
Communities Demonstration Account and Tax Base Revitalization Account Transit Oriented
Development Fund. These grants will assist in additional site assessment and a Response Action
Plan (RAP) on the site of the proposed Community Center project.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the Council support the submission of grant applications
to Hennepin County Environmental Services, Department of Employment and Economic
Development (DEED), and Metropolitan Council for additional site assessment and a Response
Action Plan (RAP) on the site of the proposed Community Center project?
SUMMARY: The City Council recommended staff to apply for three different grants to assist in
the additional site assessment and a Response Action Plan (RAP) at their October 27, 2014
meeting. Staff suggested applying for all three of these to pay for the majority of the additional
soils and environmental exploration of the site. Applying for these grants does not guarantee the
City will go forward with the project.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The maximum grant from Hennepin County
and DEED is $50,000. The maximum grant for Met Council TOD grant is $100,000. The
Hennepin County grant does not require matching funds but local funding is "strongly
encouraged". Both the DEED and Met Council Grants require matching moneys. Funds
expended for the Phase I and Limited Phase II (part of the schematic design work) will be
eligible for matching funds that will meet most, if not all, the required match. Additional
matching money could be needed which is anticipated to be in the $5,000 -$10,000 range. The
costs associated with the schematic design phase have been paid for from the Park Improvement
Fund (PIF).
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged
community.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Resolution - Metropolitan Council
Resolution - Hennepin County
Resolution - DEED
Prepared by: Stacy Voelker, Administrative Secretary
Jason West, Recreation Superintendent
Reviewed by: Cindy Walsh, Director of Operations and Recreation
Approved by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4j) Page 2
Title: Resolutions for Grant Applications for Add’l. Site Assessment & RAP on Proposed Community Center Site
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: The City Council authorized staff to apply for three different grants to assist
in the additional site assessment and a Response Action Plan (RAP) at their October 27, 2014
meeting. Staff suggested applying for all three of these to pay for the majority of the additional
soils and environmental exploration of the site. Applying for these grants does not guarantee the
City will go forward with the project.
PRESENT CONSIDERATIONS: The Hennepin County Environmental Response Fund and
the DEED grants consider the project value to the community, jobs and potential environmental
impacts. The Met Council Tax Based Revitalization Account Transit Oriented Development
(TOD) grant also considers the connection of the Site to the existing and proposed transit system.
This includes the proposed Belt Line Southwest Light Rail Station to be constructed less than
one-half mile north of the Site. The grants cover the costs of additional site investigation,
Response Action Plan (RAP) development and MPCA costs associated with the VIC Program.
The Met Council Tax Based Revitalization Transit Oriented Development Grant looks at the
relationship of the project to the transit system including the proposed SW Light Rail Belt Line
Station as well as jobs we are creating and livability in the City. The location of Wolfe Park
makes this a good candidate because it is less than one-half mile from the Belt Line Station.
The Minnesota Employment of Economic Development (DEED) Grant is a Contamination
Investigation and RAP Development Grant.
If the grants are received, the additional investigation will be completed and the RAP prepared
and submitted to the MPCA. This additional work (additional investigation and RAP) does not
commit the City to the project.
NEXT STEPS: Once response is received on the three Grants applied for, staff will contract for
the completion of the additional investigation and RAP Development. Addition investigation will
likely occur in the spring with the RAP submitted to the MPCA for approval in early summer.
MPCA approval of the RAP is expected to occur in the late summer or early fall of 2015.
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4j) Page 3
Title: Resolutions for Grant Applications for Add’l. Site Assessment & RAP on Proposed Community Center Site
RESOLUTION NO. 14-____
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A GRANT APPLICATION
TO THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL FOR THE LCA LIVABLE
COMMUNITIES DEMONSTRATION ACCOUNT AND TAX BASE
REVITALIZATION ACCOUNT TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT GRANT
FOR ADDITIONAL SITE ASSESSMENT FOR THE COMMUNITY CENTER SITE
WHEREAS the City of St. Louis Park (“City”) is a participant in the Metropolitan
Livable Communities Act (“LCA”) Local Housing Incentives Program for 2014 as determined
by the Metropolitan Council, and is therefore eligible to apply for LCA Livable Communities
Demonstration Account and Tax Base Revitalization Account Transit Oriented Development
(collectively, “TOD”) funds; and
WHEREAS the City has identified that the Community Center project within the City
meets TOD purposes and criteria and is consistent with and promotes the purposes of the
Metropolitan Livable Communities Act and the policies of the Metropolitan Council’s adopted
metropolitan development guide; and
WHEREAS the City has the institutional, managerial and financial capability to
adequately manage an LCA-TOD grant; and
WHEREAS the City certifies that it will comply with all applicable laws and regulations
as stated in the grant agreement; and
WHEREAS the City acknowledges TOD grants are intended to fund projects or project
components that can serve as models, examples or prototypes for TOD development or
redevelopment elsewhere in the Region, and therefore represents that the proposed project or key
components of the proposed project can be replicated in other metropolitan-area communities;
and
WHEREAS only a limited amount of grant funding is available through the Metropolitan
Council’s Livable Communities TOD initiative during each funding cycle and the Metropolitan
Council has determined it is appropriate to allocate those scarce grant funds only to eligible
projects that would not occur without the availability of TOD grant funding.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that, after appropriate examination and due
consideration, the governing body of the City:
1. Finds that it is in the best interests of the City’s development goals and priorities for
the proposed Community Center TOD Project to occur at this particular site and at
this particular time.
2. Finds that the Community Center TOD Project component(s) for which Livable
Communities TOD funding is sought:
(a) will not occur solely through public investment within the reasonably foreseeable
future; and
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4j) Page 4
Title: Resolutions for Grant Applications for Add’l. Site Assessment & RAP on Proposed Community Center Site
(b) will occur within the term of the grant (one year for the Cleanup Site Investigation
grant) only if Livable Communities TOD funding is made available for this
project at this time.
3. Authorizes application for Metropolitan Council Livable Communities TOD grant
funds for the TOD Project component(s) identified in the application, and execution
of such agreements as may be necessary to implement the TOD Project on behalf of
the City.
Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council November 3, 2014
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4j) Page 5
Title: Resolutions for Grant Applications for Add’l. Site Assessment & RAP on Proposed Community Center Site
RESOLUTION NO. 14-____
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A GRANT APPLICATION
TO HENNEPIN COUNTY FOR THE
ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE FUND GRANT FOR
ADDITIONAL SITE ASSESSMENT FOR THE COMMUNITY CENTER SITE
WHEREAS the City of St. Louis Park has approved the Environmental Response Fund
grant application submitted to Hennepin County on November 3, 2014, for the St. Louis Park
Community Center site; and
WHEREAS the Environmental Response Fund Grant considers the project value to the
community, jobs and potential environmental impacts; and
WHEREAS that the sources and amounts of the local match identified in the application
are not required but encouraged; and
WHEREAS the City has the institutional, managerial and financial capability to
adequately manage an Environmental Response Fund grant; and
WHEREAS that upon approval of its application by the county, the City of St. Louis
Park may enter into an agreement with Hennepin County for the above-referenced project and
that St. Louis Park certifies that it will comply with all applicable laws and regulation as stated in
all contract agreements; and
BE IT RESOLVED that the City of St. Louis Park has approved the Environmental
Response Fund grant application submitted to Hennepin County Department of Environmental
Services on November 3, 2014, for the St. Louis Park Community Center project.
Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council November 3, 2014
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4j) Page 6
Title: Resolutions for Grant Applications for Add’l. Site Assessment & RAP on Proposed Community Center Site
RESOLUTION NO. 14-____
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A GRANT APPLICATION
TO THE DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYMENT
AND ECONOMIC (DEED) FOR THE CONTAMINATION CLEANUP GRANT
FOR ADDITIONAL SITE ASSESSMENT FOR THE COMMUNITY CENTER SITE
BE IT RESOLVED that the City of St. Louis Park has approved the Contamination
Cleanup grant application submitted to the Department of Employment and Economic
Development (DEED) on November 3, 2014, for the St. Louis Park Community Center site; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of St. Louis Park has the legal authority to
apply for financial assistance, and the institutional, managerial, and financial capability to ensure
adequate project administration; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the sources and amounts of the local match
identified in the application are committed to the project identified; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that St. Louis Park has not violated any Federal, State
or local laws pertaining to fraud, bribery, graft, kickbacks, collusion, conflict of interest or other
unlawful or corrupt practice; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that upon approval of its application by the state, the
City of St. Louis Park may enter into an agreement with the State of Minnesota for the above-
referenced project and that St. Louis Park certifies that it will comply with all applicable laws
and regulation as stated in all contract agreements; and
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the Mayor and the Clerk are
hereby authorized to execute such agreements as are necessary to implement the project on
behalf of the applicant.
Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council November 3, 2014
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: November 3, 2014
Consent Agenda Item: 4k
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Traffic Study No. 649: Authorize Installing Restricted Parking - Loading Zone On
Excelsior Boulevard
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution authorizing installation of
restricted parking - loading zone on Excelsior Boulevard, west of Meridian Lane.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: The restriction is allowed per the City’s established regulatory
authority.
SUMMARY: The City has received input from TOLD Development and the St. Louis Park
Planning Department that a vacant business along Excelsior Boulevard is to be occupied by an
establishment requiring the installation of a “Loading Zone”. The installation of the described
parking restrictions will allow the business to access the storefront for pick-ups and deliveries
without the need to double park or occupy the outermost lane of traffic.
The Traffic Committee discussed the issue and recommends parking restrictions to improve
safety conditions and accommodate employees of the new business. A “Loading Zone” is
proposed to occupy the two western-most parking stalls on the north side of Excelsior Boulevard
between Meridian Lane and the parking garage entrance. This will supplement the guidance of
Traffic Study 601, which indicates that all other parking spaces on the north side of Excelsior
Boulevard from Princeton Lane to Monterey Drive will be designated as “One-Hour parking”.
The “Loading Zone” is anticipated to be approximately 45 feet long. The proposed change
requires the removal of an existing parking bay stripe and the installation of signage designating
the area as a loading zone. The attached figure depicts the proposed changes.
This loading zone is consistent with other loading zones along Excelsior Blvd.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The cost of enacting these controls is
minimal and will be completed by Hennepin County.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution
Traffic Study #649
Prepared by: Jake Bongard, Traffic Engineer
Reviewed by: Debra Heiser, Engineering Director
Approved by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4k) Page 2
Title: Traffic Study No. 649: Authorize Installing Restricted Parking - Loading Zone On Excelsior Boulevard
RESOLUTION NO. 14-___
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING INSTALLATION OF
“NO PARKING - LOADING ZONE” RESTRICTIONS ON THE
NORTH SIDE OF EXCELSIOR BOULEVARD
TRAFFIC STUDY NO. 649
WHEREAS, the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota has been requested, has studied, and
has determined that it is in the best interest of the City to install parking restrictions at this
location.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park, Minnesota, that:
1. The Engineering Director is hereby authorized to install “No Parking – Loading Zone”
restrictions on the north side of Excelsior Boulevard from the western-most location
within the parking bay between Meridian Lane and the parking garage entrance to a
location approximately 45 feet to the east.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council November 3, 2014
City Manager
Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4k) Page 3
Title: Traffic Study No. 649: Authorize Installing Restricted Parking - Loading Zone On Excelsior Boulevard
TRAFFIC STUDY NO. 649
EXCELSIOR BOULEVARD FIGURE
(NO PARKING – LOADING ZONE)
A LOADING ZONE IS
REQUESTED TO ACCOMODATE
DAILY OPERATIONS OF A
PROPOSED BUSINESS
PROPOSED
NO-PARKING-
LOADING
ZONE
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: November 3, 2014
Consent Agenda Item: 4l
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Rescind Traffic Study No. 644: Installing Restricted Parking - Loading Zone On
Webster Avenue
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution rescinding the installation of
restricted parking - loading zone on Webster Avenue, just north of 36th Street.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: The restriction is allowed per the City’s established regulatory
authority.
SUMMARY: On April 21, 2014, the City Council approved Resolution No. 14-058 that
authorized the installation of “No Parking – Loading Zone” restrictions on the west side of
Webster Avenue from 36th Street to a point approximately 80 feet to the north.
A property owner adjacent to the proposed loading zone appeared before the City Council at the
meeting. He voiced his concerns regarding the proposed restrictions. Staff met with him in the
field in an effort to address his concerns. We also met with other adjacent property owners.
Staff was unable to come up with a compromise that met the parking needs of all property
owners involved, as a result, City staff recommends that the restrictions be rescinded.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The parking restrictions were never
installed; as a result, there is no direct cost to rescind the resolution.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Resolution
Traffic Study #644
Prepared by: Jake Bongard, Traffic Engineer
Reviewed by: Debra Heiser, Engineering Director
Approved by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
City Council Meeting of April 21, 2014 (Item No. 4l) Page 2
Title: Rescind Traffic Study No. 644: Installing Restricted Parking - Loading Zone On Webster Avenue
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: The request to install parking restrictions came from the St. Louis Park
Police Department in an effort to eliminate the delivery trucks double park on 36th Street and
occupy the outermost lane of westbound traffic. This practice creates a safety hazard for both the
delivery driver and the traveling public.
The businesses within Hoigaard Village rely upon these delivery trucks to deliver goods.
However, it is important to provide a safe environment for both the delivery truck driver as well
as the motorists traveling on westbound 36th Street. Delivery truck parking on 36th Street,
Xenwood Avenue, and Webster Avenue is currently difficult as parking spaces are often
occupied by customers and residents.
The Traffic Committee discussed the issue and recommended the parking restrictions to improve
safety conditions. Since it is not possible to provide additional parking along 36th Street,
accommodations were evaluated for Webster Avenue. A “Loading Zone” was proposed on the
west side of Webster Avenue beginning at 36th Street and extending 80 feet to the north. The
proposed change was to install signage which will designate one parking stall as a loading zone.
The attached figure depicts the area discussed.
A letter was sent to the businesses and residents notifying them of the proposed modification to
parking in the area. Just prior to the Council meeting, staff was contacted by a property owner
adjacent to the proposed loading zone, he indicated that he was not supportive of the
implementation of parking restrictions. The property owner appeared before the City Council at
the meeting. He voiced his concerns regarding the proposed restrictions.
Over the summer, staff met with him in the field in an effort to address his concerns. We also
met with other adjacent property owners. Staff was unable to come up with a compromise that
met the parking needs of all property owners involved. The Traffic Committee recommends that
the restrictions be rescinded.
City Council Meeting of April 21, 2014 (Item No. 4l) Page 3
Title: Rescind Traffic Study No. 644: Installing Restricted Parking - Loading Zone On Webster Avenue
RESOLUTION NO. 14-___
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ELIMINATION OF
“NO PARKING - LOADING ZONE” RESTRICTIONS ON THE
WEST SIDE OF WEBSTER AVENUE
FROM 36TH STREET TO A POINT 80 FEET TO THE NORTH
WHEREAS, the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota has been requested, has studied, and
has determined that it is in the best interest of the City to rescind parking restrictions at this
location.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park, Minnesota, that:
1. The Engineering Director is hereby authorized to rescind Resolution 14-058 for “No
Parking – Loading Zone” restrictions on the west side of Webster Avenue from 36th
Street to a point approximately 80 feet to the north.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council November 3, 2014
City Manager
Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
City Council Meeting of April 21, 2014 (Item No. 4l) Page 4
Title: Rescind Traffic Study No. 644: Installing Restricted Parking - Loading Zone On Webster Avenue
TRAFFIC STUDY NO. 644
WEBSTER AVENUE FIGURE
(NO PARKING – LOADING ZONE)
TRUCKS UNLOADING DOUBLE
PARK AND BLOCK
WESTBOUND LANE OF
TRAFFIC
PROPOSED
NO-PARKING-
LOADING
ZONE
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: November 3, 2014
Consent Agenda Item: 4m
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Approval of City Disbursements
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to accept for filing City Disbursement Claims for the
period of September 27 through October 24, 2014.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council desire to approve City disbursements in
accordance with Section 6.11 – Disbursements – How Made, of the City’s Charter?
SUMMARY: The Accounting Division prepares this report on a monthly basis for the City
Council to review and approve. The attached reports show both City disbursements paid by
physical check and those by wire transfer or Automated Clearing House (ACH) when applicable.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Review and approval of the information
follows the City’s Charter and provides another layer of oversight to further ensure fiscal
stewardship.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: City Disbursements
Prepared by: Connie Neubeck, Account Clerk
Reviewed by: Brian A. Swanson, Controller
10/27/2014CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:19:26R55CKS2 LOGIS400
1Page -Council Check Summary
- 10/24/20149/27/2014
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
835.003SI SECURITY SYSTEMS INC JAG GRANT 2011 OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
835.00
252.007201 LAKE LLC RIGHT-OF-WAY IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
252.00
318.95A-1 OUTDOOR POWER INC TREE MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
318.95
141.68ABERNATHY, LISA ORGANIZED REC G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR
141.68
1,546.18ABRA MN ST LOUIS PARK UNINSURED LOSS G&A UNINSURED LOSS
1,546.18
225.00ACACIA ARCHITECTS LLC MOVE-UP PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
225.00
56.79ACTION FLEET INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
56.79
870.00ADVANCED PUBLIC SAFETY POLICE G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
870.00
570.00ADVANTAGE AUTO GLASS INC GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
570.00
450.00ALBERTSSON HANSEN ARCHITECTURE LTD MOVE-UP PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
450.00
456.00ALL CITY ELEVATOR INC FACILITIES MCTE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
456.00
2,550.00ALLIANCE FOR INNOVATION ADMINISTRATION G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
2,550.00
3,473.00ALLIANCE MECH SRVCS INC REC CENTER BUILDING EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
3,473.00
1,023.45ALLIED BLACKTOP PATCHING-PERMANENT OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
10,536.36PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT B/S RETAINED PERCENTAGE
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4m)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 2
10/27/2014CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:19:26R55CKS2 LOGIS400
2Page -Council Check Summary
- 10/24/20149/27/2014
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
10,566.15CONSTRUCTION PAYMENTS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
22,125.96
12,525.38AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING INC PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
12,525.38
575.00AMERICAN TEST CENTER INC OPERATIONS GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
920.00PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
1,495.00
2,176.20ANCHOR PAPER CO SUPPORT SERVICES G&A OFFICE SUPPLIES
2,176.20
292.00ANCOM TECHNICAL CENTER OPERATIONS RADIO COMMUNICATIONS
292.00
503.55ANDERSON, NATHAN ENVIRONMENTAL G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
503.55
531.27ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES FACILITIES MCTE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
173.84GENERAL CUSTODIAL DUTIES OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
91.67REC CENTER BUILDING GENERAL SUPPLIES
796.78
15.00ARBOR DAY FOUNDATION ENVIRONMENTAL G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
15.00
390.64ARCPRINTING/REPRO SERVICES EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
390.64
176.56ASET SUPPLY AND PAPER INC FACILITIES MCTE G & A CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SUPPLY
125.00SOLID WASTE G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
176.56REC CENTER BUILDING GENERAL SUPPLIES
478.12
882.33ASPEN EQUIPMENT CO GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
882.33
224.28AT&T MOBILITY CELLPHONES, IPADS, ETC.OFFICE EQUIPMENT
224.28
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4m)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 3
10/27/2014CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:19:26R55CKS2 LOGIS400
3Page -Council Check Summary
- 10/24/20149/27/2014
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
992.83ATIR ELECTRIC CORPORATION FACILITIES MCTE G & A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
992.83
64.34ATOMIC RECYCLING PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICE
64.33SEWER UTILITY G&A CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICE
64.33VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICE
193.00
119.20AUTO PLUS GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
119.20
6,813.66AUTOMATIC SYSTEMS INC WATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
6,813.66
4,795.00BADGER STATE INSPECTION LLC WATER UTILITY BALANCE SHEET GENERAL
4,795.00
487.50BAGSTAD, ERICA GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
487.50
400.00BARTON SAND & GRAVEL CO WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
350.00PARK MAINTENANCE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
750.00
19,184.00BASSETT CREEK WATERSHED MGMT COMMISSIONSTORM WATER UTILITY BAL SHEET PREPAID EXPENSES
19,184.00
58.80BATTERIES + BULBS GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
164.41WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
179.00ARENA MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT PARTS
41.90ARENA MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
444.11
145.00BD EXTERIORS INSPECTIONS G & A BUILDING
145.00
133.00BECKER ARENA PRODUCTS PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
133.00
13,850.00BERGERSON CASWELL INC WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
13,850.00
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4m)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 4
10/27/2014CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:19:26R55CKS2 LOGIS400
4Page -Council Check Summary
- 10/24/20149/27/2014
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
868.23BERSCHEID, GARY NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
868.23
3,000.00BIERSCHBACH, MATT ESCROWS PMC ESCROW
3,000.00
297.50BIOCLEAN MOBILE WASH PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
297.50
82.93BLUE TARP FINANCIAL INC PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
82.93
1,669.65BMSPOLICE & FIRE PENSION G&A MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENT
1,669.65
85.00BOBIER, HEIDI INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
85.00
761.18BOHN WELDING INC PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
761.18
2,700.00BOLTON & MENK INC ENGINEERING G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
172.50STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
27,390.00STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
30,262.50
1,867.26BOUND TREE MEDICAL, LLC POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
POLICE G & A COMPUTER SUPPLIES
1,867.26
130.69BOYER TRUCK PARTS GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
3,222.12VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
3,352.81
9,301.50BRAUN INTERTEC CORPORATION STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
9,301.50
897.00BRIN NORTHWESTERN GLASS CO FACILITIES MCTE G & A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
897.00
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4m)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 5
10/27/2014CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:19:26R55CKS2 LOGIS400
5Page -Council Check Summary
- 10/24/20149/27/2014
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
15.00BRODEN, PAUL CABLE TV G & A MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENT
15.00
3,500.00BROMWELL, DONNA ESCROWS PMC ESCROW
3,500.00
54.00BROWNING, BRUCE FRANCHISE ADMINISTRATION GENERAL SUPPLIES
54.00
510.00BUREAU OF CRIM APPREHENSION CELLPHONES, IPADS, ETC.TELEPHONE
510.00
553.84BURRELL TRUSTEE, GREGORY A EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S WAGE GARNISHMENTS
553.84
379.29CA PROPERTIES WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
379.29
13,658.35CAMPBELL KNUTSON PROF ASSOC ADMINISTRATION G & A LEGAL SERVICES
112.00ENGINEERING G & A LEGAL SERVICES
144.00CABLE TV G & A LEGAL SERVICES
48.00SSD 1 G&A LEGAL SERVICES
64.00STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A LEGAL SERVICES
179.54RIGHT-OF-WAY IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
144.00WATER UTILITY G&A LEGAL SERVICES
80.00REILLY G & A LEGAL SERVICES
14,429.89
366.86CAPITAL ONE COMMERCIAL WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
366.86
306.56CARTEGRAPH SYSTEMS INC WATER UTILITY G&A OFFICE EQUIPMENT
306.56SOLID WASTE G&A OFFICE EQUIPMENT
306.55TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENT
919.67
892.50CARTER, JAMES SOFTBALL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
892.50
200.00CAYE, JENNA GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
200.00
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4m)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 6
10/27/2014CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:19:26R55CKS2 LOGIS400
6Page -Council Check Summary
- 10/24/20149/27/2014
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
366.59CBIZ FINANCIAL SOLUTIONS INC EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
366.59
1,014.57CDW GOVERNMENT INC TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENT
1,014.57
1,960.00CENTER ENERGY & ENVIRONMENT CES Resid Energy Conservation OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,960.00
1,027.80CENTERPOINT ENERGY FACILITY OPERATIONS HEATING GAS
2,074.60WATER UTILITY G&A HEATING GAS
24.06REILLY G & A HEATING GAS
35.62SEWER UTILITY G&A ELECTRIC SERVICE
64.89SEWER UTILITY G&A HEATING GAS
189.97PARK MAINTENANCE G & A HEATING GAS
19.83WESTWOOD G & A HEATING GAS
39.14NATURALIST PROGRAMMER HEATING GAS
3,475.91
401.19CENTERPOINT ENERGY SERVICES INC FACILITY OPERATIONS HEATING GAS
401.19
261.60CENTURY LINK CELLPHONES, IPADS, ETC.TELEPHONE
261.60
14,614.00CHAN, JOSEPH & HELEN RIGHT-OF-WAY IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
14,614.00
90.49CHANG, BILL HEALTH IN THE PARK INITIATIVE GENERAL SUPPLIES
20.00HEALTH IN THE PARK INITIATIVE TRAVEL/MEETINGS
110.49
97.50CHUX SCREEN PRINTING WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
97.50
56.12CINTAS CORPORATION FACILITIES MCTE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
227.44FACILITIES MCTE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
1,821.39WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
362.48VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
2,467.43
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4m)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 7
10/27/2014CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:19:26R55CKS2 LOGIS400
7Page -Council Check Summary
- 10/24/20149/27/2014
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
208.00CITIZENS INDEPENDENT BANK GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
18.39GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET CLEARING ACCOUNT
560.00ADMINISTRATION G & A POSTAGE
42.38ADMINISTRATION G & A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
197.16ADMINISTRATION G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
95.27ADMINISTRATION G & A MEETING EXPENSE
105.01HUMAN RESOURCES GENERAL SUPPLIES
469.50HUMAN RESOURCES RECOGNITION
53.52HUMAN RESOURCES CITE
44.10COMM & MARKETING G & A POSTAGE
249.00COMM & MARKETING G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
665.00COMM & MARKETING G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
70.31IT G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
159.00IT G & A TRAINING
409.02POLICE G & A TRAINING
140.72POLICE G & A MEETING EXPENSE
107.82SUPPORT SERVICES OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
50.00JOINT COMM POLICE PARTNERSHIP TRAINING
107.27DWI ENFORCEMENT GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
3.79OPERATIONSOFFICE SUPPLIES
172.81OPERATIONSGENERAL SUPPLIES
259.50OPERATIONSFIRE PREVENTION SUPPLIES
362.89OPERATIONSOPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
83.17OPERATIONSSMALL TOOLS
557.77OPERATIONSTRAINING
2,109.01OPERATIONSTRAVEL/MEETINGS
130.84OPERATIONSMEETING EXPENSE
73.44WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
1,308.11WATER UTILITY G&A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
437.14SEWER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
172.81STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
128.52TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENT
1,140.00TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
1.19ORGANIZED REC G & A POSTAGE
795.00ORGANIZED REC G & A ADVERTISING
658.80ORGANIZED REC G & A TRAINING
161.00ADULT PROGRAMS GENERAL SUPPLIES
99.50KICKBALLGENERAL SUPPLIES
442.00SUMMER FIELDTRIPS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
15.64ENVIRONMENTAL G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4m)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 8
10/27/2014CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:19:26R55CKS2 LOGIS400
8Page -Council Check Summary
- 10/24/20149/27/2014
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
233.53WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
35.49HALLOWEEN PARTY GENERAL SUPPLIES
8.89REC CENTER BUILDING BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
226.00REC CENTER BUILDING EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
13,368.31
50.00CITY LAKES ELECTRIC INSPECTIONS G & A ELECTRICAL
50.00
399.00CLAREY'S SAFETY EQUIPMENT INC OPERATIONS REPAIRS
399.00
17,981.22CLASSIC PROTECTIVE COATINGS INC WATER UTILITY BALANCE SHEET RETAINED PERCENTAGE
17,981.22
91.41COLEMAN, ALLAN & CAROLYN REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
91.41
16,777.44COLICH & ASSOCIATES ADMINISTRATION G & A LEGAL SERVICES
16,777.44
15.80COMCASTOPERATIONSEMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS
169.70WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
87.85SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
9.03BUILDING MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
282.38
10,652.59COMMERCIAL ASPHALT COMPANY SEALCOAT PREPARATION OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
15,232.64PATCHING-PERMANENT OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
25,885.23
686.85COMMISSIONER OF TRANSPORTATION STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
686.85
4,015.90COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP SUB HENN EMERGENCY REPAIR GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
4,015.90
158.00COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT FUND MOVE-UP PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
158.00
269.15COOKE JP CO INSPECTIONS G & A PRINTING & PUBLISHING
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4m)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 9
10/27/2014CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:19:26R55CKS2 LOGIS400
9Page -Council Check Summary
- 10/24/20149/27/2014
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
269.15
8,386.20COVERALL OF THE TWIN CITIES GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
8,386.20
665.45CREATIVE PRODUCT SOURCING INC - DARE DARE PROGRAM OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
665.45
48.71CREEKSIDE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOC NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
48.71
113.44CROSLEY, VANESSA REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
113.44
48.20CROWN MARKING INC SUPPORT SERVICES G&A OFFICE SUPPLIES
48.20
5,000.00CRYSTAL, AMY & ADAM ESCROWS PMC ESCROW
5,000.00
304.99CUB FOODS POLICE G & A SUBSISTENCE SUPPLIES
304.99
465.00CUMMINS NPOWER LLC VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
465.00
510.00CURRAN-MOORE, KIM SOFTBALL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
510.00
1,240.00CUSTOM PRODUCTS & SERVICES SSD 1 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,010.00SSD 2 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
363.00SSD 3 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
231.00SSD #4 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
396.00SSD #5 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
165.00SSD #6 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
3,405.00
1,420.74CUSTOM REFRIGERATION INC FACILITIES MCTE G & A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
1,420.74
483.50DALCO ENTERPRISES INC GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SUPPLY
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4m)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 10
10/27/2014CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:19:26R55CKS2 LOGIS400
10Page -Council Check Summary
- 10/24/20149/27/2014
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
483.50
1,024.71DALSIN, JOHN & SONS INC REC CENTER BUILDING BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
1,024.71
1,716.80DEGROOT, ROBERT PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,716.80
173.80DELI EXPRESS CONCESSIONS CONCESSION SUPPLIES
173.80
9,292.34DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
9,292.34
65,197.29DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
65,197.29
416.62DEPT EMPLOYMENT & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENTEMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A UNEMPLOYMENT
416.62
10,650.92DEPT LABOR & INDUSTRY INSPECTIONS G & A DUE TO OTHER GOVTS
10,650.92
272.00DEX MEDIA EAST LLC ENTERPRISE G & A ADVERTISING
272.00
921.00DJ ELECTRIC SERVICES INC PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
865.00REC CENTER BUILDING BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
1,525.87AQUATIC PARK MAINTENANCE MAINTENANCE
3,311.87
96.00DOBIE, KEVIN REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
96.00
225.00DOREY, KENDRA GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
225.00
324.06ECM PUBLISHERS INC ADMINISTRATION G & A LEGAL NOTICES
47.88COMMUNICATION & MARKETING BUDG PRINTING & PUBLISHING
1,528.24COMM & MARKETING G & A PRINTING & PUBLISHING
1,900.18
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4m)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 11
10/27/2014CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:19:26R55CKS2 LOGIS400
11Page -Council Check Summary
- 10/24/20149/27/2014
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
5,621.67EGAN COMPANIES INC SYSTEM REPAIR OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
458.10CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,858.11WATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
7,937.88
389.20EISOLD, JASON REC CENTER BUILDING MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR
389.20
24,658.00ELECTRIC PUMP INC SEWER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
24,658.00
1,210.39EMERGENCY APPARATUS MTNCE GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
1,210.39
17,731.39EMERGENCY AUTOMOTIVE TECHNOLOGIES INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
17,731.39
181.82EMERGENCY MEDICAL PRODUCTS INC OPERATIONS OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
181.82
590.87ENEBO, EDWIN & DIANE TREE INJECTION TREE MAINTENANCE
590.87
450.07ENVIRONMENTAL EQUIPMENT & SERVICES INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
450.07
77.27ERICKSON, BREANNA COMMUNITY OUTREACH G & A MEETING EXPENSE
77.27
1,933.00ESS BROTHERS & SONS INC CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
465.00SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
2,398.00
1,788.00EXACTBYTE INC CABLE TV G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,788.00
396.71FACTORY MOTOR PARTS CO GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
399.80PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
31.92GENERAL REPAIR GENERAL SUPPLIES
828.43
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4m)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 12
10/27/2014CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:19:26R55CKS2 LOGIS400
12Page -Council Check Summary
- 10/24/20149/27/2014
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
113.06FASTENAL COMPANY PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
37.05GENERAL REPAIR GENERAL SUPPLIES
150.11
30.48FEINBERG, GREG WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
41.94SCHOOL GROUPS GENERAL SUPPLIES
72.42
262.72FERRELLGASICE RESURFACER MOTOR FUELS
262.72
3,064.50FIRE SAFETY USA INC OPERATIONS OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
3,064.50
128.00FIRST ADVANTAGE LNS SCREENING SOLUTIONS HUMAN RESOURCES GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
128.00
119.08FISCHER, MARK & LUCY REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
119.08
990.00FISCHLER & ASSOCIATES PA POLICE G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
990.00
200.00FLEX COMPENSATION INC EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
200.00
78.50FLOYD TOTAL SECURITY FACILITIES MCTE G & A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
78.50
89.58FORMO, CHRIS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
89.58
284.60FORMS & SYSTEMS OF MINNESOTA POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
284.60
708.54FOTH INFRASTRUCTURE & ENVIRONMENT STORM WATER UTILITY G&A IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
708.54
48.54FRANCIS, ERICK ENGINEERING G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
48.54
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4m)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 13
10/27/2014CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:19:26R55CKS2 LOGIS400
13Page -Council Check Summary
- 10/24/20149/27/2014
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
6.47FRATTALLONE'S HARDWARE WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
6.47
3,175.81-FRIEDGES LANDSCAPING INC PARK IMPROVE BALANCE SHEET RETAINED PERCENTAGE
2,250.00PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
63,516.29PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
62,590.48
19,565.30-G L CONTRACTING INC STREET CAPITAL PROJ BAL SHEET RETAINED PERCENTAGE
391,305.94CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
371,740.64
119.70G S DIRECT ENGINEERING G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
119.70
5,536.05GARAGE FLOOR COATING OF MN PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
5,536.05
10.00GAS TANK RENU/RADIATOR WEST VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A BANK CHARGES/CREDIT CD FEES
475.00GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
485.00
721.74GEAR WASH LLC OPERATIONS EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
721.74
1,906.50GELLERMAN CONSTRUCTION CO INC GO BONDS-FIRE STATIONS G&A LAND
5,282.00MUNICIPAL BLDG IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
7,188.50
262.91GENERAL PARTS INC REC CENTER BUILDING EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
262.91
4,049.59GLTC PREMIUM PAYMENTS EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S LONG TERM CARE INSUR
4,049.59
1,251.45GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
1,251.45
39.07GOTHBERG, BRIDGET HEALTH IN THE PARK INITIATIVE GENERAL SUPPLIES
39.07
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4m)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 14
10/27/2014CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:19:26R55CKS2 LOGIS400
14Page -Council Check Summary
- 10/24/20149/27/2014
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
150.00GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFICERS ASSOCIATIONFINANCE G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
150.00
37.08GRAINGER INC, WW GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
96.12WATER UTILITY G&A SMALL TOOLS
225.00PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
91.90REC CENTER BUILDING EQUIPMENT PARTS
450.10
100.00GRANBERG, JODY PICNIC SHELTERS RENT REVENUE
100.00
700.00GRANICUS INC TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
700.00
598.36GRANITE LEDGE ELECTRICAL CONTRACTORS WIRING REPAIR OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
598.36
3,656.43GREAT NORTHERN ENVIRONMENTAL SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
3,656.43
459.11GREEN ACRES SPRINKLER CO IRRIGATION MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
459.11
59.00GREEN HORIZONS WEED CONTROL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
59.00
244.79GREEN LIGHTS RECYCLING INC SOLID WASTE G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
244.79
46.07GREY, SUSAN REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
46.07
85.00GROSSHUESCH, MELISSA INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
85.00
4,800.00GROTH SEWER & WATER WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
2,333.25SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
7,133.25
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4m)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 15
10/27/2014CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:19:26R55CKS2 LOGIS400
15Page -Council Check Summary
- 10/24/20149/27/2014
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
458.64GROUP HEALTH INC - WORKSITE EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A HEALTH INSURANCE
458.64
37.50GROUWS, LAUREN GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
37.50
200.00HAMILTON, MIKE FOOTBALL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
357.00SOFTBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
557.00
433.13HANSON, ROBERT CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
433.13
2,550.78HAWKINS INC WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
2,550.78
550.00HEALTHPARTNERSHUMAN RESOURCES RECRUITMENT
550.00
318.00HEDBERG AGGREGATES STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
318.00
34.50HEDDLE, ALLEN DESKTOP SUPPORT/SERVICES MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR
34.50
159.04HEINTZ, STEVEN FINANCE G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR
159.04
155.12HEMANN, COTY FINANCE G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR
155.12
100.00HENNEPIN COUNTY AP GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET CONTRACTS PAYABLE
100.00
30.00HENNEPIN COUNTY MEDICAL CENTER OPERATIONS TRAINING
30.00
74.50HENNEPIN COUNTY TAXPAYER SERVICES ASSESSING G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
74.50
25.00HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER HUMAN RESOURCES GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4m)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 16
10/27/2014CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:19:26R55CKS2 LOGIS400
16Page -Council Check Summary
- 10/24/20149/27/2014
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
1,000.00IT G & A COMPUTER SERVICES
1,923.90POLICE G & A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
6,908.88POLICE G & A SUBSISTENCE SERVICE
63.90OPERATIONSRADIO COMMUNICATIONS
1,367.10OPERATIONSEMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS
3,002.13WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
3,002.13SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
3,002.13STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
9,006.41PARK MAINTENANCE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
417.54PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE
29,719.12
454.37HENNEPIN TECHNICAL COLLEGE OPERATIONS TRAINING
454.37
39.00HOFFMAN, CINDY FRANCHISE ADMINISTRATION GENERAL SUPPLIES
39.00
1,100.00HOISINGTON KOEGLER GROUP INC PUBLIC WORKS G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
1,100.00
100.00HOME DEPOT GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET CLEARING ACCOUNT
100.00
1,243.47HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
24.40ROUTINE MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
24.56ROUTINE MAINTENANCE OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
56.14TRAFFIC CONTROL OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
213.99WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
205.68SEWER UTILITY G&A OFFICE SUPPLIES
15.86SEWER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
76.53PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
6.90IRRIGATION MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
1,867.53
1,691.69HORIZON COMMERCIAL POOL SUPPLY AQUATIC PARK BUDGET EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
1,691.69
650.00HOWES, JESSICA KICKBALL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
650.00
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4m)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 17
10/27/2014CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:19:26R55CKS2 LOGIS400
17Page -Council Check Summary
- 10/24/20149/27/2014
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
400.00HOWES, KRISTINE KICKBALL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
400.00
600.00HRGREENTECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT POLICE EQUIPMENT
600.00
1,719.00I.U.O.E. LOCAL NO 49 EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S UNION DUES
1,719.00
19.00IATNVEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
19.00
246.67IDENTISYSPOLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
15.82POLICE G & A POSTAGE
150.00POLICE G & A REPAIRS
412.49
1,108.80IMPACT PROVEN SOLUTIONS WATER UTILITY G&A POSTAGE
1,108.80SEWER UTILITY G&A POSTAGE
1,108.80SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS POSTAGE
1,108.83STORM WATER UTILITY G&A POSTAGE
4,435.23
2,262.12INTEGRA TELECOM IT G & A TELEPHONE
2,262.12
2,950.00INTERSTATE COMPANIES INC WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
2,950.00
117.26INVER GROVE FORD GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
151.80UNINSURED LOSS G&A UNINSURED LOSS
269.06
132.00I-STATE TRUCK CENTER GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
132.00
88.92J&D 14-93 LP WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
88.92
147.48JEFFERSON FIRE & SAFETY INC OPERATIONS REPAIRS
147.48
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4m)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 18
10/27/2014CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:19:26R55CKS2 LOGIS400
18Page -Council Check Summary
- 10/24/20149/27/2014
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
4.49JERRY'S HARDWARE WATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT PARTS
119.72PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
124.21
1,547.00JOBS FOUNDATION/TECH DUMP SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,547.00
5,000.00JOBSINMINNEAPOLIS.COM HUMAN RESOURCES RECRUITMENT
5,000.00
300.00JOHNSON, SUSAN KICKBALL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
300.00
85.00KARCHER-RAMOS, AMBER INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
85.00
1,000.00KASALKO, JONNA ESCROWS PMC ESCROW
1,000.00
487.50KASIC, CATHRYN GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
487.50
4,000.00KAUFMANN, FARLEY ESCROWS PMC ESCROW
4,000.00
212.50KEITH, GRAHAM GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
212.50
503.08KELLER, JASMINE Z EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S WAGE GARNISHMENTS
503.08
222.00KENNEDY & GRAVEN ESCROWS ELIOT PARK
222.00
320.00KIDCREATE STUDIO PRE-SCHOOL PROGRAMS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
320.00
426.59KOERING, STEVE OPERATIONS TRAVEL/MEETINGS
426.59
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4m)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 19
10/27/2014CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:19:26R55CKS2 LOGIS400
19Page -Council Check Summary
- 10/24/20149/27/2014
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
325.00KOSA, JOHN GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
325.00
250.00KRUSE, JENNIFER NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
250.00
2,500.00L & R SUBURBAN LANDSCAPING INC ESCROWS DEMO / BROOKSIDE TRAFFIC
2,500.00
880.49LARSON, JH CO FACILITIES MCTE G & A BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES
386.58SYSTEM REPAIR OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
1,267.07
2,295.00LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR SERVICES INC EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S UNION DUES
2,295.00
2,500.00LDK BUILDERS ESCROWS DEMO / BROOKSIDE TRAFFIC
2,500.00
130.70LEAF, CYNTHIA REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
130.70
8,170.80LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A League of MN Cities dept'l exp
8,170.80
625.69LEAGUE OF MN CITIES INSURANCE TRUST UNINSURED LOSS G&A UNINSURED LOSS
625.69
30,680.00LEOTEK ELECTRONICS USA LLC SYSTEM REPAIR OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
30,680.00
500.00LHB ENGINEERS & ARCHITECTS ENVIRONMENTAL G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
500.00
199.07LITIN PAPER, PACKAGING & CONVERTING HALLOWEEN PARTY CONCESSION SUPPLIES
72.88-CONCESSIONS CONCESSION SUPPLIES
126.19
2,868.75LOCKRIDGE GRINDAL NAUEN PLLP REILLY G & A LEGAL SERVICES
2,868.75
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4m)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 20
10/27/2014CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:19:26R55CKS2 LOGIS400
20Page -Council Check Summary
- 10/24/20149/27/2014
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
1,249.16LOFFLER COMPANIES IT G & A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
1,249.16
32,692.00LOGISIT G & A COMPUTER SERVICES
32,692.00
936.00LSV METALS INC PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
936.00
46.07MACHINE TOOL SUPPLY GENERAL REPAIR GENERAL SUPPLIES
46.07
16,302.43MANSFIELD OIL COMPANY GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
16,302.43
161.32MAPLE CREST LANDSCAPE SSD 2 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
161.32
300.00MBFTEOPERATIONSTRAINING
300.00
170.00MBPTAINSPECTIONS G & A TRAINING
170.00
1,000.00MCCHESNEY, CHARLIE ESCROWS PMC ESCROW
76.50SOFTBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,076.50
5,250.00MCCROSSAN INC, C S SEALCOAT PREPARATION OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
5,250.00
185.25MCMONIGAL, MEG COMM DEV PLANNING G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR
185.25
50.00MCMULLEN, CHRIS GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
50.00
487.50MELANDER, DAVE & SARAH GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
487.50
190.59MENARDSPARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4m)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 21
10/27/2014CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:19:26R55CKS2 LOGIS400
21Page -Council Check Summary
- 10/24/20149/27/2014
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
294.92BRICK HOUSE (1324)OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
231.46WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
716.97
17,358.57METHODIST HOSPITAL SEWER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
17,358.57
243,554.85METROPOLITAN COUNCIL INSPECTIONS G & A DUE TO OTHER GOVTS
14,918.23REILLY BUDGET CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICE
299,953.92OPERATIONSCLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICE
558,427.00
125.00MFSCBOPERATIONSTRAINING
125.00
27.71MIDURA, KAY ADMINISTRATION G & A MEETING EXPENSE
27.71
262,738.00MIDWAY FORD GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
262,738.00
343.00MIDWEST BADGE & NOVELTY CO OPERATIONS FIRE PREVENTION SUPPLIES
343.00
635.40MINNEAPOLIS FINANCE DEPT PAWN FEES OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
635.40
250.00MINNEAPOLIS GLASS REC CENTER BUILDING BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
250.00
124.07MINNESOTA BENEFIT ASSOC EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S ACCRUED OTHER BENEFITS
124.07
147.66MINNESOTA CHILD SUPPORT PYT CTR EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S WAGE GARNISHMENTS
147.66
16.00MINNESOTA NCPERS LIFE INS EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S ACCRUED OTHER BENEFITS
16.00
55.00MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY SEWER UTILITY G&A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
55.00
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4m)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 22
10/27/2014CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:19:26R55CKS2 LOGIS400
22Page -Council Check Summary
- 10/24/20149/27/2014
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
130.00MINNESOTA SOCIETY OF ARBORICULTURE PARK MAINTENANCE G & A TRAINING
130.00
500.00MINNETONKA FIRE DEPT, CITY OF OPERATIONS GENERAL SUPPLIES
500.00
203.75MINUTEMAN PRESS ADMINISTRATION G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
114.29SUPPORT SERVICES G&A OFFICE SUPPLIES
318.04
87.37MINVALCO INC WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
251.80WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
339.17
50.00MISTER SPARKY INSPECTIONS G & A ELECTRICAL
50.00
358.42MITOGRAPHERS INC INSPECTIONS G & A PRINTING & PUBLISHING
358.42
400.00MN DEPT LABOR & INDUSTRY FACILITIES MCTE G & A LICENSES
400.00
2,500.00MOBIUS INC HEALTH IN THE PARK INITIATIVE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
2,500.00
2,516.00MOSS & BARNETT FRANCHISE ADMINISTRATION OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
2,516.00
125.00MPCASTREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
125.00
8.08MSC INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY CO.GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
8.08
170.02MTI DISTRIBUTING CO GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
170.02
280.00MVTL LABORATORIES REILLY BUDGET OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
280.00
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4m)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 23
10/27/2014CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:19:26R55CKS2 LOGIS400
23Page -Council Check Summary
- 10/24/20149/27/2014
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
5,000.00MY HOME SOURCE ESCROWS PMC ESCROW
5,000.00
40.00MYRUM, JEREMY INSPECTIONS G & A ELECTRICAL
40.00INSPECTIONS G & A MECHANICAL
80.00
1,890.00NAGENGAST DOORS LLC, JOHN PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES
1,890.00
756.85NAPA (GENUINE PARTS CO)GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
34.94GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES
27.98ROUTINE MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT PARTS
67.10UNINSURED LOSS G&A UNINSURED LOSS
874.81GENERAL REPAIR GENERAL SUPPLIES
1,761.68
480.00NATIVE PLANT NURSERY INC BEAUTIFICATION / FLOWERS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
480.00
918.00NEUMANN, NEAL SOFTBALL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
918.00
40.00NICKITAS, PETER INSPECTIONS G & A DOGS
40.00
200.00NOKOMIS SHOE SHOP WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
200.00
309.95NORTH CENTRAL GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
309.95
1,302.81NORTHERN SAFETY TECHNOLOGY INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
1,302.81
200.00NPELRAHUMAN RESOURCES SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
200.00
1,543.17OAK KNOLL ANIMAL HOSPITAL POLICE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,543.17
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4m)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 24
10/27/2014CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:19:26R55CKS2 LOGIS400
24Page -Council Check Summary
- 10/24/20149/27/2014
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
1,420.31OCCUPATIONAL DEVELOPMENT CENTER INC ENGINEERING G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
1,420.31
108.38OFFICE DEPOT ADMINISTRATION G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
203.46ADMINISTRATION G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
239.97HUMAN RESOURCES OFFICE SUPPLIES
32.74HEALTH IN THE PARK INITIATIVE GENERAL SUPPLIES
81.31SUPPORT SERVICES G&A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
100.32FINANCE G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
155.42GENERAL INFORMATION OFFICE SUPPLIES
66.90POLICE G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
54.28POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
51.78POLICE G & A COMPUTER SUPPLIES
288.82INSPECTIONS G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
62.17PUBLIC WORKS G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
179.03ENGINEERING G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
5.18HOUSING REHAB G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
9.58-VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A OFFICE SUPPLIES
63.36GENERAL REPAIR GENERAL SUPPLIES
1,683.54
1,340.14OLSEN CHAIN & CABLE CO INC WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
1,340.14
517.46OMAHA PAPER COMPANY INC REC CENTER BUILDING GENERAL SUPPLIES
517.46
200.00ON SITE SANITATION NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
53.64SOLID WASTE G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
3,619.30PORTABLE TOILETS/FIELD MAINT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
98.00OFF-LEASH DOG PARK OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
130.00WESTWOOD G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
4,100.94
624.88OXYGEN SERVICE COMPANY INC OPERATIONS OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
624.88
1,120.76PARK TAVERN SUMMER FIELDTRIPS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,120.76
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4m)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 25
10/27/2014CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:19:26R55CKS2 LOGIS400
25Page -Council Check Summary
- 10/24/20149/27/2014
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
239.00PARSONS ELECTRIC TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENT
239.00
72.65PATRICK, MICHEAL WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
72.65
43.08PATRICK, MIKE HALLOWEEN PARTY GENERAL SUPPLIES
43.08
3,996.45PBBS EQUIPMENT CORP REC CENTER BUILDING EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
3,996.45
2,100.00PCCS INC WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
2,100.00
262.50PEASE, MICHAEL GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
262.50
2,143.50PERNSTEINER CREATIVE GROUP INC COMM & MARKETING G & A PRINTING & PUBLISHING
2,143.50
14.93PETTY CASH HEALTH IN THE PARK INITIATIVE GENERAL SUPPLIES
11.78FINANCE G & A MISC EXPENSE
13.42COMM DEV G & A MEETING EXPENSE
24.74POLICE G & A TRAINING
5.75POLICE G & A TRAVEL/MEETINGS
107.50DWI ENFORCEMENT LICENSES
33.76INSPECTIONS G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
59.34INSPECTIONS G & A TRAINING
68.77INSPECTIONS G & A MEETING EXPENSE
13.31CABLE TV G & A OFFICE EQUIPMENT
9.48HOUSING REHAB G & A MEETING EXPENSE
20.00SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS EXTRA REFUSE STICKER REVENUE
382.78
1.07PETTY CASH - WWNC WW RENTAL HOUSE (1322)OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
32.62WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
15.34WESTWOOD G & A MOTOR FUELS
64.96WESTWOOD G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR
113.99
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4m)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 26
10/27/2014CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:19:26R55CKS2 LOGIS400
26Page -Council Check Summary
- 10/24/20149/27/2014
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
110.00PLEAACLERICALSEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
110.00
31,900.00PLESKO & ASSOCIATES INC, E J ESCROWS GENERAL
31,900.00
286.00POPP.COM INC PARK MAINTENANCE G & A TELEPHONE
286.00
180.00POST BOARD PATROL LICENSES
180.00
19.50PRAIRIE RESTORATIONS INC INVASIVE PLANT MGMT/RESTORATIO LANDSCAPING MATERIALS
162.00INVASIVE PLANT MGMT/RESTORATIO OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
181.50
402.20PRECISE MRM LLC PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A TELEPHONE
402.20WATER UTILITY G&A MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENT
402.19SEWER UTILITY G&A MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENT
402.19STORM WATER UTILITY G&A MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENT
1,608.78
15,371.00PRECISION LANDSCAPE & TREE TREE DISEASE PUBLIC CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICE
15,371.00
302.00PRESSWRITE PRINTING INC IT G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
302.00
114.00PRINTERS SERVICE INC ARENA MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
114.00
150.00PRO AUTO DETAILING GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
150.00
6,625.00PSC ALLIANCE INC POLICE & FIRE PENSION G&A MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENT
6,625.00
4,062.94PUMP & METER SERVICE GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
4,062.94
2,227.70Q3 CONTRACTING WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4m)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 27
10/27/2014CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:19:26R55CKS2 LOGIS400
27Page -Council Check Summary
- 10/24/20149/27/2014
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
1,544.87STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
3,772.57
573.53QUEST ENGINEERING INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
573.53
59.57QUICKSILVER EXPRESS COURIER VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A POSTAGE
59.57
320.00RAINBOW PARTY ARTS HALLOWEEN PARTY OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
320.00
2,561.00RAINBOW TREECARE TREE MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
2,561.00
2,126.30RAMIC, ALMIN SOCCER OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
2,126.30
2,241.58RANDY'S SANITATION INC FACILITY OPERATIONS GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE
483.70PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
1,296.50REC CENTER BUILDING GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE
4,021.78
600.00RAPP LLC, CRAIG ADMINISTRATION G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
600.00
656.92RDO EQUIPMENT CO GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
656.92
2,860.00REACHTECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENT
2,860.00
5,609.75REACH FOR RESOURCES INC COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIPS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
5,609.75
12.92REGENCY OFFICE PRODUCTS LLC POLICE G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
21.99POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
34.91
543.00REINDERS INC PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,223.50PARK MAINTENANCE G & A LANDSCAPING MATERIALS
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4m)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 28
10/27/2014CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:19:26R55CKS2 LOGIS400
28Page -Council Check Summary
- 10/24/20149/27/2014
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
1,766.50
10,564.55RICOH USA INC IT G & A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
10,564.55
5,158.47RMR SERVICES WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
5,158.47
280.71RMS RENTALS GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
280.71
204.00ROGERS, KYLE SOFTBALL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
204.00
96.00ROSE, NANCY REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
96.00
90.00ROTARY CLUB OF SLP POLICE G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
177.00POLICE G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
267.00
2,000.00ROTO-ROOTER CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
2,000.00
91.00SAFE-FAST INC WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
91.00
154.13SAM'S CLUB GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET CLEARING ACCOUNT
227.67SEWER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
111.90-CONCESSIONS CONCESSION SUPPLIES
269.90
85.00SAURER, MARTI INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
85.00
15,147.00SAVATREETREE DISEASE PRIVATE CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICE
15,147.00
200.00SAVERS RECYCLING INC SOLID WASTE G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
200.00
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4m)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 29
10/27/2014CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:19:26R55CKS2 LOGIS400
29Page -Council Check Summary
- 10/24/20149/27/2014
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
511.70SCAN AIR FILTER INC REC CENTER BUILDING GENERAL SUPPLIES
511.70
1,680.00SCHNEIDER FOUNDATION, BARBARA PATROL TRAINING
1,680.00
6,335.00SEAL KING PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
6,335.00
2,734.38SEHSTREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
712.93SEWER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
3,447.31
375.00SEIFERT, JIM HALLOWEEN PARTY OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
375.00
9,106.92SELECT SURFACES INC PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES
9,106.92
450.00SHI INTERNATIONAL CORP TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENT
450.00
487.40SHIBESHI, HANNAH GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
487.40
11.20SHRED-IT USA MINNEAPOLIS ADMINISTRATION G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
10.00FINANCE G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
56.00POLICE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
11.20INSPECTIONS G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
11.20WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
11.20PARK AND REC G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
110.80
45.55SKB ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANING/DEBRIS REMOVAL BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES
45.55SEWER UTILITY G&A BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES
45.54PARK MAINTENANCE G & A BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES
136.64
1,400.16SLP FF ASSOC IAFF LOCAL #993 EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S UNION DUES
1,400.16
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4m)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 30
10/27/2014CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:19:26R55CKS2 LOGIS400
30Page -Council Check Summary
- 10/24/20149/27/2014
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
1,804.00SMASHBURGER SERVICING ADMINISTRATION G & A LIQUOR
1,804.00
714.00SMITH, PERRY SOFTBALL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
714.00
112.00SNAP CONSTRUCTION INSPECTIONS G & A BUILDING
112.00
56.30SNAP-ON INDUSTRIAL ROUTINE MAINTENANCE SMALL TOOLS
56.30
309.68SPOK INC OPERATIONS TELEPHONE
309.68
75.00SPOONER, LANAE KICKBALL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
75.00
1,067.96SPRINTIT G & A DATACOMMUNICATIONS
1,067.96
25.86SPS COMPANIES INC PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
25.86
5,736.00SQUARERIGGER SOFTWARE TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENT
5,736.00
24,902.86SRF CONSULTING GROUP INC STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
24,902.86
88.08ST CROIX REC CO PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT MAINTENAN GENERAL SUPPLIES
88.08
340.00ST LOUIS PARK COMMUNITY EDUCATION ADULT PROGRAMS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
340.00
547.97STATE FARM INSURANCE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
547.97
255.00STEARNS, DAVID SOFTBALL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
255.00
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4m)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 31
10/27/2014CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:19:26R55CKS2 LOGIS400
31Page -Council Check Summary
- 10/24/20149/27/2014
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
40,000.00STEPHOUSING REHAB G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
40,000.00
1,131.90STREICHER'S GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
1,047.39POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
2,179.29
2,449.15SUBURBAN TIRE WHOLESALE GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
2,449.15
300.00SUNNYSIDE GARDENS CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
300.00
41.12TARGET BANK POLICE G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
55.00NEIGHBORHOOD OUTREACH OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
5.82WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
101.94
1,000.75TENNANT SALES AND SERVICE CO.VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
1,000.75
438.36TERMINAL SUPPLY CO GENERAL REPAIR GENERAL SUPPLIES
438.36
71.50TERMINIX INT BRICK HOUSE (1324)BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
71.50WW RENTAL HOUSE (1322)BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
101.00REC CENTER BUILDING BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
244.00
3,072.99THE HARTFORD - PRIORITY ACCOUNTS EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A LONG TERM DISABILITY
3,072.99
3,260.28THOMAS & SONS CONST INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET RETAINED PERCENTAGE
1,991.54PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT B/S RETAINED PERCENTAGE
1,160.30STORM WATER UTILITY BAL SHEET RETAINED PERCENTAGE
6,412.12
85.00THOMPSON, HOLLY INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
85.00
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4m)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 32
10/27/2014CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:19:26R55CKS2 LOGIS400
32Page -Council Check Summary
- 10/24/20149/27/2014
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
138.92THOMSON REUTERS WEST PAYMENT CENTER POLICE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
138.92
791.06THYSSENKRUPP ELEVATOR REC CENTER BUILDING OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
791.06
613.00TIMESAVER OFF SITE SECRETARIAL ADMINISTRATION G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
613.00
250.00T-MOBILE US INC WATER UTILITY BALANCE SHEET GENERAL
250.00
47,600.00TOWN & COUNTRY FENCE INC PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
47,600.00
4,572.03TREE TRUST PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
4,572.03
155.49TRI STATE BOBCAT GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
155.49
85.00TURGEON, VALERIE INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
85.00
300.00TWIN CITIES SIGN INSTALLATIONS SSD 1 G&A OTHER
250.00SSD 2 G&A OTHER
200.00SSD 3 G&A OTHER
150.00SSD #4 G&A OTHER
1,000.00SSD #6 G&A OTHER
1,900.00
300.00TWIN CITY SCALE CO INC SOLID WASTE G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
300.00
2,476.57U + B ARCHITECTURE & DESIGN MUNICIPAL BLDG IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
2,476.57
69.80ULINEPOLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
69.80
73.98UNIFORMS UNLIMITED (FIRE)OPERATIONS OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4m)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 33
10/27/2014CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:19:26R55CKS2 LOGIS400
33Page -Council Check Summary
- 10/24/20149/27/2014
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
73.98
602.49UNIFORMS UNLIMITED (PD)SUPPORT SERVICES OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
50.00SUPERVISORYOPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
877.46PATROLOPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
2,730.98COMMUNITY SERVICE OFFICER OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
4,260.93
260.00UNITED WAY OF MINNEAPOLIS AREA EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S UNITED WAY
260.00
390.00UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA WATER UTILITY G&A TRAINING
390.00
175.00UNO DOS TRES COMMUNICATIONS POLICE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
175.00
US IDENTIFICATION MANUAL POLICE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
82.50POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
82.50
1,449.96USA BLUE BOOK SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER
1,449.96
307.90VAIL, LORI HUMAN RESOURCES RECOGNITION
307.90
13,077.01VALLEY-RICH CO INC WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
13,077.01
179.76VAUGHAN, JIM ENVIRONMENTAL G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR
179.76
20.00VERIFIED CREDENTIALS HUMAN RESOURCES RECRUITMENT
20.00
100.12VERIZON WIRELESS SEWER UTILITY G&A TELEPHONE
8,138.16CELLPHONES, IPADS, ETC.OFFICE EQUIPMENT
74.28CELLPHONES, IPADS, ETC.TELEPHONE
8,312.56
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4m)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 34
10/27/2014CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:19:26R55CKS2 LOGIS400
34Page -Council Check Summary
- 10/24/20149/27/2014
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
912.70VERMONT SYSTEMS INC TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENT
912.70
251.00VIKING INDUSTRIAL CTR PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
251.00
28.00VIRKUS, JULIE SPECIAL PROGRAMS PROGRAM REVENUE
28.00
529.88VOSS LIGHTING SYSTEM REPAIR OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
529.88
79.33WAHL'S ENTERPRISES BASKETBALL GENERAL SUPPLIES
79.33
444.00WARNING LITES OF MN INC TRAFFIC CONTROL OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
444.00
8,878.00WATER CONSERVATION SERVICE INC WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
8,878.00
168.60WAYTEKGENERAL REPAIR GENERAL SUPPLIES
168.60
173.60WEST, JASON ORGANIZED REC G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR
173.60
26.00WOLFF, JOHN OPERATIONS TRAVEL/MEETINGS
26.00
6,779.00WOLSON, ELLIOT RIGHT-OF-WAY IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
6,779.00
85.00WRAP CITY GRAPHICS FABRICATION OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
25.00HALLOWEEN PARTY GENERAL SUPPLIES
110.00
20,220.00WSB ASSOC INC STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
20,220.00
6,100.00WTG TERRAZZO & TILE INC PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4m)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 35
10/27/2014CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:19:26R55CKS2 LOGIS400
35Page -Council Check Summary
- 10/24/20149/27/2014
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
6,100.00
14,587.90XCEL ENERGY GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE ELECTRIC SERVICE
22.65OPERATIONSEMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS
24,424.99PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A ELECTRIC SERVICE
41,921.05WATER UTILITY G&A ELECTRIC SERVICE
1,885.49REILLY BUDGET ELECTRIC SERVICE
3,838.90SEWER UTILITY G&A ELECTRIC SERVICE
2,191.23STORM WATER UTILITY G&A ELECTRIC SERVICE
4,831.35PARK MAINTENANCE G & A ELECTRIC SERVICE
747.16WESTWOOD G & A ELECTRIC SERVICE
21,504.36REC CENTER BUILDING ELECTRIC SERVICE
115,955.08
4,400.00XPERTSPARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
4,400.00
350.00ZANDER, LOIS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
350.00
4,250.00ZIEBART OF MINNESOTA INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
4,250.00
8.33-ZIEGLER INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
340.21GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
331.88
32.05ZIP PRINTING HEALTH IN THE PARK INITIATIVE PRINTING & PUBLISHING
32.05
4,350.00ZUERCHER TECHNOLOGIES LLC MUNICIPAL BLDG IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
4,350.00
80.87ZURN, DENISE REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
80.87
Report Totals 2,488,801.91
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4m)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 36
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: November 3, 2014
Consent Agenda Item: 4n
OFFICIAL MINUTES
ST. LOUIS PARK TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
SPECIAL MEETING OF June 25, 2014
ST. LOUIS PARK COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MEMBERS PRESENT: Bruce Browning, Dale Hartman, Cindy Hoffman, Toby Keeler,
Rolf Peterson, and Andrew Reinhardt
MEMBERS ABSENT: Bill Theobald
STAFF PRESENT: Reg Dunlap, Civic TV Coordinator; John McHugh, Community
TV Coordinator
1. Call to Order
Chair Hoffman called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM.
2. Roll Call
Present at roll call were Commissioners Browning, Hartman, Hoffman, Keeler, Peterson
and Reinhardt.
3. Comcast Franchise Transfer
Mr. Dunlap indicated that Comcast was working on a deal with Time Warner Cable to
absorb those franchises into the Comcast system. They plan to divest all systems in
Minnesota, including those in St. Louis Park. The City received official notice on June
18th, which means in 30 days the City needs to act and let Comcast know if there are any
deficiencies in the information that was provided. He and other City staff, along with
Commissioners Keeler and Browning, attended the MACTA annual conference which
had sessions about this. The City role is, within 120 days, to evaluate and decide to
approve or deny a transfer of the franchise to the new cable company that will be
operating as a spinoff of Charter Communications called Midwest Cable. The
Commission has received some background on Comcast and Time Warner and the
divestiture, and should make a recommendation to the City Council. The City has the
authority to look at the legal, technical and financial capability of the new company that
will hold the franchise. That company, Midwest Cable, will have 2 ½ million subscribers,
which are currently Comcast subscribers. It doesn’t currently exist, and has only two
employees, so we don’t know as much as we’d like to know about Midwest Cable. Staff
is asking the Commission to consider hiring a legal expert to help the city with the legal
review and determine whether the city should be involved in financial review of the
Midwest Cable Company. Commissioner Keeler can speak about the MACTA piece,
since he’s been active with the planning as part of the MACTA Board.
Commissioner Keeler said that, based on the available documents that they had been
provided in the FCC form 394 and those documents publicly available with the FCC and
SEC, there is not enough financial information to comfortably determine that the new
company, Midwest Cable, will have the capital available to continue the technical
upgrades that would be expected of a cable provider such as Comcast. This would be a
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4n) Page 2
Title: Telecommunications Commission Special Meeting Minutes June 25, 2014
significantly smaller company than Comcast. In the 394, the structure of the Midwest
cable company has yet to be determined. There is language that says an arrangement
would be made to provide services like administrative, IT, government service, etc., in
an agreement that would be made after the deal goes through. Right now they only have
two employees. We’re not sure if the Comcast employees would be working for Charter
or for Midwest Cable or if they would have a job at all. There are a lot of unknowns and
the documents available today don’t make it clear. Part of the review process is to look at
the financial underpinnings of the new company, and to do that, someone needs to collect
a lot of data from Time Warner and Comcast and do an analysis to determine if they
would be able to provide services, or if they needed more information, or to approve with
conditions. To do this analysis alone would cost the City $50-60,000. Rather than having
each local franchise authority (LFA) go after the information, MACTA looked at
combining the membership and having one consulting company do the report to provide
the financial analysis for the members that signed up and shared the cost. They had been
negotiating with two companies, Ashpaugh and Sculco and Front Range Consulting.
Mr. Dunlap noted that the City had hired Front Range in the past for a franchise fee
review.
Commissioner Keeler said they are some of the more prominent consultants that have
dealt with cable companies. They are trying to get enough local franchise agencies to
agree to combine to do this to cover their costs. They negotiated a sliding scale cost to do
the review. If only three LFA’s agreed, it would cost $7,500 each, total cost $22,500.
There are other LFA’s that may join in. If more LFA’s agree to do this, the sliding scale
cost will go down. The most would be $7,500 and the lowest is $5,500. The MACTA
Board thought this was a good thing for the membership so MACTA would be the
“middle man” and bill the LFA’s for the ultimate cost. A variety of things came up at the
recent annual conference that convinces me it’s a critical vetting piece to the 394 analysis
by each of the franchising authorities.
Commissioner Browning added there was talk about a reimbursement for a portion of the
cost, and asked it that was likely? Mr. Dunlap said that pertained to the legal review, not
the financial review. St. Louis Park’s franchise does not specify that. The transfer only
occurs because the cable company wants to transfer the franchise and some see it as part
of the fixed expenses of the deal. The City could ask for that as one of the transfer
approvals, but it might not happen.
Chair Hoffman asked if just cable TV would go to Midwest, and if phone and internet
would stay with Comcast or Charter? Mr. Dunlap said all of the physical structures and
services would go to Midwest, who would offer those services. Commissioner Keeler
said it would also include Comcast’s commercial side for business and commercial
entities. It includes all of the assets and current services that Comcast provides today.
Mr. Dunlap asked the city attorney about the legal review and he recommended they hire
an outside specialist to handle the legal review. Staff recommended they hire Brian
Grogan of Moss and Barnett whom they had worked with in the past, including 2006,
and is very respected in this field.
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4n) Page 3
Title: Telecommunications Commission Special Meeting Minutes June 25, 2014
Commissioner Keeler added that time was of the essence in the decision to do the
financial analysis, because we have until July 16th to reply to the 394. Either they agree
with everything in there, or we disagree and have to state why, and what is incomplete.
Commissioner Peterson asked if the consultants would do a presentation in person on the
legal and financial reviews or if it would be a written report. Commissioner Keeler said
built into the contract is a webinar for all of the cities that signed up for the report to go
through the results. If the LFA had a specific need above and beyond the general report,
they can negotiate separately with the consultants to provide additional information if
required.
Mr. Dunlap said that if you want to customize terms and conditions, for example, for the
financial information, they’ll assist with that for $175/hour to provide supporting
information.
Commissioner Peterson stated a concern about the technical capabilities of the company
as well as a human capital issue. How do we protect ourselves and make sure we have the
people in place that we’ve come to appreciate? Mr. Dunlap said there was past precedent
when there are transfers from one company to another, there was duplicate staff that
might not be needed in a merged company. He said Commissioner Keeler gave this
example earlier today at the MACTA Conference. In this case, that would be addressed in
a service agreement that isn’t drawn up yet. Apparently it’s a strategic thing to request the
transfer and then develop the service agreement later. That makes it difficult for the cities
who have to evaluate what the new company is going to look like, if they can’t be
forthright about what happens to the employees and is one reason the information is
incomplete.
Commissioner Keeler said that Charter does things differently than Comcast. One
example is that Charter deducts the cost of the educational access fees from the franchise
fee. If they provide educational access, they deduct that from the franchise fee that they
pay the local franchise authority.
Mr. Dunlap said it was specifically mentioned that the free cable service that is provided
to the different institutions such as city and school district buildings is deducted from the
franchise fees that are paid.
Commissioner Keeler said, in essence, that would be less revenue for St. Louis Park.
Once the LFA sends in the 394 saying that they need additional information, that will set
another 120 day clock. Embedded in that is the opportunity to ask for additional
information and it could extend beyond that 120 days, so that could move the finalization
out even further. One of the things that gives the LFA’s a little leverage is that contract
negotiations or renewals must be completed before the transaction is complete. That
would not include St. Louis Park. We can also make the approval with conditions such as
protecting current service levels or technology. We don’t know what those are yet, but
something like having them provide state of the art services or something such as that.
Mr. McHugh suggested they consider having a condition for approve that the cost for any
broadband provided to educational institutions, equipment or cable signals to education
buildings, be an operating expense of the company and something not to recover from the
franchise fee.
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4n) Page 4
Title: Telecommunications Commission Special Meeting Minutes June 25, 2014
Commissioner Peterson asked if their agreement with Comcast reflects that Comcast
provides that service for free to the schools? Mr. Dunlap said yes it does. In that case, he
said that we’re OK in the sense that it says in the franchise that free drops be provided at
these locations, however, it has become Comcast’s practice to issue DTA’s. That could be
handled differently, right now the service we get through the DTA’s is standard cable
service but it could be changed to basic instead.
Commissioner Peterson asked if there were other things like that? Commissioner Keeler
replied the thing that was most difficult in this complex transaction, actually four
transactions over the next year and a half, would be the unknowns. It will be critical that
those unknowns are identified and addressed. This process gives us an additional 120
days to discover some of the unknown unknowns.
Mr. McHugh said in the past other cable operators take the position that because the
franchise agreement is silent on a particular issue, therefore a new fee is legal. As a
condition of transfer, consider that whatever they are not charging for, like a service call
to trouble shoot their I-Net or return path for local channels, should be spelled out so it
doesn’t become a reoccurring expense for the City.
Commissioner Browning asked if that was spelled out in the existing franchise? Mr.
McHugh stated if it was not spelled out, they could say the franchise agreement was
silent and therefore, they could change their position. They should go on record with the
unknowns because it was new management.
Commissioner Browning said that we want to make sure it’s spelled out.
Commissioner Peterson there should be some opportunity to negotiate or have longer-
term notice for technology changes.
Mr. McHugh said it’s like their decision to digitize, then encrypt all signals on the cable
TV system. Now you can’t watch cable without cable company equipment. Then, after
two years, that company equipment must be charged for. That’s a big shift.
Commissioner Keeler said MACTA needs to hear from LFA’s that are willing to commit so
the consultants can start. MACTA will then make a down payment out of operating funds.
He said he’d be part of the group working with the consultants and providing oversight.
Chair Hoffman asked when they could bring up the conditions? Commissioner Keeler
said they first needed to either accept the 394 or not and list the conditions of why we
reject it, and what we are looking for. Then that resets the clock for 120 days for
additional discovery.
Commissioner Peterson said, so the lawyers have 30 days to draft the legal response and
the financial guys get 120 days for their review. Commissioner Keeler said there are two
pieces here, one for the legal review and one for the financial review.
Chair Hoffman noted that Commissioner Theobald shared his thoughts and supported the
city in requesting more information from Comcast regarding to the transfer. He also
supported hiring Brian Grogan to do a thorough review the transfer and felt a financial
review by an accounting firm was a must and a technical review was a good idea.
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4n) Page 5
Title: Telecommunications Commission Special Meeting Minutes June 25, 2014
It was moved by Commissioner Peterson seconded by Commissioner Browning to
recommend that the City of St. Louis Park partner with MACTA to conduct a thorough
financial review and Moss and Barnett for the legal analysis of the Comcast franchise
transfer request. Commissioner Keeler abstained.
The motion passed 5-0-1.
Mr. Dunlap said that he would revise the report for the City Council and include the
Commission’s recommendation which would go to them on July 7th. He will notify
MACTA and be sure not to miss any deadlines. The Council has the final determination,
and if they approve, the City can make the down payment the following Friday which
will meet the MACTA deadline of July 14.
Chair Hoffman asked if there were any members of the public wishing to speak.
A member of the audience said there has been discussion about legal and financial
review, but what about a technical review? Commissioner Keeler said because it was
unclear what the structure of Midwest Cable was going to be, it could turn out there were
just two employees and everything was managed by Charter. The way it was structured
today, 4.25% of the gross revenues from Midwest cable will be paid to Charter each
month. If they brought all of the current Comcast overhead (people, trucks, call centers,
assets, etc.), and those costs into Midwest Cable, paying over 4% for someone else to be
a holding company didn’t make sense. The speculation is that Midwest Cable may turn
out to be a financial holding operation and Charter will have all of the Comcast
employees and provide the services. They can’t do a technical review now because they
don’t know what the company was going to look like. As they progress, the technical
review may become more doable.
Mr. Dunlap said the City is in a partnership to do the financial review, and with Moss and
Barnett to do the legal review. There hadn’t been discussion on partnering to do a
technical review because that seemed less necessary.
Commissioner Keeler added if they were customers of a tiny cable company and they
were moving over, the technical piece would be more important. But since we’re talking
about Comcast, they are near the top for technical capability. The language will be
critical to make sure those performance levels we discussed are identified and are
conditions that we can continue at that level.
4. Adjournment
Commissioner Keeler made a motion, Commission Browning seconded to adjourn at
7:35. The motion passed.
Respectfully submitted by:
Amy L. Stegora-Peterson
Recording Secretary
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: November 3, 2014
Consent Agenda Item: 4o
OFFICIAL MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
SEPTEMBER 17, 2014 – 6:00 p.m.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MEMBERS PRESENT: Lynne Carper, Claudia Johnston-Madison, Robert Kramer,
Lisa Peilen, Carl Robertson, Joe Tatalovich,
MEMBERS ABSENT: Richard Person, Charlie Dixon (youth member)
STAFF PRESENT: Ryan Kelley, Sean Walther, Nancy Sells
1. Call to Order – Roll Call
2. Approval of Minutes of August 6, 2014
Commissioner Robertson made a motion to recommend approval of the minutes of
August 6, 2014. Commissioner Johnston-Madison seconded the motion, and the motion
passed on a vote of 4-0-2 (Kramer and Tatalovich abstained).
3. Public Hearings
A. Conditional Use Permit for Motor Vehicle Sales, Service and Repair
for new Kia Dealership
Location: 6475 and 6501 Wayzata Boulevard
Applicant: NLD 394 LLC
Case No.: 14-21-CUP
Ryan Kelley, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Mr. Kelley noted that the
application also includes a conditional use permit for land reclamation.
Commissioner Peilen asked about conditions of approval that are specific to this request.
Mr. Kelley responded that a specific condition of approval relates to the FEMA Letter of
Map Revision that must be approved.
John Fuller, architect, Coleridge Partners, stated that Mr. Kelley covered all areas of the
request.
Commissioner Kramer asked about the FEMA map revision in light of recent rain and
floods.
Mr. Kelley said the flood plain of the property is called an unnumbered A which means a
base flood elevation had not been established. There is the opportunity to have a
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4o) Page 2
Title: Planning Commission Meeting Minutes September 17, 2014
consulting firm or engineer establish that elevation which is then reviewed by FEMA,
then the property may be removed from floodplain designation.
Chair Carper asked Mr. Fuller if any type of energy conserving lighting will be used for
the project.
Darwin Lindahl, Darwin Lindahl Architects, said LED will be used for the site lighting
and for some interior lighting.
The Chair asked if any solar power will be used. He asked if the site would include a
green roof to mitigate some of the runoff.
Mr. Lindahl responded that solar power will not be used, nor will a green roof be
installed. Colors will be chosen to reduce heat gain, however.
The Chair opened the public hearing. As no one was present wishing to speak he closed
the public hearing.
Commissioner Robertson said he was looking forward to seeing a new business and
activity on the site and it will be a nice addition to St. Louis Park.
The Chair said he was also looking forward to the development.
Commissioner Kramer made a motion to recommend approval of the Conditional Use
Permit for motor vehicle sales, motor vehicle service and repair, and land reclamation.
Commissioner Robertson seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 6-0.
B. Business Park Zoning Amendments
Applicant: City of St. Louis Park
Case No.: 14-13-ZA
Sean Walther, Senior Planner, presented the staff report. He provided background on the
changes which have been discussed by the Planning Commission at study sessions.
Changes are also based on staff discussions with Business Park property owners.
Chair Carper asked if there is a concern about a lack of notification to the public if light
assembly and warehouse/storage are permitted administratively rather than through the
conditional use permit.
Mr. Walther stated that in most cases the Business Park district is going to be adjacent to
other commercial/industrial districts.
The Chair opened the public hearing. As no one was present wishing to speak the Chair
closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Peilen made a motion to recommend approval of the amendments to the
Business Park zoning district. Commissioner Kramer seconded the motion, and the
motion passed on a vote of 6-0.
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 4o) Page 3
Title: Planning Commission Meeting Minutes September 17, 2014
4. Other Business
There was a conversation regarding a new business at Texa Tonka shopping Center.
5. Communications
None
6. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 6:25 p.m.
Submitted by,
Nancy Sells
Administrative Secretary
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: November 3, 2014
Public Hearing Agenda Item: 6a(1)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: 2015 Budget & Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 1
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to Adopt Resolution
setting the 2015 Budget and Property Owner Service Charge for Special Service District No. 1
and directing staff to certify the annual service charges to Hennepin County.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to approve SSD #1 budget and
property owner service charges?
SUMMARY: The 2015 proposed budgets and service charges are very similar to that of past
years. Staff has recently held meetings with the property owners from each of the six districts
and received their support for approving the 2015 budgets and service charges.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The Parks Maintenance budget will incur a
service charge for the City-owned property located within this district at 3700 Monterey Drive
(Recreation Center/Wolfe Park). The proposed service charge for 2015 is $22,802.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged
community.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Resolution Approving 2015 Budget and Service Charges
Proposed 2015 Budget
Proposed 2015 Service Charges
Prepared by: Scott Merkley, Public Works Services Manager
Reviewed by: Mark Hanson, Public Works Superintendent
Cindy Walsh, Operations and Recreation Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 6a(1)) Page 2
Title: 2015 Budget & Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 1
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: On November 6, 2006, the City Council approved a resolution imposing a
multi-year service charge for Special Service District No. 1 (this district is located along
Excelsior Boulevard from Quentin Avenue to Highway 100 and along Park Center Boulevard
and Monterey Drive). Annually, the City Council must set a service charge for the District
following a public hearing on the proposed charge. The Special Service District Property Owners
Board approved the proposed 2015 budget and service charges. The notice of public hearing was
published in the Sun Sailor on October 9 and October 23, 2014. The public hearing notice was
sent to all property owners within the District.
Special Service District No. 1 Financial Position
Special Service District No. 1 has an anticipated year-end fund balance of approximately
$83,266.
Proposed 2015 Budget and Service Charges
The Property Owners recommended approval of the following:
• 2015 budget amount of $126,672; no increase from 2014; and
• 2015 service charge amount of $86,672; no increase from 2014. Generally, expenses
typically do not reach 100% of budget. The expected unused budget amount along with
the service charges for 2015 is anticipated to allow the district to achieve the goal of a
50% fund balance which staff and board agreed should be maintained.
The proposed resolution was reviewed by City Attorney, Tom Scott.
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 6a(1)) Page 3
Title: 2015 Budget & Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 1
RESOLUTION NO. 14-____
RESOLUTION APPROVING 2015 BUDGET
AND SERVICE CHARGES FOR
SPECIAL SERVICE DISTRICT NO. 1
WHEREAS, pursuant to Ordinance No. 2067-96, the City Council created Special
Service District No. 1 (the “District”). The specific properties located within the District are
identified on Attachment “A” attached hereto; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 06-167, the City Council is authorized to
impose service charges within the District on a multi-year basis through and including the year
2016 for taxes payable in said year; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 2.04 of Resolution No. 06-167, the maximum budget to
be imposed in any year will be subject to adjustment calculations based on Consumer Price
Index (CPI) data for the Minneapolis/St. Paul Metropolitan Area; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 3 of Resolution No. 06-167, the Service Charges shall
be payable and collected at the same time and in the same manner as provided for payment and
collection of ad valorem taxes; and
WHEREAS, the City is required by Statute to certify assessments to the County by
December 1, 2014.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park as follows:
1. The 2015 Budget for Special Service District No. 1 of $126,672 is hereby
approved as recommended by the Special Service District No. 1 Property Owners.
2. The authorized 2015 Service Charge for Special Service District No. 1 is $86,672
in the amounts and against the properties specified on Attachment “A” attached to this
Resolution.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council November 3, 2014
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Object
Account
2014 Final
Budget
2015 Proposed
Budget
EXPENDITURES
SUPPLIES
6212 - GENERAL SUPPLIES 1,000.00 1,297.00
6224 - LANDSCAPING MATERIALS 10,000.00 10,000.00
6210 - SUPPLIES 11,000.00 11,297.00
NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT
6303 - OTHER 3,600.00 3,600.00
6303 - SSD -Banner replacements
6300 - NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 3,600.00 3,600.00
SERVICES & OTHER CHARGES
6410 - GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 0.00 0.00
6410 - SSD Mgmt Services 4,500.00 4,500.00
LEGAL
6630 - SSD - snow removal 48,000.00 53,000.00
6630 - SSD Site Maintenance 3,000.00 3,000.00
6630 - SSD - Banner install/removal 2,400.00 2,400.00
6630 - SSD - Irrigation services 8,000.00 8,000.00
6630 - SSD decorative install/maint 7,000.00 9,000.00
6630 - SSD - Landscape services 25,000.00 26,500.00
POSTAGE
6950 - LEGAL NOTICES 153.00 153.00
BUSINESS INSURANCE
7106 - PUBLIC LIABILITY INSURANCE 519.00 222.00
REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE
7205 - BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 8,500.00 0.00
7207 - SSD infrastructure repair 3,000.00 3,000.00
UTILITIES
7301 - ELECTRIC SERVICE 2,000.00 2,000.00
7301 - SSD pedestrian 0.00 0.00
7301 - SSD decorative 0.00
TOTAL EXPENDITURES 126,672.00 126,672.00
SSD #1 Budget
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 6a(1))
Title: 2015 Budget & Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 1 Page 4
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK Attachment A
Special Service District #1
Estimated Annual Cost Per Parcel
Proposed 2015 Service Charge
OWNER PROPOSED ACTUAL
2015 2014
PAR.PID SERVICE SERVICE
NO.NO.CHARGE CHARGE
1 3601 Park Center Boulevard 36 Park LLC 06-028-24-33-0019 $4,317 $4,317
2 3601 State Hwy No 100 South Target Corporation T-0260 06-028-24-33-0015 $9,348 $9,348
3 3777 Park Center Boulevard Lund Food Holdings 06-028-24-33-0014 $9,820 $9,820
4 5400 Auto Club Way AAA Minneapolis 07-028-24-22-0004 $4,755 $4,755
5 3900 Park Nicollet Boulevard Park Nicollet Health Services 07-028-24-22-0035 $3,687 $3,687 $3,687
6 5300 Excelsior Boulevard Frauenshuh Companies 07-028-24-22-0036 $5,314 $5,314 $5,314
7 5200 Excelsior Boulevard Frauenshuh Companies 07-028-24-22-0037 $1,210 $1,210 $1,210
8 5100 Excelsior Boulevard Park Nicollet Health Services 07-028-24-22-0034 $1,690 $1,690 $1,690 $6,524
9 3800 Park Nicollet Boulevard Park Nicollet Health Services 07-028-24-22-0031 $5,003 $5,003 $5,003
10 3800 Park Nicollet Boulevard Park Nicollet Health Services 07-028-24-22-0031 $1,111 $1,111 $1,111
11 5050 Excelsior Boulevard Park Nicollet Health Services 07-028-24-22-0033 $3,004 $3,004 $3,004
12 5000 Excelsior Boulevard Park Nicollet Health Services 07-028-24-22-0032 $675 $675 $675
13 4950 Excelsior Boulevard Zip Printing 07-028-24-21-0006 $492 $492
14 4920 Excelsior Boulevard Park Nicollet Health Services 07-028-24-21-0005 $407 $407 $407
15 4916 Excelsior Boulevard Park Nicollet Health Services 07-028-24-21-0004 $602 $602 $602
16 4951 Excelsior Boulevard Park Nicollet Health Services 07-028-24-21-0253 $3,904 $3,904 $3,904
17 4961 Excelsior Boulevard Intercity Investments Inc.07-028-24-22-0023 $556 $556 $20,083 $556
18 4995 Excelsior Boulevard Intercity Investments Inc.07-028-24-22-0024 $748 $748 $748
19 5001 Excelsior Boulevard Intercity Investments Inc.07-028-24-22-0025 $517 $517 $517
20 5201 Excelsior Boulevard Intercity Investments Inc.07-028-24-22-0026 $6,710 $6,710 $6,710
21 3700 Monterey Drive City of St. Louis Park 06-028-24-34-0022 $22,802 $22,802 $8,531
TOTALS:$86,672 $86,672
Notes:
1)The proposed 2015 service charge calculations are based upon the same methodology used for the initial service charge collection.
a) Commercial sidewalk snow removal charges are on a front footage basis.
b) All other services charges are based on the parcel's square foot area basis.
2)For 2015, there were no changes from the 2014 budget or service charges.
3)The proposed 2015 budget is $126,672, but the service charge is only $86,672 because $40,000 was transferred from reserves
to lower the fund balance.
ADDRESS
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 6a(1))
Title: 2015 Budget & Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 1 Page 5
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: November 3, 2014
Public Hearing Agenda Item: 6a(2)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: 2015 Budget & Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 2
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to Adopt Resolution
setting the 2015 Budget and Property Owner Service Charge for Special Service District No. 2
and directing staff to certify the annual service charges to Hennepin County.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to approve SSD #2 budget and
property owner service charges?
SUMMARY: The 2015 proposed budgets and service charges are very similar to that of past
years. Staff has recently held meetings with the property owners from each of the six districts
and received their support for approving the 2015 budget and service charges. Two property
owners in SSD 2 have expressed concerns over the budget and service charges and have
requested additional information on how the service charges are calculated. Staff has provided
the information and offered to meet with the property owners on several occasions but have not
heard back from the owners.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The Public Works Operations Division
budget will incur a service charge for the City-owned property located within this district at 3929
Excelsior Boulevard (bus shelter). The proposed service charge for 2015 is $63.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged
community.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Resolution Approving 2015 Budget and Service Charges
Proposed 2015 Budget
Proposed 2015 Service Charges
Prepared by: Scott Merkley, Public Works Services Manager
Reviewed by: Mark Hanson, Public Works Superintendent
Cindy Walsh, Operations and Recreation Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 6a(2)) Page 2
Title: 2015 Budget & Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 2
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: On October 20, 2008, the City Council approved a resolution imposing a
multi-year service charge for Special Service District No. 2 (this district is located along
Excelsior Boulevard from Monterey Drive/38th Street to France Avenue). Annually, the City
Council must set a service charge for the District following a public hearing on the proposed
charge. The Special Service District Property Owners approved the proposed 2015 budget and
service charges. The notice of public hearing was published in the Sun Sailor on October 9 and
October 23, 2014. The public hearing notice was sent to all property owners within the District.
Special Service District No. 2 Financial Position
Special Service District No. 2 has an anticipated year-end fund balance of approximately
$26,384.
Proposed 2014 Budget and Service Charges
The Property Owners recommended approval of the following:
• 2015 budget amount of $47,464; reflecting an increase of $930 from 2014; and
• 2015 service charge amount of $47,464; a $3,930 increase from 2014 needed for
increased infrastructure maintenance.
The proposed resolution was reviewed by City Attorney, Tom Scott.
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 6a(2)) Page 3
Title: 2015 Budget & Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 2
RESOLUTION NO. 14-____
RESOLUTION APPROVING 2015 BUDGET
AND SERVICE CHARGES FOR
SPECIAL SERVICE DISTRICT NO. 2
WHEREAS, pursuant to Ordinance No. 2093-97, the City Council created Special
Service District No. 2 (the “District”). The specific properties located within the District are
identified on Attachment “A” attached hereto; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 08-133, the City Council is authorized to
impose service charges within the District on a multi-year basis through and including the year
2018 for taxes payable in said year; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 2.04 of Resolution No. 08-133, the maximum budget to
be imposed in any year will be subject to adjustment calculations based on Consumer Price
Index (CPI) data for the Minneapolis/St. Paul Metropolitan Area; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 3 of Resolution No. 08-133, the Service Charges shall
be payable and collected at the same time and in the same manner as provided for payment and
collection of ad valorem taxes; and
WHEREAS, the City is required by Statute to certify assessments to the County by
December 1, 2014.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park as follows:
1. The 2015 Budget for Special Service District No. 2 of $47,464 is hereby approved
as recommended by the Special Service District No. 2 Property Owners.
2. The authorized 2015 Service Charge for Special Service District No. 2 is $47,464
in the amounts and against the properties specified on Attachment “A” attached to this
Resolution.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council November 3, 2014
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Object
Account
2014 Final
Budget
2015 Proposed
Budget
EXPENDITURES
SUPPLIES
6212 - GENERAL SUPPLIES 200.00 200.00
6224 - LANDSCAPING MATERIALS 6,500.00 6,500.00
6210 - SUPPLIES 6,700.00 6,700.00
NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT
6303 - OTHER 3,000.00 1,000.00
6303 - SSD -Banner replacements
6300 - NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 3,000.00 1,000.00
SERVICES & OTHER CHARGES
6410 - GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 0.00 0.00
6410 - SSD Mgmt Services 2,000.00 2,000.00
LEGAL
6550 - Civil 0.00
6630 - SSD Site Maintenance 1,000.00 500.00
6630 - SSD - Banner install/removal 1,000.00 1,000.00
6630 - SSD - Irrigation services 3,500.00 2,000.00
6630 - SSD decorative install/maint 7,000.00 9,000.00
6630 - SSD - Landscape services 15,000.00 15,000.00
COMMUNICATIONS
6950 - LEGAL NOTICES 143.00 252.00
BUSINESS INSURANCE
7106 - PUBLIC LIABILITY INSURANCE 191.00 82.00
REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE
7207 - SSD infrastructure repair 5,000.00 7,930.00
UTILITIES
7301 - ELECTRIC SERVICE 2,000.00 2,000.00
7301 - SSD pedestrian 0.00 0.00
TOTAL EXPENDITURES 46,534.00 47,464.00
SSD #2 Budget - 2015
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 6a(2))
Title: 2015 Budget & Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 2 Page 4
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK Attachment A
Special Service District #2
Estimated Annual Cost Per Parcel
Proposed 2015 Service Charge
PROPOSED ACTUAL
2015 2014
PID SERVICE SERVICE
OWNER NO.CHARGE CHARGE
1 3924 Excelsior Blvd Ellipse on Excelsior LLC 06-028-24-41-0076 $2,742 $2,515
3542 Minikahda Ct.Sage Company
3551 Huntington Ave Frank Murray
2 4100 Excelsior Blvd Sela Roofing & Remodeling 06-028-24-41-0008 $1,592 $1,460
3 4120 Excelsior Blvd James & Anne Mattson 06-028-24-41-0009 $1,630 $1,495
4 3939 Excelsior Blvd Reuben L Anderson-Cherne, Inc.06-028-24-41-0014 $1,364 $1,251
3500 Glenhurst Ave Gary James
4011 Excelsior Blvd Richard Hogan
4015 Excelsior Blvd Jeffery Miller
4025 Excelsior Blvd Terrance Williams
4031 Excelsior Blvd Joann Armstrong
3601 Huntington Ave Martin & Alice Fowler
5 3901 Excelsior Blvd Alberto Properties LLP 06-028-24-41-0047 $2,474 $2,269
6 3900 Excelsior Blvd Ellipse on Excelsior LLC 06-028-24-41-0075 $4,890 $4,484
7 3929 Excelsior Blvd City of St. Louis Park 06-028-24-41-0067 $63 $58
8 3925 Excelsior Blvd A & A Agency Inc.06-028-24-41-0068 $1,006 $923
9 3947 Excelsior Blvd KMS Management 06-028-24-41-0070 $2,258 $2,071
10 4300 Excelsior Blvd Lyndly F Opitz & Assoc 06-028-24-43-0017 $730 $670
11 4306 Excelsior Blvd Lyndly F Opitz & Assoc 06-028-24-43-0018 $625 $573
12 4308 Excelsior Blvd Lyndly F Opitz & Assoc 06-028-24-43-0019 $861 $790
13 4301 Excelsior Blvd S & S Investments 06-028-24-43-0020 $1,632 $1,497
14 4321 Excelsior Blvd Koval Furniture & Appliance 06-028-24-43-0021 $968 $888
3757 Kipling Ave S Bruce Remmington
15 4409 Excelsior Blvd Samfar Real Estate Inc 06-028-24-43-0040 $854 $783
16 4415 Excelsior Blvd Frey Development & Management 06-028-24-43-0041 $758 $696
17 4419 Excelsior Blvd Celine Properties LLC 06-028-24-43-0042 $1,757 $1,611
18 4424 Excelsior Blvd Bridgewater Bank 06-028-24-43-0064 $1,458 $1,337
19 4331 Excelsior Blvd Bell Nelson Furniture 06-028-24-43-0091 $1,412 $1,295
20 4320 Excelsior Blvd Lyndly F Opitz & Assoc 06-028-24-43-0186 $2,415 $2,215
21 4400 Excelsior Blvd Bridgewater Bank 06-028-24-43-0187 $5,824 $5,342
22 4140 Excelsior Blvd Larson Enterprises 06-028-24-44-0001 $2,819 $2,585
3600 Huntington Ave Elmer Nordstrom
4115 Excelsior Blvd Kooros & Grace Rejali
4121 Excelsior Blvd Kooros & Grace Rejali
4131 Excelsior Blvd Roxanna, Kooros & Grace Rejali
23 4221 Excelsior Blvd Prima Investments LLC 06-028-24-44-0088 $467 $429
4143 Excelsior Blvd Sam & Pearl Bix
24 4201 Excelsior Blvd AMF Properties LLC 06-028-24-44-0173 $2,742 $2,515
25 4200 Excelsior Blvd Midas St. Paul 06-028-24-44-0175 $1,859 $1,705
27 4150 Excelsior Blvd 4150 Excelsior Blvd. Partnership 06-028-24-44-0176 $2,264 $2,077
TOTALS:$47,464 $43,534
Notes:
1)The proposed 2015 service charge calculations are based upon the same methodology / formulas
used for the initial service charge collection.
2)For 2015, the budget increased by $930 and the services charges increased by $3,930 becasu the $3,000 given in 2014 was not used in 2015.
3)The proposed 2015 budget and service charge are $47,464.
ADDRESS
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 6a(2))
Title: 2015 Budget & Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 2 Page 5
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: November 3, 2014
Public Hearing Agenda Item: 6a(3)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: 2015 Budget & Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 3
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to Adopt Resolution
setting the 2015 Budget and Property Owner Service Charge for Special Service District No. 3
and directing staff to certify the annual service charges to Hennepin County.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to approve SSD #3 budget and
property owner service charges?
SUMMARY: The 2015 proposed budgets and service charges are very similar to that of past
years. Staff has recently held meetings with the property owners from each of the six districts
and received their support for approving the 2015 budgets and service charges.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The TIF / Admin budget will incur a service
charge for the City-owned property located within this district at 4790 Excelsior Boulevard
(undeveloped property next to the old Bally’s Fitness). The proposed service charge for 2015 is
$949.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged
community.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Resolution Approving 2015 Budget and Service Charges
Proposed 2015 Budget
Proposed 2015 Service Charges
Prepared by: Scott Merkley, Public Works Services Manager
Reviewed by: Mark Hanson, Public Works Superintendent
Cindy Walsh, Operations and Recreation Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 6a(3)) Page 2
Title: 2015 Budget & Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 3
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: On October 15, 2012, the City Council approved a resolution imposing a
service charge for Special Service District No. 3 (located along Excelsior Boulevard from
Quentin Avenue to Monterey Drive/W. 38th Street). Annually, the City Council must set a
service charge for the District following a public hearing on the proposed charge. The Special
Service District Property Owners approved the proposed 2015 budget and service charges. The
notice of public hearing was published in the Sun Sailor on October 9 and October 23, 2014. The
public hearing notice was sent to all property owners within the District.
Special Service District No. 3 Financial Position
Special Service District No. 3 has an anticipated year-end fund balance of approximately
$63,017.
Proposed 2015 Budget and Service Charges
The Property Owners recommended approval of the following:
• 2015 budget amount of $63,600; reflects no change from 2014; and
• 2015 service charge amount of $43,600; reflects no change from 2014. Generally,
expenses typically do not reach 100% of budget. The expected unused budget amount
along with the service charges for 2015 is anticipated to allow the district to achieve the
goal of a 50% fund balance which staff and board agreed should be maintained.
The proposed resolution was reviewed by City Attorney, Tom Scott.
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 6a(3)) Page 3
Title: 2015 Budget & Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 3
RESOLUTION NO. 14-____
RESOLUTION APPROVING 2015 BUDGET
AND SERVICE CHARGES FOR
SPECIAL SERVICE DISTRICT NO. 3
WHEREAS, pursuant to Ordinance No. 2224-02, the City Council created Special
Service District No. 3 (the “District”). The specific properties located within the District are
identified on Attachment “A” attached hereto; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 12-149, the City Council is authorized to
impose service charges within the District on a multi-year basis through and including the year
2022 for taxes payable in said year; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 2.04 of Resolution No. 12-149, the maximum budget to
be imposed in any year will be subject to adjustment calculations based on Consumer Price
Index (CPI) data for the Minneapolis/St. Paul Metropolitan Area; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 3 of Resolution No. 12-149, the Service Charges shall
be payable and collected at the same time and in the same manner as provided for payment and
collection of ad valorem taxes; and
WHEREAS, the City is required by Statute to certify assessments to the County by
December 1, 2014.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park as follows:
1. The 2015 Budget for Special Service District No. 3 of $63,600 is hereby approved
as recommended by the Special Service District No. 3 Advisory Board.
2. The authorized 2015 Service Charge for Special Service District No. 3 is $43,600
in the amounts and against the properties specified on Attachment “A” attached to this
Resolution.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council November 3, 2014
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Object
Account 2014 Final Budget 2015 Proposed
Budget
EXPENDITURES
SUPPLIES
6212 - GENERAL SUPPLIES 500.00 500.00
6224 - LANDSCAPING MATERIALS 5,400.00 6,000.00
6210 - SUPPLIES 5,900.00 6,500.00
NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT
6303 - OTHER 2,400.00 2,000.00
6303 - SSD -Banner replacements 0.00
6300 - NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 2,400.00 2,000.00
SERVICES & OTHER CHARGES
6410 - GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 0.00 0.00
6410 - SSD Mgmt Services 2,500.00 2,500.00
LEGAL
6630 - OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 0.00
6630 - SSD - snow removal 23,500.00 24,000.00
6630 - SSD Site Maintenance 1,000.00 1,000.00
6630 - SSD - Banner install/removal 1,000.00 1,000.00
6630 - SSD - Irrigation services 5,000.00 4,500.00
6630 - SSD decorative install/maint 2,400.00 3,400.00
6630 - SSD - Landscape services 12,500.00 13,000.00
POSTAGE
6950 - LEGAL NOTICES 139.00 88.00
BUSINESS INSURANCE
7106 - PUBLIC LIABILITY INSURANCE 261.00 112.00
REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE
7207 - SSD infrastructure repair 5,000.00 3,500.00
UTILITIES
7301 - ELECTRIC SERVICE 2,000.00 2,000.00
7301 - SSD pedestrian 0.00 0.00
TOTAL EXPENDITURES 63,600.00 63,600.00
SSD #3 Budget
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 6a(3))
Title: 2015 Budget & Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 3 Page 4
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK Attachment A
Special Service District #3
Estimated Annual Cost Per Parcel
Proposed 2015 Service Charge
Proposed Actual
2015 2014
Address Business PID No.Service Charge Service
Charge
1 4911 Exc Blvd Reddy Rents Inc.07-028-24-21-0033 $624 $618
2 4907 Exc Blvd Tique, Inc.07-028-24-21-0032 $609 $592
3 4901 Exc Blvd DMM Holdings 07-028-24-21-0031 $631 $619
4 4825 Exc Blvd Eastwood Properties LLC 07-028-24-21-0017 $679 $675
5 4821 Exc Blvd Eastwood Properties LLC 07-028-24-21-0016 $661 $660
6 4811 Exc Blvd Fine Brothers 07-028-24-21-0015 $1,256 $1,230
7 4801 Exc Blvd Loffhagen & Son Insurance 07-028-24-21-0252 $1,367 $1,367
8 4725 Exc Blvd Excelsior Investments 07-028-24-21-0012 $2,965 $2,919
9 4701 Exc Blvd J & J Wolfe Properties LLC 07-028-24-21-0011 $1,887 $1,796
10 4637 Exc Blvd 4617 Excelsior Blvd LLC 07-028-24-21-0009 $1,423 $1,428
11 4617 Exc Blvd 4617 Excelsior Blvd LLC 07-028-24-12-0052 $1,382 $1,379
12 4615 Exc Blvd Judith McGrann & Friends 07-028-24-12-0051 $1,032 $1,032
13 4611 Exc Blvd Diamond Group LLC 07-028-24-12-0050 $1,290 $1,292
14 4601 Exc Blvd Park Boulevard LLP 07-028-24-12-0049 $2,592 $2,589
15 4509 Exc Blvd Park Boulevard LLP 07-028-24-12-0048 $1,871 $1,829
16 4501 Exc Blvd Laurel Properties 07-028-24-12-0047 $910 $896
17 4900 Exc Blvd Fitness International LLC 07-028-24-21-0002 $3,390 $3,522
18 4760 Exc Blvd Outlot H - Vacant 07-028-24-21-0258 $949 $950
19 4730 Exc Blvd Excelsior & Grand LLC 07-028-24-21-0256 $7,265 $7,210
20 4630 Exc Blvd Excelsior & Grand LLC 07-028-24-12-0175 $6,262 $6,202
21 4500 Exc Blvd Blakeley Props & Chalen LP 06-028-24-43-0191 $4,555 $4,795
Total $43,600 $43,600
Notes:
1)The proposed 2015 service charge calculations are based upon the same methodology / formulas
used for the initial service charge collection.
a) Commercial sidewalk snow removal charges are on a front footage basis.
b) All other services charges are based on the parcel's square foot area basis.
2)For 2015, no changes from the 2014 budget or service charges
3)The proposed 2015 budget is $63,600 but the service charge is only $43,600 because $20,000 was
transferred from reserves to lower the fund balance.
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 6a(3))
Title: 2015 Budget & Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 3 Page 5
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: November 3, 2014
Public Hearing Agenda Item: 6a(4)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: 2015 Budget & Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 4
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to Adopt Resolution
setting the 2015 Budget and Property Owner Service Charge for Special Service District No. 4
and directing staff to certify the annual service charges to Hennepin County.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to approve SSD #4 budget and
property owner service charges?
SUMMARY: The 2015 proposed budgets and service charges are very similar to that of past
years. Staff has recently held meetings with the property owners from each of the six districts
and received their support for approving the 2015 budgets and service charges.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The Public Works Operations budget will
incur a service charge for the City-owned municipal parking lot located within this district. The
proposed service charge for 2015 is $428.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged
community.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Resolution Approving 2015 Budget and Service Charges
Proposed 2015 Budget
Proposed 2015 Service Charges
Prepared by: Scott Merkley, Public Works Services Manager
Reviewed by: Mark Hanson, Public Works Superintendent
Cindy Walsh, Operations and Recreation Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 6a(4)) Page 2
Title: 2015 Budget & Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 4
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: On July 18, 2005, the City Council approved a resolution imposing a service
charge for Special Service District No. 4. (located along Excelsior Boulevard west of Highway
100 to Louisiana Avenue). Annually, the City Council must set a service charge for the District
following a public hearing on the proposed charge. The Special Service District Property Owners
approved the proposed 2015 budget and service charges. The notice of public hearing was
published in the Sun Sailor on October 9 and October 23, 2014. The public hearing notice was
sent to all property owners within the District.
Special Service District No. 4 Financial Position
Special Service District No. 4 has an anticipated year-end fund balance of approximately
$53,975.
Proposed 2015 Budget and Service Charges
The Property Owners recommended approval of the following:
• 2015 budget amount of $29,644; no change from 2014 after a detailed review of expected
future expenditures; and
• 2015 service charge amount of $14,664; no change from 2014. Generally, expenses
typically do not reach 100% of budget. The expected unused budget amount along with
the service charges for 2015 is anticipated to allow the district to achieve the goal of a
50% fund balance which staff and board agreed should be maintained.
The proposed resolution was reviewed by City Attorney, Tom Scott.
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 6a(4)) Page 3
Title: 2015 Budget & Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 4
RESOLUTION NO. 14-____
RESOLUTION APPROVING 2015 BUDGET
AND SERVICE CHARGES FOR
SPECIAL SERVICE DISTRICT NO. 4
WHEREAS, pursuant to Ordinance No. 2298-05, the City Council created Special
Service District No. 4 (the “District”). The specific properties located within the District are
identified on Attachment “A” attached hereto; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 05-100, the City Council is authorized to
impose service charges within the District on a multi-year basis through and including the year
2015 for taxes payable in said year; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 2.04 of Resolution No. 05-100, the maximum budget to
be imposed in any year will be subject to adjustment calculations based on Consumer Price
Index (CPI) data for the Minneapolis/St. Paul Metropolitan Area; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 3 of Resolution No. 05-100, the Service Charges shall
be payable and collected at the same time and in the same manner as provided for payment and
collection of ad valorem taxes; and
WHEREAS, the City is required by Statute to certify assessments to the County by
December 1, 2014.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park as follows:
1. The 2015 Budget for Special Service District No. 4 of $29,664 is hereby approved
as recommended by the Special Service District No. 4 Advisory Board.
2. The authorized 2015 Service Charge for Special Service District No. 4 is $14,664
in the amounts and against the properties specified on Attachment “A” attached to this
Resolution.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council November 3, 2014
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Object
Account
2014 Final
Budget
2015 Proposed
Budget
EXPENDITURES
SUPPLIES
6212 - GENERAL SUPPLIES 950.00 500.00
6224 - LANDSCAPING MATERIALS 4,000.00 4,500.00
6210 - SUPPLIES 4,950.00 5,000.00
NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT
6303 - OTHER 1,000.00 1,000.00
6300 - NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 1,000.00 1,000.00
SERVICES & OTHER CHARGES
6410 - GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 0.00
6410 - SSD Mgmt Services 2,500.00 2,500.00
LEGAL
6630 - SSD Site Maintenance 1,000.00 1,000.00
6630 - SSD - Banner install/removal 1,500.00 1,500.00
6630 - SSD - Irrigation services 4,000.00 4,000.00
6630 - SSD decorative install/maint 4,000.00 4,000.00
6630 - SSD - Landscape services 10,000.00 10,000.00
POSTAGE
6950 - LEGAL NOTICES 56.00 96.00
BUSINESS INSURANCE
7106 - PUBLIC LIABILITY INSURANCE 158.00 68.00
REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE
7207 - OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 500.00 500.00
7207 - SSD infrastructure repair 0.00
UTILITIES
TOTAL EXPENDITURES 29,664.00 29,664.00
SSD #4 Budget
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 6a(4))
Title: 2015 Budget & Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 4
Page 4
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK Attachment A
Special Service District #4
Estimated Annual Cost Per Parcel
Proposed 2015 Service Charge
Proposed Actual
2015 2014
PAR Service Service
NO.PID #Owner Charge Charge
1 21-117-21-32-0022 6127 Excelsior Blvd Gregory White $279 $279
2 21-117-21-32-0021 6121 Excelsior Blvd Hung LLC $345 $345
3 21-117-21-32-0006 6111 Excelsior Blvd Full Circle Equities LLC $562 $562
4 21-117-21-23-0100 6011 Excelsior Blvd Ward Properties $554 $554
5 21-117-21-23-0097 6001 Excelsior Blvd Sew What Corporation $268 $268
6 21-117-21-24-0195 5925 Excelsior Blvd Dys Properties $734 $734
7 21-117-21-24-0185 5825 Excelsior Blvd Kil-Ben Excelsior, LLC $704 $704
8 21-117-21-24-0209 5813 Excelsior Blvd Universal Outdoor, Inc.$35 $35
9 21-117-21-24-0208 5809 Excelsior Blvd C.B.S. Real Est Prtnr II LLP $239 $239
10 21-117-21-24-0161 5801 Excelsior Blvd MGV Holdings LLC $276 $276
11 21-117-21-24-0193 5717 Excelsior Blvd LMC, Inc $624 $624
12 21-117-21-24-0141 5707 Excelsior Blvd Len Paul/Gene Pretty Good LLC $475 $475
13 20-117-21-41-0009 6600 Excelsior Blvd Methodist Hospital $2,028 $2,028
14 20-117-21-14-0026 6500 Excelsior Blvd Methodist Hospital $1,074 $1,074
15*6200 & 6250 Excelsior Blvd $1,541 $1,541
16 21-117-21-23-0130 6112 Excelsior Blvd Snyder Electric Co.$306 $306
17 21-117-21-23-0155 6100 Excelsior Blvd Laurene I Meger $213 $213
18 21-117-21-23-0128 6006 Excelsior Blvd RRK LLC $154 $154
19 21-117-21-23-0127 6002 Excelsior Blvd Fitrz Inc $296 $296
20 City Municipal Parking Lot City of St. Louis Park $428 $428
21 21-117-21-23-0011 5930 Excelsior Blvd Leonard C Riley $210 $210
22 21-117-21-23-0010 5922 Excelsior Blvd Muriel B. Frederick $99 $99
23 21-117-21-23-0156 5916 Excelsior Blvd Rackner & Rackner $518 $518
24 21-117-21-24-0083 5900 Excelsior Blvd Realty Income Props 3 LLC $469 $469
25 21-117-21-24-0067 5810 Excelsior Blvd 5812 Excelsior Blvd. Co $396 $396
26 21-117-21-24-0066 5804 Excelsior Blvd 5804 Excelsior Blvd., LLC $338 $338
27 21-117-21-24-0040 5720 Excelsior Blvd Holiday Stationstores Inc.$597 $597
28 21-117-21-24-0202 5608 Excelsior Blvd Helmut Mauer $367 $367
29 21-117-21-24-0019 5600 Excelsior Blvd Payday America Inc.$535 $535
$14,664 $14,664
**6200 & 6250 Excelsior Blvd Charges 2015 2014
21-117-21-32-0133 6200 Excelsior Blvd 101 Mark S Bloomberg $90 $90
21-117-21-32-0134 6200 Excelsior Blvd 102 Charles and Janice Woodson $94 $94
21-117-21-32-0135 6200 Excelsior Blvd 103 Laurie G Holasek $91 $91
21-117-21-32-0136 6200 Excelsior Blvd 104 Laurie G Holasek $102 $102
21-117-21-32-0137 6200 Excelsior Blvd 201 Dennis and Lois Schlutter $87 $87
21-117-21-32-0138 6200 Excelsior Blvd 202 Dennis and Lois Schlutter $91 $91
21-117-21-32-0139 6200 Excelsior Blvd 203 Unite Rope Holland Dist $119 $119
21-117-21-32-0140 6200 Excelsior Blvd 204 Dennis and Lois Schlutter $105 $105
21-117-21-32-0141 6250 Excelsior Blvd 101 Nemer Fieger & Assoc Inc $96 $96
21-117-21-32-0142 6250 Excelsior Blvd 102 Lgh Properties LLC $89 $89
21-117-21-32-0143 6250 Excelsior Blvd 103 Donald J & Joyce E Borgen $98 $98
21-117-21-32-0144 6250 Excelsior Blvd 104 Lgh Properties LLC $88 $88
21-117-21-32-0145 6250 Excelsior Blvd 201 James V and June M Fieger $94 $94
21-117-21-32-0146 6250 Excelsior Blvd 202 Skads Travel Service Inc $85 $85
21-117-21-32-0147 6250 Excelsior Blvd 203 Lgh Properties LLC $124 $124
21-117-21-32-0148 6250 Excelsior Blvd 204 Joseph Urista $88 $88
$1,541 $1,541
Notes:
*Denotes properties with a single street address but have sub-units that are independently owned.
1)The proposed 2015 service charge calculations are based upon the same methodology / formulas
used for the initial service charge collection.
2)For 2015, no changes from the 2014 budget or service charges.
3)The proposed 2015 budget is $38,664 but the service charge is only $14,664 because $24,000 was
transferred from reserves to lower the fund balance.
Address
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 6a(4))
Title: 2015 Budget & Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 4 Page 5
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: November 3, 2014
Public Hearing Agenda Item: 6a(5)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: 2015 Budget & Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 5
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to Adopt Resolution
setting the 2015 Budget and Property Owner Service Charge for Special Service District No. 5
and directing staff to certify the annual service charges to Hennepin County.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to approve SSD #5 budget and
property owner service charges?
SUMMARY: The 2015 proposed budgets and service charges are very similar to that of past
years. Staff has recently held meetings with the property owners from each of the six districts
and received their support for approving the 2015 budgets and service charges.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: None. There are no City owned properties
within this district.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged
community.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Resolution Approving 2015 Budget and Service Charges
Proposed 2015 Budget
Proposed 2015 Service Charges
Prepared by: Scott Merkley, Public Works Services Manager
Reviewed by: Mark Hanson, Public Works Superintendent
Cindy Walsh, Operations and Recreation Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 6a(5)) Page 2
Title: 2015 Budget & Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 5
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: On February 2, 2009, the City Council approved a resolution imposing a
service charge for Special Service District No. 5 (located along Park Place Boulevard between I-
394 and Cedar Lake Road). Annually, the City Council must set a service charge for the District
following a public hearing on the proposed charge. The Special Service District Property Owners
approved the proposed 2015 budget and service charges. The notice of public hearing was
published in the Sun Sailor on October 9 and October 23, 2014. The public hearing notice was
sent to all property owners within the District.
Special Service District No. 5 Financial Position
Special Service District No. 5 has an anticipated year-end fund balance of approximately
$28,109.
Proposed 2015 Budget and Service Charges
The Property Owners recommended approval of the following:
• 2015 budget amount of $27,198; no change from 2014; and
• 2015 service charge amount of $18,698; no change from 2014. Generally, expenses
typically do not reach 100% of budget. The expected unused budget amount along with
the service charges for 2014 is anticipated to allow the district to achieve the goal of a
50% fund balance which staff and board agreed should be maintained.
The proposed resolution was reviewed by City Attorney, Tom Scott.
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 6a(5)) Page 3
Title: 2015 Budget & Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 5
RESOLUTION NO. 14-____
RESOLUTION APPROVING 2015 BUDGET
AND SERVICE CHARGES FOR
SPECIAL SERVICE DISTRICT NO. 5
WHEREAS, pursuant to Ordinance No. 2371-09, the City Council created Special
Service District No. 5 (the “District”). The specific properties located within the District are
identified on Attachment “A” attached hereto; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 09-021, the City Council is authorized to
impose service charges within the District on a multi-year basis through and including the year
2019 for taxes payable in said year; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 2.04 of Resolution No. 09-021, the maximum budget to
be imposed in any year will be subject to adjustment calculations based on Consumer Price
Index (CPI) data for the Minneapolis/St. Paul Metropolitan Area; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 3 of Resolution No. 09-021, the Service Charges shall
be payable and collected at the same time and in the same manner as provided for payment and
collection of ad valorem taxes; and
WHEREAS, the City is required by Statute to certify assessments to the County by
December 1, 2014.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park as follows:
1. The 2015 Budget for Special Service District No. 5 of $27,198 is hereby approved
as recommended by the Special Service District No. 5 Property Owners.
2. The authorized 2014 Service Charge for Special Service District No. 5 is $18,698
in the amounts and against the properties specified on Attachment “A” attached to this
Resolution.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council November 3, 2014
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Object
Account
2014 Final
Budget
2015 Proposed
Budget
SUPPLIES
6212 - GENERAL SUPPLIES 500.00 500.00
6223 - OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
6223 - banner replacement
6224 - LANDSCAPING MATERIALS 5,000.00 5,000.00
6210 - SUPPLIES 5,500.00 5,500.00
NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT
SERVICES & OTHER CHARGES
6410 - GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 0.00
6410 - SSD Mgmt Services 3,250.00 3,250.00
LEGAL
6550 - Civil
6630 - OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
6630 - SSD Site Maintenance 500.00 600.00
6630 - SSD - Banner install/removal 1,000.00 1,000.00
6630 - SSD - Irrigation services 3,000.00 3,000.00
6630 - SSD decorative install/maint 3,000.00 3,000.00
6630 - SSD - Landscape services 9,000.00 9,000.00
POSTAGE
COMMUNICATIONS
6950 - LEGAL NOTICES 136.00 100.00
BUSINESS INSURANCE
7106 - PUBLIC LIABILITY INSURANCE 112.00 48.00
REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE
7207 - OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 300.00 300.00
UTILITIES
7301 - ELECTRIC SERVICE 1,400.00 1,400.00
7301 - SSD pedestrian
7301 - SSD decorative
TOTAL EXPENDITURES 27,198.00 27,198.00
SSD #5 Budget
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 6a(5))
Title: 2015 Budget & Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 5 Page 4
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK Attachment A
Special Service District #5
Estimated Annual Cost Per Parcel
Proposed 2015 Service Charge
Proposed Actual
2015 2014
PID Address Owner Service
Charge
Service
Charge
04-117-21-31-0018 5611 Wayzata Blvd KK Corporation $721 $721
04-117-21-31-0019 1500 Park Place Blvd Doubletree Hotel $4,234 $4,234
04-117-21-34-0043 5600 Cedar Lake Rd Inland Real Estate Corp $1,515 $1,515
04-117-21-34-0044 1690 Park Place Blvd James & Patricia Oslund $667 $667
04-117-21-34-0045 1650 Park Place Blvd Inland Real Estate Corp $820 $820
04-117-21-34-0046 1620 Park Place Blvd Inland Real Estate Corp $743 $743
04-117-21-34-0047 5699 16th St W Inland Real Estate Corp $746 $746
04-117-21-34-0049 1700 Park Place Blvd Costco Wholesale $584 $584
04-117-21-34-0050 5601 16th St W Inland Ryan LLC $572 $572
30-029-24-32-0026 5353 Wayzata Blvd 5353 Wayzata LLC $1,477 $1,477
30-029-24-33-0011 5401 Gamble Dr MLCFC 2006-4 S $1,305 $1,305
30-029-24-33-0015 5402 Parkdale Dr MLCFC 2006-4 S $2,360 $2,360
30-029-24-32-0022 5370 16th St W Shops at West End $667 $667
30-029-24-33-0031 1600 West End Blvd Shops at West End $2,287 $2,287
$18,698 $18,698
Notes:
1) The proposed 2015 service charge calculations are based upon the same methodology / formulas
used for the initial service charge collection.
2)For 2015, no changes from the 2014 budget and service charges.
3) The 2015 budget is $27,198 but the service charge is only $18,698 because $8500 was transferred
from reserves to lower the fund balance.
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 6a(5))
Title: 2015 Budget & Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 5 Page 5
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: November 3, 2014
Public Hearing Agenda Item: 6a(6)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: 2015 Budget & Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 6
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to Adopt Resolution
setting the 2015 Budget and Property Owner Service Charge for Special Service District No. 6
and directing staff to certify the annual service charges to Hennepin County.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to approve SSD #6 budget and
property owner service charges?
SUMMARY: The 2015 proposed budgets and service charges are very similar to that of past
years. Staff has recently held meetings with the property owners from each of the six districts
and received their support for approving the 2015 budgets and service charges.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The TIF / Admin budget will incur a service
charge for the three city-owned undeveloped properties located within this district. The proposed
service charge for 2015 is $1,206.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged
community.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Resolution Approving 2015 Budget and Service Charges
Proposed 2015 Budget
Proposed 2015 Service Charges
Prepared by: Scott Merkley, Public Works Services Manager
Reviewed by: Mark Hanson, Public Works Superintendent
Cindy Walsh, Operations and Recreation Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 6a(6)) Page 2
Title: 2015 Budget & Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 6
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: On June 15, 2009, the City Council approved a resolution imposing a service
charge for Special Service District No. 6 (located along 36th Street W. from Wooddale Avenue to
Highway 100). Annually, the City Council must set a service charge for the District following a
public hearing on the proposed charge. The Special Service District Property Owners approved
the proposed 2015 budget and service charges. The notice of public hearing was published in the
Sun Sailor on October 9 and October 23, 2014. The public hearing notice was sent to all property
owners within the District.
Special Service District No. 6 Financial Position
Special Service District No. 6 has an anticipated year-end fund balance of approximately
$24,366.
Proposed 2015 Budget and Service Charges
The Property Owners recommended approval of the following:
• 2015 budget amount of $25,155; no change from 2014; and
• 2015 service charge amount of $13,155; no change from 2014. Generally, expenses
typically do not reach 100% of budget. The expected unused budget amount along with
the service charges for 2015 is anticipated to allow the district to achieve the goal of a
50% fund balance which staff and board agreed should be maintained.
The proposed resolution was reviewed by City Attorney, Tom Scott.
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 6a(6)) Page 3
Title: 2015 Budget & Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 6
RESOLUTION NO. 14-____
RESOLUTION APPROVING 2015 BUDGET
AND SERVICE CHARGES FOR
SPECIAL SERVICE DISTRICT NO. 6
WHEREAS, pursuant to Ordinance No. 2374-09, the City Council created Special
Service District No. 5 (the “District”). The specific properties located within the District are
identified on Attachment “A” attached hereto; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 09-078, the City Council is authorized to
impose service charges within the District on a multi-year basis through and including the year
2019 for taxes payable in said year; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 2.04 of Resolution No. 09-078, the maximum budget to
be imposed in any year will be subject to adjustment calculations based on Consumer Price
Index (CPI) data for the Minneapolis/St. Paul Metropolitan Area; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 3 of Resolution No. 09-078, the Service Charges shall
be payable and collected at the same time and in the same manner as provided for payment and
collection of ad valorem taxes; and
WHEREAS, the City is required by Statute to certify assessments to the County by
December 1, 2014.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park as follows:
1. The 2015 Budget for Special Service District No. 6 of $25,155 is hereby approved
as recommended by the Special Service District No. 6 Property Owners.
2. The authorized 2015 Service Charge for Special Service District No. 6 is $13,155
in the amounts and against the properties specified on Attachment “A” attached to this
Resolution.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council November 3, 2014
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Object
Account
2014 Final
Budget
2015 Proposed
Budget
REVENUES
EXPENDITURES
SUPPLIES
6212 - GENERAL SUPPLIES 200.00 150.00
6224 - LANDSCAPING MATERIALS 3,700.00 3,700.00
6210 - SUPPLIES 3,900.00 3,850.00
NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT
6300 - NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT
SERVICES & OTHER CHARGES
6410 - GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 0.00 0.00
6410 - SSD Mgmt Services 2,500.00 2,500.00
LEGAL
6550 - Civil
6630 - SSD Site Maintenance 1,000.00 1,000.00
6630 - SSD - Banner install/removal 1,000.00 1,000.00
6630 - SSD - Irrigation services 3,000.00 3,000.00
6630 - SSD decorative install/maint 3,500.00 4,000.00
6630 - SSD - Landscape services 9,000.00 8,500.00
POSTAGE
COMMUNICATIONS
6950 - LEGAL NOTICES 151.00 61.00
BUSINESS INSURANCE
7106 - PUBLIC LIABILITY INSURANCE 104.00 44.00
REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE
7207 - OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 1,000.00 200.00
7207 - SSD infrastructure repair 0.00 1,000.00
TOTAL EXPENDITURES 25,155.00 25,155.00
SSD #6 Budget - 2015
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 6a(6))
Title: 2015 Budget & Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 6 Page 4
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK Attachment A
Special Service District #6
Estimated Annual Cost Per Parcel
Proposed 2015 Service Charge
Proposed Actual
2015 2014
PID Address Owner Service
Charge
Service
Charge
16-117-21-34-0607 3601 Wooddale Ave TowerLight Senior Living $2,277 $2,277
16-117-21-34-0355 5600 36th St W Tammy Medina c/o KAMI Inc $2,130 $2,130
16-117-21-34-0073 5605 36th St W 36th Street LLC $2,027 $2,027
16-117-21-34-0068 5800 36th St W Standal Properties Inc $1,205 $1,205
16-117-21-34-0040 5700 36th St W Standal Properties Inc $1,205 $1,205
16-117-21-34-0077 5721 36th St W Evan Johnson c/o Thermetic Products $846 $846
16-117-21-34-0072 5701 36th St W M A Lerner & S O Lerner $761 $761
16-117-21-34-0024 3575 Wooddale Ave City of St. Louis Park $402 $402
16-117-21-34-0042 5814 36th St W City of St. Louis Park $402 $402
16-117-21-34-0041 5816 36th St W City of St. Louis Park $402 $402
16-117-21-34-0038 5724 36th St W LRJ of Minnesota Ltd Partnership $402 $402
16-117-21-34-0071 5718 36th St W M A Lerner & S O Lerner $402 $402
16-117-21-34-0046 5727 36th St W R & SA Investment LLC $402 $402
16-117-21-34-0015 3536 State Hwy No 100 S SLMB LLC $292 $292
Total $13,155 $13,155
Notes:
1) The proposed 2015 service charge calculations are based upon the same methodology / formulas
used for the initial service charge collection.
2)For 2015, not changes from the 2014 budget or services charges.
3) The proposed 2015 budget is $25,155 but the service charge is only $13,155 because $12,000 was paid
from reserves to lower the fund balance.
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 6a(6))
Title: 2015 Budget & Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 6 Page 5
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: November 3, 2014
Public Hearing Agenda Item: 6b
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Groves Academy - Private Activity Revenue Bonds Host Approval Resolution
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Mayor to open the public hearing, solicit comments, and close
the public hearing. Motion to Adopt Resolution giving host approval to the issuance of
educational facilities revenue bonds for the Groves Academy Project.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Is the City Council willing to grant host approval to the City of
Mayer to allow issuance of Educational Facility Revenue Bonds Series 2014 for Groves
Academy in an aggregate principal amount of not to exceed $5,600,000?
SUMMARY: On June 20, 2010, the City of St. Louis Park issued its Educational Facilities
Revenue Bonds – Series 2010 on behalf of Groves Academy in the original aggregate principal
amount of $4,590,000 and loaned the proceeds derived from the sale to Groves Academy.
Groves Academy is now requesting that the City grant host approval and consent through the
public hearing and resolution process to the issuance by the City of Mayer, Minnesota, of
Educational Facilities Revenue Bonds – Series 2014 on behalf of Groves Academy in an
aggregate principal amount not to exceed $5,600,000. Mayer will loan the proceeds of the Series
2014 Bonds to Groves Academy, which will be applied to the redemption and prepayment of the
outstanding Series 2010 Bonds and then towards the financing of capital items at the Academy.
The Series 2014 Bonds will be directly purchased by Wells Fargo Bank, National Association in
a negotiated sale. More information on this matter is provided in the background section of this
report.
NEXT STEPS: After conducting the public hearing this evening, the City Council will be asked
to consider adopting a resolution to grant host approval to the City of Mayer.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: None
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged
community.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Resolution
Prepared by: Brian A. Swanson, Controller
Approved by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 6b) Page 2
Title: Groves Academy - Private Activity Revenue Bonds Host Approval Resolution
DISCUSSION
On June 20, 2010, the City of St. Louis Park issued its Educational Facilities Revenue Bonds –
Series 2010 on behalf of Groves Academy in the original aggregate principal amount of
$4,590,000 and loaned the proceeds derived from the sale to Groves Academy, a Minnesota
nonprofit corporation to finance and refinance a major building renovation of the Borrower’s
independent co-educational day school facilities located at 3220 Highway 100 South in the City
of St. Louis Park.
On September 22nd and October 6th, the City Council received reports outlining Groves
Academy and the City of Mayer’s intent to refinance the 2010 Bonds and also issue new money
to finance infrastructure for the Academy. Groves Academy is also requesting that the City grant
host approval and consent through the public hearing and resolution process to the issuance by
the City of Mayer, Minnesota, of Educational Facilities Revenue Bonds – Series 2014 on behalf
of Groves Academy in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed $5,600,000. Mayer will loan
the proceeds of the Series 2014 Bonds to Groves Academy, which will be applied to the
redemption and prepayment of the outstanding Series 2010 Bonds and then towards the
financing of new classroom renovations and construction of a new learning center at the
Academy. The Series 2014 Bonds will be directly purchased by Wells Fargo Bank, National
Association in a negotiated sale.
The Series 2014 Bonds are proposed to be issued as obligations the interest on which will not be
includable in net taxable income of individuals, estates, and trusts for State of Minnesota tax
purposes. The Series 2014 Bonds are proposed to be issued as revenue obligations under
Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.152 through 469.1655, as amended. The Series 2014 Bonds
will be payable solely from payments received from Groves Academy under a Loan Agreement
with the City of Mayer and any additional security provided by Groves Academy. The Series
2014 Bonds will not be general or moral obligations of City of Mayer or of the City of St. Louis
Park and will not be secured by the full faith and credit or taxing powers of either City.
The Bank requires that the Series 2014 Bonds be designated as “bank qualified” bonds. A city is
limited to issuing, or having an expectation of issuing, no more than $10,000,000 of bonds for its
own governmental purposes or qualified 501(c)(3) bonds, like the Series 2014 Bonds, in any
calendar year in order to designate bonds as “bank qualified.” In late June, 2014, Wells Fargo
Bank contacted the City of St. Louis Park as to whether the City expected to issue any other
bonds in 2014 and whether it had sufficient capacity to issue bonds on behalf of Groves
Academy that could be designated as bank qualified. At that time, the City expected that it
would be issuing debt that when taken in aggregate with the proposed Groves Academy project
would exceed the $10 million threshold. Therefore, the City advised the Wells Fargo that it
would not be able to issue bonds for the Project in 2014 that could be designated as bank
qualified.
On that basis, the Groves Academy and Wells Fargo sought out another city that could issue
bonds for the project which could be designated as bank qualified. Because Groves Academy
draws students from across the broader Twin Cities region, most of the cities in the area could
issue bonds if they had sufficient bank qualification capacity. As such, the City of Mayer had
sufficient capacity and was willing to act as the issuer for the Series 2014 Bonds.
Under federal tax law, when a project is located in a jurisdiction that is not that of the issuer, the
jurisdiction in which the project is located must give its approval to the project following a
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 6b) Page 3
Title: Groves Academy - Private Activity Revenue Bonds Host Approval Resolution
public hearing. This is often referred to as “host approval.” Also, under state law, when one
jurisdiction issues bonds to refund the bonds of another jurisdiction, the jurisdiction whose bonds
are being refunded must consent to the refunding. Therefore, the Groves Academy is requesting
that the City of St. Louis Park hold a public hearing on the project and adopt a resolution that
grants host approval to the project and consents to the redemption and prepayment of the Series
2010 Bonds.
The proposed remaining schedule is as follows:
1. At the City of St. Louis Park’s regularly scheduled meeting on Monday, November
3rd, a public hearing on the project will be conducted before the City Council and,
following the public hearing, the City Council will consider the host approval
resolution.
2. Concurrently with the above item, Mayer will also be conducting a public hearing,
adopting an approving resolution, and submitting an application to the Department
of Employment and Economic Development (“DEED”) for the approval of the
issuance of the Series 2014 Bonds.
3. If the host approval resolution is approved by the St. Louis Park City Council, the
bond issuance resolution is approved by the City of Mayer, and DEED approves
the application, the Series 2014 Bonds will be issued on a date agreed upon by all
of the parties, which is currently anticipated to be in mid-November.
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 6b) Page 4
Title: Groves Academy - Private Activity Revenue Bonds Host Approval Resolution
RESOLUTION NO. 14-____
RESOLUTION GIVING HOST APPROVAL TO
THE ISSUANCE OF EDUCATIONAL FACILITY REVENUE BONDS
UNDER MINNESOTA STATUTES, SECTIONS 469.152 THROUGH 469.1655
(GROVES ACADEMY PROJECT)
1. General Recitals. The purpose of Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.152 through
469.1655, as amended, (the “Act”), is, among other things, to promote the welfare of the State of
Minnesota (the “State”) by the active attraction and encouragement and development of
economically sound industry and commerce to prevent so far as possible the emergence of
blighted and marginal lands and areas of chronic unemployment.
2. Description of the Project.
(a) Groves Academy, a Minnesota nonprofit corporation and 501(c)(3) organization
(the “Borrower”), proposes to (i) finance new classroom renovations and the construction and
equipping of a new learning center at the Borrower’s independent co-educational day school
facilities located at 3200 Highway 100 South in the City (the “Renovation and Expansion
Project”), (ii) refund the City’s outstanding Educational Facility Revenue Bonds (Groves
Academy Project), Series 2010, the proceeds of which were used to finance and refinance a
renovation, expansion, and improvement of the Borrower’s campus (the “Original Project” and,
together with the Renovation and Expansion Project, the “Project”), and (iii) finance the costs of
issuing the Bonds. The Project is owned, operated, and managed by the Borrower.
(b) The Borrower has proposed that the City of Mayer, Minnesota (the "Issuer"),
issue revenue obligations, in one or more series (the "Bonds"), under the Act, in order to finance
the Project, in the approximate aggregate principal amount not to exceed $5,600,000; and
(c) The City has been advised that the Bonds or other obligations, as and when
issued, will not constitute a charge, lien or encumbrance upon any property of the City or the
Issuer, except the Project and the revenues to be derived from the Project. Such Bonds or
obligations will not be a charge against the general credit or taxing powers of the City or the
Issuer, but is payable from sums to be paid by the Borrower pursuant to a revenue agreement.
3. Recital of Representations Made by the Borrower.
(a) The Borrower has agreed to pay any and all costs incurred by the City in
connection with the issuance of the Bonds, whether or not such issuance is carried to completion.
4. Public Hearing.
(a) As required by the Act and Section 147(f) of the Code, a Notice of Public Hearing
was published in the City’s official newspaper and newspaper of general circulation, for a public
hearing on the proposed issuance of the Bonds and the proposal to undertake and finance the
Project.
(b) As required by the Act and Section 147(f) of the Code, the City Council has on
this same date held a public hearing on the issuance of the Bonds and the proposal to undertake
and finance the portion of the Project located within the jurisdictional limits of the City, at which
all those appearing who desired to speak were heard and written comments were accepted.
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 6b) Page 5
Title: Groves Academy - Private Activity Revenue Bonds Host Approval Resolution
5. Host Approval. The City Council hereby gives the host approval required under
Section 147(f) of the Code and, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Sections 469.155, Subd. 12 and
471.656, Subd. 2(2), the City Council hereby consents to the issuance of the Bonds.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council November 3, 2014
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Meeting: Study Session
Meeting Date: November 3, 2014
Action Agenda Item: 8a
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Authorize Pre-Sale of 2014 G.O. Bonds for Sidewalks, Trails and Utilities
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution Providing for the Sale of
$10,000,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2014A.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
• Does the City Council desire to issue bonds for the first phase of Connect the Park?
• Does the City Council desire to issue bonds in the Water and Storm Sewer Funds to
finance all or a portion of some of the projects to occur in the next two years?
SUMMARY: Based on previous Council direction staff is recommending issuing bonds for the
first phase of Connect the Park and for the Water and Storm Sewer funds in an amount not to
exceed $10 million in aggregate. For Connect the Park, these bonds will be G.O. Charter Bonds
due to the type of project that is being financed. The issue amount will not exceed approximately
$5.2 million. The bonds will finance Connect the Park to date and expected costs estimated
through much of 2015 and possibly early 2016. Connect the Park will require several other bond
issues over the life of the project. Since these are Charter Bonds, they will require approval by at
least 6 of the 7 City Council members.
Based on previous Council direction staff also recommends issuing G.O. Revenue Bonds to
finance all or a portion of capital projects within the Water and Storm Water funds. The issue
amount will not exceed approximately $4.8 million to finance projects into 2015 for Storm
Water and possibly early 2016 for Water. Since the bonds are straight G.O., approval is required
by a simple majority vote only.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The two proposed bond issues will be
consolidated into one for potential investors to bid, which should aid in receiving more and lower
bids due to the larger dollar issuance amount. The 10 year bond issue will have its first two
interest payments on 8/1/15 and 2/1/16 paid from capitalized interest from the bond issue, with
the first principal payment due 2/1/17. The Charter Bonds debt service will be via tax levy
beginning in pay 2016 in an amount of approximately $600,000 - $625,000 per year. The Utility
Bonds debt service of approximately $550,000 - $575,000 will be paid from utility rates and
subsequent revenues that have already been built into the LRFMP and presented to the City
Council.
NEXT STEPS:
Week of November 17th – Official Statement Distributed to Council
December 1st – Authorize and Award Sale of 2014A G.O. Bonds (Ehlers staff in attendance)
December 22nd– Closing date on the Bonds – No City Council action required
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution Providing for the Sale of the Bonds
Pre-Sale Report from Ehlers and Associates
Prepared by: Brian A. Swanson, Controller
Reviewed by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 8a) Page 2
Title: Authorize Pre-Sale of 2014 G.O. Bonds for Sidewalks, Trails and Utilities
RESOLUTION NO. 14-_____
RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE SALE OF
$10,000,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS, SERIES 2014A
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota has heretofore
determined that it is necessary and expedient to issue the City's $10,000,000 General Obligation
Bonds, Series 2014A (the "Bonds"), to finance sidewalk and trail connections and water and
storm water projects in the City; and
WHEREAS, the City has retained Ehlers & Associates, Inc., in Roseville, Minnesota
("Ehlers"), as its independent financial advisor for the Bonds and is therefore authorized to solicit
proposals in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.60, Subdivision 2(9);
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park, Minnesota, as follows:
1. Authorization; Findings. The City Council hereby authorizes Ehlers to solicit proposals for
the sale of the Bonds.
2. Meeting; Proposal Opening. The City Council shall meet at 7:30 p.m. on December 1, 2014,
for the purpose of considering sealed proposals for and awarding the sale of the Bonds.
3. Official Statement. In connection with said sale, the officers or employees of the City are
hereby authorized to cooperate with Ehlers and participate in the preparation of an official
statement for the Bonds and to execute and deliver it on behalf of the City upon its
completion.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council November 3, 2014
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
October 20, 2014
Pre-Sale Report
City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota
$10,000,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2014A
Prepared by:
Mark Ruff
Senior Financial Advisor
And
Jason Aarsvold
Financial Advisor
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 8a)
Title: Authorize Pre-Sale of 2014 G.O. Bonds for Sidewalks, Trails and Utilities Page 3
Executive Summary of Proposed Debt
Proposed Issue: $10,000,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2014A (the “Bonds”)
Purposes: The proposed issue includes financing for the following two purposes under
two different legal authorities:
• The City will issue $5.2 million in General Obligation Bonds
issued pursuant to the City Charter to finance “Connect the Park”,
the city’s sidewalk and trail connection program. The City
Charter portion of the Bonds will fund projects to date as well as
projects anticipated in 2015. Debt service will be paid from ad
valorem property taxes beginning with taxes payable in 2016.
• The City will issue $4.8 million in General Obligation Water and
Storm Water Revenue Bonds to finance capital projects in the
city’s water and storm water funds. This issuance will fund
projects anticipated in 2015 and 2016. Debt service will be paid
from the enterprise fund revenues.
Authority: The Bonds are being issued pursuant to the City’s Charter and Minnesota
Statutes, Chapters 444 and 475.
Chapter 444 allows cities to issue debt for utility project without limitation as
long as 100% of the debt service is expected to be paid from water and storm
water revenues.
The City’s Charter enables the City to issue general obligation bonds for any
corporate purpose pursuant to a “super majority” vote of the City Council.
The City Charter portion of the Bonds will count against the City’s general
obligation, tax supported debt capacity limit of 3% of market value.
Approximately $130,000,000 of debt limit remains available to the City.
The Bonds will be general obligations of the City for which its full faith, credit
and taxing powers are pledged in the event other revenues supporting the debt
are not available.
Term/Call Feature: The Bonds are being issued for an 11 year term, ten years of full payments
with interest only for the first year. Principal on the Bonds will be due on
February 1 in the years 2017 through 2026. Interest is payable every six
months beginning August 1, 2015. Capitalized interest derived from proceeds
of the Bonds will make the first two interest payments.
The Bonds maturing on and after February 1, 2024 will be subject to
prepayment at the discretion of the City on February 1, 2023 or any date
thereafter.
Bank Qualification: Because the City is issuing less than $10,000,000 in the calendar year, the City
will be able to designate the Bonds as “bank qualified” obligations. Bank
qualified status broadens the market for the Bonds, which can result in lower
interest rates.
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 8a)
Title: Authorize Pre-Sale of 2014 G.O. Bonds for Sidewalks, Trails and Utilities Page 4
Rating: The City’s most recent bond issues were rated “AAA” by Standard & Poor’s.
The City will request a new rating for the Bonds.
Basis for Recommendation: Based on our knowledge of your situation, your objectives communicated to
us, our advisory relationship as well as characteristics of various municipal
financing options, we are recommending the issuance of General Obligation
City Charter Bonds and General Obligation Water and Storm Water Revenue
Bonds as a suitable financing option because
- Revenue bonds without a general obligation pledge for the utility
project would increase the interest rates between .5% and 1%, adding
costs to the projects over time.
- Issuing non-general obligation bonds for the trail and sidewalk
projects through an annual appropriation structure would be very
difficult to accomplish and also increase interest cost substantially.
- A bank placement or negotiated issue would likely result in slightly
higher interest rates. The only advantage of a bank placement would
be the ability to pre-pay the debt immediately, which is not a goal
expressed to us in the staff discussion of the issue.
- The proposed structure is the most overall cost effective option that
still maintains future flexibility for the repayment of debt.
Method of Sale/Placement: In order to obtain the lowest interest cost to the City, we will solicit
competitive bids for purchase of the Bonds from local banks in your area and
national and regional underwriters.
We have included an allowance for discount bidding equal to 0.9% of the
principal amount of the issue. The discount is treated as an interest item and
provides the underwriter with all or a portion of their compensation in the
transaction.
If the Bonds are purchased at a price greater than the minimum bid amount
(maximum discount), the unused allowance may be used to lower your
borrowing amount.
Premium Bids: Under current market conditions, most investors in municipal
bonds prefer “premium” pricing structures. A premium is achieved when the
coupon for any maturity (the interest rate paid by the issuer) exceeds the yield
to the investor, resulting in a price paid that is greater than the face value of
the bonds. The sum of the amounts paid in excess of face value is considered
“reoffering premium.”
The amount of the premium varies, but it is not uncommon to see premiums
for new issues in the range of 2.00% to 10.00% of the face amount of the
issue. This means that an issuer with a $2,000,000 offering may receive bids
that result in proceeds of $2,040,000 to $2,200,000.
For this issue of Bonds we have been directed to use the premium increase the
net proceeds for the project. The adjustments may slightly change the true
interest cost of the original bid, either up or down. The City’s bond attorney
has confirmed that a premium bid will not count against the bank qualified
nature of the bond issue.
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 8a)
Title: Authorize Pre-Sale of 2014 G.O. Bonds for Sidewalks, Trails and Utilities Page 5
You have the choice to limit the amount of premium in the bid
specifications. This may result in fewer bids, but it may also eliminate large
adjustments on the day of sale and other uncertainties.
Review of Existing Debt: We have reviewed all outstanding indebtedness for the City and find that there
are no refunding opportunities at this time.
We will continue to monitor the market and the call dates for the City’s
outstanding debt and will alert you to any future refunding opportunities.
Continuing Disclosure: Because the City has more than $10,000,000 in outstanding debt (including
this issue) and this issue is over $1,000,000, the City will be agreeing to
provide certain updated Annual Financial Information and its Audited
Financial Statement annually as well as providing notices of the occurrence of
certain “material events” to the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (the
“MSRB”), as required by rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission
(SEC). The City is already obligated to provide such reports for its existing
bonds, and has contracted with Ehlers to prepare and file the reports.
Arbitrage Monitoring:
Because the Bonds are tax-exempt securities/tax credit securities, the City
must ensure compliance with certain Internal Revenue Service (IRS) rules
throughout the life of the issue. These rules apply to all gross proceeds of the
issue, including initial bond proceeds and investment earnings in construction,
escrow, debt service, and any reserve funds. How issuers spend bond
proceeds and how they track interest earnings on funds (arbitrage/yield
restriction compliance) are common subjects of IRS inquiries. Your specific
responsibilities will be detailed in the Tax Certificate prepared by your Bond
Attorney and provided at closing. You have retained Ehlers to assist you with
compliance with these rules.
Risk Factors: The City expects to pay the Bond debt service with utility funds. If utility
revenue is inadequate, the City may have to levy taxes to pay debt service on
the Bonds.
Other Service Providers This debt issuance will require the engagement of other public finance service
providers. This section identifies those other service providers, so Ehlers can
coordinate their engagement on your behalf. Where you have previously used
a particular firm to provide a service, we have assumed that you will continue
that relationship. For services you have not previously required, we have
identified a service provider. Fees charged by these service providers will be
paid from proceeds of the obligation, unless you notify us that you wish to pay
them from other sources. Our pre-sale bond sizing includes a good faith
estimate of these fees, so their final fees may vary. If you have any questions
pertaining to the identified service providers or their roles, or if you would like
to use a different service provider for any of the listed services please contact
us.
Bond Attorney: Kennedy & Graven, Chartered
Paying Agent: Bond Trust Services Corporation
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 8a)
Title: Authorize Pre-Sale of 2014 G.O. Bonds for Sidewalks, Trails and Utilities Page 6
Rating Agency: Standard and Poor’s
This presale report summarizes our understanding of the City’s objectives for the structure and terms of
this financing as of this date. As additional facts become known or capital markets conditions change, we
may need to modify the structure and/or terms of this financing to achieve results consistent with the
City’s objectives.
Proposed Debt Issuance Schedule
Pre-Sale Review by City Council November 3, 2014
Distribute Official Statement: Week of November 17, 2014
Conference with Rating Agency: On or about November 20, 2014
City Council Meeting to Award Sale of the Bonds: December 1, 2014
Estimated Closing Date: December 22, 2014
Attachments
Sources and Uses of Funds
Proposed Debt Service Schedule
Resolution Authorizing Ehlers to Proceed With Bond Sale
Ehlers Contacts
Financial Advisors: Mark Ruff (651) 697-8505
Jason Aarsvold (651) 697-8512
Disclosure Coordinator: Pia Troy (651) 697-8556
Financial Analyst: Alicia Gage (651) 697-8551
The Official Statement for this financing will be mailed to the City Council at their home address or e-
mailed for review prior to the sale date.
City Council Meeting of November 3, 2014 (Item No. 8a)
Title: Authorize Pre-Sale of 2014 G.O. Bonds for Sidewalks, Trails and Utilities Page 7
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: November 3, 2014
Discussion Item: 8b
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Ownership of Residential Water Service Lines
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Approve 1st Reading of Ordinance accepting partial
ownership of residential water service lines and set Second Reading for November 17.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does Council agree with the recommendation for the City to
accept ownership of residential water service lines from the water main to the curb stop?
SUMMARY: Currently, homeowners own the service lines from their homes to the water main
connections and are responsible for the repair costs of service line breaks. In most other
communities, the city owns the service line from the water main to the curb stop and would
cover the costs to make any repairs in this section of the line, with the homeowner still being
responsible for repairs between the curb stop and the house. Splitting the service line in this
manner is done because repair costs for a break between the water main and the curb stop
typically include disrupting the street.
Accepting ownership would shift the financial burden for repair and replacement of this section
from the property owner to the City. The cost of this program can be absorbed within the
recommended utility rate increases (discussed previously in the budget process) for the next two
years. Staff will continue to review actual costs from 2015 construction data and estimates
moving forward to determine whether or not rates will need to be adjusted for this program
during the 2017 budget process.
The proposed change is recommended to start January 1, 2015 and will relate solely to single
family residential customers. The second reading of this ordinance is scheduled for November
17, 2014.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Based on 2015 adopted and future proposed
utility rates, these costs can be funded within the Water Fund.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Ordinance Sections 32-41, 32-202, and 32-204
Prepared by: Mark Hanson, Public Works Superintendent
Brian A. Swanson, Controller
Reviewed by: Cindy Walsh, Director of Operations and Recreation
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting November 3, 2014 (Item No. 8b) Page 2
Title: Ownership of Residential Water Service Lines
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: During the 2015 budget planning process, Council asked staff to explore the
rationale and costs associated with accepting ownership of residential water service lines from
the water main to the curb stop. Currently, homeowners own the service lines from their houses
all the way to the water main connection and are responsible for the repair costs of service line
breaks. In most other communities, the City owns the service line from the water main to the
curb stop and would cover the costs to make any repairs in this section of the line, with the
homeowner still being responsible for repairs between the curb stop and the house. Splitting the
service line in this manner is done because repair costs for a break between the water main and
the curb stop typically include disrupting the street. These costs are considerably higher than
repair costs between the curb stop and the house, which generally do not require street repair.
Analysis of all the utility projects has shown that the cost of this program can be absorbed within
the scope of the projects and funded within the approved 2015 utility rates and proposed 2016
recommended utility rate increases per the Long Range Financial Management Plan (discussed
during the budget planning process). Staff will continue to review actual costs from 2015
construction data and estimates moving forward to determine whether or not rates will need to be
adjusted for this program during the 2017 budget process.
This change to our program puts St. Louis Park on par with our neighboring communities. It also
ensures that service line repairs, and any associated connections to our water main including curb
and streets will have proper oversight by Utilities staff. This change is recommended for single
family residential customers only.
SUMMARY OF PROPOSED ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS: All of these ordinance
changes have been reviewed by City Attorney, Tom Scott.
Ordinance 32-41. Cost of Installation Borne by Consumer (attached): Updates the ordinance
to state that for single family residential housing, the cost of replacing all plumbing within the
City right of way between the main and the water shut-off as part of a street reconstruction
project shall be the responsibility of the city. It also clarifies that for properties other than single
family housing, the property owner is responsible for repair/replacement of the entire line. The
description of the special assessment process was also updated to reflect current
practice/terminology.
Ordinance 32-202. Repair of Leaks (attached): Updates the ordinance to state that for single
family residential housing, the cost of repairing the water service line between the main and the
water shut-off shall be the responsibility of the city, for properties other than single family
housing, the property owner owns the entirety of the line. It also clarifies that the property of
owner is responsible for all expenses related to the thawing/repairing of frozen service lines for
the entire line.
Ordinance 32-204. Service Abandoned (attached): Updates the ordinance to state that all
expenses related to the disconnection and removal of a water service shall be paid by the
property owner.
ORDINANCE NO. ____-14
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO THE COST OF REPAIR AND
REPLACEMENT OF WATER SERVICE LINES, AMENDING
CHAPTER 32 OF THE ST. LOUIS PARK CITY CODE
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK ORDAINS:
SECTION 1. Section 32-41 of the St. Louis Park City Code is amended to read as follows:
(1) The cost of original installation or repair of all plumbing between the main and
the meter shall be borne entirely by the consumer, except as provided herein.
Such plumbing shall at all reasonable times be subject to inspection by the city.
Any repairs that are the responsibility of the consumer which are found to be
necessary by such representatives shall be made promptly or the city will
discontinue service. The total cost of the repair will then be charged interest at a
rate per annum set by the City Manager or designee. This rate will be equal to the
per annum interest rate set that year for other certified special assessments and
will be assessed to the property and payable over a period of years, depending on
the dollar amount and circumstance. The city will be responsible for any
necessary repairs to the portion of the service line to a single family dwelling
between the main and the water shutoff.
(2) The cost of replacing all plumbing within the City right of way between the main
and the shut off as part of a street reconstruction project shall be a charge to the
consumer., except for a single family dwelling in which case the city shall be
responsible for the cost. The total cost of the replacement will then be charged
interest at a rate per annum interest rate set that year for other certified special
assessments and will be assessed to the property and payable over a period of
years depending on the dollar amount and circumstance. shall be added to the
consumer’s water bill and be payable over a period of 10 years in equal
installments, together with an amount equal to interest on the unpaid balance at a
fixed annual rate set by the City Finance Department equal to the special
assessments interest rate adopted that year.
SECTION 2. Section 32-202 of the St. Louis Park City Code is amended to read as follows:
(1) The Property Owner shall be responsible for repairing any leaks in the service
pipeline to the property. , except that the city shall be responsible for leaks in the
service line to a single family dwelling between the main and the shutoff. In case
of failure uponby the part of any owner to repair any leak occurring from the
service pipe, for which the owner is responsible, within 24 hours after verbal or
City Council Meeting November 3, 2014 (Item No. 8b)
Title: Ownership of Residential Water Service Lines Page 3
written notice has been given upon the premises, the water will be shut off from
the same and will not be turned on until the leak is repaired and the fee as set by
city council resolution or ordinance has been paid. When in the judgment of the
city the waste of water is significant, or when damage is likely to result from the
leak, the water will be turned off if the repair is not proceeded with immediately
upon the giving of such notice. If the water service leak is on the street side of the
water shut-off and the leak cannot be shut off, the city will have the service leak
repaired and the cost of the repairs will be added to the property owner’s taxes as
a special assessment.
(2) The Property Owner, including the owner of a single family dwelling, is
responsible for all expenses related to the thawing or repairing of frozen service
lines from the water main to the building.
SECTION 3. Section 32-204 of the St. Louis Park City Code is amended to read as follows:
When a service is to be abandoned, the meter shall be removed and returned to the city
and the service shall be disconnected at the city main by plugging or capping the corporation
cock or valve in an approved manner. When a building is to be demolished, the service shall be
abandoned before a demolition permit is issued. If a new building is to be erected on the same
site, the service may be reused with the prior approval of the city and the service may be
temporarily abandoned at the stop box by plugging. All expenses related to the disconnection
and removal of the water service shall be the owner’s responsibility.
SECTION 4. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen (15) days after its passage and
publication.
ADOPTED this _____ day of ____________, 2014 by the City Council of the City of St.
Louis Park.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council
___________________, 2014:
City Manager Mayor
Attest: Approved as to form and execution:
City Clerk City Attorney
City Council Meeting November 3, 2014 (Item No. 8b)
Title: Ownership of Residential Water Service Lines Page 4