HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013/07/01 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - Regular
AGENDA
JULY 1, 2013
6:30 p.m. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY -- Council Chambers
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Minutes
3a. Economic Development Authority Minutes May 20, 2013
4. Approval of Agenda
5. Reports
5a. EDA Vendor Claims
6. Old Business -- None
7. New Business
7a. Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Victoria Ponds TIF District
Recommended Action: Motion to Adopt EDA Resolution modifying the Tax
Increment Financing Plan for the Victoria Ponds TIF District and authorizing the use of
the remaining pooling funds.
7b. Defeasance of the 2004A Bonds
Recommended Action: Motion to Adopt EDA Resolution Authorizing Funds for the
Redemption of the 2004A Bonds.
7c. Decertification of Excelsior Boulevard HSTI Subdistrict
Recommended Action: Motion to Adopt EDA Resolution approving the
decertification of the Excelsior Blvd HSTI Subdistrict.
7d. Decertification of Oak Hill II TIF District
Recommended Action: Motion to Adopt EDA Resolution approving the
decertification of the Oak Hill II TIF District.
8. Communications
8a. Property Acquisition Update: 4601 Highway 7
9. Adjournment
Immediately Following EDA Meeting - CITY COUNCIL MEETING – Council Chambers
1. Call to Order
1a. Pledge of Allegiance
1b. Roll Call
2. Presentations -- None
3. Approval of Minutes
3a. Study Session Meeting Minutes June 10, 2013
3b. City Council Meeting Minutes June 17, 2013
Meeting of July 1, 2013
City Council Agenda
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.)
5. Boards and Commissions -- None
6. Public Hearings -- None
7. Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public -- None
8. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions and Discussion Items
8a. Defeasance of the 2004A Bonds
Recommended Action: Motion to Adopt Resolution Providing for Payment and
Redemption of the 2004A Bonds.
9. Communications
7:00 p.m. JOINT CITY COUNCIL & SCHOOL BOARD MEETING – Council Chambers
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.
Meeting of July 1, 2013
City Council Agenda
CONSENT CALENDAR
4a. Adopt Resolution designating 2013 polling places and appointing election judges for
the August 13, 2013, Municipal Primary Election and the November 5, 2013,
Municipal General Election and School Election
4b. Designate G.L. Contracting, Inc. the lowest responsible bidder and authorize execution
of a contract with the firm in the amount of $469,688.68 for the France Avenue
Improvements, Project No. 2010-0005
4c. Adopt Resolution accepting donations to the Fire Department
4d. Authorize execution of a contract with Rehrig Pacific in the amount of $798,837.00 for
the purchase of recycling and organic waste carts
4e. Adopt Resolution authorizing final payment in the amount of $3,170.50 and accepting
work for Fire Stations No. 1 and No. 2 Work Scope 15 (Acoustical Ceilings) for
Project Nos. 2008-3001 and 2008-3002, City Contract No. 66-11
4f. Adopt Resolution authorizing final payment in the amount of $4,418.75 and accepting
work for Fire Stations No. 1 and No. 2 Work Scope 04 (Precast Concrete) for Project
No. 2008-3001, City Contract No. 39-11.
4g. Adopt Resolution authorizing final payment in the amount of $115,274.84 and
accepting work for Fire Stations No. 1 and No. 2 Work Scope 03 (Cast-in-Place
Concrete/Masonry) for Project Nos. 2008-3001 & 2008-3002, City Contract No. 78-11
4h. Adopt Resolution modifying the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Victoria Ponds
TIF District and authorizing the use of the remaining pooling funds
4i. Approve for filing Housing Authority Meeting Minutes April 10, 2013
4j. Approve for filing Vendor Claims
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: Economic Development Authority
Meeting Date: July 1, 2013
Minutes: 3a
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
MAY 20, 2013
1. Call to Order
President Santa called the meeting to order at 7:20 p.m.
Commissioners present: President Sue Santa, Steve Hallfin, Jeff Jacobs, Anne Mavity, Julia
Ross, and Jake Spano.
Commissioners absent: Susan Sanger.
Staff present: Executive Director (Mr. Harmening), Director of Community Development (Mr.
Locke), Economic Development Coordinator (Mr. Hunt), Communications Coordinator (Mr.
Zwilling), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Hughes).
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Minutes
3a. Economic Development Authority Minutes May 6, 2013
The minutes were approved as presented.
4. Approval of Agenda
The agenda was approved as presented.
5. Reports
5a. EDA Vendor Claims
It was moved by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Mavity, to accept for
filing Vendor Claims for the period April 27 through May 10, 2013.
The motion passed 6-0 (Commissioner Sanger absent).
6. Old Business - None
7. New Business
7a. Redevelopment Contract with Eliot Park Apartments, LLC.
EDA Resolution No. 13-05.
Mr. Hunt presented the staff report and explained that Hunt Associates has signed a
purchase agreement for the former Eliot School property and proposes to raze the
Economic Development Authority Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 3a) Page 2
Title: Economic Development Authority Meeting Minutes of May 20, 2013
building and construct a multi-family development of 138 market rate apartments and
two single family homes. He advised the redeveloper hopes to begin construction this
year, however it might be some time before the financing is in place and construction
may not begin until next summer. He stated that in order to accommodate this, the
redevelopment contract allows construction to commence by July 1, 2014, with
substantial completion of both the apartment homes and single family homes by
December 1, 2015. He stated the redeveloper has applied for TIF assistance from the
EDA in order to offset a portion of the extraordinary costs to redevelop the site, including
asbestos abatement, lead –based paint removal, building demolition, and constructing the
project in conformance with the Design Guidelines. It was determined that $1.1 million
in TIF assistance was needed to move the project forward. He noted that the EDA
applied for a $325,000 contamination cleanup grant through the Met Council and if this
grant were awarded, the amount of TIF assistance would be decreased by the amount of
the grant, thus shortening the payback period. He stated the property is currently tax
exempt and the property will become taxable after the transfer of the property to the
redeveloper and the estimated market value of the property upon redevelopment has been
conservatively estimated at $17.7 million. He indicated the EDA’s participation would
leverage approximately $25 million in new investment and the ratio of private to public
investment in the project is $23 to $1 and the TIF assistance is consistent with other
similar sized multi-family developments the EDA has previously assisted. He pointed
out the TIF assistance does not constitute a business subsidy because the project is for
housing and the request for TIF assistance is considered reasonable given the total
projected value of the redevelopment. He then introduced Mr. Dan Hunt (Hunt
Associates) and EDA legal counsel Ms. Martha Ingram.
It was moved by Commissioner Ross, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs, to adopt EDA
Resolution No. 13-05 Approving a Contract for Private Redevelopment with Eliot Park
Apartments, LLC.
The motion passed 5-1 (Commissioner Hallfin opposed; Commissioner Sanger absent).
8. Communications - None
9. Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 7:25 p.m.
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Secretary President
Meeting: Economic Development Authority
Meeting Date: July 1, 2013
Agenda Item: 5a
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: EDA Vendor Claims
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to accept for filing EDA Vendor Claims for the period
May 11 through June 21, 2013.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUMMARY: The Finance Department prepares this report on a monthly basis for Council’s
review.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: EDA Vendor Claims
Prepared by: Connie Neubeck, Account Clerk
6/26/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 13:56:35R55CKSUMLOG23000VO
1Page -Council Check Summary
6/21/2013 -5/11/2013
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
110.00-DEVELOPMENT - EDA BALANCE SHEE DUE TO OTHER GOVTS11TH HOUR HEROICS LLC
1,710.00PUBLIC ART OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,600.00
720.00ELIOT PARK TIF DIST G&A LEGAL SERVICESCAMPBELL KNUTSON PROF ASSOC
32.00DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A LEGAL SERVICES
752.00
4,670.29CONVENTION & VISITORS BUREAU MISC EXPENSECREATIVE NERVE INC
4,670.29
675.00BALLY'S REDEVELOPMENT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESEHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC
632.50WEST END TIF DIST G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
631.50ELLIPSE ON EXC TIF DIST G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
628.50HSTI G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
632.50VICTORIA PONDS G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
632.50PARK CENTER HOUSING G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
632.50CSM TIF DIST G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
632.50MILL CITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
632.50PARK COMMONS G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
632.50EDGEWOOD TIF DIST G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
857.50ELMWOOD VILLAGE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
632.50WOLFE LAKE COMMERCIAL TIF G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
632.50AQUILA COMMONS G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
632.50HWY 7 BUSINESS CENTER G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
632.50HARD COAT G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
9,750.00
1,750.00PUBLIC ART OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESFORECAST PUBLIC ART
1,750.00
1,522.40DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A AUDITING AND ACCOUNTING SERVICHLB TAUTGES REDPATH LTD
1,522.40
3,362.75LOUISIANA LRT STATION OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESHOISINGTON KOEGLER GROUP INC
3,362.75
3,000.00HRA LEVY G&A LEGAL SERVICESLOCKRIDGE GRINDAL NAUEN PLLP
3,000.00
5,625.00PUBLIC ART OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESMYKLEBUST + SEARS
5,625.00
Economic Development Authority Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 5a)
Title: EDA Vendor Claims Page 2
6/26/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 13:56:35R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
2Page -Council Check Summary
6/21/2013 -5/11/2013
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
200.04DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A TELEPHONENEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS
200.04
10.58DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A OFFICE SUPPLIESOFFICE DEPOT
10.58
2,941.30DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESSEH
2,941.30
62,607.49CONVENTION & VISITORS BUREAU COST REIMBURSEMENT-VISIONST LOUIS PARK CONV & VISITORS
62,607.49
200.00DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPSST LOUIS PARK SUNRISE ROTARY
200.00
90.00DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTATTWIN WEST CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
90.00
32.14HWY 7 & LOUISIANA ELECTRIC SERVICEXCEL ENERGY
32.14
Report Totals 98,113.99
Economic Development Authority Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 5a)
Title: EDA Vendor Claims Page 3
Meeting: Economic Development Authority
Meeting Date: July 1, 2013
Action Agenda Item: 7a
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Victoria Ponds TIF District
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt EDA Resolution modifying the Tax Increment
Financing Plan for the Victoria Ponds TIF District and authorizing the use of the remaining
pooling funds.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the EDA support use of the approximately $490,000 in
remaining pooling funds within the Victoria Ponds TIF District as proposed?
SUMMARY:
It is estimated that there will be approximately $490,000 available for legal pooling after the
final Victoria Ponds tax increment payment is made to SVK Development on August 1st.
Pursuant to the TIF Management Review & Analysis Report prepared by Ehlers & Associates
and as discussed at the May 13th Study Session, it is proposed that the EDA and City modify the
Victoria Ponds TIF District Plan prior to August 1st and develop a plan for the use of the
remaining funds. If no modification to the TIF Plan is completed by that date, the balance must
be returned to Hennepin County.
It is proposed that the remaining funds from the Victoria Ponds TIF District be allocated towards
the installation of a traffic signal at the intersection of 36th Street and Xenwood Avenue as well
as reconstruction of the intersection and traffic signal at 36th Street and Wooddale Avenue. Both
projects are listed in the City’s Capital Improvement Program and are scheduled for completion
in 2016 in concert with the proposed SWLRT construction and implementation.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: It is proposed that the remaining pooling
funds within the Victoria Ponds TIF District (approximately $490,000) be allocated towards the
installation of a traffic signal at the intersection of 36th Street and Xenwood Avenue and
reconstruction of the intersection and traffic signal at 36th Street and Wooddale Avenue.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not Applicable
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Resolution
Modified Victoria Ponds TIF Plan
Prepared by: Greg Hunt, Economic Development Coordinator
Reviewed by: Kevin Locke, Community Development Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, EDA Executive Director and City Manager
Economic Development Authority Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 7a) Page 2
Title: Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Victoria Ponds TIF District
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND:
The Victoria Ponds TIF District was established on April 1, 1996. This redevelopment TIF
district was created to facilitate the construction of 74 owner occupied townhomes west of
Victoria Lake. Tax increment from this district was utilized for payment on the $760,000
PAYGO note with SVK Development, the project’s developer. With the August 1st payment, the
note will be paid in full. Statutorily, once all outstanding obligations of a TIF district are paid off,
the TIF district must be decertified.
After the first half increment is received and the final SVK payment is disbursed it is estimated
that there will be approximately $490,000 available for legal pooling. Pursuant to the TIF
Management Review & Analysis Report prepared by Ehlers & Associates, and as discussed at the
May 13th Study Session, it is recommended that the EDA modify the Victoria Ponds TIF District
Plan prior to August 1st and develop a plan for the use of these legal pooling funds. If no pooling
is completed by August 1st when the obligation is fully satisfied, the balance must be returned to
Hennepin County.
MN Statute 469.176 subd. 4j specifies the activities on which tax increment from a
redevelopment district may be spent. In general, tax increment must be spent on correcting those
conditions which caused the area to be designated a redevelopment district in the first place.
Allowable uses include property acquisition, demolition, rehabilitation, installation of public
utilities, road, sidewalks, public parking facilities, and allowable administrative expenses.
Given these allowable uses, it is proposed that the remaining funds be allocated towards the
installation of a traffic signal at the intersection of 36th Street and Xenwood Avenue as well as
the reconstruction of the intersection and traffic signal at 36th Street and Wooddale Avenue.
These projects are located within the Elmwood Village Renewal and Renovation TIF District
and will facilitate current and future redevelopment efforts. Both projects are listed in the City’s
Capital Improvement Program and are scheduled to be completed in 2016 in concert with the
proposed SWLRT construction and implementation. These projects were identified to be paid
with tax increment from the Elmwood TIF District. In the later years of that district it is
estimated there will be sufficient funds to meet these obligations. However, in 2016, it is
estimated that there will be insufficient cash flow to cover these project costs due to the timing of
other financial obligations within that district. Rather than borrowing to cover the cost of these
projects or increasing the existing interfund loan with the Development Fund, it is proposed that
the remaining tax increment from the Victoria Ponds TIF District be utilized.
PRESENT CONSIDERATIONS: None
NEXT STEPS: Later this year, pursuant to the recommendations within the TIF Management
Review & Analysis Report and in compliance with state statutes, the EDA will be asked to
decertify the Victoria Ponds TIF District.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 7a) Page 3
Title: Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Victoria Ponds TIF District
ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
RESOLUTION NO. 13-____
RESOLUTION APPROVING MODIFICATION OF
REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR REDEVELOPMENT PROEJCT
NO. 1 AND TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR
VICTORIA PONDS TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT
WHEREAS, St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority (the “Authority”)
administers Redevelopment Project No. 1 (the “Project”) and the Victoria Ponds Tax Increment
Financing (the “TIF District”) within the Project, pursuant to and in conformity with Minnesota
Statutes, Sections 469.090 through 469.1081 (the “EDA Act”), Sections 460.001 to 469.047 (the
“HRA Act”) and Sections 469.174 to 469.179 (the “TIF Act”); and
WHEREAS, the City of St. Louis Park (the “City”) and Authority have determined a
need to modify the description of authorized tax increment expenditures in the Tax Increment
Financing Plan (the “TIF Plan”) for the TIF District; and
WHEREAS, under Section 469.175, subd. 4 of the TIF Act, the Authority may modify
the TIF Plan for the TIF District without the notice and hearings required for a new district, if the
changes are not those described in Section 469.175, subdivision 4(b), clauses (1) through (6);
and
WHEREAS, under Section 469.029, the Authority may modify the Redevelopment Plan
for the Project without hearings if the modification does not change the exterior boundaries of
the Project or affect general land uses established under the Redevelopment Plan; and
WHEREAS, the proposed modifications to the TIF Plan include a more detailed
description of expenditures to finance additional infrastructure costs within the Project but
outside the TIF District, within the limits allowed under the TIF Act, but the modifications do
not increase the total estimated tax increment expenditures or the total amount of bonded
indebtedness; and
WHEREAS, the proposed modifications to the Redevelopment Plan simply
acknowledge the changes proposed in the TIF Plan and do not affect the Project boundaries or
land uses;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the board of commissioners of the St.
Louis Park Economic Development Authority as follows:
1. The administrative modification to the TIF Plan and Redevelopment Plan is hereby
approved in substantially the form on file in City Hall.
2. Upon approval of the modification to the TIF Plan and Redevelopment Plan by the
City Council of the City, the Community Development Director is authorized to
forward a copy of the modified plans to the Department of Revenue and the State
Auditor pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 469.175, subd.4a.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 7a) Page 4
Title: Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Victoria Ponds TIF District
3. The City Clerk is authorized and directed to forward a copy of the modified plans to
Hennepin County for information purposes.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the Economic Development
Authority, July 1, 2013
Executive Director President
Attest
Secretary
FINAL COPY
Modification to the Redevelopment Plan
for Redevelopment Project No. 1
and the
Tax Increment Financing Plan
for the modification of the
Victoria Ponds Tax Increment Financing District
(a redevelopment district)
within
Redevelopment Project No. 1
St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority
City of St. Louis Park
Hennepin County
State of Minnesota
Public Hearing: March 18, 1996
Adopted: April 1, 2006
Modification #1: April 7, 2008
Modification #2: July 1, 2013
Prepared by: EHLERS & ASSOCIATES, INC.
3060 Centre Pointe Drive, Roseville, Minnesota 55113-1105
651-697-8500 fax: 651-697-8555 www.ehlers-inc.com
Economic Development Authority Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Victoria Ponds TIF District Page 5
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(for reference purposes only)
SECTION I.
MODIFIED REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT ...............................................1-1
SECTION II
TAX INCREMENT PLAN FOR THE VICTORIA PONDS TAX INCREMENT
FINANCING DISTRICT .......................................................2-1
A. Forward .............................................................2-1
B. Statutory Authority ....................................................2-1
C. Statement of Objectives.................................................2-2
D. Redevelopment Plan Overview ...........................................2-2
E. Legal Description of Property in the Victoria Ponds Tax Increment Financing
District ..............................................................2-2
F. Classification of the Victoria Ponds Tax Increment Financing District ............2-3
G. Property To Be Acquired................................................2-4
H. Estimate of Project Costs................................................2-5
I. Bonded Indebtedness ...................................................2-7
J. Sources of Revenue ....................................................2-7
K. Original Tax Capacity and Tax Rate .......................................2-8
L. Estimated Captured Net Tax Capacity Value/Increment........................2-9
M Duration of the Victoria Ponds District .....................................2-9
N. Estimated Impact on Other Taxing Jurisdictions.............................2-10
O. Modifications to the Victoria Ponds District ................................2-11
P. Administrative Expenses ...............................................2-12
Q. Limitation of Increment................................................2-13
R. Use of Tax Increment..................................................2-14
S. Notification of Prior Planned Improvements ...............................2-15
T. Excess Tax Increments .................................................2-15
U. Requirements for Agreements with the Developer ...........................2-16
V. Assessment Agreements ...............................................2-16
W. Administration of the Victoria Ponds District ...............................2-16
X. Financial Reporting Requirements........................................2-17
Y. Municipal Approval and Public Purpose...................................2-18
Z. State Tax Increment Financing Aid.......................................2-19
AA Fiscal Disparities Election ..............................................2-20
AB. County Road Costs ...................................................2-21
AC. Economic Development and Job Creation ..................................2-21
AD. Business Subsidies ....................................................2-21
AE. Summary ...........................................................2-22
APPENDIX A
BOUNDARY MAP OF REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AND
THE VICTORIA PONDS TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT ............... A-1
Economic Development Authority Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Victoria Ponds TIF District Page 6
APPENDIX B
LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR THE VICTORIA PONDS TAX INCREMENT
FINANCING DISTRICT ..................................................... B-1
APPENDIX C
MINNESOTA BUSINESS ASSISTANCE FORM ................................. C-1
Economic Development Authority Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Victoria Ponds TIF District Page 7
TIF Plan for the Victoria Ponds Tax Increment District 1-1
07-117-21-41-0072 07-117-21-41-0097 08-117-21-32-0066 08-117-21-32-0093
07-117-21-41-0074 07-117-21-41-0098 08-117-21-32-0067 08-117-21-32-0094
07-117-21-41-0075 07-117-21-41-0099 08-117-21-32-0068 08-117-21-32-0095
07-117-21-41-0076 07-117-21-41-0100 08-117-21-32-0069 08-117-21-32-0096
07-117-21-41-0077 07-117-21-41-0101 08-117-21-32-0071 08-117-21-32-0097
07-117-21-41-0078 07-117-21-41-0102 08-117-21-32-0074 08-117-21-32-0098
07-117-21-41-0079 07-117-21-41-0103 08-117-21-32-0075 08-117-21-32-0099
07-117-21-41-0080 07-117-21-41-0104 08-117-21-32-0076 08-117-21-32-0100
07-117-21-41-0081 07-117-21-41-0105 08-117-21-32-0077 18-117-21-12-0048
07-117-21-41-0082 07-117-21-41-0106 08-117-21-32-0078 18-117-21-12-0049
07-117-21-41-0083 07-117-21-41-0107 08-117-21-32-0079 18-117-21-12-0050
07-117-21-41-0084 07-117-21-44-0103 08-117-21-32-0080 18-117-21-12-0051
07-117-21-41-0085 08-117-21-32-0054 08-117-21-32-0081 18-117-21-12-0052
07-117-21-41-0086 08-117-21-32-0055 08-117-21-32-0082 18-117-21-12-0053
07-117-21-41-0087 08-117-21-32-0056 08-117-21-32-0083 18-117-21-12-0054
07-117-21-41-0088 08-117-21-32-0057 08-117-21-32-0084 18-117-21-12-0055
07-117-21-41-0089 08-117-21-32-0058 08-117-21-32-0085 18-117-21-12-0056
07-117-21-41-0090 08-117-21-32-0059 08-117-21-32-0086 18-117-21-13-0088
07-117-21-41-0091 08-117-21-32-0060 08-117-21-32-0087 18-117-21-13-0089
07-117-21-41-0092 08-117-21-32-0061 08-117-21-32-0088 18-117-21-13-0090
07-117-21-41-0093 08-117-21-32-0062 08-117-21-32-0089 18-117-21-31-0063
07-117-21-41-0094 08-117-21-32-0063 08-117-21-32-0090 18-117-21-34-0021
07-117-21-41-0095 08-117-21-32-0064 08-117-21-32-0091 18-117-21-34-0022
07-117-21-41-0096 08-117-21-32-0065 08-117-21-32-0092
SECTION I.
MODIFIED REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
FOR REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
NARRATIVE BOUNDARY DESCRIPTION
The following property was included in the Redevelopment Project area as a result of the March 18, 1996
Plan modifications:
PID Numbers:
08-117-21-32-0050
18-117-21-31-0001
18-117-21-12-0005
07-117-21-44-0103
(AS MODIFIED APRIL 7, 2008)
The following properties are the current list of property identification numbers for the district due to
property subdivisions and replatting:
See attached map in Appendix A showing the boundaries of the Redevelopment Project and the Victoria
Ponds Tax Increment Financing District.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Victoria Ponds TIF District Page 8
TIF Plan for the Victoria Ponds Tax Increment District 2-1
SECTION II
TAX INCREMENT PLAN FOR THE VICTORIA PONDS TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT
A.Forward
The City, staff and consultants have prepared the following information to expedite and create the Victoria
Ponds Tax Increment Financing District (The “Victoria Ponds District”) in the Redevelopment Project Area.
B.Statutory Authority
Within the City, there exist areas where public involvement is necessary to cause development or
redevelopment to occur. To this end, the City has certain statutory powers pursuant to the TIF Act to assist
in financing eligible activities related to these development needs.
This Section contains the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Victoria Ponds District. Other relevant
information is contained in the Redevelopment Plan for the Redevelopment Project.
(AS MODIFIED APRIL 7, 2008)
Within the City, there exist areas where public involvement is necessary to cause development or
redevelopment to occur. To this end, the City and EDA has certain statutory powers pursuant to Minnesota
Statutes ("M.S."), Sections 469.090 to 469.1082 inclusive, as amended, and M.S., Sections 469.174 through
469.1799, inclusive, as amended (the "Tax Increment Financing Act" or "TIF Act"), to assist in financing
public costs related to this project.
The following contains the modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan (the "Plan") for District No.
1.
C.Statement of Objectives
The Victoria Ponds District currently consists of 4 parcels of land. Present plans on the site include the
construction of 74 owner occupied townhouse units. The tax increment assistance is intended to assist the
developer with on site soil problems. At this time the estimated cost of the soil correction is $760,000. The
estimated total public cost of the project is approximately $1,700,000.
The activities contemplated in the present Redevelopment Plan and Tax Increment Financing Plan do not
preclude the undertaking of other qualified redevelopment activities. These activities are anticipated to occur
over the life of the tax increment district.
The Victoria Ponds District is expected to achieve many of the objectives set forth the section
“Redevelopment Plan Objectives” in the Redevelopment Plan.
(AS MODIFIED APRIL 7, 2008)
The Tax Increment Financing Plan for Victoria Ponds Tax Increment Financing District is being modified
to provide budgetary authority to utilize increased tax increments collected from the District and to modify
the budget to reflect actual project activity to date and to bring it into compliance with the State Auditor
budget requirements.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Victoria Ponds TIF District Page 9
TIF Plan for the Victoria Ponds Tax Increment District 2-2
(AS MODIFIED JULY 1, 2013)
The Tax Increment financing Plan for Victoria Ponds Tax Increment Financing Disrict is being
modified to authorize the use of approximately $490,000 in legal pooling funds to finance public
improvements which consist of the installation of a traffic signal at the intersection of 36th Street and
Xenwood Avenue and reconstruction of the intersection and traffic signal at 36th Street and
Wooddale Avenue. These projects are located within the Elmwood Village Renewal and
Renovation TIF District and will facilitate current and future redevelopment efforts. Both projects
are listed in the City’’s Capital Improvement Program and are scheduled to be completed in 2016
in concert with the proposed SWLRT construction and implementation.
D.Redevelopment Plan Overview
1. Property to be Acquired - Selected property located within the Victoria
Ponds District by the City and is further described in Section G of this Plan.
2. Relocation - Complete relocation services are available pursuant to
Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 117 and other relevant state and federal laws.
3. Upon approval of the developer's plan relating to the project and completion
of the necessary legal requirements, the City may sell to the developer
selected properties that they may acquire within the Victoria Ponds District
or may lease land or facilities to the developer.
4. The City may perform or provide for some or all necessary acquisition,
construction, relocation, demolition, and required utilities and public streets
work within the Victoria Ponds District.
E.Legal Description of Property in the Victoria Ponds Tax Increment Financing District
The Victoria Ponds District encompasses all property and adjacent rights-of-way identified by parcel numbers
listed below:
PID Numbers
08-117-21-32-005018-117-21-31-0001
18-117-21-12-0005
07-117-21-44-0103
See the map in Appendix A for further information on the location of the Victoria Ponds District.
(AS MODIFIED APRIL 7, 2008)
The District encompasses all property and adjacent rights-of-way identified by the parcel list on the
following page:
Economic Development Authority Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Victoria Ponds TIF District Page 10
TIF Plan for the Victoria Ponds Tax Increment District 2-3
07-117-21-41-0072 07-117-21-41-0097 08-117-21-32-0066 08-117-21-32-0093
07-117-21-41-0074 07-117-21-41-0098 08-117-21-32-0067 08-117-21-32-0094
07-117-21-41-0075 07-117-21-41-0099 08-117-21-32-0068 08-117-21-32-0095
07-117-21-41-0076 07-117-21-41-0100 08-117-21-32-0069 08-117-21-32-0096
07-117-21-41-0077 07-117-21-41-0101 08-117-21-32-0071 08-117-21-32-0097
07-117-21-41-0078 07-117-21-41-0102 08-117-21-32-0074 08-117-21-32-0098
07-117-21-41-0079 07-117-21-41-0103 08-117-21-32-0075 08-117-21-32-0099
07-117-21-41-0080 07-117-21-41-0104 08-117-21-32-0076 08-117-21-32-0100
07-117-21-41-0081 07-117-21-41-0105 08-117-21-32-0077 18-117-21-12-0048
07-117-21-41-0082 07-117-21-41-0106 08-117-21-32-0078 18-117-21-12-0049
07-117-21-41-0083 07-117-21-41-0107 08-117-21-32-0079 18-117-21-12-0050
07-117-21-41-0084 07-117-21-44-0103 08-117-21-32-0080 18-117-21-12-0051
07-117-21-41-0085 08-117-21-32-0054 08-117-21-32-0081 18-117-21-12-0052
07-117-21-41-0086 08-117-21-32-0055 08-117-21-32-0082 18-117-21-12-0053
07-117-21-41-0087 08-117-21-32-0056 08-117-21-32-0083 18-117-21-12-0054
07-117-21-41-0088 08-117-21-32-0057 08-117-21-32-0084 18-117-21-12-0055
07-117-21-41-0089 08-117-21-32-0058 08-117-21-32-0085 18-117-21-12-0056
07-117-21-41-0090 08-117-21-32-0059 08-117-21-32-0086 18-117-21-13-0088
07-117-21-41-0091 08-117-21-32-0060 08-117-21-32-0087 18-117-21-13-0089
07-117-21-41-0092 08-117-21-32-0061 08-117-21-32-0088 18-117-21-13-0090
07-117-21-41-0093 08-117-21-32-0062 08-117-21-32-0089 18-117-21-31-0063
07-117-21-41-0094 08-117-21-32-0063 08-117-21-32-0090 18-117-21-34-0021
07-117-21-41-0095 08-117-21-32-0064 08-117-21-32-0091 18-117-21-34-0022
07-117-21-41-0096 08-117-21-32-0065 08-117-21-32-0092
F.Classification of the Victoria Ponds Tax Increment Financing District
The City, in determining the need to create a tax increment financing district in accordance with Minnesota
Statutes, Section 469.174 to 469.179, as amended, inclusive, finds that the Victoria Ponds Tax Increment
Financing District to be established is a redevelopment district pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section
469.174, Subdivision 10 as defined below:
(a) "Redevelopment district" means a type of tax increment financing district consisting of a project,
or portions of a project, within which the authority finds by resolution that one of the following
conditions, reasonably distributed throughout the district, exists:
(1) parcels consisting of 70 percent of the area in the district are occupied by buildings,
streets, utilities, or other improvements and more than 50 percent of the buildings, not
including outbuildings, are structurally substandard to a degree requiring substantial
renovation or clearance; or
(2) The property consists of vacant, unused, underused, inappropriately used, or
infrequently used railyards, rail storage facilities or excessive or vacated railroad
rights-of-way.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Victoria Ponds TIF District Page 11
TIF Plan for the Victoria Ponds Tax Increment District 2-4
(b) For purposes of this subdivision, "structurally substandard" shall mean containing defects in
structural elements or a combination of deficiencies in essential utilities and facilities, light and
ventilation, fire protection including adequate egress, layout and condition of interior partitions,
or similar factors, which defects or deficiencies are of sufficient total significance to justify
substantial renovation or clearance.
A building is not structurally substandard if it is in compliance with the building code applicable
to new buildings or could be modified to satisfy the building code at a cost of less than 15
percent of the cost of constructing a new structure of the same square footage and type on the
site. The municipality may find that a building is not disqualified as structurally substandard
under the preceding sentence on the basis of reasonably available evidence, such as the size,
type, and age of the building, the average cost of plumbing, electrical, or structural repairs or
other similar reliable evidence. If the evidence supports a reasonable conclusion that the
building is not disqualified as structurally substandard, the municipality may make such a
determination without an interior inspection or an independent, expert appraisal of the cost of
repair and rehabilitation of the building.
(c) For purposes of this subdivision, a parcel is not occupied by buildings, streets, utilities or other
improvements until 15 percent of the area of the parcel contains improvements.
In meeting the statutory criteria described above, the City relies on the following facts and findings:
1. The Victoria Ponds District consists of vacant, unused, under used, inappropriately used, or
infrequently used railyards, rail storage facilities or excessive or vacated railroad rights-of-way.
G.Property To Be Acquired
The City may acquire any parcel within the Victoria Ponds District including interior and adjacent street
rights of way.
1. Any properties identified for acquisition will be acquired by the City only in order to accomplish one
or more of the following: storm sewer improvements; provide land for needed public streets, utilities
and facilities; carry out land acquisition, site improvements, clearance and/or development to
accomplish the uses and objectives set forth in this plan.
2. The following are conditions under which properties not designated to be acquired may be acquired:
The City may acquire property by gift, dedication, condemnation or direct purchase from willing
sellers in order to achieve the objectives of this tax increment financing plan. Such acquisitions will
be undertaken only when there is assurance of funding to finance the acquisition and related costs.
(AS MODIFIED APRIL 7, 2008)
The parcels on the following page may be acquired with tax increments generated from the District.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Victoria Ponds TIF District Page 12
TIF Plan for the Victoria Ponds Tax Increment District 2-5
07-117-21-41-0072 07-117-21-41-0097 08-117-21-32-0066 08-117-21-32-0093
07-117-21-41-0074 07-117-21-41-0098 08-117-21-32-0067 08-117-21-32-0094
07-117-21-41-0075 07-117-21-41-0099 08-117-21-32-0068 08-117-21-32-0095
07-117-21-41-0076 07-117-21-41-0100 08-117-21-32-0069 08-117-21-32-0096
07-117-21-41-0077 07-117-21-41-0101 08-117-21-32-0071 08-117-21-32-0097
07-117-21-41-0078 07-117-21-41-0102 08-117-21-32-0074 08-117-21-32-0098
07-117-21-41-0079 07-117-21-41-0103 08-117-21-32-0075 08-117-21-32-0099
07-117-21-41-0080 07-117-21-41-0104 08-117-21-32-0076 08-117-21-32-0100
07-117-21-41-0081 07-117-21-41-0105 08-117-21-32-0077 18-117-21-12-0048
07-117-21-41-0082 07-117-21-41-0106 08-117-21-32-0078 18-117-21-12-0049
07-117-21-41-0083 07-117-21-41-0107 08-117-21-32-0079 18-117-21-12-0050
07-117-21-41-0084 07-117-21-44-0103 08-117-21-32-0080 18-117-21-12-0051
07-117-21-41-0085 08-117-21-32-0054 08-117-21-32-0081 18-117-21-12-0052
07-117-21-41-0086 08-117-21-32-0055 08-117-21-32-0082 18-117-21-12-0053
07-117-21-41-0087 08-117-21-32-0056 08-117-21-32-0083 18-117-21-12-0054
07-117-21-41-0088 08-117-21-32-0057 08-117-21-32-0084 18-117-21-12-0055
07-117-21-41-0089 08-117-21-32-0058 08-117-21-32-0085 18-117-21-12-0056
07-117-21-41-0090 08-117-21-32-0059 08-117-21-32-0086 18-117-21-13-0088
07-117-21-41-0091 08-117-21-32-0060 08-117-21-32-0087 18-117-21-13-0089
07-117-21-41-0092 08-117-21-32-0061 08-117-21-32-0088 18-117-21-13-0090
07-117-21-41-0093 08-117-21-32-0062 08-117-21-32-0089 18-117-21-31-0063
07-117-21-41-0094 08-117-21-32-0063 08-117-21-32-0090 18-117-21-34-0021
07-117-21-41-0095 08-117-21-32-0064 08-117-21-32-0091 18-117-21-34-0022
07-117-21-41-0096 08-117-21-32-0065 08-117-21-32-0092
H.Estimate of Project Costs
Currently under consideration is a proposal by the City to encourage construction of 74 townhouse units. To
facilitate this project, this Plan authorizes the use of tax increment financing to pay for the cost of certain
eligible expenses. The estimate of public costs associated with Victoria Ponds District are outlined in the
following line item budget.
Estimate of Public Costs
Item Estimate of Costs
Soil Correction $760,000
Public Improvements, Site Improvements
and Land Acquisition 770,000
10% City Administration 170,000
TOTAL $1,700,000
Estimated costs associated with the Victoria Ponds Tax Increment Financing District are subject to change.
The cost of all activities to be considered for tax increment financing will not exceed $1,700,000. No more
than 25 percent of the tax increment paid by property within the Victoria Ponds District will be spent on
activities related to redevelopment outside of the Victoria Ponds District (including administrative costs,
which are considered to be spent outside of the Victoria Ponds District).
Economic Development Authority Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Victoria Ponds TIF District Page 13
TIF Plan for the Victoria Ponds Tax Increment District 2-6
(AS MODIFIED APRIL 7, 2008)
Public improvement costs, utilities, streets and sidewalks, and site preparation costs and other costs outlined
in the Uses of Funds will be financed primarily through the annual collection of tax increments. The City
and EDA reserve the right to use other sources of revenue legally applicable to the City, the EDA and the TIF
Plan, including, but not limited to, special assessments, general property taxes, state aid for road maintenance
and construction, proceeds from the sale of land, other contributions from the developer and investment
income, to pay for the estimated public costs.
The estimate of public costs expected to be paid with tax increments associated with the original and modified
District is outlined in the following table.
USES OF FUNDS TOTAL
Land/Building Acquisition $1,500,000
Site Improvements/Preparation $500,000
Public Utilities $0
Parking Facilities $0
Streets and Sidewalks $85,000
Interest $800,000
Return to County $1,000,000
Other Public Improvements $1,930,000
Administrative Costs (up to 10%)$500,000
PROJECT COSTS TOTAL $6,315,000
Transfer Out $10,000
Bond Principal $1,200,000
Loan Principal $4,000,000
The above referenced budget includes the original TIF budget plus the budget for the modification of the
district.
The above budget is organized according to the Office of State Auditor (OSA) reporting forms.
It is estimated that the cost of improvements, including administrative expenses which will be paid or
financed with tax increments, will equal $6,315,000 as is presented in the budget above.
Estimated costs associated with the District are subject to change among categories without a modification
to this TIF Plan. The cost of all activities to be considered for tax increment financing will not exceed,
without formal modification, the budget above pursuant to the applicable statutory requirements. Pursuant
to M.S., Section 469.1763, Subd. 2, no more than 25 percent of the tax increment paid by property within the
District will be spent on activities related to development or redevelopment outside of the District but within
the boundaries of the Project, (including administrative costs, which are considered to be spent outside of the
District) subject to the limitations as described in this TIF Plan.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Victoria Ponds TIF District Page 14
TIF Plan for the Victoria Ponds Tax Increment District 2-7
I.Bonded Indebtedness
The City reserves the right to incur bonded indebtedness as a result of the Tax Increment Financing Plan.
As presently proposed, the city is not planning to issue General Obligation Bonds.
The City intends to finance the activities to be undertaken pursuant to the Tax Increment Financing Plan by
reimbursing the Developer on a “pay-as-you-go” basis for eligible activities paid for by the Developer.
(AS MODIFIED APRIL 7, 2008)
The costs outlined in the Uses of Funds will be financed primarily through the annual collection of tax
increments. The EDA or City reserves the right to use other sources of revenue legally applicable to the EDA
or City and the TIF Plan, including, but not limited to, special assessments, general property taxes, state aid
for road maintenance and construction, proceeds from the sale of land, other contributions from the developer
and investment income, to pay for the estimated public costs.
The EDA or City reserves the right to incur bonded indebtedness or other indebtedness as a result of the TIF
Plan. As presently proposed, the project will be financed by one or more pay-as-you-go notes. Additional
indebtedness may be required to finance other authorized activities. The total principal amount of bonded
indebtedness, including general obligation (GO) TIF bonds, pay-as-you-go notes or other indebtedness by
tax increments, will not exceed $1,200,000 without a modification to the TIF Plan pursuant to applicable
statutory requirements. It is estimated that up to $10,000 in transfers may be financed with tax increment
revenues.
This provision does not obligate the EDA or City to incur debt. The EDA or City will issue bonds or incur
other debt only upon the determination that such action is in the best interest of the City.
The other financing sources listed above is included for purposes of OSA reporting for the TIF District. It
is not intended to be cumulative. Transfers are included in case money is moved from one fund to another
before an expenditure.
(AS MODIFIED JULY 1, 2013)
The City/EDA will be utilizing approxiamtely $490,000 in legal pooling funds to finance public
improvements which consist of the installation of a traffic signal at the intersection of 36th Street and
Xenwood Avenue and reconstruction of the intersection and traffic signal at 36th Street and
Wooddale Avenue. These projects are located within the Elmwood Village Renewal and
Renovation TIF District and will facilitate current and future redevelopment efforts. Both projects
are listed in the City’’s Capital Improvement Program and are scheduled to be completed in 2016
in concert with the proposed SWLRT construction and implementation.
J.Sources of Revenue
Public improvements costs, acquisition, relocation, and site preparation costs and other costs outlined in the
Estimate of Costs (Subsection H) will be financed through the annual collection of tax increments.
(AS MODIFIED APRIL 7, 2008)
In order to facilitate the redevelopment of the District, this TIF Plan authorizes the use of tax increment
Economic Development Authority Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Victoria Ponds TIF District Page 15
TIF Plan for the Victoria Ponds Tax Increment District 2-8
financing to pay for the cost of certain eligible expenses. The estimate of public costs and uses of funds
associated with the District is outlined in the following table.
*The chart below includes the sources of funds for the original and modified District.
SOURCES OF FUNDS TOTAL
Tax Increment $6,100,000
Interest Income $200,000
Local Contribution $15,000
PROJECT REVENUES $6,315,000
Transfer In $1,210,000
Loan Principal $4,000,000
The other financing uses listed above is included for purposes of OSA reporting for the TIF District. It is not
intended to be cumulative. TIF is expected to be used for the project costs listed above, which is a not-to-
exceed budget rather than an expected budget of costs.
Pursuant to MN Statute 469.175 Sub 1 (5), it is estimated that the cost of improvements, including
administrative expenses which will be paid or financed with tax increments, will equal $6,315,000. For
purposes of OSA reporting forms, it is estimated that the cost of improvements, including financing which
will be paid for with tax increment will equal $11,525,000 as is presented in the budget on the previous page.
Estimated costs associated with the District are subject to change among categories without a modification
to this TIF Plan. The cost of all activities to be considered for tax increment financing will not exceed,
without formal modification, the budget above pursuant to the applicable statutory requirements. Project
costs may be spent on activities related to development or redevelopment outside of the District but within
the boundaries of the Project, (including administrative costs, which are considered to be spent outside of the
District) subject to the limitations as described in this TIF Plan.
K.Original Tax Capacity and Tax Rate
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 7 and Section 469.177, Subdivision 1, the
Original Net Tax Capacity (ONTC) as certified for the Victoria Ponds District is based on the market values
placed on the property by the assessor in 1995 for taxes payable 1996. The original tax capacity of the
property will be $29,351.
Pursuant to Section 469.177, Subds. 1 and 2, of the Tax Increment Financing Act, the County Auditor shall
certify in each year (beginning in the payment year 1998) the amount by which the original value has
increased or decreased as a result of a change in tax exempt property within the Tax Increment Financing
District, reduction or enlargement of the Tax Increment Financing District or changes in connection with
previously issued building permits. In any year in which the current Net Tax Capacity value of the District
declines below the ONTC, no value will be captured and no tax increment will be payable to the City.
The County Auditor shall certify in each year after the date the ONTC was certified (beginning in payment
year 1998), the amount the ONTC has increased or decreased as a result of:
Economic Development Authority Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Victoria Ponds TIF District Page 16
TIF Plan for the Victoria Ponds Tax Increment District 2-9
1. change in tax exempt status of property;
3. reduction or enlargement of the geographic boundaries of the district;
3. change due to adjustments, negotiated or court-ordered abatements;
4. change in the use of the property and classification; or
5. change in state law governing class rates.
The original local tax rate for the Victoria Ponds District will be the local tax rate for 1996 taxes. Since the
Pay 1996 tax rate is unavailable at this time, the proposed (“Truth-in-Taxation”) Pay 1996 rate is being used
for estimates. The proposed Pay 1996 tax rate for the Victoria Ponds District is 1.407510.
L.Estimated Captured Net Tax Capacity Value/Increment
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174 Subdivision 4 and Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.177,
Subdivision 1, 2, and 4, the estimated Captured Net Tax Capacity (CTC) of the Victoria Ponds District, within
the Redevelopment Project upon completion of the project, will annually approximate $152,891 or $215,196
in tax increment. The City requests 100 percent of the available increase in tax capacity for repayment of its
obligations and current expenditures, beginning in the tax year payable 1998. The project tax capacity listed
is an estimate of values when the project is completed.
Original Tax Capacity 29,351
Estimated Project Tax Capacity 182,242
Estimated Captured Tax Capacity 152,891
M Duration of the Victoria Ponds District
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 479.175, Subdivision 1, and Section 469.176, Subd. 1, the duration
of the Victoria Ponds District must be indicated within the Plan. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section
469.176, subdivision 1(b), the duration of the Victoria Ponds District will be 25 years from the date of receipt
of the first increment by the City. The date of receipt by the City of St Louis Park of the first tax increment
will be approximately July, 1998. Thus, it is estimated that Victoria Ponds District, including any
modifications of the Plan for subsequent phases or other changes, would terminate after 2022, or when the
Plan is satisfied. The City does reserve the right to decertify the Victoria Ponds District prior to the legally
required date.
(AS MODIFIED APRIL 7, 2008)
Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 1, and Section 469.176, Subd. 1, the duration of the District must
be indicated within the TIF Plan. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 1b, the duration of the District
will be 25 years after receipt of the first increment by the City (a total of 26 years of tax increment). The date
of receipt by the City of the first tax increment was July 1998. Thus, it is estimated that the District, including
any modifications of the TIF Plan for subsequent phases or other changes, would terminate after 2023, or
when the TIF Plan is satisfied. The City reserves the right to decertify the District prior to the legally required
date
Economic Development Authority Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Victoria Ponds TIF District Page 17
TIF Plan for the Victoria Ponds Tax Increment District 2-10
N.Estimated Impact on Other Taxing Jurisdictions
The estimated impact on other taxing jurisdictions assumes construction which would have occurred without
the creation of the Victoria Ponds District. If the construction is a result of tax increment financing, the
impact is $0 to other entities. Notwithstanding, the fact that the fiscal impact on the other taxing jurisdictions
is $0 due to the fact that the construction would not have occurred without the assistance of the City, the
following estimated impact of the Victoria Ponds District would be as follows if the "but for" test was not
met:
IMPACT ON TAX BASE
TAXING
JURISDICTION
ENTITY’S
PROPOSED
1995/96 TOTAL
NET TAX
CAPACITY
CAPTURED
TAX
CAPACITY
(CTC)
PERCENT OF
CTC TO
ENTITY
TOTAL
Hennepin County 1,006,485,910 152,891 0.02%
ISD No.283 39,290,053 152,891 0.39%
City of St Louis Park 42,471,236 152,891 0.36%
Other N/A N/A N/A
IMPACT ON TAX RATES
ENTITY PROPOSED
1995/96
TAX RATE
PERCENT
OF TOTAL
CTC POTENTIAL
TAXES
Hennepin County 38.099 27.07% 152,891 58,250
ISD No. 283 76.0470 54.03% 152,891 116,269
City of St Louis Park 20.0260 14.23% 152,891 30,618
Other 6.579 4.67%152,891 10,059
TOTAL 1.40751 100.00% 152,891 215,196
The Authority elects the calculation of tax increment under Section 469.177, subd. 3(a), which means that
fiscal disparities contribution will be made from outside the District.
The estimates listed above display the captured tax capacity when all construction is completed. The tax rate
used for calculations is the Proposed (“Truth-in-Taxation”) 1995/Pay 1996 rate, used for estimates only. The
total net capacity for the entities listed above are based on Pay 1996 figures. The Victoria Ponds District will
be certified under the 1995/Pay 1996 rates which were not available at the time the TIF Plan was assembled.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Victoria Ponds TIF District Page 18
TIF Plan for the Victoria Ponds Tax Increment District 2-11
(AS MODIFIED APRIL 7, 2008)
The estimated impact on other taxing jurisdictions assumes that the redevelopment contemplated by the TIF
Plan would not occur without the creation of the District. However, the City has determined that such
development or redevelopment would not occur "but for" tax increment financing and that, therefore, the
fiscal impact on other taxing jurisdictions is $0. The estimated fiscal impact of the District would be as
follows if the "but for" test was not met:
*The charts below include the captured tax capacity for the original and modified District.
IMPACT ON TAX BASE
Estimated
2007/2008
Tax Capacity
Estimated Captured
Tax Capacity (CTC)
Upon Completion
Percent of CTC
to Entity Total
Hennepin County 1,471,599,883 385,339 0.0262%
City of St. Louis Park 54,480,804 385,339 0.7073%
St. Louis Park ISD No. 283 513,509,111 385,339 0.0750%
IMPACT ON TAX RATES
Estimated
2007/2008
Extension Rates
Percent
of Total CTC
Potential
Taxes
Hennepin County 0.387310 37.50% 385,339 149,246
City of St. Louis Park 0.361430 34.99% 385,339 139,273
St. Louis Park ISD No. 283 0.195750 18.95% 385,339 75,430
Other 0.088380 8.56%385,339 34,056
Total 1.032870 100.00%398,005
The estimates listed above display the captured tax capacity when all construction is completed. The tax rate
used for calculations is the 2007/Pay 2008 rate. The total net capacity for the entities listed above are based
on estimated Pay 2008 figures.
O.Modifications to the Victoria Ponds District
In accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.175, Subdivision 4, any reduction or enlargement of the
geographic area of the project or tax increment financing district; increase in amount of bonded indebtedness
to be incurred, including a determination to capitalize interest on debt if that determination was not a part of
the original plan, or to increase or decrease the amount of interest on the debt to be capitalized; increase in
the portion of the captured tax capacity to be retained by the City; increase in total estimated tax increment
expenditures; or designation of additional property to be acquired by the City shall be approved upon the
notice and after the discussion, public hearing and findings required for approval of the original plan. The
geographic area of a tax increment financing district may be reduced, but shall not be enlarged after five years
Economic Development Authority Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Victoria Ponds TIF District Page 19
TIF Plan for the Victoria Ponds Tax Increment District 2-12
following the date of certification of the original tax capacity by the county auditor. Modifications to the
Victoria Ponds District in the form of a budget modification or an expansion of the boundaries will be
recorded in the Plan.
(AS MODIFIED APRIL 7, 2008)
In accordance with M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 4, any:
1. Reduction or enlargement of the geographic area of Redevelopment Project No. 1 or the District, if
the reduction does not meet the requirements of M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 4(e);
2. Increase in amount of bonded indebtedness to be incurred;
3. A determination to capitalize interest on debt if that determination was not a part of the original TIF
Plan, or to increase or decrease the amount of interest on the debt to be capitalized;
4. Increase in the portion of the captured net tax capacity to be retained by the City;
5. Increase in the estimate of the cost of the project, including administrative expenses, that will be paid
or financed with tax increment from the District; or
6. Designation of additional property to be acquired by the City, shall be approved upon the notice and
after the discussion, public hearing and findings required for approval of the original TIF Plan.
Pursuant to M.S. Section 469.175 Subd. 4(f), the geographic area of the District may be reduced, but shall
not be enlarged after five years following the date of certification of the original net tax capacity by the
county auditor. If a redevelopment district is enlarged, the reasons and supporting facts for the determination
that the addition to the district meets the criteria of M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 11 must be documented.
The requirements of this paragraph do not apply if (1) the only modification is elimination of parcel(s) from
Redevelopment Project No. 1 or the District and (2) (A) the current net tax capacity of the parcel(s)
eliminated from the District equals or exceeds the net tax capacity of those parcel(s) in the District's original
net tax capacity or (B) the City agrees that, notwithstanding M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 1, the original net
tax capacity will be reduced by no more than the current net tax capacity of the parcel(s) eliminated from the
District.
The City must notify the County Auditor of any modification that reduces or enlarges the geographic area
of Redevelopment Project No. 1 or the District. Modifications to the District in the form of a budget
modification or an expansion of the boundaries will be recorded in the TIF Plan.
P.Administrative Expenses
In accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 14, and Minnesota Statutes, Section
469.176, Subdivision 3 administrative expenses means all expenditures of an authority other than amounts
paid for the purchase of land or amounts paid to contractors or others providing materials and services,
including architectural and engineering services, directly connected with the physical development of the real
property in the district, relocation benefits paid to or services provided for persons residing or businesses
located in the district or amounts used to pay interest on, fund a reserve for, or sell at a discount bonds issued
pursuant to Section 469.178. Administrative expenses also include amounts paid for services provided by
bond counsel, fiscal consultants, and planning or economic development consultants. No tax increment shall
be used to pay any administrative expenses for the tax increment financing district which exceed ten percent
of the total tax increment expenditures authorized by the tax increment financing plan or the total tax
increment expenditures for the project, whichever is less.
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.176, Subdivision 4h, tax increments may be used to pay for the
Economic Development Authority Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Victoria Ponds TIF District Page 20
TIF Plan for the Victoria Ponds Tax Increment District 2-13
county's actual administrative expenses incurred in connection with the Victoria Ponds District. The county
may require payment of those expenses by February 15 of the year following the year the expenses were
incurred.
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469. 177, Subdivision 11, the county treasurer shall deduct an amount
equal to 0.1 percent of any increment distributed to an authority or municipality and the county treasurer shall
pay the amount deducted to the state treasurer for deposit in the state general fund.
(AS MODIFIED APRIL 7, 2008)
In accordance with M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 14, administrative expenses means all expenditures of the
City, other than:
1. Amounts paid for the purchase of land;
2. Amounts paid to contractors or others providing materials and services, including
architectural and engineering services, directly connected with the physical development of
the real property in the project;
3. Relocation benefits paid to or services provided for persons residing or businesses located
in the project; or
4. Amounts used to pay principal or interest on, fund a reserve for, or sell at a discount bonds
issued pursuant to M.S., Section 469.178; or
5. Amounts used to pay other financial obligations to the extent those obligations were used
to finance costs described in clauses (1) to (3).
For districts for which the request for certification were made before August 1, 1979, or after June 30, 1982,
administrative expenses also include amounts paid for services provided by bond counsel, fiscal consultants,
and planning or economic development consultants.
Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 4h, tax increments may be used to pay for the County's actual
administrative expenses incurred in connection with the District. The county may require payment of those
expenses by February 15 of the year following the year the expenses were incurred.
Pursuant to M.S., Section 469. 177, Subd. 11, the County Treasurer shall deduct an amount (currently .36
percent) of any increment distributed to the City and the County Treasurer shall pay the amount deducted to
the State Treasurer for deposit in the state general fund to be appropriated to the State Auditor for the cost
of financial reporting of tax increment financing information and the cost of examining and auditing
authorities' use of tax increment financing. This amount may be adjusted annually by the Commissioner of
Revenue.
Q.Limitation of Increment
Pursuant to Section 469.176, Subd. 1, of the Tax Increment Financing Act, no tax increment shall be paid to
the City for the Tax Increment Financing District after three (3) years from the date of certification of the
Original Net Tax Capacity value of the taxable property in the Tax Increment Financing District by the
County Auditor unless within the three (3) years period:
(a) bonds have been issued pursuant to Section 469.178, or in aid of a project
pursuant to any other law, except revenue bonds issued pursuant to Chapter
474 prior to August 1, 1979, or
Economic Development Authority Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Victoria Ponds TIF District Page 21
TIF Plan for the Victoria Ponds Tax Increment District 2-14
(b) the City has acquired property within the Tax Increment Financing District,
or
(c) the City has constructed or caused to be constructed public improvements
within the Tax Increment Financing District.
The bonds must be issued, or the City must acquire property or construct or cause public improvements to
be constructed by approximately December 1998.
The tax increment pledged to the payment of bonds and interest thereon may be discharged and the Tax
Increment Financing District may be terminated if sufficient funds have been irrevocably deposited in the
debt service fund or other escrow account held in trust for all outstanding bonds to provide for the payment
of the bonds at maturity or redemption date.
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.176, Subdivision 6:
if, after four years from the date of certification of the original tax capacity of the tax
increment financing district pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.177, no demolition,
rehabilitation or renovation of property or other site preparation, including qualified
improvement of a street adjacent to a parcel but not installation of utility service including
sewer or water systems, has been commenced on a parcel located within a tax increment
financing district by the authority or by the owner of the parcel in accordance with the tax
increment financing plan, no additional tax increment may be taken from that parcel and the
original tax capacity of that parcel shall be excluded from the original tax capacity of the
tax increment financing district. If the authority or the owner of the parcel subsequently
commences demolition, rehabilitation or renovation or other site preparation on that parcel
including improvement of a street adjacent to that parcel, in accordance with the tax
increment financing plan, the authority shall certify to the county auditor in the annual
disclosure report that the activity has commenced. The county auditor shall certify the tax
capacity thereof as most recently certified by the commissioner of revenue and add it to the
original tax capacity of the tax increment financing district. The county auditor must enforce
the provisions of this subdivision... For purposes of this subdivision, qualified improvements
are limited to (1) construction or opening of a new street, (2) relocation of a street, and (3)
substantial reconstruction or rebuilding of an existing street.
The City or a property owner must improve parcels within the Victoria Ponds District by approximately
March 2000.
R.Use of Tax Increment
All revenues derived from tax increment shall be used in accordance with the tax increment financing plan,
pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.176, Subdivision 4 and Section 273.1399, Subdivision 1. The
revenues shall be used for the following purposes:
1. to pay the principal of and interest on bonds used to finance a project;
2. to finance, or otherwise pay the capital and administration costs of the Development District
pursuant to the Development District Act;
3. to pay for project costs as identified in the budget; and
4. to finance, or otherwise pay for other purposes as provided in Section 469.176, Subd. 4, of
Economic Development Authority Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Victoria Ponds TIF District Page 22
TIF Plan for the Victoria Ponds Tax Increment District 2-15
the Tax Increment Act.
These revenues shall not be used to circumvent any levy limits.
Tax increments generated in the Victoria Ponds Tax Increment Financing District will be paid by Hennepin
County to the City of St Louis Park for the Tax Increment Fund of said District. The City will pay to the
developers annually an amount not to exceed an amount as specified in a developer’s agreement to reimburse
the costs of land acquisition, public improvements, demolition and relocation, site preparation, and
administration. Remaining increment funds will be used for City administration (10%) and the costs of public
improvement activities outside Victoria Ponds District.
S.Notification of Prior Planned Improvements
The City shall, after due and diligent search, accompany its request for certification to the County Auditor
or its notice of Tax Increment Financing District enlargement with a listing of all properties within the Tax
Increment Financing District or area of enlargement for which building permits have been issued during the
eighteen (18) months immediately preceding approval of the tax increment financing plan by the municipality
pursuant to Section 469.175, Subd. 3, of the Tax Increment Financing Act. The County Auditor shall increase
the original value of the Tax Increment Financing District by the value of improvements for which a building
permit was issued.
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.177, Subdivision 4, the City has reviewed the area to be included
in the Victoria Ponds District and found no parcels for which building permits have been issued during the
18 months immediately preceding approval of the Plan by the City. If the building permit had been issued
within the 18 month period preceding approval of the plan by the City, the county auditor shall increase the
original tax capacity of the district by the valuation of the improvements for which the building permit was
issued.
T.Excess Tax Increments
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.176, Subdivision 2, in any year in which the tax increment
exceeds the amount necessary to pay the costs authorized by the tax increment plan, including the amount
necessary to cancel any tax levy as provided in Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.61, Subdivision 3, the City
shall use the excess amount to do any of the following:
1. prepay the outstanding bonds;
2. discharge the pledge of tax increment therefor;
3. pay into an escrow account dedicated to the payment of such bond; or
4. return the excess to the County Auditor for redistribution to the respective taxing
jurisdictions in proportion to their tax capacity rate as provided in Minnesota Statutes,
Section 469.176, Subd. 2.
(AS MODIFIED APRIL 7, 2008)
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.176, Subdivision 2, in any year in which the tax increment
exceeds the amount necessary to pay the costs authorized by the tax increment plan, including the amount
necessary to cancel any tax levy as provided in Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.61, Subdivision 3, the City
shall use the excess amount to do any of the following:
Economic Development Authority Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Victoria Ponds TIF District Page 23
TIF Plan for the Victoria Ponds Tax Increment District 2-16
1. prepay the outstanding bonds;
2. discharge the pledge of tax increment herefore;
3. pay into an escrow account dedicated to the payment of such bond; or
4. return the excess to the County Auditor for redistribution to the respective taxing jurisdictions in
proportion to their tax capacity rate as provided in Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.176, Subd. 2.
In addition, the City may, subject to the limitation set forth herein choose to modify the tax increment plan
as described in Section N in order to finance additional public costs of Redevelopment Project No. 1.
The City must spend or return the excess increments under Section 476.176, sub 2, paragraph (c) within nine
months after the end of the year. In addition, the City, may, subject to the limitations set forth herein, choose
to modify the TIF Plan in order to finance additional public costs in Redevelopment Project No. 1 or the TIF
District.
U.Requirements for Agreements with the Developer
The City will review any proposal for private development to determine its conformance with the Project Plan
and with applicable municipal ordinances and codes. To facilitate this effort, the following documents may
be requested for review and approval: site plan, construction, mechanical, and electrical system drawings,
landscaping plan, grading and storm drainage plan, signage system plan, and any other drawings or narrative
deemed necessary by the City to demonstrate the conformance of the development with city plans and
ordinances. The City may also use the Agreements to address other issues related to the development.
Pursuant to Section 469.176, Subd. 5, of the Tax Increment Financing Act, no more than twenty-five percent
(25%), by acreage, of the property to be acquired in the Tax Increment Financing District as set forth in the
tax increment financing plan shall at any time be owned by the City as a result of acquisition with the
proceeds of bonds issued pursuant to Section 469.178, of the Tax Increment Financing Act, without the City
having, prior to acquisition in excess of twenty-five percent (25%) of the acreage, concluded an agreement
for the development or of the property acquired and which provides recourse for the City should the
development not be completed.
V.Assessment Agreements
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.177, Subdivision 8, the City may enter into an agreement in
recordable form with the developer of property within the tax increment financing district which establishes
a minimum market value of the land and completed improvements for the duration of the Victoria Ponds
District. The assessment agreement shall be presented to the assessor who shall review the plans and
specifications for the improvements constructed, review the market value previously assigned to the land
upon which the improvements are to be constructed and, so long as the minimum market value contained in
the assessment agreement appear, in the judgment of the assessor, to be a reasonable estimate, the assessor
may certify the minimum market value agreement.
W.Administration of the Victoria Ponds District
Administration of the Victoria Ponds District will be handled by the City Manager of the City of St Louis
Park.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Victoria Ponds TIF District Page 24
TIF Plan for the Victoria Ponds Tax Increment District 2-17
X.Financial Reporting Requirements
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.175, Subdivisions 5, 6, and 6(a); an authority must file an annual
disclosure report for all tax increment financing districts with the Office of the State Auditor, the county
board, school board, and Department of Revenue.
Pursuant to Section 469.175, Subd. 5, of the Tax Increment Financing Act, the City must file an annual
disclosure report for the Tax Increment Financing District. The report shall be filed with the county board,
county auditor, school board, and the State Auditor. The report to be filed by the City shall include the
following information:
1. the amount and source of revenue in the tax increment account;
2. the amount and purpose of expenditures from the account;
3. the amount of any pledge of revenues, including principal and interest, on any outstanding
bond indebtedness;
4. the original net tax capacity of the Tax Increment Financing District;
5. the captured value retained by the City;
6. the captured value shared with other taxing districts;
7. the tax increment received;
8. any additional information to demonstrate compliance with the tax increment financing plan.
Section 469.175, Subd. 5, of the Tax Increment Financing Act also provides that an annual statement showing
the tax increment received an expended in that year, the original value, captured value, amount of outstanding
bonded indebtedness, the amount of the district’s increment s paid to other governmental bodies, the amount
paid for administrative costs, the sum of increments paid, directly or indirectly, for activities and
improvements located outside of the district, and any additional information the City deems necessary shall
be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the City.
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.175, Subd. 6, of the Tax Increment Financing Act, the City must
annually submit to the State Auditor, on or before July 1, a financial report which shall:
1. provide for full disclosure of the sources and uses of the public funds in the district;
2. permit comparison and reconciliation with the City’s accounts and financial reports;
3. permit auditing of the funds expended on behalf of the tax increment district; and
4. be consistent with generally accepted accounting principles.
The financial report must also include the following:
1. the original net tax capacity of the district;
2. the captured net tax capacity of the district, including the amount of any captured net tax
capacity shared with other taxing districts;
3. for the reporting period and for the duration of the district, the amount budgeted under the
tax increment financing plan, and the actual amount expended for, at lest, the following
categories:
a. acquisition of land and buildings through condemnation or purchase;
b. site improvements or preparation costs;
c. installation of public utilities, parking facilities, streets, roads, sidewalks, or
other similar public improvements;
d.. administrative costs, including the allocated cost of the authority;
Economic Development Authority Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Victoria Ponds TIF District Page 25
TIF Plan for the Victoria Ponds Tax Increment District 2-18
e. public park facilities, facilities for social, recreational, or conference
purposes, or other similar public improvements;
4. for properties sold to developers, the total costs of the property to the authority and the price
paid by the developer;
5. the amount of increments rebated or paid to developers or property owners for privately
financed improvements or other qualifying costs.
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.175, subdivision 6a, the City must also annually report to the
State Auditor before or on July 1 of each year the following amounts for the entire City:
1. the total principal amount of nondefeased bonds that are outstanding at the end of the
previous calendar year; and
2. the total annual amount of principal and interest payments that are due for the current
calendar year on (i) general obligation tax increment financing bonds and (ii) other tax
increment financing bonds.
and for each tax increment financing district within the City:
1. the type of tax increment financing district;
2. date on which the district is required to be decertified;
3. amount of any payments and the value of in-kind benefits, such as physical improvements
and the used of building space, that are financed with revenues derived from increments and
are provided to another governmental unit (other than the municipality) during the preceding
calendar year;
4. the tax increment revenues for taxes payable in the current calendar year;
5. whether the tax increment financing plan or other governing document permits increment
revenues to be expended outside of the tax increment financing district;
6. any additional information that the State Auditor may require.
Copies of this report must also be provided to the county and school district boards.
(AS MODIFIED APRIL 7, 2008)
Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 5, 6, and 6b the City must undertake financial reporting for all tax
increment financing districts to the Office of the State Auditor, County Board, County Auditor and School
Board on or before August 1 of each year. M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 5 also provides that an annual
statement shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the City on or before August 15.
If the City fails to make a disclosure or submit a report containing the information required by M.S., Section
469.175 Subd. 5 and Subd. 6, the OSA will direct the County Auditor to withhold the distribution of tax
increment from the District.
Y.Municipal Approval and Public Purpose
The reasons and facts supporting the finds for the adoption of the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the
Victoria Ponds District as required pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.175, Subdivision 3 are as
follows:
1. Finding that the Victoria Ponds District is a redevelopment district as defined in Minnesota Statutes,
Economic Development Authority Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Victoria Ponds TIF District Page 26
TIF Plan for the Victoria Ponds Tax Increment District 2-19
Section 469.174, Subdivision 10.
2. Finding that the proposed development, in the opinion of the Council, would not occur solely through
private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future and, therefore, the use of tax increment
financing is deemed necessary and that the increased market value of the site that could reasonably
be expected to occur without the use of tax increment financing would be less than the increase in
the market value estimated to result from the proposed development after subtracting the present
value of the projected tax increments for the maximum duration of the District.
A comparative analysis of estimated market values both with and without establishment of the
Victoria Ponds Tax Increment Financing District and the use of tax increments has been performed
as described above. Such analysis indicates that the increase in estimated market value of the
proposed development (less the indicated subtractions) exceeds the estimated market value of the site
absent the establishment of the Victoria Ponds Tax Increment Financing District and the use of tax
increments (See Appendix C).
3. Finding that the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Victoria Ponds District conforms to the general
plan for the development or redevelopment of the municipality as a whole.
The site is appropriately zoned. The Tax Increment Financing Plan has been found by resolution to
conform to the general development plan of the City by the Planning Commission on February 21,
1996.
4. Finding that the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Victoria Ponds District will afford maximum
opportunity, consistent with the sound needs of the City as a whole, for the development of
Redevelopment Project and Development District by private enterprise.
The establishment of the Victoria Ponds District will result in increased employment for the City,
renovate substandard properties, and increase the tax base of the City and State.
Z.State Tax Increment Financing Aid
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.1399, for tax increment financing districts for which certification
was requested after April 30, 1990, a municipality incurs a reduction in state tax increment financing aid
(RISTIFA) applied to the municipality's Local Government Aids (LGA) first and, Homestead and
Agricultural Aid (HACA) second, in an amount equal to a formula based upon the equalized qualifying
captured tax capacity (QCTC) of the tax increment financing district.
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.1399, Subdivision 6, for tax increment financing districts
certified after June 30, 1994, the City may choose an option to the LGA-HACA penalty. A tax increment
financing district is exempt if the City elects at the time of approving the tax increment financing plan to
make a qualifying local contribution. To qualify for the exemption in each year, the City must make a
qualifying local contribution to the project of a certain percentage. The local contribution for a
redevelopment district is 7.5 percent. The maximum local contribution for all districts in the City is limited
to two percent of the City’s net tax capacity.
The amount of the local contribution must be made out of unrestricted money of the authority or municipality,
such as the general fund, a property tax levy, or a federal or a state grand-in-aid which may be spent for
general government purposes. The local contribution may not be made, directly or indirectly, with tax
Economic Development Authority Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Victoria Ponds TIF District Page 27
TIF Plan for the Victoria Ponds Tax Increment District 2-20
increments or developer payments. The local contribution must be used to pay project costs and cannot be
used for general government purposes.
The City elects to make the annual local contribution to the project to exempt itself from the LGA-HACA
penalty.
AA Fiscal Disparities Election
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.177, Subdivision 3, the governing body may elect one of two
methods to calculate fiscal disparities. It the calculations pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.177,
subdivision 3, clause a, are followed the following method of computation shall apply:
(1) The original tax capacity and the current tax capacity shall be determined before the application of
the fiscal disparity provisions of Chapter 473F. Where the original tax capacity is equal to or
greater than the current tax capacity, there is no captured tax capacity and no tax increment
determination. Where the original tax capacity is less than the current tax capacity, the difference
between the original tax capacity and the current tax capacity is the captured tax capacity. This
amount less any portion thereof which the authority has designated, in its tax increment financing
plan, to share with the local taxing districts is the retained captured tax capacity of the authority.
(2) The county auditor shall exclude the retained captured tax capacity of the authority from the taxable
value of the local taxing districts in determining local taxing district tax capacity rates. The tax
capacity rates so determined are to be extended against the retained captured tax capacity of the
authority as well as the taxable value of the local taxing districts. The tax generated by the extension
of the lesser of (A) the local taxing district tax capacity rates or (B) the original tax capacity rate to
the retained captured tax capacity of the authority is the tax increment of the authority.
If the calculations pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.177, subdivision 3, clause b, are followed, the
following method of computation shall apply:
(1) The original tax capacity shall be determined before the application of the fiscal disparity provisions
of chapter 473F. The current tax capacity shall exclude any fiscal disparity commercial-industrial
tax capacity increase between the original year and the current year multiplied by the fiscal disparity
ratio determined pursuant to section 473F.08, subdivision 6. Where the original tax capacity is
equal to or greater than the current tax capacity, there is no captured tax capacity and no tax
increment determination. Where the original tax capacity is less than the current tax capacity, the
difference between the original tax capacity and the current tax capacity is the captured tax capacity.
This amount less any portion thereof which the authority has designated, in its tax increment
financing plan, to share with the local taxing districts is the retained captured tax capacity of the
authority.
(2) The county auditor shall exclude the retained captured tax capacity of the authority from the taxable
value of the local taxing districts in determining local taxing district tax capacity rates. The tax
capacity rates so determined are to be extended against the retained captured tax capacity of the
authority as well as the taxable value of the local taxing districts. The tax generated by the extension
of the less of (A) the local taxing district tax capacity rates or (B) the original tax capacity rate to
the retained captured tax capacity of the authority is the tax increment of the authority.
The Authority shall submit to the County Auditor at the time of the request for certification which method
Economic Development Authority Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Victoria Ponds TIF District Page 28
TIF Plan for the Victoria Ponds Tax Increment District 2-21
of computation of fiscal disparities the authority elected. The City of St Louis Park will choose to calculate
fiscal disparities by clause a.
According to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.177, Subdivision 3:
(c) The method of computation of tax increment applied to a district pursuant to paragraph (a) or
(b) shall remain the same for the duration of the district, except that the governing body may
elect to change its election from the method of computation in paragraph (a) to the method in
paragraph (b).
AB.County Road Costs
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.175, Subdivision 1a, the county board may require the authority
to pay for all or part of the cost of county road improvements if the proposed development to be assisted by
tax increment will in the judgement of the county, substantially increase the use of county roads requiring
construction of road improvements or other road costs and if the road improvements are not scheduled within
the next five years under a capital improvement plan or other county plan.
The improvements outlined in the Plan serve as notice to the county that the development of the residential
facilities will be assisted with tax increment. In the opinion of the Authority and consultants, the proposed
development will have little or no impact upon county roads. If the county elects to use increments to
improve county roads, it must notify the Authority within thirty days of receipt of this plan.
AC.Economic Development and Job Creation
To the extent applicable, the City agrees to comply with Minnesota Statutes, Section 116J.991, which states
that a business receiving state or local government assistance for economic development or job growth
purposes, including tax increment financing, must create a net increase in jobs and meet wage level goals in
Minnesota within two years of receiving assistance (See Appendix D).
AD.Business Subsidies
(AS MODIFIED ON JULY 1, 2013)
Pursuant to M.S., Section 116J.993, Subd. 3, the following forms of financial assistance are not
considered a business subsidy:
(1) A business subsidy of less than $150,000;
(2) Assistance that is generally available to all businesses or to a general class of similar
businesses, such as a line of business, size, location, or similar general criteria;
(3) Public improvements to buildings or lands owned by the state or local government that serve
a public purpose and do not principally benefit a single business or defined group of
businesses at the time the improvements are made;
(4) Redevelopment property polluted by contaminants as defined in M.S., Section 116J.552,
Subd. 3;
(5) Assistance provided for the sole purpose of renovating old or decaying building stock or
bringing it up to code and assistance provided for designated historic preservation districts,
provided that the assistance is equal to or less than 50% of the total cost;
(6) Assistance to provide job readiness and training services if the sole purpose of the assistance
Economic Development Authority Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Victoria Ponds TIF District Page 29
TIF Plan for the Victoria Ponds Tax Increment District 2-22
is to provide those services;
(7) Assistance for housing;
(8) Assistance for pollution control or abatement, including assistance for a tax increment
financing hazardous substance subdistrict as defined under M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 23;
(9) Assistance for energy conservation;
(10) Tax reductions resulting from conformity with federal tax law;
(11) Workers' compensation and unemployment compensation;
(12) Benefits derived from regulation;
(13) Indirect benefits derived from assistance to educational institutions;
(14) Funds from bonds allocated under chapter 474A, bonds issued to refund outstanding bonds,
and bonds issued for the benefit of an organization described in section 501 (c) (3) of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended through December 31, 1999;
(15) Assistance for a collaboration between a Minnesota higher education institution and a
business;
(16) Assistance for a tax increment financing soils condition district as defined under M.S., Section
469.174, Subd. 19;
(17) Redevelopment when the recipient's investment in the purchase of the site and in site
preparation is 70 percent or more of the assessor's current year's estimated market value;
(18) General changes in tax increment financing law and other general tax law changes of a
principally technical nature;
(19) Federal assistance until the assistance has been repaid to, and reinvested by, the state or local
government agency;
(20) Funds from dock and wharf bonds issued by a seaway port authority;
(21) Business loans and loan guarantees of $150,000 or less;
(22) Federal loan funds provided through the United States Department of Commerce, Economic
Development Administration; and
(23) Property tax abatements granted under M.S., Section 469.1813 to property that is subject to
valuation under Minnesota Rules, chapter 8100.
The City will comply with M.S., Sections 116J.993 to 116J.995 to the extent the tax increment assistance
under this TIF Plan does not fall under any of the above exemptions.
AD.Summary
The City of St Louis Park is establishing the Victoria Ponds Tax Increment Financing District to preserve and
enhance the tax base, redevelopment substandard areas, and increase employment of the City. The Tax
Increment Financing Plan for Victoria Ponds Tax Increment Financing District was prepared by Ehlers and
Associates, Inc., 2950 Norwest Center, 90 South Seventh Street, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402-4100,
telephone (612) 339-8291.
(AS MODIFIED APRIL 7, 2008)
The District is being modified to provide budgetary authority to utilize increased tax increments collected
from the District and to modify the budget to reflect actual project activity to date and to bring it into
compliance with the State Auditor budget requirements.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Victoria Ponds TIF District Page 30
Appendix A-1
APPENDIX A
BOUNDARY MAP OF REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AND
THE VICTORIA PONDS TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT
Economic Development Authority Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Victoria Ponds TIF District Page 31
Victoria Ponds Tax Increment Finance District
Subject Area
Legend
Victoria Ponds TIF District
Redevelopment Project No. 1
Municipal Boundary
Prepared February 20, 2008
Prepared by the St. Louis Park Community Development Department
´0 0.1 0.20.05 Miles
City of St. Louis Park
TH 7
US 169
Economic Development Authority Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Victoria Ponds TIF District Page 32
Appendix C-1
07-117-21-41-0072 07-117-21-41-0097 08-117-21-32-0066 08-117-21-32-0093
07-117-21-41-0074 07-117-21-41-0098 08-117-21-32-0067 08-117-21-32-0094
07-117-21-41-0075 07-117-21-41-0099 08-117-21-32-0068 08-117-21-32-0095
07-117-21-41-0076 07-117-21-41-0100 08-117-21-32-0069 08-117-21-32-0096
07-117-21-41-0077 07-117-21-41-0101 08-117-21-32-0071 08-117-21-32-0097
07-117-21-41-0078 07-117-21-41-0102 08-117-21-32-0074 08-117-21-32-0098
07-117-21-41-0079 07-117-21-41-0103 08-117-21-32-0075 08-117-21-32-0099
07-117-21-41-0080 07-117-21-41-0104 08-117-21-32-0076 08-117-21-32-0100
07-117-21-41-0081 07-117-21-41-0105 08-117-21-32-0077 18-117-21-12-0048
07-117-21-41-0082 07-117-21-41-0106 08-117-21-32-0078 18-117-21-12-0049
07-117-21-41-0083 07-117-21-41-0107 08-117-21-32-0079 18-117-21-12-0050
07-117-21-41-0084 07-117-21-44-0103 08-117-21-32-0080 18-117-21-12-0051
07-117-21-41-0085 08-117-21-32-0054 08-117-21-32-0081 18-117-21-12-0052
07-117-21-41-0086 08-117-21-32-0055 08-117-21-32-0082 18-117-21-12-0053
07-117-21-41-0087 08-117-21-32-0056 08-117-21-32-0083 18-117-21-12-0054
07-117-21-41-0088 08-117-21-32-0057 08-117-21-32-0084 18-117-21-12-0055
07-117-21-41-0089 08-117-21-32-0058 08-117-21-32-0085 18-117-21-12-0056
07-117-21-41-0090 08-117-21-32-0059 08-117-21-32-0086 18-117-21-13-0088
07-117-21-41-0091 08-117-21-32-0060 08-117-21-32-0087 18-117-21-13-0089
07-117-21-41-0092 08-117-21-32-0061 08-117-21-32-0088 18-117-21-13-0090
07-117-21-41-0093 08-117-21-32-0062 08-117-21-32-0089 18-117-21-31-0063
07-117-21-41-0094 08-117-21-32-0063 08-117-21-32-0090 18-117-21-34-0021
07-117-21-41-0095 08-117-21-32-0064 08-117-21-32-0091 18-117-21-34-0022
07-117-21-41-0096 08-117-21-32-0065 08-117-21-32-0092
APPENDIX B
LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR
THE VICTORIA PONDS TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT
The District encompasses all property and adjacent rights-of-way identified by the parcel identification
numbers listed below:
PID Numbers
08-117-21-32-0050
18-117-21-31-0001
18-117-21-12-0005
07-117-21-44-0103
(AS MODIFIED APRIL 7, 2008)
The following properties are the current list of property identification numbers for the district due to property
subdivisions and replatting:
Economic Development Authority Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Victoria Ponds TIF District Page 33
APPENDIX C-2
APPENDIX C
MINNESOTA BUSINESS ASSISTANCE FORM
(MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRADE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT)
A Minnesota Business Assistance Form (MBAF) should be used to report and/or update each calendar
year's activity by April 1 of the following year.
Please see the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED) website at
http://www.deed.state.mn.us/Community/subsidies/MBAFForm.htm for information and forms.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Victoria Ponds TIF District Page 34
Meeting: Economic Development Authority
Meeting Date: July 1, 2013
Action Agenda Item: 7b
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Defeasance of the 2004A Bonds
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt EDA Resolution Authorizing Funds for the
Redemption of the 2004A Bonds.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the EDA desire to fully defease the 2004A Bonds?
SUMMARY: The 2004A Bonds were issued as General Obligation Tax Increment Refunding
Bonds to refund the 1996 Tax Increment Bonds issued to fund various eligible tax increment
costs as well as the Recreation Center project. The Bonds were partially defeased through
August 1, 2016, with the City responsible for paying $51,665 in interest costs annually through
2016 and then making payments for the remaining totals of $1,415,000 in principal and $52,658
in interest in 2017 and 2018 . By fully defeasing these Bonds, the City will save approximately
$200,000 in remaining interest costs.
The funding for the defeasance will be $707,500 from the Hwy 7 Development District,
$353,750 from the Development Fund, and $353,750 from the Permanent Improvement
Revolving Fund. This is consistent with the City’s Long Range Financial Management Plan.
The redemption of the Bonds is scheduled for August 5, 2013.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: By fully defeasing the 2004A Bonds, the
City will save approximately $200,000 in remaining interest costs.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution
Prepared by: Steven Heintz, Finance Supervisor
Reviewed by: Brian Swanson, Controller
Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Economic Development Authority Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 7b) Page 2
Title: Defeasance of the 2004A Bonds
ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
RESOLUTION NO. 13-____
AUTHORIZING AUTHORITY FUNDS FOR THE REDEMPTION OF THE
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK’S GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT
REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES 2004A
BE IT RESOLVED By the Board of Commissioners of the St. Louis Park Economic
Development Authority (the “Authority”) as follows:
Section 1. Background.
1.01. The City of St. Louis Park (the “City”) previously issued and sold its General
Obligation Tax Increment Refunding Bonds, Series 2004A (the “Bonds”), dated April 7, 2004, in
the original aggregate principal amount of $7,490,000, of which $1,895,000 in principal amount
(constituting the 2014 through 2016 maturities) has previously been defeased and redeemed on
February 1, 2013, and the remainder of $1,415,000 in principal amount is currently outstanding.
Bonds maturing on or after February 1, 2014, are subject to call for prior redemption on February
1, 2013, or on any date thereafter at a price of par plus accrued interest. Redemption may be in
whole or in part, and if in part, at the option of the City and in such order as the City will
determine and within a maturity selected by the Controller of the City (as successor to the
Finance Director), acting as the Registrar for the Bonds (the “Registrar”). Prepayments will be
at a price of par plus accrued interest.
1.02. The City has determined that it is in the best interests of the sound financial
management of the City that Bonds maturing on February 1, 2017 and February 1, 2018,
comprising all of the Bonds subject to redemption, be prepaid and redeemed on August 5, 2013
(the “Redemption Date”), and will call those Bonds for redemption on the Redemption Date in
the aggregate principal amount of $1,415,000.
1.03. The City has requested that the sources of funds used to prepay and redeem the
Bonds include the Development Fund and the Trunk Highway 7 Fund of the Authority.
1.04. The Authority finds that it is in the best interest of the City and Authority to
allocate funds from its Development Fund and Trunk Highway 7 Fund to pay all or a portion of
the redemption and prepayment of the Bonds, as requested by the City.
Section 2. Funds for Redemption Approved.
2.01. The Authority hereby authorizes the use of Development Fund and Trunk
Highway 7 Fund moneys to pay all or a portion of the cost of redemption and prepayment of the
Bonds on the Redemption Date.
2.02. Authority staff and consultants are authorized to take any actions necessary to
carry out the intent of this resolution, including without limitation working with the City
Controller to accomplish the prepayment and redemption of the Bonds on the Redemption Date.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 7b) Page 3
Title: Defeasance of the 2004A Bonds
Section 3. Effective Date. This resolution is effective upon approval by the City of its
resolution calling for the redemption of the Bonds.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the Economic Development
Authority July 1, 2013
Executive Director President
Attest
Secretary
Meeting: Economic Development Authority
Meeting Date: July 1, 2013
Action Agenda Item: 7c
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Decertification of Excelsior Boulevard HSTI Subdistrict
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt EDA Resolution approving the decertification
of the Excelsior Blvd HSTI Subdistrict.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the EDA support the early termination of the Excelsior
Blvd Hazardous Substance Tax Increment (HSTI) Subdistrict?
SUMMARY: The Park Nicollet HSTI Subdistrict is a hazardous substance subdistrict that is
located in the former Excelsior Boulevard TIF District. It was established on September 9,
1993. It captures the “base value” or existing value of the parcels that constitute the Park
Nicollet Clinic campus.
On March 30, 1993, the EDA entered into a Contract for Private Redevelopment with PNMC
Holdings to construct a multi-phased expansion to the medical campus. Pursuant to that
Contract, the EDA agreed to provide PNMC Holdings with up to $9 million in assistance for
various environmental remediation expenses incurred in connection with redeveloping the
site. Park Nicollet did not move forward with Phase II of the development. The EDA determined
that failure to complete Phase II resulted in a loss of tax increment for the TIF District in the
amount of approximately $312,000. In 2008, Park Nicollet acknowledged this financial impact,
and paid that amount to the EDA. In 2011, the EDA and Park Nicollet negotiated a resolution to
the ongoing default of Phase II never being constructed in which the total amount of assistance
was reduced to approximately $4,975,000. In consideration of releasing their obligation to
construct this phase, the EDA made payments in an amount that left an unpaid balance on the TIF
Note of $500,000. The final TIF payment was made on August 1, 2012.
At the May 13, 2013 Study Session, the EDA reviewed the TIF Management Review & Analysis
Report prepared by Ehlers & Associates and was informed that this TIF district needs to be
decertified for pay 2014. Pursuant to the Report, the EDA should retain $145,000 in the TIF
account until the outstanding tax petitions have been settled within this district. The remaining
TIF fund balance above this amount, along with the first half and second half 2013 TIF receipts,
should be returned to the County for redistribution to the appropriate taxing jurisdictions (City,
County and School District).
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Decertifying the Excelsior Blvd HSTI TIF
Subdistrict will terminate the Subdistrict nine years early thus adding approximately $1 million
(or about 1.4%) in tax capacity to the City’s total tax base.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution of Approval
Prepared by: Greg Hunt, Economic Development Coordinator
Reviewed by: Kevin Locke, Community Development Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, EDA Executive Director and City Manager
Economic Development Authority Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 7c) Page 2
Title: Decertification of Excelsior Blvd HSTI Subdistrict
ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
RESOLUTION NO. 13-____
APPROVING THE DECERTIFICATION OF THE
HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE SUBDISTRICT WITHIN THE
EXCELSIOR BOULEVARD TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT
WHEREAS, on August 22, 1977, the City of St. Louis Park (the "City") approved
establishment of the Excelsior Boulevard Tax Increment Financing District (the "TIF District")
within its Redevelopment Project No. 1 (the "Project"); and
WHEREAS, the Project and TIF District are now administered by the St. Louis Park
Economic Development Authority (the “Authority”); and
WHEREAS, pursuant to 1992 Minnesota Laws, Chapter 511, Article 9, Section 29, the
Authority and City a Hazardous Substance Subdistrict (“HSTI Subdistrict”) within the TIF
District, and filed the HSTI Subdistrict for certification with Hennepin County on September 3,
1993;and
WHEREAS, the Authority entered into a Contract for Redevelopment with PNMC
Holdings dated March 30, 1993, as amended (the “Contract”), which Contract included a “pay as
you go” tax increment obligation secured in part with tax increments from the TIF District and the
HSTI District:
WHEREAS, on August 1, 2009, the TIF District expired by law, and
WHEREAS, on August 1, 2012, the last payment of HSTI Subdistrict tax increment was
made under the Contract, and as of the date hereof there are no outstanding obligations secured
by the HSTI Subsdistrict; and
WHEREAS, the Authority desires by this resolution to cause the decertification of the
HSTI Subdistrict after which all property taxes generated by property within the HSTI
Subdistrict will be distributed in the same manner as all other property taxes.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Commissioners of the St.
Louis Park Economic Development Authority, that:
1. The HSTI Subdistrict is decertified effective for taxes payable in 2014.
2. Authority staff are authorized and directed to deliver a copy of this resolution to
the Hennepin County Director of Property Taxation together a request to decertify
the HSTI District effective for taxes payable in 2014.
3. Authority staff are further authorized and directed to return to the County any tax
increments from the HSTI District not required to pay any pending tax petitions in
connection with the HSTI District, for redistribution to all relevant taxing
jurisdictions.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 7c) Page 3
Title: Decertification of Excelsior Blvd HSTI Subdistrict
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the Economic Development
Authority July 1, 2013
Deputy Executive Director President
Attest
Secretary
Meeting: Economic Development Authority
Meeting Date: July 1, 2013
Action Agenda Item: 7d
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Decertification of Oak Hill II TIF District
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt EDA Resolution approving the decertification
of the Oak Hill II TIF District.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the EDA support the early termination of the Oak Hill II
TIF District?
SUMMARY: The Oak Hill II TIF District is an economic development district established on
January 17, 2012. Anderson-KM Builders’ proposed the development of a 21,450 SF office
building on the property it owns at 3340 Republic Avenue. The company planned to occupy half
of the office space and lease the remaining space to another tenant. On February 6, 2012, the
EDA entered into a Redevelopment Contract with Oak Hill 7100 LLC (Anderson-KM Builders)
in which the EDA agreed to provide up to $300,000 in pay-as-you-go TIF assistance to facilitate
the construction of the Oak Hill II office building project.
The Oak Hill II TIF District was created under the authority of the 2010 Jobs Act (that was
extended in 2011). This legislation allowed office developments to be constructed in an
economic development district, if construction commenced by December 31, 2012. Construction
did not commence by the required date and the Jobs Act was not extended in either the 2012 or
2013 legislative sessions.
At the May 13, 2013 Study Session, the EDA reviewed the TIF Management Review & Analysis
Report prepared by Ehlers & Associates and was informed that this TIF district would need to be
decertified if the Jobs Act was not extended. Since the proposed Oak Hill II office development
did not occur by the required statutory date and no longer meets the requirements of an economic
development district, it is recommended that the Oak Hill II TIF District be decertified pursuant
to the TIF Management Review & Analysis Report and statutory requirements.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Decertification of the Oak Hill II TIF
District will not impact the City’s tax capacity as the land value of 3340 Republic Avenue will
continue to be fully taxed to the benefit of the City and all other taxing jurisdictions. Only the
improved value of the property would have been captured by the TIF district.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution of Approval
Prepared by: Greg Hunt, Economic Development Coordinator
Reviewed by: Kevin Locke, Community Development Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, EDA Executive Director and City Manager
Economic Development Authority Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 7d) Page 2
Title: Decertification of Oak Hill II TIF District
ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
RESOLUTION NO. 13-____
RESOLUTION DECERTIFYING OAK HILL II
TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT
WHEREAS, on January 17, 2011, the City of St. Louis Park (“City”) and the St. Louis Park
Economic Development Authority (the “Authority”) established the Oak Hill II Tax Increment
Financing District (the "TIF District"), an economic development TIF district, within existing
Redevelopment Project No. 1 (the “Project”), all pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Sections 469.174 to
469.179 (the “TIF Act’), and Sections 469.090 to 469.1081 (the “EDA Act”), and particularly the
temporary authority of Section 469.476, subd. 4c(d) of the TIF Act (the “Temporary Authority”);
and
WHEREAS, no development meeting the requirements of the Temporary Authority has
occurred within the TIF District, and the Authority does not expect any development meeting the
requirements of the TIF Act to occur within the TIF District in the foreseeable future; and
WHEREAS, as of the date hereof there are no outstanding obligations secured by the
TIF District; and
WHEREAS, the Authority desires by this resolution to cause the decertification of the
TIF District after which all property taxes generated by property within the TIF District will be
distributed in the same manner as all other property taxes.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED By the Board of Commissioners of the St.
Louis Park Economic Development Authority as follows:
1. The TIF District is hereby decertified as of the date hereof.
2. Authority staff is authorized and directed to transmit a copy of this resolution to the
Hennepin County Director of Property Taxation together with a request to decertify the
TIF District effective for taxes payable in 2014.
3. Authority staff are further authorized and directed to return to the County any tax
increments from the TIF District that are not needed to pay administrative costs, for
redistribution to all relevant taxing jurisdictions.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the Economic Development
Authority July 1, 2013
Deputy Executive Director President
Attest
Secretary
Meeting: Economic Development Authority
Meeting Date: July 1, 2013
Communications: 8a
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Property Acquisition Update: 4601 Highway 7
RECOMMENDED ACTION: None at this time. Please let staff know of any questions or
comments that you might have.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the EDA support the proposed acquisition of 4601
Highway 7?
SUMMARY: Staff has reached agreement on terms to purchase the former Professional
Instruments Company property located at 4601 Highway 7 (“subject property”). The subject
property fronts on the south side of CTH 25 just east of Belt Line Blvd. The property consists of
two parcels which total 3.16 acres. It lies immediately northeast of the proposed Belt Line
SWLRT station platform.
At the June 17th Study Session, Staff indicated that they were pursuing the potential acquisition
of a key parcel in the Belt Line Blvd Station area. This is that parcel and is strategically located
virtually adjacent to the proposed station platform.
EDA ownership of this parcel will provide the City control of the future use of the property and
insure that it is used to the maximum benefit of the community and the future SWLRT line. The
property is actively being marketed and numerous parties have expressed interest in the
property. Based upon the tenor of some of these inquires, the property could end up being
purchased for an allowable use that may not be an optimal use for a site near an LRT station.
EDA ownership will ensure use of the property is consistent with the City’s station area plans.
Acquisition and clearance of this site will also improve the image and appearance of the CTH
25/Highway 7 corridor. Consistent with the Comprehensive Plan the EDA has actively
encouraged redevelopment in this corridor for some time. Acquiring, clearing and preparing the
subject property for redevelopment is logical next step in that process.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The negotiated purchase price for 4601
Highway 7 is $2.25 million. This price is well within market according to the City Assessor. A
purchase agreement is being prepared for EDA review and approval. The EDA would incur
additional costs related to building demolition and property management. The cost of acquisition
and related expenses would be covered by the Development Fund with the intent recoup the
EDA’s investment from the future sale or leasing of the property. Grant and/or TIF funds may
be used as well.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged
community.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: None
Prepared by: Greg Hunt, Economic Development Coordinator
Reviewed by: Kevin Locke, Community Development Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, EDA Executive Director and City Manager
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: July 1, 2013
Minutes: 3a
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
JUNE 10, 2013
The meeting convened at 6:30 p.m.
Councilmembers present: Mayor Jeff Jacobs, Steve Hallfin, Anne Mavity, Julia Ross (arrived at
6:34 p.m.), Susan Sanger, Sue Santa, and Jake Spano.
Councilmembers absent: None.
Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), Deputy City Manager/Director of Human
Resources (Ms. Deno), Director of Community Development (Mr. Locke), Planning/Zoning
Supervisor (Ms. McMonigal), Economic Development Coordinator (Mr. Hunt), Communications
Coordinator (Mr. Zwilling), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Hughes).
Guests: Mr. Gary Dreher (TOLD Development) and Mr. Dennis Sutliff (ESG Architects).
1. Future Study Session Agenda Planning – June 17 & 24, 2013
Mr. Harmening presented the staff report and proposed special study session agenda for June 17,
2013, and the proposed study session agenda for June 24, 2013.
Councilmember Hallfin noted that next week’s Council agenda includes the Comprehensive Plan
Amendment for the Wooddale Flats project and requested that this item be discussed in study
session prior to the Council meeting.
Mr. Harmening agreed to place this item on the study session agenda prior to Council action.
Councilmember Hallfin stated he has heard from some residents requesting that the bathrooms at
Browndale and Oak Hill parks be kept open and suggested the City consider using timers on the
bathrooms. He requested this item be placed on a study session agenda for further discussion.
Councilmember Mavity stated the City has adopted anti-discrimination policies and the City has
partnered with a number of organizations that do not have anti-discrimination policies in place.
She requested that Council discuss this issue and consider whether the City should ask the
organizations that it partners with to adopt anti-discrimination policies.
2. Proposed Redevelopment of the Former Bally Total Fitness Block
Mr. Locke presented the staff report and advised the Bally Total Fitness site has been identified
in the original Excelsior & Grand plan as a mixed use development and TOLD Development
now has control of the property and is prepared to redevelop the site, including the vacant EDA
parcel. He added that the project will need some level of TIF assistance. He then introduced Mr.
Gary Dreher from TOLD Development and Mr. Dennis Sutliff from ESG Architects.
Mr. Dreher stated the proposed redevelopment plan is intended as an extension of the existing
Excelsior & Grand project and indicated that due to the condition of the former Bally building,
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 3a) Page 2
Title: Study Session Meeting Minutes of June 10, 2013
primarily related to asbestos, the building will be torn down. He presented several architectural
renderings of the proposed redevelopment and advised the project will include 103 market rate
apartment units and 30,000 square feet of retail space with an anchor tenant occupying 22,400
square feet of space and all parking will be located below grade. He stated they feel the
proposed number of apartment units provides a good mix given the number of units being built
in the City and throughout the metro area. He advised that the project will include a courtyard in
the middle of the project accessible to residents. He stated that access to the building and
parking for retail and residential will be in the midblock region of Quentin Avenue to avoid
congestion along Excelsior Boulevard. He indicated the underground parking for the
commercial retail provides 120 stalls not including the on-street parking and the residential
parking provides approximately one parking stall per unit.
Councilmember Ross encouraged the City to make sure there is enough parking in the building.
Mr. Dreher stated they conducted a detailed parking analysis to get the right mix of residential
and commercial parking and added that parking has not been an issue at Excelsior & Grand. He
also indicated they have had discussions with several potential anchor tenants who have
expressed an interest in the project.
Mr. Sutliff presented a drawing of the lower level parking plan and the level three and level four
plans, noting the residential building extends over the top of the retail level. He indicated the
height of the building approaches 50’ high in this region and would be slightly taller than Phases
1 and 3 of the Excelsior & Grand project. He also showed the level five residential plan,
indicating the building steps down from five stories to four stories as seen from Park Commons
Drive. He presented several aerial drawings of the project and stated the retail section along
Excelsior Boulevard has a height of approximately 25’ with three levels of residences above it.
He stated the proposed building has been designed to be consistent with the colors and materials
in the earlier phases of Excelsior & Grand without replicating the earlier phases.
Councilmember Hallfin stated that while he does not like all the rental units being built in the
City, there does not appear to be another use for this site and was okay with moving forward.
Councilmember Sanger stated she was okay with selling the vacant EDA parcel and felt that
retail with housing above the retail space makes sense in this location. She stated she did not
agree with having so many small one-bedroom units and no two-bedroom units in the building.
She indicated it appears most developers are banking on one set of data from one market
research company that says they need to build only one-bedroom units and stated there are a lot
of people looking for larger units, adding she was not happy with the mix of unit sizes and urged
the developer to look into this further. She added she would not support any TIF assistance if the
developer only built one-bedroom units. She indicated the City also needs a stronger ordinance
in place requiring insulation or a buffer between commercial and residential units so that upstairs
residents are not inundated with fumes and noise from commercial businesses.
Councilmember Spano felt the proposed use was appropriate for the area. He agreed the
proposed residential mix seems lopsided and stated he would like to make sure the project
includes some affordable housing. He indicated he was okay with selling the vacant EDA
parcel. He stated Council has previously expressed increasing concern about the balance of
residential units available in the City and urged the City to remain mindful of Council’s concern.
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 3a) Page 3
Title: Study Session Meeting Minutes of June 10, 2013
Mr. Dreher acknowledged Council’s concern regarding the number of units being built in the
City and agreed to work with the City on this issue.
Councilmember Sanger stated she would be inclined to provide TIF assistance if the project
included units large enough to accommodate families.
Councilmember Ross agreed and added she was concerned about the amount of retail space
being proposed given the vacant retail space existing in the City today.
Mr. Dreher acknowledged Councilmember Ross’s concern and stated that TOLD Development
would not put up speculative space.
Councilmember Mavity requested that TOLD Development provide further information
regarding the current market for apartments particularly related to two-bedroom apartments. She
agreed that the City needs larger units and stated she would rather see less square footage in an
apartment with more bedrooms rather than a large apartment that might be cost prohibitive for
families. She requested that staff research what it would take to have Sec. 8 housing in the
proposed redevelopment. She also urged the developer to make sure the proposed retail
complements the existing retailers in the area and brings added value to the community.
Councilmember Santa stated she would like to see the proposed retail blend in and enhance what
is currently happening all along Excelsior Boulevard. She indicated she has heard that people
are looking for three-bedroom apartments and was concerned about the proposed unit mix. She
added she wanted to make sure the proposed courtyard contains usable space for residents. She
stated she was in agreement with selling the vacant EDA parcel and was open to discussing TIF
assistance.
Mayor Jacobs stated he was also concerned about overbuilding apartment units in the City
especially since the housing markets change over time. He shared Councilmember Sanger’s
concern about the number of smaller apartments and felt it would be nice if the project included
apartments for families with children. He stated he was in agreement with selling the vacant
EDA parcel and was open to discussing TIF assistance.
3. Southwest LRT Update
Mr. Locke presented the staff report and stated the SWLRT Project Office (SPO) has indicated it
will be presenting its recommendations for freight rail in mid-July and the City would be
submitting its comments related to freight rail to the SPO in early July. He advised the City
would prepare its position statement based on the previous work done by the City including its
current position on freight rail and identify its concerns as well as what additional information or
analysis the City feels is necessary. He presented a large map depicting two freight rail reroute
options and stated the map includes several staff comments on some of the key issues. He also
distributed a preliminary list of pros and cons for the reroute options.
Councilmember Mavity requested further information regarding the process for preparing and
submitting the City’s comments.
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 3a) Page 4
Title: Study Session Meeting Minutes of June 10, 2013
Mr. Locke explained that staff will prepare draft comments for review with Council on June 24th.
He stated that a joint meeting with the School Board would be scheduled on July 1st or July 8th
followed by Council approval of the comment letter to the SPO.
Councilmember Mavity expressed concern that the modeling for Wooddale and Beltline on the
colocation option seems to be missing and stated she wanted to make sure Council is given an
opportunity to consider traffic and grade separation issues for this area and especially around
Wooddale.
Ms. McMonigal advised that staff will be meeting with the SPO tomorrow to review the
colocation alternative and further information will be provided to Council following that
meeting.
Mr. Locke explained that the large map contains the Brunswick West alternative and the
Brunswick Central alternative and in either a relocation or colocation scenario, the storage track
on the Bass Lake Spur goes away as well as the switching wye. He stated that in either of the
Brunswick reroute scenarios, over 50% of the route consists of new right-of-way and the tracks
are elevated in almost every location. He discussed the Brunswick West and Central reroutes
and provided detailed information about the proposed track elevations.
Councilmember Mavity indicated the City has been dealing with sight line issues at the Highway
7 and Wooddale interchange and requested that issues with sight lines be addressed by the SPO.
Mr. Locke indicated the City’s DEIS comments raised the issue that this corridor was too narrow
and would become even narrower due to the elevated tracks. He stated the City believes the
Blackstone side of the corridor should be acquired between Minnetonka Blvd and West 27th
Street to provide a larger buffer between homes on Blackstone and Brunswick and the freight rail
tracks.
Councilmember Sanger felt that the acquisitions along Blackstone north of Minnetonka Blvd
should go south to Lake Street, too. She felt the City should be concerned about the number of
feet from the tracks to houses and was also concerned about the elevated tracks because of the
noise.
Mr. Locke stated one of the big issues for both reroute alternatives relates to the impact of
introducing large berms/retaining walls and bridges through the middle of the community,
creating visual and physical barriers, especially through the high school campus area. The berms
will have a tendency to create barriers and divide neighborhoods. He added it will be important
to understand the long-term impact on the community of creating this type of barrier.
Councilmember Spano stated that putting freight rail 20’ up in the air will cause additional sound
to spill out into areas that had not necessarily experienced noise issues in the past and felt that
sound mitigation issues become more pronounced as a result of the elevated tracks.
Mr. Locke explained that the Brunswick West alternative has freight rail traveling through the
ponding area along Lake Street near Brunswick Avenue. The ponding area is very deep. He
stated this important ponding area provides anti-flooding capacity for the City, and the drawings
show this area getting filled in. He stated indicated it would need to be replaced.
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 3a) Page 5
Title: Study Session Meeting Minutes of June 10, 2013
He stated with both reroute options, most at-grade crossings are eliminated over significant roads
in the City, including Wooddale and Beltline. He discussed the reroute option that goes through
the high school football field and stated the map shows the commercial properties along Lake
Street being acquired and Lake Street rerouted to parallel the freight rail tracks with the
possibility of shifting the football field north of this area.
Councilmember Mavity stated as Council has noted previously, the money invested by the City
in this area would need to be mitigated.
Councilmember Sanger requested information about what the reroutes will do to PSI.
Mr. Locke advised that the Brunswick West route keeps the trains almost equidistant between
the high school and PSI. He stated the Brunswick Central option retains the new football field
but goes through the PSI/Central Community Center playgrounds and School District’s
maintenance building. He indicated Wooddale would have to be lowered a couple feet to make
this route work, and Hwy 7 would need to be lowered about 4.5 ft. This option hits more homes
and also impacts the City’s storm water system. He stated this option is problematic because
freight rail gets moved closer to the elementary school and goes through the playground area.
The residual land from taking homes might make it possible to replace the playground close to
the Central Community Center but this area would be adjacent to elevated tracks between 14’
and 17’ above the existing grade. He added one of the common issues with berms is the side
slopes and the City feels the side slopes should be at least as flat as 3:1 slopes for maintainability
and safety. However, gentler slopes will need more land. Another option is retaining walls but
they are more expensive, can be a safety issue, and create a visual barrier.
Councilmember Spano asked how close the tracks are to the PSI property at Section B of the
Brunswick Central option.
Mr. Locke stated he did not know and agreed to obtain this measurement. He indicated all the
freight rail alternatives include the south connection from the Bass Lake spur and that this has
impacts on a number of commercial properties in that area. He stated that staff will prepare a
similar analysis for impacts related to colocation, including the continued at-grade rail crossings
at Wooddale and Beltline and related circulation impacts, as well as the impact of freight rail at
the station areas for the next City Council Meeting. He asked Council to review the preliminary
list of pros and cons for the reroute options and to provide feedback and comments to staff as
soon as possible prior to the continued study session discussion on June 24th.
After further discussion, it was the consensus of the City Council to start the special study
session on June 17th at 6:00 p.m. to allow Council another opportunity to review and discuss
SWLRT, particularly as it relates to colocation and the Wooddale and Beltline crossings.
Mr. Locke advised the City has asked the SPO to produce 3D drawings of some of the key
locations and these 3D drawings will be provided to Council at its next meeting.
Councilmember Sanger requested that Council be provided with a complete list of all properties
to be acquired for both the reroute and colocation options. She also requested that Council be
provided with information regarding the distance from the tracks to the property lines for
remaining properties under both the colocation and reroute options as well as information
regarding the distance from the tracks to buildings for each of these options. She also requested
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 3a) Page 6
Title: Study Session Meeting Minutes of June 10, 2013
information regarding mitigation being proposed by the SPO for each of these options. She also
asked when the FTA is expected to make a decision regarding whether an amended or
supplemental DEIS will be required.
Mr. Locke stated that staff will ask the SPO’s environmental consultant about the decision
regarding an amended or supplemental DEIS.
Councilmember Sanger asked when studies would be conducted related to noise impacts,
vibration, and derailment potential. She also requested information regarding the railroad’s
position with respect to reroute and colocation and whether they have accepted any of the routes
as viable options and if not, she asked what was left to be decided. She stated the railroads have
indicated if they are rerouted through the MN&S route that they would need to be compensated
and she questioned whether any decisions on compensation have been made and who would be
responsible for that compensation. She stated the previous DEIS indicated that colocation was
not a feasible option because of 4f parklands in Kenilworth and asked whether this issue has
been resolved.
Mr. Locke agreed to follow-up on the 4f parkland issue adding it was his understanding that the
options on the table for rerouting and colocation represent options that the SPO feels could be done.
Councilmember Hallfin stated that City Council Resolution No. 10-070 lays out the City’s
position, most notably that the City opposes the rerouting of freight rail traffic from the
Kenilworth corridor to St. Louis Park and indicated the SPO has already showed that other viable
options exist. He added the City has established its position and this position has not changed.
Councilmember Mavity stated that Met Council has previously indicated there are five options
that work for the SPO and the railroads but there is no indication these options work for the
community. She asked what happens during construction since this is an open and functioning
railroad line.
Mr. Locke stated it was his understanding that the SPO is having conversations with the railroad
at this time regarding constructability and figuring out how to keep the trains moving during
construction.
Mr. Harmening indicated the School Board has expressed an interest in meeting with Council
and suggested meeting with the School Board on July 1st.
It was the consensus of the City Council to schedule a joint meeting with the School Board on
July 1 st.
Mr. Harmening advised that the Corridor Management Committee is meeting on Wednesday,
June 12th, and stated he would attend the meeting in Mayor Jacobs’s absence. He stated he
planned to reiterate the City’s current position and policy related to freight rail and that the City
continues to have significant concerns regarding the freight rail reroute options based on what
has been presented to date.
Councilmember Santa suggested that Mr. Harmening also point out that Council has reviewed
the next level of information on a potential reroute but has not yet had an opportunity to review
the colocation option and any remarks regarding colocation would be preliminary, but that
Council has significant concerns based on what it has seen to date.
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 3a) Page 7
Title: Study Session Meeting Minutes of June 10, 2013
4. Human Resources Update
Mr. Harmening presented the staff report and stated the reorganization of the Parks and
Recreation and Public Works Departments to the Departments of Operations and Recreation and
Engineering has gone very well. He stated staff continues to closely review the City’s CIP from
an engineering perspective and advised the impacts are much greater than previously anticipated,
e.g., SWLRT. He advised that Mr. Rardin has announced his retirement effective June 28, 2013,
and the Director of Engineering position will be posted tomorrow. He also advised that the City
is close to filling the Engineering Project Coordinator position, previously held by Mr. Olson.
He stated that if it is determined that additional engineering support is needed, we are in the
process of staffing analysis due to business needs and there would be cost implications to the
budget. He indicated the City’s engineering costs are charged out to the City’s various projects
and part of the cost of staffing would go directly to projects.
Councilmember Ross asked if it would make sense to hire additional staff on a contract basis.
Mr. Harmening replied that we do use consultants to help engineering in various areas to off load
some of the work.
City Council was appreciative of the update and was in support of the City Manager continuing
to handle staffing and to add in areas as needed.
Communications/Meeting Check-In (Verbal)
None.
The meeting adjourned at 8:56 p.m.
Written Reports provided and documented for recording purposes only:
5. Knollwood Development Proposal
6. Process Update – Environment and Sustainability Commission: Sustainable SLP
7. Update on Sale of 5609 Wood Lane (Vacant City Property)
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Nancy Stroth, City Clerk Jeff Jacobs, Mayor
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: July 1, 2013
Minutes: 3b
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
JUNE 17, 2013
1. Call to Order
Mayor Pro Tem Sanger called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m.
Councilmembers present: Mayor Pro Tem Susan Sanger, Steve Hallfin, Anne Mavity, Julia
Ross, and Sue Santa.
Councilmembers absent: Mayor Jeff Jacobs and Councilmember Jake Spano.
Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), Deputy City Manager/Director of Human
Resources (Ms. Deno), City Attorney (Mr. Scott), Director of Engineering (Mr. Rardin), City
Engineer (Mr. Brink), Senior Planner (Mr. Walther), Controller (Mr. Swanson), Communications
Coordinator (Mr. Zwilling), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Hughes).
Guests: David Mol, CPA (HLB Tautges Redpath, Ltd.) and Mark Ruff (Ehlers).
1a. Pledge of Allegiance
1b. Roll Call
2. Presentations
2a. 2012 Financial Statements – Auditors Discussion and Review
Mr. Swanson presented the staff report and introduced David Mol, CPA (HLB Tautges
Redpath, Ltd.).
Mr. Mol presented the opinion on the fair presentation of the financial statements, a
report on internal controls, a report on compliance with the Minnesota legal compliance
audit guide, and a communication to those charged with governance and advised the
financial statements, which are the responsibility of management, were audited using
Generally Accepted Accounting Standards to obtain reasonable assurance that the
financial statements are free of material misstatement and the auditors have issued a clean
opinion. He stated the City has previously received a GFOA award for excellence in
financial reporting and staff will submit the 2012 financial statements for recognition. He
stated the report on internal controls is intended to gain an understanding of internal
controls in place and perform tests to determine compliance but does not audit or opine
on the City’s internal controls. He advised that one item was noted regarding an
adjustment to the financial statements. He stated the report on compliance with the
Minnesota legal compliance audit guide resulted in no findings of noncompliance after a
sample of transactions was tested for compliance in seven categories. He stated the
document referred to as communication with those in charge discloses whether any
changes were made to accounting policies and found that the City changed the way it
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 3b) Page 2
Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of June 17, 2013
accounts for capital assets using the Modified Approach. He indicated there were two
immaterial adjustments in the financial statements and one material corrected adjustment
related to revenue recognition. He advised there were no disagreements with
management and no difficulties encountered in performing the audit.
Mayor Pro Tem Sanger expressed the City Council’s thanks to Mr. Mol and Mr.
Swanson.
2b. Recognition for Mike Rardin’s Years of Service
Mayo r Pro Tem Sanger stated that Mr. Rardin recently announced his retirement as the
City’s longtime Director of Public Works and Engineering effective June 28th. She stated
Mr. Rardin has been invaluable and it has been a great pleasure to work with him. She
presented Mr. Rardin with a Certificate of Appreciation recognizing him for over
eighteen years of service to the City.
Mr. Harmening stated that Mr. Rardin transformed the Public Works Department and
accomplished a great deal for the City, including his work on Excelsior & Grand and the
West End project and stated it has been a pleasure to work with Mr. Rardin.
Mr. Rardin stated he appreciated the opportunity to work with Mr. Harmening, the City
Council, residents, and the great engineering staff. He thanked the City for allowing him
to be part of many important projects in the community.
3. Approval of Minutes
3a. Study Session Meeting Minutes May 28, 2013
Councilmember Mavity requested that the first paragraph on page 4 be revised to state
“Councilmember Mavity noted the design does not include widening of the corridor as
previously discussed on the entire MN&S corridor north of Minnetonka Boulevard as
previously noted in the City’s DEIS comments, adding if freight was relocated, the entire
right-of-way would need to be widened and would require additional property
acquisitions.”
Mr. Harmening stated that Councilmember Spano has requested that the second and third
paragraphs on page 5 be clarified to state “Councilmember Spano asked if the trail could
be used temporarily during construction about temporary relocation of the trail and/or
freight rail temporarily during tunnel construction in the Kenilworth corridor and felt that
those options should be considered on the colocation option. Mr. Fuhrmann replied they
have not assumed the trail can be used temporarily during construction and their working
assumption has been that they would have to acquire properties during construction of the
tunnel options that the idea of moving the bike trail or freight rail temporarily had not
been considered but would be examined.”
The minutes were approved as amended.
3b. City Council Meeting Minutes June 3, 2013
The minutes were approved as presented.
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 3b) Page 3
Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of June 17, 2013
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. 13-087 “Declaring that it is The City of St. Louis Park’s
Policy to Utilize Complete Streets Principles in Transportation Planning and
Community Design.”
4b. Adopt Resolution No. 13-088 authorizing installation of stop sign at the east
termination point of Auto Club Way.
4c. Adopt Resolution No. 13-089 authorizing the special assessment for the repair of
the sewer service line at 2600 Inglewood Avenue South, St. Louis Park, MN -
P.I.D. 31-029-24-41-0106.
4d. Adopt Resolution No. 13-090 authorizing the special assessment for the repair of
the water service line at 3208 Webster Avenue South, St. Louis Park, MN - P.I.D.
16-117-21-21-0105.
4e. Adopt Resolution No. 13-091 authorizing the special assessment for the repair of
the water service line at 3224 Dakota Avenue South, St. Louis Park, MN - P.I.D.
17-117-21-14-0007.
4f. Approve premises amendment to the on-sale intoxicating and Sunday sales liquor
license for El Gordo Uno, Inc.; dba El Patron Mexican Cuisine located at 8140
Hwy 7.
4g. Approve a temporary on-sale intoxicating liquor license for Park Nicollet
Foundation – Meadowbrook Collaborative, St. Louis Park, for an event to be held
on June 18, 2013, at the Warehouse Winery located at 6415 Cambridge St.
4h. Adopt Resolution No. 13-092 approving acceptance of a monetary donation from
John Wiley & Sons, Inc. in the amount of $500 and from Inscape Publishing in an
amount of $1,150 for the purchase and installation of a memorial bench in
memory of Colin Farbotko. The bench will be installed along the walking trail of
Otten Pond.
4i. Adopt Resolution No. 13-093 approving acceptance of a monetary donation from
Rebekah Forrest in the amount of $25 to be used at the discretion of Westwood
Hills Nature Center.
4j. Adopt Resolution No. 13-094 approving acceptance of a monetary grant from the
Minnesota Recreation and Park Foundation in the amount of $800 to fund
“Interactive Scavenger Hunt with GPS” at Westwood Hills Nature Center.
4k. Adopt Resolution No. 13-095 approving a Minor Amendment to the Planned Unit
Development (PUD) for Costco / Home Depot, with conditions recommended by
staff.
4l. Approve Second Reading and Adopt Ordinance No. 2443-13 amending
Appendix A of the City Code, and Chapter 36 pertaining to Mobile Medical Uses,
and to approve the summary ordinance for publication.
4m. Authorize the execution of an encroachment agreement for grading on City
property next to 4300 Cedarwood Road.
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 3b) Page 4
Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of June 17, 2013
4n. Confirm the appointment of Scott Brink to the position of Interim Engineering
Director effective June 29, 2013.
4o. Adopt Resolution No. 13-096 ordering the abatement of the hazardous buildings
located at 7112 Minnetonka Boulevard.
4p. Approve for filing Planning Commission Meeting Minutes May 15, 2013.
4q. Approve for filing Vendor Claims.
It was moved by Councilmember Mavity, seconded by Councilmember Santa, to approve
the Agenda and items listed on the Consent Calendar; and to waive reading of all
resolutions and ordinances.
The motion passed 5-0 (Mayor Jacobs and Councilmember Spano absent).
5. Boards and Commissions - None
6. Public Hearings
6a. Public Hearing: Citywide Sidewalk, Trail, and Bikeway System Plan
Mr. Brink presented the staff report and provided historical background regarding the
City’s public input process. He advised the Sidewalk, Trail, and Bikeway System Plan is
a ten-year plan with a purpose to develop a comprehensive citywide system of trails and
sidewalks. He reviewed the goals and objectives that included the development of a grid
system of sidewalks every ¼ mile and bicycle facilities every ½ mile. He stated that a
Capital Improvement Plan was developed after the extensive public process and based on
priorities, needs, and available resources. He explained that while the bulk of public
comment had to do with the sidewalk plan, the System Plan includes a bikeway system
that will go through further public process work with residents to determine the best fit
for bikeways. He presented an illustration of existing and proposed sidewalks and stated
staff met with Council to put together a ten-year plan including costs. He noted that the
City has a plan in place that identifies other projects, e.g., street reconstruction or sewer
construction, and any sidewalk or bikeway construction will be scheduled around other
significant projects. He stated the cost of the proposed ten-year plan is estimated at $17-
24 million and includes construction costs, right-of-way acquisition, and engineering. He
pointed out that the estimated total includes the cost for bike and pedestrian bridges in
three locations identified in the System Plan and added the project would be financed
using G.O. tax exempt bonds.
Councilmember Santa requested confirmation that the overall System Plan is intended to
be adopted by Council and then each project would be looked at in greater detail with
some projects being removed and/or added or moved to another location, but in all
instances, the residents being affected would be invited to every meeting and would have
an opportunity to provide input and help make any tweaks if necessary.
Mr. Brink stated that this was correct. He explained that Council ultimately approves and
authorizes a specific project to go out for bid and the same process would be used for the
System Plan, adding that once a project undergoes more detailed engineering design,
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 3b) Page 5
Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of June 17, 2013
Council would make a determination whether it makes sense to move ahead with a
particular project.
Councilmember Santa asked if each segment would come back to Council for approval.
Mr. Brink replied in the affirmative.
Councilmember Mavity stated that for many people this process has been frustrating and
acknowledged it has been a challenge to figure out how much information to provide at
one time. She stated residents have expressed concern about removing trees and the
impact to trees after installation of a sidewalk. She requested information about the
City’s past experience with sidewalks and the percentage of trees that have died after
installation of a sidewalk. She added studies have been done that show installation of a
sidewalk around trees can harm them and requested that Council be provided with further
information to better understand this potential impact.
Mr. Brink stated the City does not have a specific percentage but City staff reviews each
project individually to determine the best location for a sidewalk and to minimize project
impacts including trees. He stated that once City staff has an understanding of the
topography and with input from residents, the project can be designed, adding the City
tries to work around trees as much as possible. He presented pictures of past projects
demonstrating how the City has installed a sidewalk around trees or in areas with tight
grades, adding the City Forester is involved on all of these projects.
Councilmember Ross asked about liability if someone fell on a sidewalk in front of a
resident’s home.
Mr. Scott advised that any liability typically rests with the person who slips and falls and
not with the property owner. He stated if there was potential liability on a City sidewalk
or trail in the right-of-way maintained by the City, the liability would be on the City’s
part adding he has never seen a situation where that has created any liability on the part
of the homeowner.
Mayor Pro Tem Sanger opened the public hearing at 8:17 p.m.
Mr. Patrick Djeff, 4111 Brookside Avenue, stated he lives a mile from the middle school
where he will be attending and he tries to bike or walk as much as he can. He felt the
City should add more sidewalks so he can walk to and from school and to encourage kids
and adults to be more active.
Ms. Becky Phelan, 3944 Joppa Avenue, stated she is the first of eight households
between Joppa and Natchez who are unanimous in their opposition to installation of a
sidewalk on 40th Street. She asked Council to remove this sidewalk because it does not
fit the parameters of the plan.
Ms. Mary Gindorff, 3928 Monterey Avenue, stated they moved into their home in 1968
and were impressed by the natural beauty and ambience of this Minikahda Vista
neighborhood. She stated the proposed sidewalks in her neighborhood will be in close
proximity to their homes and this presents a huge impact on their lives, especially in the
summer, resulting in little or no privacy. She stated their neighborhood takes pride in
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 3b) Page 6
Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of June 17, 2013
their homes and yards and they are concerned about the loss of mature trees and shrubs,
as well as impacts to their property values and lifestyles. She respectfully asked Council
to delete 40th Street from the plan and presented several photographs to Council.
Mr. Mike Lang, 3971 Natchez Avenue, stated that many residents along 40th have
installed irrigation systems and have invested in landscaping, retaining walls, and fences
and the residents are now at risk of losing their investment. He was concerned about the
loss of 25 mature trees, many of the trees being over 70 years old.
Mr. Tom Latham 3944 Kipling Avenue, stated they have invested substantially in their
home and yard including investment in the City’s setback of a 70’ retaining wall. He
stated when they put in the first 35’ in 1992 they called the City and were told it would be
okay and that the City would have enough space for snow plowing. He stated he added
the second section in 2011 and their contractor got a permit after the Connect the Park
project was established and received no heads-up about sidewalks. He stated the cost to
relocate the retaining walls and fence would be about $8,000. He added he was present
this evening on behalf Cindy Abramovitz, 3933 Monterey, who could not attend and
stated her driveway’s total length is 20’ and the sidewalk easement of 11’ would leave
her with a 14’ driveway and her SUV is 16’. He stated he felt the issues raised were all
compelling reasons to remove this segment from Connect the Park.
Ms. Jackie Perrizo, 3945 Kipling, requested deletion of the sidewalk segment from
Natchez to Joppa and asked for reconsideration of the logistics surrounding snow
removal for this stretch of sidewalk. She stated she is on a fixed income and the
estimated cost to hire someone to remove snow varies between $395-$725. She stated
that once the sidewalks are cleared there is still snow and ice on the sidewalk so people
prefer to walk in the street. She requested reconsideration to delete the segment from
Natchez to Joppa.
Councilmember Hallfin stated it was important to understand that the City designates
sidewalks as Community Sidewalks and Neighborhood Sidewalks and the City is
responsible for snow removal on Community Sidewalks.
Mr. Brink stated that Community Sidewalks are sidewalks along busier collector streets,
e.g., France Avenue or Texas Avenue, and Neighborhood Sidewalks are the
responsibility of the homeowner.
Ms. Cindy Latham, 3944 Kipling, stated their neighborhood submitted a petition
unanimously opposed to a sidewalk on 40th Street. She stated their neighborhood also
initiated a meeting with Councilmember Mavity to ask her what they could do to better
understand the process and potential impacts and Councilmember Mavity suggested they
get additional support from the Minikahda Vista neighborhood and confer with the
Minikahda Vista co-chair Claudia Madison. She distributed a summary sheet of their
efforts stating they obtained a total of 146 signatures on their petitions indicating their
opposition to a sidewalk on 40th Street. She stated this means 89% of the households said
they wanted to delete the 40th Street segment, noting that 29 of the households have
school-age children. She respectfully requested the deletion of the 40th Street segment.
Ms. Jen Jacobsen, 3945 Lynn Avenue, stated their children walk to Susan Lindgren
School and felt that 40th Street was a safe, pedestrian friendly road with a low volume of
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 3b) Page 7
Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of June 17, 2013
traffic with no issues of pedestrian safety. She stated she contacted the St. Louis Park
and Edina Police Departments and was informed that 40th Street is considered a low
volume traffic road with no unusual safety issues or concerns reported with no accidents
of any kind. She stated Connect the Park identifies criteria for sidewalk installation
geared toward streets with high volumes and she did not believe the 40th Street segment
fits the criteria and respectfully requested deletion of the 40th Street segment.
Mr. Shawn Jacobsen, 3945 Lynn Avenue, stated their street ends in a cul-de-sac and felt
their street was primarily used by people in their neighborhood. He stated they have
never felt there was a problem with traffic and they can watch their children walk to
school. He stated the great majority of residents are opposed to this part of the plan and
some residents brought up reasonable alternatives such as pedestrian lanes, school
crosswalks, or adding more stop signs, adding these measures were put out by the
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration as part of its Safe Streets initiative to
increase the safety of school-age walkers. He added that crossing guards at Susan
Lindgren is another possibility and respectfully requested deletion of the 40th Street
segment.
Mr. Greg Phelan, 3944 Joppa, stated his opposition to the sidewalk along 40th Street and
indicated when they learned about the proposal and the impact of construction on their
narrow green space, they commissioned a study by Heritage Shade Tree Consultants. He
stated the report includes a detailed inventory and analysis of 30 trees in the project space
and 18 of those trees are large, mature trees and represent prime urban forestry. He stated
the consultant tabulated the environmental value based on air quality, storm water
control, and CO2 reduction, and the report states that large trees produce an annual
benefit to the community of over $3,600. He stated the report includes overhead photos
of the entire green space that convey the sheer density of the area and indicated the
proposed project space will have a concrete strip extending over 1,200’ from Joppa to
Natchez and represents a retrofit going through urban forest density and cityscape. He
stated the report indicates the sidewalk through this area could negatively impact any or
all these trees thus putting a key community asset at risk of damage or loss and
recommended the deletion of the proposed 40th Street segment.
Mr. Bill Kallenberg, 3940 Lynn Avenue, stated they were attracted to the Minikahda
Vista neighborhood by the mature trees and canopy. He stated that at the May 28th study
session, the question was raised about the potential impact to this canopy, which was a
direct result of the study done by Heritage Shade Tree Consultants. He stated it was
important to note the report states that approximately 4,264 square feet of canopy could
be potentially lost and presented a before and after scenario demonstrating the impact of
the proposed sidewalk. He stated the national tree benefit calculator indicates these trees
capture 4,551 gallons of storm water, reduce CO2 by 1,300 pounds per year, and provide
kilowatt hour annual savings. He stated he spoke with Mr. Jordan and Mr. Vaughan who
indicated that if a tree were cut down at the time of sidewalk installation it does not mean
the tree will survive adding all of these trees are community assets that provide a calming
effect to the neighborhood and enhanced wide-open spaces encourage faster vehicle
traffic. He felt there were less intrusive options available and did not feel this street was
designed for a sidewalk and respectfully requested the deletion of the 40th Street segment.
Ms. Julie Kallenberg, 3940 Lynn Avenue, stated that residents between Joppa and
Natchez are undivided in their opposition to a sidewalk. She stated they invited
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 3b) Page 8
Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of June 17, 2013
Councilmember Mavity to a meeting to voice their concerns and gain insight into
Connect the Park, focusing on all aspects of the plan and the process for determining
segments as well as recommendations for obtaining additional support for removal of this
segment. She stated they met with Claudia Johnson and gained her endorsement of their
position and they prepared a petition, met with other Councilmembers to understand their
perspective on the plan, and spoke with and wrote letters to staff attempting to understand
the goals and objectives of the plan. She stated they met with Mr. Vaughan to get his
professional opinion and hired Heritage Shade Tree to obtain an independent and
objective report. She stated 40th Street is a low volume street with no known safety
concerns. She stated they have broad support for removing the 40th Street segment from
the plan and respectfully requested that Council delete this segment.
Ms. Lois Scudder, 8025 Cedar Lake Road, stated that 20 years ago they lost all the
parking in front of their street due to the left turn lane installed on Virginia and this
impacted their business. She stated if this sidewalk is installed they will lose two or three
more parking places and there is no place to park in the neighborhood. She stated they
spent a lot of money on landscaping and after a portion of their driveway was deleted
they lost part of their lawn and if a sidewalk is installed they would lose all the money
they spent on landscaping. She stated they are opposed to a sidewalk on Cedar Lake
Road between Virginia and Nevada.
Mr. Dan Scudder, 8025 Cedar Lake Road, stated if a sidewalk is installed and their trees
die five years later, they have to pay to have them removed because the sidewalk killed
them. He stated he has the oldest elm tree on Cedar Lake Road and felt this tree would
not survive the sidewalk installation. He stated the sidewalk would not enhance his
property and was concerned about his property value going down.
Mr. Dave Carlson, 7006 West 23rd Street, stated he is a member of the Hennepin County
Bike Advisory Committee and served on the City’s Vision committees. He expressed
support for the biking provisions and felt the plan would enhance the City’s trail network.
He stated the City needs more adequate space for the safety of bikes and motorists and
was hopeful the City would pass this plan and provide flexibility especially with
sidewalks and to deal with pedestrian issues on an individual basis.
Mr. Matt Adams, 1445 Louisiana Avenue, spoke against the plan and expressed concern
about removal of trees and the impact on trees not being removed immediately. He stated
this also impacts parking in driveways and decreases parking spaces.
Mr. Steve May, 3501 Joppa, thanked Mr. Brink for his correspondence and follow-up
over the past six months. He stated no safety issues on 39th Street have been identified
and felt the City was trying to create a problem that does not exist. He applauded the
residents on 40th Street for their efforts to identify and quantify the environmental impact,
stating the impact of 10.5 miles of sidewalks is $1,260,000 and felt this would impact the
City’s ability to say it is a green community. He stated the 2011 community recreation
survey showed less than 5% of respondents wanted more sidewalks and felt that moving
forward was questionable. He stated that 67 people filed a petition against a sidewalk on
39th Street and asked Council to take that into consideration. He also felt the City should
consider other options before putting in bridges. He stated the plan would cost a lot of
money and felt this money should be put toward things like schools, roads, or sewers. He
asked Council to delete 39th Street and 40th Street from the plan.
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 3b) Page 9
Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of June 17, 2013
Mr. Howard Noreen, 8512 Westmoreland Lane, stated he was opposed to the sidewalk on
the north side of Westmoreland Lane. He stated the proposed sidewalk is in one of the
least populated areas of the City bordered by the Nature Center and is one of the longest
proposed segments as well as one of the most expensive that serves the lowest number of
people. He felt that adding sidewalks would change the look and feel of the Westwood
Hills neighborhood. He stated the speed limit in this area is 25 mph and the kids are
bussed to school. He stated the segment along Westmoreland does not meet the criteria
for putting in sidewalks and adds no value to the City.
Councilmember Hallfin noted that Westmoreland is a main artery to the Nature Center
and it leads to the junior high.
Mr. Noreen stated that the kids are bussed to school adding there are no cross streets and
the only people this will serve are those living along the street and these residents do not
want a sidewalk.
Mr. Marvin Marshak, 2855 Ottawa Avenue, acknowledged that Ottawa is a busy street
and requested consideration of a stop sign at 29th and Ottawa to slow traffic. He
questioned the need for a sidewalk on both sides of the street and whether a sidewalk
needs to be 6’ wide, noting many sidewalks in Fernhill are 4’ wide and this would reduce
the impact.
Ms. Anita Kolman, 2855 Ottawa, agreed with Mr. Marshak’s comments and stated she
frequently walks in the street in the winter because the sidewalks are covered with ice
and puddles. She stated many of the trees will be impacted by a sidewalk and they
previously lost two large trees when curbs were installed and felt there was no way to put
in a sidewalk without impacting trees. She stated their street is busy in part because
people use it as a detour into Benilde or to avoid Highway 100 and because there is no
stop sign at 29th and Ottawa. She was concerned about how fast drivers are traveling and
felt a stop sign would slow down the traffic and might take away some of the traffic.
Mr. Paul Jennings, 3925 Joppa, felt the City Forester needs to work with City staff to
save as many trees as possible and stated he felt a sidewalk on 39th Street was a better
choice than 40th Street; however, he would speak against both segments, emphasizing the
loss of trees.
Mr. Steven Olson, 1641 Louisiana Avenue, stated he has a mature maple tree in his front
yard and was concerned that a sidewalk would cover up 20% of the root system and
stated his opposition to a sidewalk on the east side of Louisiana Avenue. He stated that
St. Louis Park was not built for bike paths and sidewalks on all streets and some
sidewalks will be within 15’ of some doorsteps. He referenced information from the
Internet that says the City has 110 miles of sidewalks, Edina has 25 miles, Golden Valley
has 44, and Hopkins has 21. He added he was dismayed to see plans to put a bus shelter
in front of his house and was concerned about what that would do to his property value.
Mr. Jim Janick, 2048 Texas Avenue, stated he was present representing himself and Ms.
Wanda Moss, 2042 Texas Avenue. He questioned the need for a second sidewalk along
Texas Avenue and stated he received an email from the City outlining the City’s logic
that there is a junior high school in the area with 3,300-4,000 cars a day on Texas but the
data does not show how many cars on a school day vis-à-vis a work day and urged the
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 3b) Page 10
Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of June 17, 2013
City to do a traffic count. He felt the City would be better off spending the money
redoing its current assets versus building another sidewalk. He stated that Ms. Moss has
two of the last old majestic elms and a sidewalk would kill those trees.
Mr. Ernest Griffith, 3936 Lynn Avenue, stated the proposal has sidewalks and bikeways
grouped together resulting in the issuance of bonds that he has to pay a part of and asked
if the City could split the cost so he knows how much the sidewalks cost and how much
the bikeways cost. He requested that Council give some thought to spending money to
put some drop gates on the snowplows so when he shovels his driveway he does not have
to shovel it twice after the plows come through. He stated his opposition to the sidewalk
on 40th from Joppa to Natchez and on 39th from France to Natchez.
Mr. Harmening explained that total construction cost is $11.8 million with sidewalk
construction estimated at $2.5 million, construction of bikeways estimated at $200,000,
construction of bike lanes estimated at $417,000, construction of trails estimated at
$740,500, and construction of bridges estimated at $8 million.
Ms. Judy Simmons, 1441 Louisiana Avenue, stated her opposition to a sidewalk and
stated the sidewalk on the west side takes care of pedestrian traffic. She stated she would
rather see the City put money into road repairs and police enforcement of speed limits.
Ms. Dianna Martin, 5220 Morningside Road, stated her opposition to a sidewalk on the
north side of Morningside and felt it would make more sense to have a sidewalk on the
south side but in any case, she requested that the sidewalk be removed from the plan for
reasons of safety, noting the stretch from Browndale to Mackey has crosswalks that are
not controlled and the crosswalks are offset at the intersections. She stated the existing
sidewalk along Browndale Park is on the south side and all of the large trees on that
section of Morningside are on the north side, adding the trees help buffer car exhaust and
are aesthetically important. She stated a sidewalk on the north side of Morningside
would reduce their front yards and most of the homes have a single car garage and would
have a hard time finding parking. She stated this stretch of sidewalk would not be a
safety improvement and would not contribute to connectivity and requested that this
segment be deleted. She stated that the homeowners she was able to reach agreed with
removing this segment and stated they would be happy to present a petition to the City.
Ms. Michelle Willinganz, 2848 Ottawa, stated she has landscaped and added on to their
home to increase curb appeal and the value of their property and would hate to see that
change. She requested further information about the statement that the City will work
with residents. She also requested further information about Community Sidewalks and
Neighborhood Sidewalks. She felt the addition of stop signs and traffic enforcement
would help, along with single side parking on Ottawa.
Ms. Elsa Linke, 2859 Ottawa Avenue, stated she has not had trouble getting around even
though there is no sidewalk. She stated Ottawa is a busy street and has observed that this
is the result of no stop sign on 29th and Ottawa. She felt a sidewalk on Ottawa was not
justified due to the environmental and aesthetic cost.
Mr. Ron Berry, 4100 Salem, stated this is the third time he has appeared regarding a
sidewalk on 41st and encouraged Council to reject the sidewalk plan as presented until
more details are available related to environmental costs, safety, and total project cost.
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 3b) Page 11
Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of June 17, 2013
Mr. Harold Ludtke, 2218 Texas Avenue, felt the sidewalk on the west side of Texas from
Franklin to Cedar Lake Road should be deleted because it was a waste of money. He felt
the only reason for putting in a sidewalk was the junior high school but a lot of students
are bussed to school and traffic is low.
Ms. Lorri Peters, 2520 Virginia Avenue, stated they already have a sidewalk on the east
side of Virginia and if a sidewalk is installed on their side of the street, it has to go under
the railroad bridge and there is no place to put a sidewalk under this bridge. She also
expressed concern about taking trees and making their short yard even shorter.
Mr. Duane Povlitzki, 3400 Aquila Avenue, questioned the need for a sidewalk between
Aquila and 34th and stated there are telephone poles and trees on the south side of the
street where the sidewalk is being proposed and nothing on the north side. He stated his
neighborhood is against a sidewalk. He also requested clarification regarding
responsibility for snow removal on sidewalks.
Mayor Pro Tem Sanger requested that Mr. Harmening follow-up with Mr. Povlitzki.
Mr. Neil Gilbert, 8608 Westmoreland Lane, agreed with Mr. Noreen’s earlier comments
and noted the overwhelming opposition to a sidewalk. He stated they have a street
leading to both the Nature Center and junior high school but they are not used by
pedestrians to get to either location. He felt the City was trying to increase accessibility
but in the process was reducing the reason why people want to live in St. Louis Park and
felt this should be taken into consideration. He asked who would be liable if someone
slips on a residential sidewalk. He felt the entire plan needs to be looked at before
passing something that is disliked by a large population of the City.
Mr. Jack Pope, 4101 Toledo Avenue, stated that a lot of people expressing interest in the
project are not the ones being impacted and was hopeful that this process going forward
would provide people being impacted with a lot more say than in the prior process.
Ms. Ruth Owens, 8031 Cedar Lake Road, agreed with previous comments and stated they
have a sidewalk across the street and have a full pedestrian walkway. She stated they
previously petitioned the City for a stoplight on the corner of Virginia and Cedar Lake
Road and felt that a better use of funds on that particular stretch would be a stoplight
because cars do not stop for the pedestrian crossing. She was concerned about the loss of
trees and was not convinced that they would not lose their trees.
Mr. David Ornstein, 8712 Westmoreland Lane, stated he was asked by residents to
present their overwhelming opposition to a sidewalk for the reasons stated earlier. He
stated several homes in the neighborhood have experienced broken water lines that are
expensive to repair and applauded the City for offering an insurance option but if
sidewalks are constructed and there are subsequent broken water or sewer lines, that
could increase the cost of repairs. He stated they have never experienced safety concerns
and was not aware of any accidents in their area and urged Council to delete this sidewalk
from the project.
Ms. Priscilla Bue, 2201 Louisiana Avenue, spoke in favor of a sidewalk along Louisiana
Avenue and stated crossing Louisiana Avenue is horrific especially during rush hour.
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 3b) Page 12
Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of June 17, 2013
She stated it is hard to walk on the east side of Louisiana Avenue because of hills and the
pitch to some of the yards. She stated she has a bus stop in front of her house and was
okay with that.
Mr. Kimball Justesen, 2219 Louisiana Avenue, stated his opposition to the sidewalk on
the east side of Louisiana. He stated someone suggested that sidewalks would slow
traffic but the sidewalk on the west side of Louisiana Avenue has not slowed traffic and
suggested that the Police Department patrol this area more frequently. He stated when
Louisiana Avenue was widened and sidewalks installed on the west side, the City put in
trees that now provide shade and most of the trees are close to the curb and he did not
feel these trees would live if a sidewalk is installed. He felt there was a safety issue with
respect to increased traffic close to people’s front doors and guaranteed that a sidewalk
on the east side of Louisiana Avenue would dramatically increase home invasions,
particularly with the addition of 144 apartments two blocks away. He stated that snow
removal on sidewalks and the question of liability was raised and indicated the person or
organization responsible for snow and ice removal will bear the lion’s share of liability
and the City has immunity for the Community Sidewalk segments but homeowners do
not have immunity. He felt the overall plan of connectivity in the Park was laudable but
felt that the plan’s goals have not been achieved with respect to Louisiana.
Ms. Melissa Brogger, 3901 Lynn Avenue, agreed with the overwhelming response in
opposition to the sidewalk on 39th Street. She referred to Exhibit 6 indicating sidewalks
provide traffic calming and disagreed stating that studies have indicated a sidewalk adds
to speeding. She disagreed that a sidewalk would improve aesthetics in their
neighborhood. She was also concerned about water runoff where hardscape is put in as
well as loss of privacy, decreased property values and curb appeal, and loss of significant
landscaping. She respectfully requested the removal of 39th Street from the plan.
Mr. Chris Edman, 7225 Minnetonka Boulevard, stated his opposition to the proposed
sidewalk stating the sidewalk would be approximately five feet from his bedroom
windows and would be a sidewalk that he would have to maintain. He was concerned
about losing his driveway and where to pile the snow. He stated his neighbor across the
street is in the same position and would lose his driveway as well.
Ms. Kira Bohmann, 3407 Aquila Lane, stated they are in favor of the bike connectivity in
the plan but are opposed to the sidewalk, adding they bought their house because it did
not have a sidewalk. She asked that Council consider decoupling the proposal and
removing the sidewalks in their neighborhood.
Mr. John Snyder, 3316 Huntington, stated he thought most neighbors were fine with the
bike plan. He stated one concern mentioned relates to those situations where people are
left with a driveway too small to hold a second car and felt that any segments with that
situation should be dropped from the plan.
Mr. Tim Brausen, 8301 Virginia Circle North, encouraged Council to pass the bike
portion of the plan and stated anything the City can do to make the City more bike
friendly would be appreciated and welcomed. He encouraged Council to strongly
reconsider proposals relating to sidewalks on both sides of a street.
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 3b) Page 13
Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of June 17, 2013
Ms. Gloria Hiner, 4050 Wooddale, stated the City did a review of Wooddale five years
ago and tabled it and did not know why this segment is back on. She agreed with Mr.
Berry’s comment that this needs more study.
Mayor Pro Tem Sanger stated she received an email from Ms. Katherine McManus, 3106
Zarthan Avenue South, who could not be present this evening and recited the email for
inclusion in the official record.
Mr. Greg Meredith, 8506 Westmoreland Lane, stated he submitted a letter to the City in
November and recited his letter opposing the City’s initiative to install sidewalks in the
green space in front of his home and urging the City Council to reconsider the plan and
not spend unnecessary resources on concrete. He reiterated his written request to remove
Westmoreland from the sidewalk plan.
Mr. Dave Bohmann, 3407 Aquila Lane, stated he did not believe that sidewalks promote
community involvement and activity and asked that the City remove the proposed
sidewalk on Aquila from the plan.
Mayor Pro Tem Sanger thanked all the residents for attending and speaking tonight and
closed the public hearing at 10:47 p.m.
Councilmember Mavity stated that Council adopted a Complete Streets Policy as part of
its Consent Agenda this evening that instructs staff to adopt the policy for all of the City’s
engineering and transportation projects; in addition, Council adopted an Active Living
Policy to encourage people to be more active and these policies were envisioned when
the sidewalk plan was initiated. She indicated she did not envision how frustrating this
process would be and agreed that Council does not have enough information on many
segments to say yes or no, but felt that Council should move to adopt the Sidewalk, Trail,
and Bikeway System Plan with amendments.
It was moved by Councilmember Mavity, seconded by Councilmember Santa, to adopt the
Citywide Sidewalk, Trail, and Bikeway System Plan as presented in Exhibits A2, B1, and
C2, which depict the proposed 10-year Capital Plan.
Councilmember Mavity stated she appreciated the thoroughness of the 40th Street
neighbors in their presentation and requested a friendly amendment to remove 40th Street
from the Citywide Sidewalk, Trail, and Bikeway System Plan because the neighborhood
petition was significant and did not feel the grid itself justifies that many segments.
Councilmember Santa seconded the friendly amendment.
The friendly amendment request to remove 40th Street from the Citywide Sidewalk, Trail,
and Bikeway System Plan passed 5-0. (Mayor Jacobs and Councilmember Spano
absent).
Councilmember Mavity stated Council needs more information on many of these
segments and did not want to make a decision without that information. She stated the
snow removal issue is a serious issue and suggested that Council work with staff to figure
out how to make sure those sidewalks that the City is responsible for are plowed
effectively. She stated there are gaps in the current sidewalk segments that this proposal
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 3b) Page 14
Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of June 17, 2013
does not address and there are a lot of segments around the community where people
were able to opt out individually and felt it was important to figure out how to fill in
those gaps. She reiterated she would not approve a plan that will cut down a canopy of
trees.
Councilmember Hallfin stated he lives on 41st Street where a sidewalk is proposed and
this is the only section of 41st Street from Susan Lindgren School to Highway 100 that
does not have a sidewalk. He stated that Council takes this plan seriously and
acknowledged the concerns about loss of trees and felt Council was at the point where the
City will do some engineering to see what the projects will look like, including how
many trees are impacted, and Council will have the answers it does not have now. He
reminded residents that the final plan would not be voted on tonight and Council is only
voting to approve further engineering so that Council can review segments on a case-by-
case basis.
Councilmember Ross agreed with Councilmember Hallfin’s comments and stated that
Council’s task is about connecting the city. She stated she agreed with the resident’s
comments about Westmoreland adding there are other areas in the City, e.g., Louisiana
Avenue and Cedar Lake Road, that she supported. She indicated the City has a north-
south issue that needs to be addressed in order to connect people throughout the City and
move people from one side of town to the other. She requested an amendment to remove
Westmoreland Lane from the Citywide Sidewalk, Trail, and Bikeway System Plan.
Councilmember Hallfin seconded the amendment request to remove Westmoreland Lane
from the Citywide Sidewalk, Trail, and Bikeway System Plan.
The amendment request to remove Westmoreland Lane from the Citywide Sidewalk,
Trail, and Bikeway System Plan passed 4-1 (Councilmember Mavity opposed; Mayor
Jacobs and Councilmember Spano absent).
Mayor Pro Tem Sanger stated that during the entire process the City has received
comments from people indicating they wanted to add another sidewalk segment and the
City is maintaining a list of requested additions. She stated if there are other suggested
additions to the plan, residents should contact either Mr. Brink or Council so that they
may be added to the list, but Council will not be voting on them tonight. She noted that
Council is open to amending the plan and reminded residents the plan being voted on
tonight is a concept plan, adding Council settled on this process to identify conceptually
the major locations where sidewalks should be installed. She advised that if the plan is
adopted, it directs staff to go forward with the plan and as each segment comes up, the
City will perform further engineering work for the proposed sidewalk segment and work
with neighbors before a project is voted on by Council. She agreed with the concerns
expressed about trees and stated she did not want to cut down a canopy of trees and this
will be an important factor to consider. She stated she was in favor of moving forward
with the conceptual plan so that the City can get to the point of determining specific
details for each segment and have a more considered opinion as to which segments are
workable and not workable.
Councilmember Mavity requested that staff make sure driveways are adequate to park a
car in the driveway when sidewalks are installed. She also expressed thanks to City staff
for their efforts on this project and for working with residents.
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 3b) Page 15
Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of June 17, 2013
Councilmember Santa called the question.
The original motion to adopt the Citywide Sidewalk, Trail, and Bikeway System Plan as
presented in Exhibits A2, B1, and C2 with the exception of amendments removing 40th
Street and Westmoreland Lane passed 5-0. (Mayor Jacobs and Councilmember Spano
absent).
7. Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public – None
8. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions and Discussion Items
8a. Awarding Sale of 2013 Bonds (Refunding of 2007A & 2008A).
Resolution No. 13-097
Mr. Swanson presented the staff report and introduced Mr. Mark Ruff from Ehlers.
Mr. Ruff presented the sale report for $4,170,000 General Obligation Refunding Bonds,
Series 2013A, and advised the City’s AAA rating was affirmed by S&P. He stated that
several metro communities have recently been downgraded and there are only twelve
communities in the State with a “AAA” rating. He stated that eight bids were received
with the low bid from Raymond James & Associates at 1.37%. He indicated the
refunding will save the City over $200,000 and noted that interest rates were slightly
more than anticipated and the issue was changed from $4,165,000 to $4,170,000.
It was moved by Councilmember Ross, seconded by Councilmember Mavity, to adopt
Resolution No. 13-097 Awarding the Sale of General Obligation Refunding Bonds,
Series 2013A, in the Original Aggregate Principal Amount of $4,170,000; Fixing their
Form and Specifications; Directing their Execution and Delivery; Providing for their
Payment; Providing for the Escrowing and Investment of the Proceeds Thereof; and
Providing for the Redemption of Bonds Refunded Thereby.
The motion passed 5-0 (Mayor Jacobs and Councilmember Spano absent).
9. Communications
Councilmember Santa stated that residents participated in the hazardous waste collection
event held last weekend even though Hennepin County scheduled the event during the
Parktacular celebration.
10. Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 11:22 p.m.
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Nancy Stroth, City Clerk Susan Sanger, Mayor Pro Tem
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: July 1, 2013
Consent Agenda Item: 4a
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Designating Polling Places and Appointing Election Judges for 2013 Elections
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution designating 2013 polling places
and appointing election judges for the August 13, 2013, Municipal Primary Election and the
November 5, 2013, Municipal General Election and School Election.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: None
SUMMARY: MN Statute 204B.21, Subd. 2 and City Charter Section 4.05 provides that
election judges for precincts shall be appointed by the governing body of the municipality and
that the appointments be made at least 25 days before the election at which the election judges
will serve. Election judges are assigned to precincts based on availability, party balance, and the
number required for each location. Election judges without affiliation to a major political party
are also allowed to serve but are not allowed to perform certain tasks at the precinct. The
resolution contains the names of those who have indicated a willingness and ability to serve as an
election judge, and appointment by the Council will allow judges to serve at the 2013 Elections.
The City of St. Louis Park and other Hennepin County municipalities will be using a new vote
tabulator machine, the DS 200, for the 2013 Municipal and School District Elections. The basic
voting process will remain the same, with voters completing a paper ballot to insert into the vote
tabulator. However, advanced digital scan technology and improved voter features in the
updated voting equipment will enhance the voting process. Please see the attached summary
description of the new voting equipment.
In order to provide further experience with the new vote tabulator machines for our head election
judges, staff has assigned Election Chair Judges to serve in the Ward 3 precincts at the Primary
Election. In Hennepin County, each city is responsible for training their election judges. Three
2.5-hour paid training sessions are scheduled to accommodate all election judges, in addition to
training sessions for Chair and Co-Chair Judges.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Election expenses for judges are included
in the adopted 2013 budget. Election judge hourly pay is as follows: $8.42 Regular Judges,
$9.44 Co-Chair Judges; $9.95 Chair Judges.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged
community through recruitment and training of community members to serve as Election Judges.
Attachments: Resolution
New 2013 Updated Voting Equipment
Prepared by: Kay Midura, Assistant - City Clerk
Reviewed by: Nancy Stroth, City Clerk
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 4a) Page 2
Title: Designating Polling Places and Appointing Election Judges for 2013 Elections
RESOLUTION NO. 13 -____
RESOLUTION DESIGNATING POLLING PLACES AND
APPOINTING ELECTION JUDGES FOR THE
PRIMARY AND GENERAL ELECTIONS OF 2013
WHEREAS, the Municipal Primary Election will be held on August 13, 2013, at the
following precinct polling locations in Ward 3:
Ward 3 Precinct 9 – Prince of Peace Lutheran Church, 8115 State Hwy No 7
Ward 3 Precinct 10 – Lenox Community Center, 6715 Minnetonka Blvd
Ward 3 Precinct 11 – St. Louis Park Senior High School, 6425 W. 33rd St
Ward 3 Precinct 12 – Aquila Elementary School, 8500 W. 31st St
AND WHEREAS, the Municipal General Election and School Election will be held on
November 5, 2013, at the following precinct polling locations:
Ward 1 Precinct 1 – Beth El Synagogue, 5224 26th St W
Ward 1 Precinct 2 – Peter Hobart Elementary School, 6500 W. 26th St
Ward 1 Precinct 3 – St. Louis Park City Hall, 5005 Minnetonka Blvd
Ward 1 Precinct 4 – Central Community Center, 6300 Walker St
Ward 2 Precinct 5 – Union Congregational Church, 3700 Alabama Ave S
Ward 2 Precinct 6 – St. Louis Park Recreation Center, 3700 Monterey Dr
Ward 2 Precinct 7 – Susan Lindgren Elementary School, 4801 W 41st St
Ward 2 Precinct 8 – Aldersgate United Methodist Church, 3801 Wooddale Ave S
Ward 3 Precinct 9 – Prince of Peace Lutheran Church, 8115 State Hwy No 7
Ward 3 Precinct 10 – Lenox Community Center, 6715 Minnetonka Blvd
Ward 3 Precinct 11 – St. Louis Park Senior High School, 6425 W. 33rd St
Ward 3 Precinct 12 – Aquila Elementary School, 8500 W. 31st St
Ward 4 Precinct 13 – Westwood Lutheran Church, 9001 Cedar Lake Road
Ward 4 Precinct 14 – Park Assembly Church, 1615 Texas Ave S
Ward 4 Precinct 15 – Peace Presbyterian Church, 7624 Cedar Lake Road
Ward 4 Precinct 16 – Sabes Jewish Community Center, 4330 Cedar Lake Rd
WHEREAS, as authorized by MN Statute 204B.21, Subd. 2, election judges for
precincts shall be appointed by the governing body of the municipality no later than 25 days
before each election; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the St. Louis Park City Council that the
following individuals named on Exhibit A and on file in the office of the City Clerk are hereby
appointed to serve as election judges, absentee ballot board judges, or alternate judges for the
2013 Primary and General Elections; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the St. Louis Park City Council also appoints other
individuals and all members appointed to the Hennepin County Absentee Ballot Board as
authorized under Minn. Stat. 204B.21, subd. 2 under direction of the Election Manager to serve
as members of the St. Louis Park Absentee Ballot Board; and
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 4a) Page 3
Title: Designating Polling Places and Appointing Election Judges for 2013 Elections
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Clerk is with this, authorized to make any
substitutions or additions as deemed necessary.
Reviewed for Administration
Adopted by the City Council July 1 , 2013
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 4a) Page 4
Title: Designating Polling Places and Appointing Election Judges for 2013 Elections
Resolution No. 13 - ___ Exhibit A
Appointed 2013 Election Judges
The following individuals are appointed to serve in the 2013 Primary and General Elections:
WARD 3
3-9, Prince of Peace Lutheran Church
William Tape, Chair
Kimball Justesen, Co-Chair
David Brehmer
Kay Drache
David Larson
Jilla Nadimi
3-10, Lenox Community Center
Martin Lee, Chair
Judy Shapiro, Co-Chair
Mary Enz
Barbara Ruhl
Eunice Slager
Mary Wickersham
3-11, St. Louis Park Senior High School
Judith Serrell, Chair
Janet Benson, Co-Chair
Loren Botner
Mary Hendrix
Julie Ann Manuel
3-12, Aquila Elementary School
Ken Huiras, Chair
Kevin Marsh, Co-Chair
Mary Lou Christensen
Angela Fischels
Jami LaPray
Absentee Ballot Board Judges
Melonie Danovsky
Josephine Jacobs
Jodie Meckle
Darla Monson
Deb Montilino
Lori Vail
Alternate Election Judges
Nanette Malcomson
Margaret Marek
Brenda Martens
Mary Maynard
Ross Plovnick
Deb Wuebker
The following additional individuals are appointed to serve in the 2013 General Election:
First Name
Ronald
Last Name
Adams
Jane Ahrens
Gary Berkovitz
Nan Blomquist
Rose Bratland
Deb Brinkman
First Name
Glenice
Last Name
Cannon
Dianne Casey
Mary Kaye Conery
Patricia Davis
John Davis
Helen Desens
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 4a) Page 5
Title: Designating Polling Places and Appointing Election Judges for 2013 Elections
First Name
Emma
Last Name
Disrud
Richard Dworsky
Heidi Finnerud
Beverly Fricke
Roberta Gale
Joan Gerhardson
Lillian Goltzman
Duane Googins
Lawrence Grose
Olga Hanlon
Todd Hintz
John Iacono
Carol Johnson
Sandra Johnson
Todd Kalk
Katherine Kloehn
Carol Kohler
Kari Konopliv
Marguerite Krause
Patricia Kremer
Carla Kulas
Kirsten Kurtz
J. Hamilton Kurtz
Joan Lee
Philip Lindblad
Barbara Lindblad
Brendalee Litman
Shammi Lochan
Mary Jo Lochan
Heather Mainella
Paula Maisel
Susanne Mattison
Kathy McKay
First Name
Gail
Last Name
Miller
Cynthia Mueller
Lois Nalezny
Donna Ness
Carol Nulsen
Ross Oden
Barb Osfar
Carol Pappone
Forrest Peiper
Josie Petermeier
Martha Rice
William Robinson
Elizabeth Rung
John Schaefer
Francis Schmit
Karen Secor
Joy Showalter
Regina Smith
Sherm Stanchfield
Kris Stapleton
Jo Tennison
Irene Thoennes
Richard Thorne
Lucille Thornsjo
Carolyn Turk
Ernest Tursich
Dana Uhrig-Fox
Gay Urness
Julie Weaver
John White
Nancy Wood
Sheila Woodbeck
Roz Wyles
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 4a) Page 6
Title: Designating Polling Places and Appointing Election Judges for 2013 Elections
NEW 2013 UPDATED VOTING EQUIPMENT
Introduction
St. Louis Park and other Hennepin County voters will see a new vote tabulator machine when casting a
ballot in the 2013 Municipal and School District Elections. The basic voting process will remain the
same with voters completing a paper ballot to insert into the vote tabulator. However, advanced digital
scan technology and improved voter features in the updated voting equipment will enhance the voting
process.
Reasons for new equipment purchase
The current optical scan vote tabulator equipment has performed well since 1999. Voting equipment has
a projected useful life expectancy and is now at the point that it must be replaced, just like other computer
or mechanical equipment. Significant improvements in optical scan and tabulation technology have been
achieved since the 1990’s.
Hennepin County, cities, leases
Hennepin County purchased the voting equipment, and cities will enter into a lease agreement for use,
storage, and maintenance of the equipment. This continues the long standing partnership and
collaboration between Hennepin County that provides cost savings and consistency in election
administration for the 47 cities in the county.
Type of equipment and background of company
Hennepin County issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the new voting equipment. After reviewing
the vendor proposals, Elections Systems & Software (ES & S) was awarded the contract with Hennepin
County to provide voting systems and equipment for polling places and absentee voting.
ES&S’ DS200™ combines a paper-based balloting system with the flexibility and efficiency of a digital
environment. The DS200™ is an intelligent, advanced, integrated system, featuring the most advanced
patented digital image technology. Its features include:
• 12-inch LCD touch screen improves voter communication and supports multiple languages
• Modem: After the polls close, transmits votes directly from the polling place
• Flexible: Processes a variety of ballot sizes and designs, from 11” to 19”
• Convenient: Lightweight, compact, and easy to set up and use in the polling place
• Smart: Uses Intelligent Mark Recognition technology to determine what dictates a mark for a
candidate
• Fully compliant usability, accessibility, and security enhancements with the 2005 Voluntary
Voting Systems Guidelines
• Independence and privacy is guaranteed for people with special needs by accepting a ballot
from the AutoMARK (assistive voting equipment)
• Increased functionality features helpful in administering an RCV election
• Internal battery pack provides reliable and sustained power in the event of a power outage
Equipment Demonstrations are available at the City Clerk’s Office in St. Louis Park, 5005 Minnetonka
Blvd. during regular business hours.
Education for voters will include public demonstrations, information in the City newsletter, City website,
and instruction by the Head Election Judges at each polling place.
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: July 1, 2013
Action Agenda Item: 4b
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Bid Tabulation – France Avenue Improvements - Project No. 2010-0005
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to designate G.L. Contracting, Inc. the lowest
responsible bidder and authorize execution of a contract with the firm in the amount of
$469,688.68 for the France Avenue Improvements, Project No. 2010-0005.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to take the final step to allow this
project to move forward?
SUMMARY: A total of four (4) bids were received for this project. A summary of the bid
results is as follows:
A review of the bids indicates G.L. Contracting, Inc. submitted the lowest bid. Staff
recommends that a contract be awarded to the firm in the amount of $469,688.68.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: This project was planned for and is
included in the City’s adopted Capital Improvement Program (C.I.P.) for 2013.
The low bid is approximately six percent over the engineer’s estimate for this project. Based on
the low bid received the total project cost has increased from $499,000 to $552,373.68. The
approximately $53,000 increase is mainly attributed to the increasing costs of construction
material such as concrete, asphalt and the fiber optic components.
Even with the increase to the project cost, staff is recommending approval of the project. The
additional funding necessary to account for the increase in project cost is expected to come from
the Sidewalk and Trail fund. The Hennepin County turn-back funds of $320,000 will be the
primary funding source with the remaining balance to be funded by a combination of Sidewalk
and Trail funds, Utility Maintenance funds (storm sewer) and Capital Replacement funds (fiber
optic).
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Prepared by: Jack Sullivan, Engineering Project Manager
Reviewed by: Michael P. Rardin, Engineering Director
Scott Brink, City Engineer
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
CONTRACTOR BID AMOUNT
G.L. Contracting, Inc. $469,688.68
Northwest Asphalt Corp. $478,702.62
Urban Companies $496,607.00 *
New Look Contracting, Inc. $520,809.69
Engineer’s Estimate $441,240.00
*Bid corrected upon extension
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 4b) Page 2
Title: Bid Tabulation – France Avenue Improvements - Project No. 2010-0005
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: This project involves improvements along France Avenue from 26th Street up
to 22nd Street in Minneapolis. This work includes a 6 foot boulevard style concrete sidewalk on the
west side of France Avenue from 26th Street to 22nd Street, roadway narrowing along the west side,
lane narrowing for north and south bound traffic, narrow striped shoulders/bike lanes that preclude
on street parking, new curb and gutter and upgrades to the city owned street lighting.
The project will be constructed under traffic (no detours); motorists will be guided through the
work zone during periods of temporary lane closures or lane shifts.
Bid Information:
Bids were received on June 19, 2013 for the France Avenue Improvements.
An advertisement for bids was published in the St. Louis Park Sun-Sailor on May 23, 30, and June 6,
2013 and in the Finance & Commerce on May 23, and 30, 2013. In addition, plans and
specifications are noticed on the City Website and are made available electronically via the internet
by our vendor Quest CDN.com. Email notification is provided to five minority associations and final
printed plans are made available for viewing at the AGC of Minnesota Planroom and at City Hall.
Twenty-nine contractors purchased plan sets with seven Disadvantaged Business Enterprises
(DBE’s) identifying themselves as subcontractors.
Bid Evaluation:
This project was planned for and is included in the City’s adopted Capital Improvement Program
(C.I.P.) for 2013.
The low bid is approximately six percent over the engineer’s estimate for this project. Based on
the low bid received the total project cost has increased from $499,000 to $552,373.68. The
approximately $53,000 increase is mainly attributed to the increasing costs of construction
material such as concrete, asphalt and the fiber optic components.
Even with the increase to the project cost, staff is recommending approval of the project. The
additional funding necessary to account for the increase in project cost is expected to come from
the Sidewalk and Trail fund. The Hennepin County turn-back funds of $320,000 will be the primary
funding source with the remaining balance to be funded by a combination of Sidewalk and Trail
funds, Utility Maintenance funds (storm sewer) and Capital Replacement funds (fiber optic).
Funding Details
Based on the low bid received, cost and funding details are revised as follows:
Expenditures
Construction Cost $ 469,688.68
Contingencies (5%) $ 23,485.00
Engineering & Administration (12%) $ 59,200.00
Total $ 552,373.68
Revenues
Hennepin County Turn Back Funds $ 320,000.00
Sidewalk, Trail and Bikeway Funds $ 194,973.68
Utility Maintenance Funds (Storm Sewer) $2,300.00
Capital Replacement Funds (Fiber Optic) $ 35,100.00
Total $552,373.68
Construction Timeline:
Construction is tentatively planned to begin in mid-July and is expected to be completed by mid-
September.
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: July 1, 2013
Consent Agenda Item: 4c
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Acceptance of Donations to Fire Department
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution accepting donations to the Fire
Department.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to accept these donations?
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.
The following donations were provided by these businesses for the 2013 Fire Department Open
House:
• Northland Aluminum/Nordic Ware $300.00
• Rainbow Foods $100.00 Gift Card
• Cub Foods $200.00 Gift Card
• Sam’s Club $50.00 Gift Card
• Costco $100.00 Gift Card
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: These donations will assisted the Fire
Department in providing food and supplies needed for the annual Fire Department Open House.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution
Prepared by: Cary Smith, Assistant Chief
Reviewed by: Mark Windschitl, Fire Chief
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 4c) Page 2
Title: Acceptance of Donations to Fire Department
RESOLUTION NO. 13-_____
RESOLUTION APPROVING ACCEPTANCE OF
FIRE DEPARTMENT OPEN HOUSE DONATIONS
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 donations
by the donors; and
WHEREAS, the donations from Northland Aluminum/Nordic Ware, Rainbow Foods,
Cub Foods, Sam’s Club and Costco will be directed toward the Fire Department Open House;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park that these donations are hereby accepted with thanks and appreciation.
Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council July 1, 2013
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: July 1, 2013
Consent Agenda Item: 4d
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Quote Tabulation: Purchase of Recycling and Organic Waste Carts
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to authorize execution of a contract with Rehrig Pacific
in the amount of $798,837.00 for the purchase of recycling and organic waste carts.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to take the final step to allow this
program change to move forward?
SUMMARY: Over the past 2 years Solid Waste program changes have been discussed with the
public and approved by Council. Several of the changes include going to single-sort recycling
and creating an organic waste collection program, of which both require the purchase of carts.
A total of four (4) quotes were received for cart procurement. A summary of the quote results is
as follows:
SUPPLIER QUOTE AMOUNT
Rehrig Pacific $776,837.00 (1)
Otto $783,792.00
Toter $803,705.00
Cascade Quote Withdrawn (2)
(1) Cost shown above is net quote cost. $798,837 - $22,000 = $776,837 (quote amount less
inventory savings amount), see Discussion below for more detailed information.
(2) Quote withdrawn due to not being able to meet the City’s cart rollout timeline.
A review of the quotes indicates Rehrig Pacific submitted the lowest net quote. Rehrig Pacific is the
City’s current garbage cart supplier and has provided quality products and services to the City since
2003. Staff recommends that a contract be awarded to the firm in the amount of $798,837.00.
Carts are being procured using Cooperative Purchasing through the Houston-Galveston Area
Council (HGAC) in-lieu of Competitive Bidding. Staff has discussed Cooperative Purchasing
with the City Attorney and found this is an acceptable method for purchasing these carts. The
City has used Cooperative Purchasing in the past to purchase fire trucks through HGAC. The
major advantage of Cooperative Purchasing for solid waste cart procurement is that it can be
done in a shorter timeframe than traditional Competitive Bidding and carts needs to be purchased
as soon as possible to meet the October 1, 2013 contract timeline. More details on this are
provided in the attached Discussion section.
Cart distribution is planned to occur in September 2013.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
The bulk of this purchase was planned for and included in the City’s Long Range Financial
Management Plan. All of the costs for the cart purchases will be paid from the Solid Waste Fund.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Prepared by: Scott Merkley, Infrastructure Manager
Reviewed by: Michael P. Rardin, Director of Engineering
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 4d) Page 2
Title: Quote Tabulation: Purchase of Recycling and Organic Waste Carts
DISCUSSION
Background: Earlier in 2013 Council approved program changes that included adding single-
sort recycling and organic waste collection, of which both services will require the purchase of
carts.
Financial Details
Council approval of the cart purchase contract is required being the contract amount is in excess
of $100,000. The City estimate for purchase of recycling and organic carts, including shipping,
is $805,000. Several years ago the City earmarked $650,000, in the Long Range Financial
Management Plan for 2014, for the recycling carts. Organic Waste carts were not included at that
time being that the program had yet to be developed. The Solid Waste Fund has adequate funds
available to cover the cart purchase costs.
City Purchasing Procedure
The City’s current Purchasing Procedures requires that the City utilize the sealed bid process for
purchases over $100,000, or purchase through the State Contract or a National Cooperative
Purchasing Association.
State Procurement Law
Minnesota Statutes, section 471.345, subd. 15 (Uniform Municipal Contracting Law,
Cooperative Purchasing) allows municipalities to contract for the purchase of equipment through
cooperative purchasing in one of two ways: through the State's cooperative purchasing venture;
or through a national municipal association's purchasing alliance or cooperative created by a
joint powers agreement that purchases items from more than one source on the basis of
competitive bids or competitive quotations.
State Contract Purchasing
The State of Minnesota, Department of Administration’s Cooperative Purchasing Venture does
not include the variety of cart manufacturers that are being considered by the City. Therefore,
purchasing from the State Contract is not a viable option for the City.
Cooperative Purchasing
Staff has discussed Cooperative Purchasing with the City Attorney and found this is an
acceptable method for purchasing.
The major advantage of Cooperative Purchasing for solid waste cart procurement is that it can be
done in a shorter timeframe than traditional Competitive Bidding and carts needs to be purchased
as soon as possible to meet the October 1, 2013 contract timeline.
The City has used Cooperative Purchasing in the past to purchase fire trucks through the
Houston-Galveston Area Council (HGAC) and mowers from National IPA.
Staff talked with the City of Maplewood which recently purchased garbage carts from Houston-
Galveston Area Council (HGAC) using Cooperative Purchasing and they intend to use this
method again for recycling carts in the near future. Maplewood researched the purchase of carts
through four national municipal cooperative purchasing organizations including National
Intergovernmental Purchasing Alliance Company, U.S. Communities Cooperative Purchasing
Company, Houston-Galveston Area Council (HGAC), and BuyBoard National Cooperative. All
of these cooperatives met the definition of “national municipal association's purchasing alliance
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 4d) Page 3
Title: Quote Tabulation: Purchase of Recycling and Organic Waste Carts
or cooperative that purchases items from more than one source on the basis of competitive bids
or competitive quotations” as defined in State statute.
Staff talked with Waste Management (new recycling contractor) and Advanced Disposal (new
organics contractor) and found they have purchased carts from cooperative purchasing
associations in the past. Staff has also contacted the 4 primary cart venders (Rehrig Pacific,
Cascade, Otto, and Toter) that the City sent RFQ’s to and found that they are currently active
members with HGAC.
The benefits to the City using the cooperative purchasing procurement process are: 1) ability to
negotiate prices, 2) reduced administrative effort and costs compared with the Competitive
Bidding process, and 3) can be done in a shorter timeframe.
Actions / Recommendations:
Based on the short time frame, legal requirements, and the need for competitive pricing, staff
solicited and received quotes from 4 venders on June 21, 2013 using the cooperative purchasing
procurement process through the Houston-Galveston Area Council (HGAC) & National
Intergovernmental Purchasing Alliance Company (NIPA). After quotes were received, staff
negotiated separately with the various vendors to obtain lower prices. The following summary is
a result of the procurement process and these negotiations;
SUPPLIER QUOTE AMOUNT
Rehrig Pacific $776,837.00 (1)
Otto $783,792.00
Toter $803,705.00
Cascade Quote Withdrawn
(1) Cost shown above is net quote cost. The net cost is $798,837 - $22,000 = $776,837 (quote
amount less inventory savings amount). The saving results from needing to stock a reduced
number of replacement carts since the same carts will be used for garbage, recycling and
organic/yard waste (only the color of the lids will be different).
Staff is recommending Rehrig Pacific (Rehrig) for the following reasons:
• Rehrig is our current garbage cart supplier with whom we have had a satisfactory relationship
with; and the Rehrig cart purchase will be approximately $7,000 lower than the next quote
due to the reduced number of replacement carts we will need to purchase for our inventory.
• The City will need to have a smaller amount of replacement parts (wheels, axles, etc.) on
hand with the carts all being the same.
• The City will have reduced administrative time in the future with only one cart supplier when
dealing with issues such as: cart warranty; replacement orders; etc.
Staff discussed this with the City Attorney and awarding the contract to Rehrig Pacific based on the
net quote amount is acceptable to do.
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: July 1, 2013
Consent Agenda Item: 4e
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Final Payment Resolution - Contract 66-11 – Kirk Acoustics Inc. – Projects 2008-
3001 and 2008-3002
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution authorizing final payment in the
amount of $3,170.50 and accepting work for Fire Stations No. 1 and No. 2 Work Scope 15
(Acoustical Ceilings) for Project Nos. 2008-3001 and 2008-3002, City Contract No. 66-11.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: None
SUMMARY: Bids were received on March 31, 2011 for Two New Fire Stations – Project Nos.
2008-3001 and 2008-3002. The projects included construction of Fire Station No. 1 at 3750
Wooddale Avenue and Fire Station No. 2 at 2262 Louisiana Avenue.
The City used an agency construction manager (CM) delivery method for both fire stations,
rather than a general contractor (GM). With this approach, the City is the owner and general
contractor for the project. The construction manager acts as the city’s advisor and representative
throughout planning, design and construction of the stations. There are 31 different contracts
related to the construction of the two stations.
City Council awarded the contract for Work Scope 15 (Acoustical Ceilings) for Fire Stations No.
1 and No. 2 to Kirk Acoustics Inc. on April 11, 2011, in the amount of $50,400.00. The
contractor completed this work within the contract time allowed at a final contract cost of
$63,410.00. The additional costs primarily related to owner directed changes to the work scope.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The Fire Stations Project was programmed
in the Capital Improvement Program for construction in 2011/12 at a total projected cost of
$15,500,000. The final project costs are expected to be approximately $15,100,000.
$12.5 million of this project cost will be paid from bond proceeds issued in December 2010. The
remaining portion will be paid from the Fire portion of the Police and Fire Pension Fund.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution
Prepared by: Sean Walther, Senior Planner
Reviewed by: Mark Windschitl, Assistant Fire Chief
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 4e) Page 2
Title: Final Payment Resolution - Contract 66-11 - Kirk Acoustics Inc. - Projs 2008-3001 & 2008-3002
RESOLUTION NO. 13 -____
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING FINAL PAYMENT IN THE
AMOUNT OF $3,170.50 AND ACCEPTING THE WORK FOR THE
ACOUSTICAL CEILINGS FOR FIRE STATIONS NO. 1 AND NO. 2 WITH
KIRK ACOUSTICS INC.
CITY PROJECT NO. 2008-3001 & 2008-3002
CONTRACT NO. 66-11
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park, Minnesota, as follows:
1. Pursuant to a written contract with the City dated April 12, 2011, Kirk Acoustics Inc.
satisfactorily completed Work Scope 15 (Acoustical Ceilings) for Fire Stations No. 1 and No.
2, as per Contract No. 66-11.
2. The Construction Manager Kraus-Anderson Construction Company recommends final
acceptance of the work.
3. The work completed under this contract is accepted and approved. The City Manager is
directed to make final payment on the contract, taking the contractor's receipt in full.
Original Contract Price $50,400.00
Change Order #1 $13,010.00
Final Contract Amount $63,410.00
Previous Payments ($60,239.50)
Balance Due $3,170.50
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council July 1 , 2013
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: July 1, 2013
Consent Agenda Item: 4f
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Final Payment Resolution - Contract 39-11 – Molin Concrete Products Company –
Project 2008-3001
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution authorizing final payment in the
amount of $4,418.75 and accepting work for Fire Stations No. 1 and No. 2 Work Scope 04
(Precast Concrete) for Project No. 2008-3001, City Contract No. 39-11.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: None.
SUMMARY: Bids were received on March 31, 2011 for Two New Fire Stations – Project No.
2008-3001. The projects included construction of Fire Station No. 1 at 3750 Wooddale Avenue
and Fire Station No. 2 at 2262 Louisiana Avenue.
The City used an agency construction manager (CM) delivery method for both fire stations,
rather than a general contractor (GM). With this approach, the City is the owner and general
contractor for the project. The construction manager acts as the city’s advisor and representative
throughout planning, design and construction of the stations. There are 31 different contracts
related to the construction of the two stations.
City Council awarded the contract for Work Scope 04 (Precast Concrete) for Fire Stations No. 1
to Molin Concrete Products Company on April 11, 2011, in the amount of $85,475.00. The
contractor completed this work within the contract time allowed at a final contract cost of
$88,375.00. The additional costs related to an error of another contractor and the City deducted
the costs from the responsible party’s contract.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The Fire Stations Project was programmed
in the Capital Improvement Program for construction in 2011/12 at a total projected cost of
$15,500,000. The final project costs are expected to be approximately $15,100,000.
$12.5 million of this project cost will be paid from bond proceeds issued in December 2010. The
remaining portion will be paid from the Fire portion of the Police and Fire Pension Fund.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution
Prepared by: Sean Walther, Senior Planner
Reviewed by: Mark Windschitl, Assistant Fire Chief
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 4f) Page 2
Title: Final Payment Resolution - Contract 39-11 - Molin Concrete Products Company - Project 2008-3001
RESOLUTION NO. 13 -____
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING FINAL PAYMENT IN THE
AMOUNT OF $4,418.75 AND ACCEPTING THE WORK FOR THE
PRECAST CONCRETE FOR FIRE STATIONS NO. 1 WITH
MOLIN CONCRETE PRODUCTS COMPANY
CITY PROJECT NO. 2008-3001
CONTRACT NO. 39-11
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park, Minnesota, as follows:
1. Pursuant to a written contract with the City dated April 12, 2011, Molin Concrete Products
Company satisfactorily completed Work Scope 04 (Precast Concrete) for Fire Stations No. 1,
as per Contract No. 39-11.
2. The Construction Manager Kraus-Anderson Construction Company recommends final
acceptance of the work.
3. The work completed under this contract is accepted and approved. The City Manager is
directed to make final payment on the contract, taking the contractor's receipt in full.
Original Contract Price $85,475.00
Change Order #1 $2,900.00
Final Contract Amount $88,375.00
Previous Payments ($83,956.25)
Balance Due $4,418.75
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council July 1 , 2013
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: July 1, 2013
Consent Agenda Item: 4g
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Final Payment Resolution - Contract 78-11 – Steenberg-Watrud Construction LLC –
Projects 2008-3001 and 2008-3002
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution authorizing final payment in the
amount of $115,274.84 and accepting work for Fire Stations No. 1 and No. 2 Work Scope 03
(Cast-in-Place Concrete/Masonry) for Project Nos. 2008-3001 and 2008-3002, City Contract No.
78-11.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: None.
SUMMARY: Bids were received on March 31, 2011 for Two New Fire Stations – Project Nos.
2008-3001 and 2008-3002. The projects included construction of Fire Station No. 1 at 3750
Wooddale Avenue and Fire Station No. 2 at 2262 Louisiana Avenue.
The City used an agency construction manager (CM) delivery method for both fire stations,
rather than a general contractor (GM). With this approach, the City is the owner and general
contractor for the project. The construction manager acts as the city’s advisor and representative
throughout planning, design and construction of the stations. There are 31 different contracts
related to the construction of the two stations.
City Council awarded the contract for Work Scope 03 (Cast-in-Place Concrete/Masonry) for Fire
Stations No. 1 and No. 2 to Steenberg-Watrud Construction LLC on April 11, 2011, in the
amount of $2,289,308.00. The contractor completed this work at a final contract cost of
$2,305,496.82. The additional costs related to additions by the structural engineer and owner
directed changes. The change orders also included deductions for work corrections.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The Fire Stations Project was programmed
in the Capital Improvement Program for construction in 2011/12 at a total projected cost of
$15,500,000. The final project costs are expected to be approximately $15,100,000.
$12.5 million of this project cost will be paid from bond proceeds issued in December 2010. The
remaining portion will be paid from the Fire portion of the Police and Fire Pension Fund.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution
Prepared by: Sean Walther, Senior Planner
Reviewed by: Mark Windschitl, Assistant Fire Chief
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 4g) Page 2
Title: Final Payment Resolution - Contract 78-11 - Steenberg-Watrud - Projs 2008-3001 & 2008-3002
RESOLUTION NO. 13 -____
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING FINAL PAYMENT IN THE
AMOUNT OF $115,274.84 AND ACCEPTING THE WORK FOR THE
CAST-IN-PLACE CONCRETE/MASONRY FOR FIRE STATIONS NO. 1 AND NO. 2
WITH STEENBERG-WATRUD CONSTRUCTION LLC
CITY PROJECT NO. 2008-3001 & 2008-3002
CONTRACT NO. 78-11
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park, Minnesota, as follows:
1. Pursuant to a written contract with the City dated April 12, 2011, Steenberg-Watrud
Construction LLC satisfactorily completed Work Scope 03 (Cast-in-Place Concrete/Masonry)
for Fire Stations No. 1 and No. 2, as per Contract No. 78-11.
2. The Construction Manager Kraus-Anderson Construction Company recommends final
acceptance of the work.
3. The work completed under this contract is accepted and approved. The City Manager is
directed to make final payment on the contract, taking the contractor's receipt in full.
Original Contract Price $2,289,308.00
Change Order #1 $12,257.60
Change Order #2 $3,931.22
Final Contract Amount $2,305,496.82
Previous Payments ($2,190,221.98)
Balance Due $115,274.84
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council July 1 , 2013
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: July 1, 2013
Consent Agenda Item: 4h
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Victoria Ponds TIF District
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution modifying the Tax Increment
Financing Plan for the Victoria Ponds TIF District and authorizing the use of the remaining
pooling funds.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council support use of the approximately
$490,000 in remaining pooling funds within the Victoria Ponds TIF District as proposed?
SUMMARY:
It is estimated that there will be approximately $490,000 available for legal pooling after the
final Victoria Ponds tax increment payment is made to SVK Development on August 1st.
Pursuant to the TIF Management Review & Analysis Report prepared by Ehlers & Associates
and as discussed at the May 13th Study Session, it is proposed that the City and EDA modify the
Victoria Ponds TIF District Plan prior to August 1st and develop a plan for the use of the
remaining funds. If no modification to the TIF Plan is completed by that date, the balance must
be returned to Hennepin County.
It is proposed that the remaining funds from the Victoria Ponds TIF District be allocated towards
the installation of a traffic signal at the intersection of 36th Street and Xenwood Avenue as well
as reconstruction of the intersection and traffic signal at 36th Street and Wooddale Avenue. Both
projects are listed in the City’s Capital Improvement Program and are scheduled for completion
in 2016 in concert with the proposed SWLRT construction and implementation.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: It is proposed that the remaining pooling
funds within the Victoria Ponds TIF District be allocated towards the installation of a traffic
signal at the intersection of 36th Street and Xenwood Avenue and reconstruction of the
intersection and traffic signal at 36th Street and Wooddale Avenue.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not Applicable
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Resolution
Modified Victoria Ponds TIF Plan (see EDA staff report)
Prepared by: Greg Hunt, Economic Development Coordinator
Reviewed by: Kevin Locke, Community Development Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, EDA Executive Director and City Manager
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 4h) Page 2
Title: Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Victoria Ponds TIF District
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND:
The Victoria Ponds TIF District was established on April 1, 1996. This redevelopment TIF
district was created to facilitate the construction of 74 owner occupied townhomes west of
Victoria Lake. Tax increment from this district was utilized for payment on the $760,000
PAYGO note with SVK Development, the project’s developer. With the August 1st payment, the
note will be paid in full. Statutorily, once all outstanding obligations of a TIF district are paid off,
the TIF district must be decertified.
After the first half increment is received and the final SVK payment is disbursed it is estimated
that there will be approximately $490,000 available for legal pooling. Pursuant to the TIF
Management Review & Analysis Report prepared by Ehlers & Associates, and as discussed at the
May 13th Study Session, it is recommended that the EDA modify the Victoria Ponds TIF District
Plan prior to August 1st and develop a plan for the use of these legal pooling funds. If no pooling
is completed by August 1st when the obligation is fully satisfied, the balance must be returned to
Hennepin County.
MN Statute 469.176 subd. 4j specifies the activities on which tax increment from a
redevelopment district may be spent. In general, tax increment must be spent on correcting those
conditions which caused the area to be designated a redevelopment district in the first place.
Allowable uses include property acquisition, demolition, rehabilitation, installation of public
utilities, road, sidewalks, public parking facilities, and allowable administrative expenses.
Given these allowable uses, it is proposed that the remaining funds be allocated towards the
installation of a traffic signal at the intersection of 36th Street and Xenwood Avenue as well as
the reconstruction of the intersection and traffic signal at 36th Street and Wooddale Avenue.
These projects are located within the Elmwood Village Renewal and Renovation TIF District
and will facilitate current and future redevelopment efforts. Both projects are listed in the City’s
Capital Improvement Program and are scheduled to be completed in 2016 in concert with the
proposed SWLRT construction and implementation. These projects were identified to be paid
with tax increment from the Elmwood TIF District. In the later years of that district it is
estimated there will be sufficient funds to meet these obligations. However, in 2016, it is
estimated that there will be insufficient cash flow to cover these project costs due to the timing of
other financial obligations within that district. Rather than borrowing to cover the cost of these
projects or increasing the existing interfund loan with the Development Fund, it is proposed that
the remaining tax increment from the Victoria Ponds TIF District be utilized.
PRESENT CONSIDERATIONS: None
NEXT STEPS: Later this year, pursuant to the recommendations within the TIF Management
Review & Analysis Report and in compliance with state statutes, the EDA will be asked to
decertify the Victoria Ponds District.
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 4h) Page 3
Title: Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Victoria Ponds TIF District
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
RESOLUTION NO. 13-____
RESOLUTION APPROVING MODIFICATION OF
REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR REDEVELOPMENT PROEJCT
NO. 1 AND TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR
VICTORIA PONDS TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT
WHEREAS, St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority (the “Authority”)
administers Redevelopment Project No. 1 (the “Project”) and the Victoria Ponds Tax Increment
Financing (the “TIF District”) within the Project, pursuant to and in conformity with Minnesota
Statutes, Sections 469.090 through 469.1081 (the “EDA Act”), Sections 460.001 to 469.047 (the
“HRA Act”) and Sections 469.174 to 469.179 (the “TIF Act”); and
WHEREAS, the City and Authority have determined a need to modify the description of
authorized tax increment expenditures in the Tax Increment Financing Plan (the “TIF Plan”) for
the TIF District; and
WHEREAS, under Section 469.175, subd. 4 of the TIF Act, the Authority may modify
the TIF Plan for the TIF District without the notice and hearings required for a new district, if the
changes are not those described in Section 469.175, subdivision 4(b), clauses (1) through (6);
and
WHEREAS, under Section 469.029, the Authority may modify the Redevelopment Plan
for the Project without hearings if the modification does not change the exterior boundaries of
the Project or affect general land uses established under the Redevelopment Plan; and
WHEREAS, the proposed modifications to the TIF Plan include a more detailed
description of expenditures to finance additional infrastructure costs within the Project but
outside the TIF District, within the limits allowed under the TIF Act, but the modifications do
not increase the total estimated tax increment expenditures or the total amount of bonded
indebtedness; and
WHEREAS, the proposed modifications to the Redevelopment Plan simply
acknowledge the changes proposed in the TIF Plan and do not affect the Project boundaries or
land uses;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park, Minnesota as follows:
1. The administrative modification to the TIF Plan and Redevelopment Plan is hereby
approved in substantially the form on file in City Hall.
2. Upon approval of the modification to the TIF Plan and Redevelopment Plan by the
board of commissioners of the Authority, the Community Development Director is
authorized to forward a copy of the modified plans to the Department of Revenue and
the State Auditor pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 469.175, subd.4a.
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 4h) Page 4
Title: Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Victoria Ponds TIF District
3. The City Clerk is authorized and directed to forward a copy of the modified plans to
Hennepin County for information purposes.
Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council July 1 , 2013
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: July 1, 2013
Consent Agenda Item: 4i
MINUTES
St. Louis Park Housing Authority
Westwood Room, St. Louis Park City Hall
Wednesday, April 10, 2013, 5:00 P.M.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Commissioners Catherine Courtney, Justin Kaufman,
Suzanne Metzger, Markeith Thomas, Richard Webb
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: Jane Klesk, Kevin Locke, Marney Olson, Michele Schnitker
1. Call to Order – The meeting was called to order at 5:04 p.m.
2. Approval of Minutes for March, 2013
The Board minutes of March 13, 2013 were unanimously approved.
3. Hearings – None
4. Reports and Committees – None
5. Unfinished Business – None
6. New Business
a. Approval of Development Agreement – Edgebrook Drive
Ms. Schnitker provided Commissioners Thomas and Webb general background on the
Excess Land Program. Ms. Olson stated that staff requests that the Board authorize
execution of a Development Contract with Robert Eldridge for development of the
parcel located at 7701 Edgebrook Drive, in accordance with guidelines established by
the City Council. The next step will be submission of construction plans to the City
no later than fifteen (15) days prior to closing. The closing date will be determined
following approval of the construction documents. Commissioner Metzger moved to
authorize the execution of the Development Agreement between the HA and AKARE
Companies, LLC for development of 7701 Edgebrook Drive, for the purchase price of
$59,600. Commissioner Kaufman seconded the motion and the motion passed 5-0.
b. Amendment of Project Based Housing Choice Voucher Contract with Vail Place
Ms. Schnitker explained that Vail Place currently administers seven units of project-
based Section 8 at their property located at 3647 Sumter Avenue South. The building
provides permanent and affordable housing with program services tailored to the
needs of people with psychiatric disabilities. Staff recommends amending the term of
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 4i) Page 2
Title: Housing Authority Meeting Minutes April 10, 2013
the existing contract for an additional 5 five years. Commissioner Metzger moved to
authorize the execution of the Amendment to the Housing Assistance Payments
contract Between the Housing Authority of St. Louis Park and Vail Place;
Commissioner Kaufman seconded the motion and the motion passed 5-0.
c. Southwest Light Rail Train (SWLRT) Housing Inventory Study
Ms. Schnitker informed the Commissioners that the SWLRT Housing Inventory
Study was provided to the City Council at its April 1, 2013 Study Session. No action
was required of City Council, nor is action required from the HA Board.
Additionally, the City has contracted with Maxfield Research Inc. to conduct a
comprehensive housing study including the entire geographic are of the City.
d. Approval of Revised Payment Standard for Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher
Program
Ms. Schnitker stated that the HA’s four bedroom Section 8 payment standard does not
meet HUD criteria of being 90% to 110% of Fair Market Rent for the metro area for
2013. Staff recommends that the four bedroom Section 8 payment standard be raised
by $6.00, to $1376, to meet HUD’s 90% criteria. Staff will be reviewing payment
standards for all bedroom sizes prior to the next Board meeting. Commissioner
Metzger moved for approval of the revised payment standard for Section 8 Housing
Choice Voucher program four bedroom units, and Commissioner Webb seconded the
motion. The motion passed 5-0.
7. Communications from Executive Director
a. Claims List – April, 2013
b. Communications
1. Monthly Report – April, 2013
8. Other
9. Adjournment
Commissioner Kaufman moved to adjourn the meeting, and Commissioner Metzger
seconded the motion. The motion passed 5-0. The meeting was adjourned at 6:07 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
____________________
Suzanne Metzger,
Secretary
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: July 1, 2013
Consent Agenda Item: 4j
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Vendor Claims
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to accept for filing Vendor Claims for the period June
8, 2013 through June 21, 2013.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUMMARY: The Finance Department prepares this report on a monthly basis for Council’s
review.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Vendor Claims
Prepared by: Connie Neubeck, Account Clerk
6/26/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 13:12:06R55CKSUMLOG23000VO
1Page -Council Check Summary
6/21/2013 -6/8/2013
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
228.38WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERSABELSON, MIKE
228.38
23,603.03PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDIAIM ELECTRONICS
23,603.03
68.50OPERATIONSOPERATIONAL SUPPLIESAIRGAS NORTH CENTRAL
68.50
9.05INSPECTIONS G & A DUE TO OTHER GOVTSAIRTECH INC
361.75INSPECTIONS G & A MECHANICAL
370.80
560.00REC CENTER BUILDING EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEALLIANCE MECH SRVCS INC
560.00
801.56PATCHING-PERMANENT OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESALLIED BLACKTOP
801.56
79.00POLICE G & A TELEPHONEAMERICAN MESSAGING
79.00
211.80PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYAMERICAN TIRE DISTRIBUTORS
211.80
3,639.73SUPPORT SERVICES G&A OFFICE SUPPLIESANCHOR PAPER CO
3,639.73
833.05REC CENTER BUILDING GENERAL SUPPLIESAPACHE GROUP OF MINNESOTA
833.05
428.08GENERAL CUSTODIAL DUTIES OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESARAMARK UNIFORM CORP ACCTS
428.08
51.85OPERATIONSOPERATIONAL SUPPLIESASPEN MILLS
51.85
216.51CELLPHONES, IPADS, ETC.OFFICE EQUIPMENTAT&T MOBILITY
216.51
64.33PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICEATOMIC RECYCLING
257.33VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICE
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 4j)
Title: Vendor Claims Page 2
6/26/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 13:12:06R55CKSUMLOG23000VO
2Page -Council Check Summary
6/21/2013 -6/8/2013
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
64.34SEWER UTILITY G&A CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICE
386.00
43.64PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYAUTO PLUS
43.64
314.10WATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEAUTOMATIC SYSTEMS INC
314.10
65.79GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEAUTOMOBILE SERVICE
65.79
3,443.87REFORESTATIONLANDSCAPING MATERIALSBACHMANS
4,849.29TREE REPLACEMENT TREE REPLACEMENT
8,293.16
116.82ARENA MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEBECKER ARENA PRODUCTS
295.24UNINSURED LOSS G&A UNINSURED LOSS
412.06
3.75INSPECTIONS G & A DUE TO OTHER GOVTSBERGMANN ELECTRIC
176.25INSPECTIONS G & A ELECTRICAL
180.00
140.68ORGANIZED REC G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CARBIRNO, RICK
140.68
4,320.04REILLY BUDGET OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESBLOOMINGTON, CITY OF
4,320.04
69.51REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESBLOYER, SUSAN
69.51
2.29-GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET DUE TO OTHER GOVTSBLUE LAGOON MARINE
188.24OPERATIONSEQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
185.95
341.99PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYBLUE TARP FINANCIAL INC
341.99
827.00ENGINEERING G & A ENGINEERING SERVICESBOLTON & MENK INC
827.00
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 4j)
Title: Vendor Claims Page 3
6/26/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 13:12:06R55CKSUMLOG23000VO
3Page -Council Check Summary
6/21/2013 -6/8/2013
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
6,809.00PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT LANDSCAPING MATERIALSBORMANN CONSTRUCTION INC
6,809.00
732.03POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIESBOUND TREE MEDICAL, LLC
27.98POLICE G & A POSTAGE
760.01
3,775.02GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEBOYER TRUCKS LAUDERDALE
3,775.02
225.00ENGINEERING G & A TRAININGBRINK, SCOTT
225.00
226.04OPERATIONSGENERAL SUPPLIESBROADWAY AWARDS
226.04
220.00INSPECTIONS G & A CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCEBROWN, ADAM
220.00
741.00OPERATIONSRADIO COMMUNICATIONSCALHOUN TOWERS APTS
741.00
7,952.09ADMINISTRATION G & A LEGAL SERVICESCAMPBELL KNUTSON PROF ASSOC
24.00EXCESS PUBLIC LAND LEGAL SERVICES
667.00STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A LEGAL SERVICES
160.00WATER UTILITY G&A LEGAL SERVICES
320.00REILLY G & A LEGAL SERVICES
32.00SOLID WASTE G&A LEGAL SERVICES
304.00REV BONDS 2001B / 2010B REF IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
9,459.09
173.88WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIESCAPITAL ONE COMMERCIAL
173.88
330.24IT G & A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICECARTRIDGE CARE
330.24
910.00CES Resid Energy Conservation OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESCENTER ENERGY & ENVIRONMENT
910.00
2,600.13FACILITY OPERATIONS HEATING GASCENTERPOINT ENERGY
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 4j)
Title: Vendor Claims Page 4
6/26/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 13:12:06R55CKSUMLOG23000VO
4Page -Council Check Summary
6/21/2013 -6/8/2013
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
40.00INSPECTIONS G & A MECHANICAL
431.58PARK MAINTENANCE G & A HEATING GAS
32.65WESTWOOD G & A HEATING GAS
80.81NATURALIST PROGRAMMER HEATING GAS
3,477.85WATER UTILITY G&A HEATING GAS
132.75REILLY G & A HEATING GAS
143.62SEWER UTILITY G&A ELECTRIC SERVICE
26.21SEWER UTILITY G&A HEATING GAS
6,965.60
1,550.08FACILITY OPERATIONS HEATING GASCENTERPOINT ENERGY SERVICES IN
1,550.08
1,151.04SUPPORT SERVICES G&A OFFICE SUPPLIESCENTRAL ENVELOPE CORPORATION
1,151.04
15,250.00EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S OTHER RETIREMENTCENTRAL PENSION FUND
15,250.00
3,783.38PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT LANDSCAPING MATERIALSCENTRAL WOOD PRODUCTS
3,783.38
280.85CELLPHONES, IPADS, ETC.TELEPHONECENTURY LINK
280.85
192.00WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIESCHUX SCREEN PRINTING
192.00
370.59NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT PUBLIC LIABILITY INSURANCECIMA COMPANIES INC
370.59
6.64FACILITIES MCTE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIESCINTAS CORPORATION
50.18FACILITIES MCTE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
99.08VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
296.15WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
452.05
2,813.80FINANCE G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTATCITIZENS INDEPENDENT BANK
198.58WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
3,012.38
16,893.06ADMINISTRATION G & A LEGAL SERVICESCOLICH & ASSOCIATES
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 4j)
Title: Vendor Claims Page 5
6/26/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 13:12:06R55CKSUMLOG23000VO
5Page -Council Check Summary
6/21/2013 -6/8/2013
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
16,893.06
85.56WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESCOMCAST
82.41SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
167.97
1,677.58PATCHING-PERMANENT OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESCOMMERCIAL ASPHALT COMPANY
1,677.58
230.64AQUATIC PARK BUDGET EQUIPMENT PARTSCOMMERCIAL RECREATION SPECIALI
230.64
8,962.75GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESCOVERALL OF THE TWIN CITIES
8,962.75
22.75-GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET DUE TO OTHER GOVTSCREATIVE SERVICES OF NEW ENGLA
23.46POLICE G & A POSTAGE
330.24NEIGHBORHOOD OUTREACH OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
330.95
598.09SPLASH PAD MAINT - Oak Hill Pk GENERAL SUPPLIESCREATIVE WATER SOLUTIONS LLC
3,722.46AQUATIC PARK BUDGET OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
4,320.55
3.21-SEWER UTILITY BALANCE SHEET DUE TO OTHER GOVTSCUES INC
49.86SEWER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
46.65
1,535.00FACILITIES MCTE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESCUMMINS NPOWER LLC
2,529.92GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
4,064.92
306.00SOFTBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESCURRAN-MOORE, KIM
306.00
20,715.35WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESDAKOTA SUPPLY GROUP
20,715.35
85.28GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SUPPLYDALCO ENTERPRISES INC
85.28
167.94WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIESDAVIS, HAVEN
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 4j)
Title: Vendor Claims Page 6
6/26/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 13:12:06R55CKSUMLOG23000VO
6Page -Council Check Summary
6/21/2013 -6/8/2013
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
167.94
6,830.54INSPECTIONS G & A DUE TO OTHER GOVTSDEPT LABOR & INDUSTRY
6,830.54
269.16ENTERPRISE G & A ADVERTISINGDEX MEDIA EAST LLC
269.16
164.31SPECIAL EVENTS GENERAL SUPPLIESDH ATHLETICS LLC
164.30HOLIDAY PROGRAMS GENERAL SUPPLIES
164.30SOCCERGENERAL SUPPLIES
492.91
186.00PARK MAINTENANCE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESDJ ELECTRIC SERVICES INC
1,847.82PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES
1,248.85PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
3,282.67
4,792.99POSTAL SERVICES POSTAGEDO-GOOD.BIZ INC
4,792.99
95.04-PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH DUE TO OTHER GOVTSDUNDEE NURSERY
1,477.45BEAUTIFICATION / FLOWERS LANDSCAPING MATERIALS
1,382.41
8,950.78PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT BUILDINGS & STRUCTURESELECTRIC PUMP INC
33,665.63SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER
1,600.12SEWER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
44,216.53
8.03-GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET DUE TO OTHER GOVTSEMERGENCY MEDICAL PRODUCTS INC
124.78INSPECTIONS G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
116.75
350.00IT G & A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEENCORE BROKERS
350.00
705.73PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYENVIRONMENTAL EQUIPMENT & SERV
705.73
10.38-GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET DUE TO OTHER GOVTSEVIDENT CRIME SCENE PRODUCTS
141.08POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 4j)
Title: Vendor Claims Page 7
6/26/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 13:12:06R55CKSUMLOG23000VO
7Page -Council Check Summary
6/21/2013 -6/8/2013
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
20.30POLICE G & A POSTAGE
151.00
75.56PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYFACTORY MOTOR PARTS CO
75.56
71.26WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESFASTENAL COMPANY
71.26
125.27HUMAN RESOURCES RECRUITMENTFEDEX
125.27
314.27ICE RESURFACER MOTOR FUELSFERRELL GAS
314.27
244.18STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A LEGAL NOTICESFINANCE & COMMERCE
244.18
89.50INSPECTIONS G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESFLOYD TOTAL SECURITY
89.50
20.00YOUTH PROGRAMS PROGRAM REVENUEFORD, EDITH
20.00
7.15-PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH DUE TO OTHER GOVTSFORESTRY SUPPLIERS INC
111.21TREE MAINTENANCE SMALL TOOLS
104.06
220.00INSPECTIONS G & A CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCEFRIDAY, MATT
220.00
1,000.00ESCROWSPMC ESCROWFRY, TOM
1,000.00
5,500.00HUMAN RESOURCES RECRUITMENTFURSMAN, BRIMEYER
5,500.00
107.38PUBLIC WORKS G & A GENERAL SUPPLIESG S DIRECT
107.38
3,000.00ESCROWSPMC ESCROWGERVALS, JACOB
3,000.00
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 4j)
Title: Vendor Claims Page 8
6/26/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 13:12:06R55CKSUMLOG23000VO
8Page -Council Check Summary
6/21/2013 -6/8/2013
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
7.28OPERATIONSGENERAL SUPPLIESGLAPA, SHAWN
7.28
4,048.66EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S LONG TERM CARE INSURGLTC PREMIUM PAYMENTS
4,048.66
1,558.95WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICEGOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC
1,558.95
3,339.85PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYGRAFIX SHOPPE
96.25-PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH DUE TO OTHER GOVTS
3,243.60
1,068.59GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIESGRAINGER INC, WW
27.37ROUTINE MAINTENANCE SMALL TOOLS
43.77REILLY BUDGET EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
1,139.73
7,058.97SYSTEM REPAIR OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESGRANITE LEDGE ELECTRICAL CONTR
7,058.97
235.48WEED CONTROL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESGREEN HORIZONS
235.48
1,700.00BEAUTIFICATION/LANDSCAPE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESGREENSIDE INC
1,700.00
5,000.00WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICEGROTH SEWER & WATER
5,000.00
446.88EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A HEALTH INSURANCEGROUP HEALTH INC - WORKSITE
446.88
769.50BEAUTIFICATION/LANDSCAPE OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESHAAG COMPANIES INC
769.50
1,072.42EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A TUITIONHAGEN, DENNIS
1,072.42
14.31WATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEHALLOCK COMPANY INC
14.31
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 4j)
Title: Vendor Claims Page 9
6/26/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 13:12:06R55CKSUMLOG23000VO
9Page -Council Check Summary
6/21/2013 -6/8/2013
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
459.00SOFTBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESHAMILTON, MIKE
459.00
11,564.92PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESHAMMEL GREEN & ABRAHAMSON INC
11,564.92
42.00OPERATIONSFIRE PREVENTION SUPPLIESHANSON ASSOC, R.D.
42.00
941.92EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A TUITIONHANSON, ANTHONY
941.92
28.77OTHER SUMMER CAMPS GENERAL SUPPLIESHASLERUD, CARRIE
28.77
3,815.31AQUATIC PARK BUDGET GENERAL SUPPLIESHAWKINS INC
4,122.28AQUATIC PARK BUDGET OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
7,937.59
75.00GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESHEATH, STANLEY
75.00
700.00SOFTBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESHENDERSON, TRACY
700.00
2,273.70POLICE G & A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEHENNEPIN COUNTY INFO TECH
825.20OPERATIONSRADIO COMMUNICATIONS
256.00OPERATIONSEMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS
3,354.90
440.00POLICE G & A TRAININGHENNEPIN COUNTY MEDICAL CENTER
440.00
534.38IT G & A COMPUTER SERVICESHENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER
1,074.50POLICE G & A SUBSISTENCE SERVICE
323.86PARK MAINTENANCE G & A TRAINING
1,932.74
315.47DARE PROGRAM OPERATIONAL SUPPLIESHERMAN, JOHN
315.47
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 4j)
Title: Vendor Claims Page 10
6/26/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 13:12:06R55CKSUMLOG23000VO
10Page -Council Check Summary
6/21/2013 -6/8/2013
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
17,507.60FINANCE G & A AUDITING AND ACCOUNTING SERVICHLB TAUTGES REDPATH LTD
4,947.80PARK AND REC G&A AUDITING AND ACCOUNTING SERVIC
1,141.80CABLE TV G & A AUDITING AND ACCOUNTING SERVIC
761.20HOUSING REHAB G & A AUDITING AND ACCOUNTING SERVIC
3,806.00WATER UTILITY G&A AUDITING AND ACCOUNTING SERVIC
4,567.20SEWER UTILITY G&A AUDITING AND ACCOUNTING SERVIC
2,283.60SOLID WASTE G&A AUDITING AND ACCOUNTING SERVIC
1,522.40STORM WATER UTILITY G&A AUDITING AND ACCOUNTING SERVIC
36,537.60
351.80GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIESHOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES
20.26ROUTINE MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
195.54ROUTINE MAINTENANCE SMALL TOOLS
20.28ROUTINE MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT PARTS
5.00DAMAGE REPAIR OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
118.82TRAFFIC CONTROL GENERAL SUPPLIES
136.16PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
42.69BEAUTIFICATION / FLOWERS OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
148.98REC CENTER BUILDING GENERAL SUPPLIES
279.24WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
42.07SEWER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
1,360.84
2,332.59PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEHOPKINS AUTO BODY INC
1,460.09UNINSURED LOSS G&A UNINSURED LOSS
3,792.68
50.00VOLLEYBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESHOWES, JEFFREY
306.00SOFTBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
356.00
220.00VOLLEYBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESHOWES, JENNIFER
25.00KICKBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
245.00
150.00VOLLEYBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESHOWES, JESSICA
75.00KICKBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
225.00
204.00SOFTBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESHOWES, KRISTINE
204.00
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 4j)
Title: Vendor Claims Page 11
6/26/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 13:12:06R55CKSUMLOG23000VO
11Page -Council Check Summary
6/21/2013 -6/8/2013
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
600.00TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT POLICE EQUIPMENTHRGREEN
600.00
94.28REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESHUNTER, MARY
94.28
773.08WATER UTILITY G&A POSTAGEIMPACT PROVEN SOLUTIONS
773.08SEWER UTILITY G&A POSTAGE
773.09SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS POSTAGE
773.08STORM WATER UTILITY G&A POSTAGE
3,092.33
5.81ROUTINE MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT PARTSINDELCO
5.81
577.12BEAUTIFICATION/LANDSCAPE OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESINDEPENDENT BLACK DIRT CO
288.56PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES
865.68
187.76PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYINVER GROVE FORD
512.38GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
700.14
110.28BEAUTIFICATION/LANDSCAPE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESJ & F REDDY RENTS
110.28
1,427.48EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A TUITIONJANIGA, NATHAN
1,427.48
79.00INSPECTIONS G & A MECHANICALJASMER, JERRY
80.00INSPECTIONS G & A PLUMBING
159.00
895.44OPERATIONSOPERATIONAL SUPPLIESJEFFERSON FIRE & SAFETY INC
895.44
169.90PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIESJERRY'S HARDWARE
31.71STORM WATER UTILITY G&A SMALL TOOLS
201.61
300.00WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIESJM CONSULTING LTD
300.00
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 4j)
Title: Vendor Claims Page 12
6/26/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 13:12:06R55CKSUMLOG23000VO
12Page -Council Check Summary
6/21/2013 -6/8/2013
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
810.80IRRIGATION MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIESJOHN DEERE LANDSCAPES/LESCO
810.80
200.00GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESJOHNSON, JERRY
200.00
150.00VOLLEYBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESJOHNSON, SUSAN
100.00KICKBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
250.00
133.58RANGEPOLICE EQUIPMENTKEEPRS INC
133.58
528.46EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S WAGE GARNISHMENTSKELLER, JASMINE Z
528.46
540.00PRE-SCHOOL PROGRAMS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESKIDCREATE STUDIO
540.00
1,240.80TENNISOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESKIDS TEAM TENNIS LLC
1,240.80
17.04-PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH DUE TO OTHER GOVTSKIEFER & ASSOCIATES LLC, ADOLP
264.94AQUATIC PARK BUDGET GENERAL SUPPLIES
247.90
350.00GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESKILBER, DAVID
350.00
10,056.56WIRING REPAIR OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESKILLMER ELECTRIC CO INC
10,056.56
3,550.00SEWER UTILITY G&A IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDIKOTHRADE SEWER WATER & EXCAVAT
3,550.00
306.00SOFTBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESKUBES, JON
306.00
13,488.69TREE REPLACEMENT TREE REPLACEMENTLANDSCAPING BY DAVID MILLER LL
13,488.69
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 4j)
Title: Vendor Claims Page 13
6/26/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 13:12:06R55CKSUMLOG23000VO
13Page -Council Check Summary
6/21/2013 -6/8/2013
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
240.00SYSTEM REPAIR OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESLARSON, JH CO
240.00
323.80UNINSURED LOSS G&A UNINSURED LOSSLEAGUE OF MN CITIES INSURANCE
323.80
120.00COMM DEV PLANNING G & A TRAININGLEARNING JOURNEYS
120.00
300.00ADMINISTRATION G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESLISEC, TOM
300.00
1,594.80REILLY BUDGET GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICESLOCKRIDGE GRINDAL NAUEN PLLP
1,594.80
221.40HUMAN RESOURCES GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICESMADDEN GALANTER HANSEN LLP
221.40
1,040.00TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENTMASTER TECHNOLOGY GROUP
1,040.00
175.00GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESMCMILLAN, THOMAS
175.00
9.93ROUTINE MAINTENANCE SMALL TOOLSMENARDS
23.45IRRIGATION MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
63.10PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
224.44WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
23.45WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
344.37
21,695.85INSPECTIONS G & A DUE TO OTHER GOVTSMETROPOLITAN COUNCIL
316,652.43OPERATIONSCLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICE
338,348.28
256.68OPERATIONSOPERATIONAL SUPPLIESMIDWEST BADGE & NOVELTY CO
256.68
2,411.50WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESMIDWEST TESTING LLC
2,411.50
33,000.65PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDIMINNCOR INDUSTRIES
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 4j)
Title: Vendor Claims Page 14
6/26/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 13:12:06R55CKSUMLOG23000VO
14Page -Council Check Summary
6/21/2013 -6/8/2013
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
33,000.65
117.96EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S ACCRUED OTHER BENEFITSMINNESOTA BENEFIT ASSOC
117.96
380.00SUPPORT SERVICES TRAININGMINNESOTA BUREAU CRIMINAL APPR
380.00
1,250.00SUPPORT SERVICES TRAININGMINNESOTA CIT OFFICER'S ASSN
1,250.00
695.00HUMAN RESOURCES TRAININGMINNESOTA CONTINUING LEGAL ED
695.00
1,964.54GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESMINNESOTA CONWAY
1,964.54
600.00AQUATIC PARK BUDGET OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESMINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
600.00
45.00OPERATIONSTRAININGMINNESOTA FIRE SVC CERT BD
45.00
16.00EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S ACCRUED OTHER BENEFITSMINNESOTA NCPERS LIFE INS
16.00
667.00DAILY ADMISSION ADVERTISINGMINNESOTA PREMIER PUBLICATIONS
667.00
258.68SUPPORT SERVICES G&A OFFICE SUPPLIESMINUTEMAN PRESS
258.68
1,635.12COMMUNICATIONS/GV REIMBURSEABL EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEMOTOROLA
1,635.12
400.00PE INVEST/REVIEW/PER IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDIMPCA
400.00
934.89FABRICATIONOTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESM-R SIGN CO INC
934.89
59.23PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYMTI DISTRIBUTING CO
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 4j)
Title: Vendor Claims Page 15
6/26/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 13:12:06R55CKSUMLOG23000VO
15Page -Council Check Summary
6/21/2013 -6/8/2013
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
59.23
265.00REILLY BUDGET OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESMVTL LABORATORIES
265.00
201.61PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYNAPA (GENUINE PARTS CO)
275.52PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
477.13
2,500.00ESCROWSDEMO / BROOKSIDE TRAFFICNITTI ROLLOFF SERVICES
2,500.00
164.44BEAUTIFICATION / FLOWERS OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESNORTH CENTRAL REFORESTATION IN
164.44
22,753.69TREE REPLACEMENT TREE REPLACEMENTNORTH METRO COMPANIES
22,753.69
267.19GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICENORTH SUBURBAN TOWING
267.19
163.49AQUATIC PARK BUDGET GENERAL SUPPLIESNORTHERN AIRE SWIMMING POOLS
163.49
610.26GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIESNORTHERN STATES SUPPLY INC
610.26
500.00POLICE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESOAK KNOLL ANIMAL HOSPITAL
500.00
34.99ADMINISTRATION G & A OFFICE SUPPLIESOFFICE DEPOT
21.26HUMAN RESOURCES OFFICE SUPPLIES
65.80GENERAL INFORMATION OFFICE SUPPLIES
133.97POLICE G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
30.64POLICE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
97.44POLICE G & A COMPUTER SUPPLIES
86.83INSPECTIONS G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
5.87HOUSING REHAB G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
476.80
1,585.44INSPECTIONS G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICESOFFICE TEAM
1,585.44
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 4j)
Title: Vendor Claims Page 16
6/26/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 13:12:06R55CKSUMLOG23000VO
16Page -Council Check Summary
6/21/2013 -6/8/2013
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
540.18PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIESOLSEN CHAIN & CABLE CO INC
540.18
28.44-PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH DUE TO OTHER GOVTSOMAHA PAPER COMPANY INC
442.06PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
413.62
2,374.63PORTABLE TOILETS/FIELD MAINT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESON SITE SANITATION
45.80OPENOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
104.74OFF-LEASH DOG PARK OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
124.06WESTWOOD G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
53.44NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
2,702.67
22,625.00WATER UTILITY G&A MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENTONE HOUR HEATING & AIR CONDITI
22,625.00
1,100.00REC CENTER BUILDING BUILDING MTCE SERVICEPARKING MARKING INC
1,100.00
310.00SOLID WASTE TRAINING OPERATIONAL SUPPLIESPARKTACULAR
310.00
38.17INSPECTIONS G & A MECHANICALPERFECTION HEATING & AIR CONDI
38.17
5,925.00COMM & MARKETING G & A PRINTING & PUBLISHINGPERNSTEINER CREATIVE GROUP INC
5,925.00
33.98ADMINISTRATION G & A MEETING EXPENSEPETTY CASH
23.58HUMAN RESOURCES ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT
20.00HUMAN RESOURCES TRAVEL/MEETINGS
6.00SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS MEETING EXPENSE
20.00POLICE G & A LICENSES
53.21INSPECTIONS G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
10.00INSPECTIONS G & A MEETING EXPENSE
25.90CABLE TV G & A OFFICE EQUIPMENT
7.50HOUSING REHAB G & A TRAINING
.10GO BONDS-FIRE STATIONS BAL S RETAINED PERCENTAGE
10.00WATER UTILITY G&A REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS
210.27
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 4j)
Title: Vendor Claims Page 17
6/26/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 13:12:06R55CKSUMLOG23000VO
17Page -Council Check Summary
6/21/2013 -6/8/2013
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
6,511.52ROUTINE MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESPHILIP'S TREE CARE INC
180.35PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
98.23AQUATIC PARK BUDGET OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
6,790.10
364.70REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESPLANTRA INC
364.70
361.88PARK MAINTENANCE G & A TELEPHONEPOPP.COM INC
361.88
108.00ARENA MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEPRINTERS SERVICE INC
108.00
20,664.03WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICEQ3 CONTRACTING
1,158.00SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
21,822.03
19.81GENERAL INFORMATION GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICESQUICKSILVER EXPRESS COURIER
19.81
1,383.26REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESRAINBOW TREECARE
278.92WATER UTILITY G&A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
1,662.18
3,384.18FACILITY OPERATIONS GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICERANDY'S SANITATION INC
1,113.82REC CENTER BUILDING GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE
990.40SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE
5,488.40
3,534.68AQUATIC PARK BUDGET OPERATIONAL SUPPLIESRECREATION SUPPLY CO
3,534.68
199.92POLICE G & A OFFICE SUPPLIESREGENCY OFFICE PRODUCTS LLC
199.92
1,340.00SUPPORT SERVICES TRAININGREID & ASSOCIATES, JOHN E
1,340.00
1,200.00IT G & A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICERICOH USA INC
1,200.00
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 4j)
Title: Vendor Claims Page 18
6/26/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 13:12:06R55CKSUMLOG23000VO
18Page -Council Check Summary
6/21/2013 -6/8/2013
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
355.00SEWER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICESROOT-O-MATIC
355.00
3,000.00ESCROWSPMC ESCROWSADE LLC
3,000.00
1,168.41-CABLE TV BALANCE SHEET DUE TO OTHER GOVTSSAFE HARBOR COMPUTERS
18,163.41TV PRODUCTION MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENT
16,995.00
225.00MOVE-UP PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESSALA ARCHITECTS INC
225.00
300.23OPERATIONSGENERAL SUPPLIESSAM'S CLUB
429.06ORGANIZED REC G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
298.34ORGANIZED REC G & A TRAINING
54.23CONCESSIONSGENERAL SUPPLIES
9.78CONCESSIONSCONCESSION SUPPLIES
1,091.64
116.23DAMAGE REPAIR OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESSCHERER BROS. LUMBER CO.
116.23
1,973.40GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESSCHINDLER ELEVATOR CORP
1,973.40
24.50OPERATIONSFIRE PREVENTION SUPPLIESSCHLEGEL, EVA
24.50
528.66SEWER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICESSEH
528.66
76.00HOUSING REHAB G & A TRAININGSENSIBLE LAND USE COALITION
76.00
150.00GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESSETTINGSGARD, JARED
150.00
399.00ADMINISTRATION G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICESSHRED-IT USA MINNEAPOLIS
10.00FINANCE G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
50.00POLICE G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 4j)
Title: Vendor Claims Page 19
6/26/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 13:12:06R55CKSUMLOG23000VO
19Page -Council Check Summary
6/21/2013 -6/8/2013
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
10.00INSPECTIONS G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
60.00WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
10.00WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
539.00
42.75GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIESSIGN PRODUCERS INC
42.75
660.00AQUATIC PARK BUDGET EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICESIGNATURE AQUATICS
660.00
805.50IRRIGATION MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESSIGNATURE MECHANICAL INC
11,700.00PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
4,817.00PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES
17,322.50
20,498.89PAINTINGOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESSIR LINES-A-LOT
20,498.89
147.50POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIESSIRCHIE FINGER PRINT LABS INC
147.50
3,388.00COMM & MARKETING G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESSITEIMPROVE INC
3,388.00
200.00SOFTBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESSMITH, PERRY
200.00
145.76-GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET DUE TO OTHER GOVTSSONUS INTERIORS INC
2,265.96GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES
2,120.20
215.47OPERATIONSGENERAL SUPPLIESSPS COMPANIES INC
2.67TREE MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
218.14
855.00TREE DISEASE PRIVATE CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICEST CROIX TREE SERVICE INC
855.00
16.56HUMAN RESOURCES CITEST PAUL SAINTS
16.56
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 4j)
Title: Vendor Claims Page 20
6/26/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 13:12:06R55CKSUMLOG23000VO
20Page -Council Check Summary
6/21/2013 -6/8/2013
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
1,460.19PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYSTANDARD SPRING
1,460.19
48.08SUPPORT SERVICES OPERATIONAL SUPPLIESSTREICHER'S
48.08
36.00INSPECTIONS G & A ELECTRICALSUBURBAN ELECTRIC
36.00
4,320.00PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDISUMMIT ENVIROSOLUTIONS INC
900.00PE DESIGN GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
5,250.00PE DESIGN IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
10,470.00
201.35ADMINISTRATION G & A LEGAL NOTICESSUN NEWSPAPERS
238.00HUMAN RESOURCES RECRUITMENT
404.55STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A LEGAL NOTICES
843.90
21.29-PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH DUE TO OTHER GOVTSTAHO SPORTSWEAR
234.59WESTWOOD G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
366.24JUNIOR NATURALISTS OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
579.54
469.91-PARK IMPROVE BALANCE SHEET DUE TO OTHER GOVTSTHOR GUARD INC
4,769.91PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
4,300.00
129.00ADMINISTRATION G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESTIMESAVER OFF SITE SECRETARIAL
129.00
1,415.00PARK EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESTOWN & COUNTRY FENCE INC
1,415.00
127.50SOFTBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESTRAUTMANN, JOHN
127.50
4,561.00WATER UTILITY G&A BUILDING MTCE SERVICETREMCO WEATHERPROOFING TECH IN
4,561.00
975.46PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYTRI STATE BOBCAT
975.46
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 4j)
Title: Vendor Claims Page 21
6/26/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 13:12:06R55CKSUMLOG23000VO
21Page -Council Check Summary
6/21/2013 -6/8/2013
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
10,924.38PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYTRUCK UTILITIES MFG CO
327.04VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A BANK CHARGES/CREDIT CD FEES
11,251.42
121.84ORGANIZED REC G & A GENERAL SUPPLIESTWIN CITY HARDWARE
121.84
261.00FACILITIES MCTE G & A BUILDING MTCE SERVICEUHL CO INC
11,371.15TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE FURNITURE & EQUIPMENT
11,632.15
37.62POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIESUNIFORMS UNLIMITED (PD)
3,635.30POLICE G & A POLICE EQUIPMENT
351.37SUPPORT SERVICES OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
1,609.00SUPERVISORYOPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
7,639.57PATROLOPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
514.36RESERVESOPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
19.24EXPLORERSOPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
712.76COMMUNITY SERVICE OFFICER OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
14,519.22
150.00EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S WAGE GARNISHMENTSUNITED STATES TREASURY
150.00
234.00EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S UNITED WAYUNITED WAY OF MINNEAPOLIS AREA
234.00
1,084.49T-BALL/BASEBALL PROGRAM REVENUEUNIVERSAL ATHLETIC
1,084.49
265.22POLICE G & A POSTAGEUPS STORE
265.22
2,750.00AQUATIC PARK BUDGET OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESUSAQUATICS
2,750.00
4,134.00EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICESVAN IWAARDEN ASSOCIATES
4,134.00
199.45ENVIRONMENTAL G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CARVAUGHAN, JIM
199.45
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 4j)
Title: Vendor Claims Page 22
6/26/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 13:12:06R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
22Page -Council Check Summary
6/21/2013 -6/8/2013
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
2,654.24WATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEVESSCO INC
2,654.24
363.47WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIESVIKING INDUSTRIAL CTR
363.47
97.90OPERATIONSOPERATIONAL SUPPLIESWATERS, JOEL
97.90
2,493.76WATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEWEBER ELECTRIC
2,493.76
100.00SOFTBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESWHIPPS, MATTHEW
100.00
24.87OPERATIONSEMERGENCY PREPAREDNESSXCEL ENERGY
27,124.10PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A ELECTRIC SERVICE
34.80BRICK HOUSE (1324)ELECTRIC SERVICE
51.11WW RENTAL HOUSE (1322)ELECTRIC SERVICE
565.29WESTWOOD G & A ELECTRIC SERVICE
27,051.34WATER UTILITY G&A ELECTRIC SERVICE
1,994.69REILLY BUDGET ELECTRIC SERVICE
2,698.08STORM WATER UTILITY G&A ELECTRIC SERVICE
59,544.28
26,137.16PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYYOCUM OIL CO INC
26,137.16
76.89PATCHING-PERMANENT SMALL TOOLSZACKS INC
76.89
Report Totals 1,098,924.40
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 4j)
Title: Vendor Claims Page 23
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: July 1, 2013
Action Agenda Item: 8a
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Defeasance of the 2004A Bonds
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution Providing for Payment and
Redemption of the 2004A Bonds.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the Council desire to fully defease the 2004A Bonds?
SUMMARY: The 2004A Bonds were issued as General Obligation Tax Increment Refunding
Bonds to refund the 1996 Tax Increment Bonds issued to fund various eligible tax increment
costs as well as the Recreation Center project. The Bonds were partially defeased through
August 1, 2016, with the City responsible for paying $51,665 in interest costs annually through
2016 and then making payments for the remaining totals of $1,415,000 in principal and $52,658
in interest in 2017 and 2018 . By fully defeasing these Bonds, the City will save approximately
$200,000 in remaining interest costs.
The funding for the defeasance will be $707,500 from the Hwy 7 Development District,
$353,750 from the Development Fund, and $353,750 from the Permanent Improvement
Revolving Fund. This is consistent with the City’s Long Range Financial Management Plan.
The redemption of the Bonds is scheduled for August 5, 2013.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: By fully defeasing the 2004A Bonds, the
City will save approximately $200,000 in remaining interest costs.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Extract of Minutes (draft)
Resolution
Prepared by: Steven Heintz, Finance Supervisor
Reviewed by: Brian Swanson, Controller
Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 8a) Page 2
Title: Defeasance of the 2004A Bonds
Extract of Minutes of Meeting of the
City Council of the City of St. Louis Park,
Hennepin County, Minnesota
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
St. Louis Park, Minnesota, was duly held in the City Hall on Monday, July 1, 2013, commencing at
7:30 P.M.
The following members were present:
and the following were absent:
* * * * * * * * *
Member _______________ introduced the following written resolution, the reading of
which was dispensed with by unanimous consent, and moved its adoption:
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 8a) Page 3
Title: Defeasance of the 2004A Bonds
RESOLUTION NO. 13- _____
RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE
PREPAYMENT AND REDEMPTION OF THE CITY’S OUTSTANDING
GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES 2004A
BE IT RESOLVED By the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota (the
“City”), as follows:
1. The City previously issued and sold its General Obligation Tax Increment
Refunding Bonds, Series 2004A (the “Bonds”), dated April 7, 2004, in the original aggregate
principal amount of $7,490,000, of which $1,895,000 in principal amount (constituting the 2014
through 2016 maturities) has previously been defeased and redeemed on February 1, 2013, and the
remainder of $1,415,000 in principal amount is currently outstanding. Bonds maturing on or after
February 1, 2014, are subject to call for prior redemption on February 1, 2013, or on any date
thereafter at a price of par plus accrued interest. Redemption may be in whole or in part, and if in
part, at the option of the City and in such order as the City will determine and within a maturity
selected by the Controller of the City (as successor to the Finance Director), acting as the Registrar
for the Bonds (the “Registrar”). Prepayments will be at a price of par plus accrued interest.
2. It is determined that it is in the best interests of the sound financial management of
the City that Bonds maturing on February 1, 2017 and February 1, 2018, comprising all of the
Bonds subject to redemption, be prepaid and redeemed on August 5, 2013 (or on the first date
thereafter for which the Registrar can provide proper notice to the holders of the Bonds), and those
Bonds are hereby called for redemption on that date in the aggregate principal amount of
$1,415,000.
3. The Registrar is authorized and directed to mail notice of call for redemption of the
Bonds in the form attached hereto as EXHIBIT A to the registered owners of each Bond to be
redeemed at the address shown on the registration books kept by the Registrar.
(The remainder of this page is intentionally left blank.)
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 8a) Page 4
Title: Defeasance of the 2004A Bonds
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Member
_______________, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against:
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 8a) Page 5
Title: Defeasance of the 2004A Bonds
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
)
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) SS.
)
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK )
I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified City Clerk of the City of St. Louis Park,
Minnesota (the “City”), do hereby certify that I have carefully compared the attached and foregoing
extract of minutes of a regular meeting of the City Council held on Monday, July 1, 2013, with the
original thereof on file in my office, and the same is a full, true, and complete transcript therefrom
insofar as the same relates to the prepayment and redemption of the City’s General Obligation Tax
Increment Refunding Bonds, Series 2004A, issued in the original aggregate principal amount of
$7,490,000.
WITNESS My hand as City Clerk and the corporate seal of the City this ____ day of
________________, 2013.
City Clerk
City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota
(SEAL)
City Council Meeting of July 1, 2013 (Item No. 8a) Page 6
Title: Defeasance of the 2004A Bonds
EXHIBIT A
NOTICE OF CALL FOR REDEMPTION
$7,490,000
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT REFUNDING BONDS
SERIES 2004A
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that, by order of the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park, Minnesota (the “City”), there have been called for redemption and prepayment on
August 5, 2013
all outstanding bonds of the City designated as General Obligation Tax Increment Refunding
Bonds, Series 2004A, dated April 7, 2004, having stated maturity dates of February 1 in the
years 2017 through 2018, both inclusive, totaling $1,415,000 in principal amount, and with the
following CUSIP numbers:
Year of Maturity Amount CUSIP
2017 $690,000 791740 TK9
2018 725,000 791740 TL7
The bonds are being called at a price of par plus accrued interest to August 5, 2013, on which
date all interest on said bonds will cease to accrue. Holders of the bonds hereby called for
redemption are requested to present their bonds for payment at the office of Controller of the
City, 5005 Minnetonka Boulevard, St. Louis Park, MN 55416-2216, on or before August 5,
2013.
Important Notice: In compliance with the Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act
of 2003, federal backup withholding tax will be withheld at the applicable backup withholding rate
in effect at the time the payment by the redeeming institutions if they are not provided with your
social security number or federal employer identification number, properly certified. This
requirement is fulfilled by submitting a W-9 Form, which may be obtained at a bank or other
financial institution.
Dated: ______________, 2013.
BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
By
City Clerk
City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota