HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011/10/17 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - Regular
AGENDA
OCTOBER 17, 2011
(Councilmember Finkelstein Out)
7:20 p.m. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY – Council Chambers
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Minutes
3a. Economic Development Authority Minutes September 6, 2011
4. Approval of Agenda
5. Reports
5a. Economic Development Authority Vendor Claims
6. Old Business
7. New Business
7a. Authorization to Submit Environmental Cleanup Grant Applications - 3924 Excelsior Blvd.
Recommended Action:
1) Motion to adopt EDA Resolution authorizing the Executive Director and President to
submit a grant application to the Department of Employment and Economic
Development (DEED) Contamination Clean-up Grant Program on behalf of Bader
Development related to its proposed E2 project.
2) Motion to adopt EDA Resolution authorizing the Executive Director and President to
submit a grant application to the Metropolitan Council Tax Base Revitalization Grant
Program on behalf of Bader Development related to its proposed E2 project.
3) Motion to adopt EDA Resolution authorizing the Executive Director and President to
submit a grant application to the Hennepin County Environmental Response Fund
Program on behalf of Bader Development related to its proposed E2 project.
7b. Authorization to Submit a Grant Application to Hennepin County - Open to Business Program.
Recommended Action: Motion to adopt EDA Resolution authorizing the Executive
Director and President to submit a grant application to the Hennepin County Housing and
Redevelopment Authority seeking matching funds for the Open to Business program.
8. Communications
9. Adjournment
7:30 p.m. CITY COUNCIL MEETING – Council Chambers
1. Call to Order
1a. Pledge of Allegiance
1b. Roll Call
2. Presentations
2a. Acceptance of Monetary Donation from St. Louis Park Historical Society for
Improvements to the Depot at Jorvig Park.
Meeting of October 17, 2011
City Council Agenda
3. Approval of Minutes
3a. Special Study Session Minutes of September 19, 2011
3b. Study Session Meeting Minutes of September 26, 2011
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
6a. Public Hearing – Intoxicating On-Sale Liquor License – Thanh Do
Recommended Action: Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to approve application
from Thanh Do, Inc., dba Thanh Do for an on-sale intoxicating liquor license upgrade for
their establishment located at 8028 Minnetonka Boulevard for the remainder of the
license term through March 1, 2012.
6b. Consolidated Public Hearing
(1) 2012 Budget and Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 1
Recommended Action:
Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to approve Resolution setting the 2012
Budget and Property Owner Service Charge for Special Service District No. 1 and
directing staff to certify the annual service charges to Hennepin County.
(2) 2012 Budget and Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 2
Recommended Action:
Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to approve Resolution setting the 2012
Budget and Property Owner Service Charge for Special Service District No. 2 and
directing staff to certify the annual service charges to Hennepin County.
(3) 2012 Budget and Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 3
Recommended Action:
Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to approve Resolution setting the 2012
Budget and Property Owner Service Charge for Special Service District No. 3 and
directing staff to certify the annual service charges to Hennepin County.
(4) 2012 Budget and Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 4
Recommended Action:
Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to approve Resolution setting the 2012
Budget and Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 4
and directing staff to certify the annual service charges to Hennepin County.
Meeting of October 17, 2011
City Council Agenda
(5) 2012 Budget and Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 5
Recommended Action:
Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to approve Resolution setting the 2012
Budget and Property Owner Service Charge for Special Service District No. 5 and
directing staff to certify the annual service charges to Hennepin County.
(6) 2012 Budget and Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 6
Recommended Action:
Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to approve Resolution setting the 2012
Budget and Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 6
and directing staff to certify the annual service charges to Hennepin County.
6c. Public Hearing for Assessment of Delinquent Utilities, Tree Removal/Injection, Mowing,
False Alarms, and Other Miscellaneous Charges.
Recommended Action: Mayor to open the public hearing, solicit comments, and close
the public hearing. Motion to adopt resolution to assess delinquent water, sewer, storm
water, refuse, abating grass/weed cutting, tree removal/injection, false alarm fees and
other miscellaneous charges.
7. Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public -- None
8. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions and Discussion Items
8a. ParkAlert Citizen Notification System Policy
Recommended Action: Motion to adopt ParkAlert Citizen Notification Policy.
9. Communication
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 October 17, 2011
City Council Agenda
CONSENT CALENDAR
4a. Designate Visu-Sewer, Inc. the lowest responsible bidder and authorize execution of a
contract with the firm in the amount of $109,605.00 for the 2011 Sanitary Sewer
Mainline Rehabilitation Project - Project No. 2011-2200
4b. Adopt Resolution accepting work and authorizing final payment in the amount of
$1,246.21 for the Micro-Surfacing on Monterey Drive, Contract No. 111-08
4c. Adopt Resolution accepting donation from St. Louis Park Historical Society in the
amount of $3,880 to assist with the funding of HVAC and insulation improvements in the
Jorvig Park Depot
4d. Approve a Temporary On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor License for Job’s Daughters
Foundation of Minnesota for an event to be held on Saturday, October 29, 2011 at Paul
Revere Masonic Center at 6509 Walker Street in St. Louis Park
4e. Adopt Resolution authorizing the special assessment for the repair of the sewer service
line at 1401 Flag Avenue South, St. Louis Park, MN - P.I.D. 06-117-21-32-0102
4f. Approve for filing Telecommunication Commission Minutes August 25, 2011
4g. Approve for filing Planning Commission Minutes September 21, 2011
4h. Approval of Filing of 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 Date: October 17, 2011
Agenda Item #: 3a
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
SEPTEMBER 6, 2011
1. Call to Order
President Finkelstein called the meeting to order at 7:20 p.m.
Commissioners present: President Phil Finkelstein, Anne Mavity, Paul Omodt, Julia Ross, and
Susan Sanger.
Commissioners absent: Jeff Jacobs and Sue Santa.
Staff present: Executive Director (Mr. Harmening), Controller (Mr. Swanson), Finance
Supervisor (Mr. Heintz), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Hughes).
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Minutes
3a. Economic Development Authority Minutes of July 18, 2011
The minutes were approved as presented.
4. Approval of Agenda
The agenda was approved as presented.
5. Reports
5a. Economic Development Authority Vendor Claims
It was moved by Commissioner Sanger, seconded by Commissioner Mavity, to accept for
filing Vendor Claims for the period May 28, 2011 through August 26, 2011.
The motion passed 5-0 (Commissioners Jacobs and Santa absent).
6. Old Business - None
7. New Business
7a. 2012 Preliminary HRA Levy Certification
EDA Resolution No. 11-08
Mr. Heintz presented the staff report and advised that the HRA levy is used to fund future
improvements to the City’s infrastructure. He stated that possible uses include the
Highway 7/Louisiana Avenue project and the possible Highway 100 reconstruction and
the 2012 budget includes approximately $3.4 million in estimated capital expenditures for
the Highway 7/Louisiana Avenue project. He indicated that the City first adopted the
HRA levy in 2002 and the maximum levy is based on a percentage of the City’s previous
EDA Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 3a) Page 2
Subject: Economic Development Authority Meeting Minutes of September 6, 2011
year’s taxable market value. He stated that the maximum 2012 HRA levy is $983,574,
representing a $45,314 decrease for 2012 based on the City’s taxable market value of
$5,316,617,000.
It was moved by Commissioner Sanger, seconded by Commissioner Ross, to approve
EDA Resolution No. 11-08 Authorizing the Proposed Levy of a Special Benefit Levy
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.033, Subdivision 6, and Approval of a
Preliminary Budget for Fiscal Year 2012.
The motion passed 5-0 (Commissioners Jacobs and Santa absent).
8. Communications - None
9. Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 7:24 p.m.
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Secretary President
Meeting Date: October 17, 2011
Agenda Item #: 5a
Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance
Presentation Other:
EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other: Vendor Claims
Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other:
TITLE:
Vendor Claims.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Motion to accept for filing Vendor Claims for the period August 27, 2011 through October 7,
2011.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Not applicable.
BACKGROUND:
The Finance Department prepares this report for council’s review.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
None.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
Not applicable.
Attachments: Vendor Claims
Prepared by: Connie Neubeck, Account Clerk
10/11/2011CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:49:26R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
1Page -Council Check Summary
10/7/2011 -8/27/2011
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
1,347.84AMERICAN INN PROP DEVELOPMENT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESAMEC GEOMATRIX INC
1,347.84
510.00DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPSAMERICAN PLANNING ASSOC
510.00
1,365.50DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A LEGAL SERVICESCAMPBELL KNUTSON PROF ASSOC
1,365.50
74.467015 WALKER-REYNOLDS WELD PROP HEATING GASCENTERPOINT ENERGY
74.46
69.17DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICESCITIZENS INDEPENDENT BANK
69.17
70,000.00MILL CITY BALANCE SHEET LOAN RECEIVABLE - LONG TERMCKJ PROPERTIES
70,000.00
912.66WEST END TIF DIST G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESEHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC
912.64ELLIPSE ON EXC TIF DIST G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
556.43TRUNK HWY 7 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
556.43HSTI G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
556.43VICTORIA PONDS G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
556.43PARK CENTER HOUSING G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,360.54CSM TIF DIST G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
95.00DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,004.29MILL CITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,004.29PARK COMMONS G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,146.79EDGEWOOD TIF DIST G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
912.68ELMWOOD VILLAGE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,146.79WOLFE LAKE COMMERCIAL TIF G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,004.31AQUILA COMMONS G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,004.29HWY 7 BUSINESS CENTER G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
12,730.00
21.00DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A MEETING EXPENSEHUNT, GREG
21.00
765.00HARD COAT LEGAL SERVICESKENNEDY & GRAVEN
180.00DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A LEGAL SERVICES
945.00
EDA Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 5a)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 2
10/11/2011CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:49:26R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
2Page -Council Check Summary
10/7/2011 -8/27/2011
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
6,000.00HRA LEVY G&A LEGAL SERVICESLOCKRIDGE GRINDAL NAUEN PLLP
6,000.00
95.00DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPSMINNEAPOLIS ST PAUL BUSINESS J
95.00
474.54DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A TELEPHONENEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS
474.54
22.69DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A OFFICE SUPPLIESOFFICE DEPOT
22.69
2,397.32DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A PLANNINGSEH
2,397.32
5,538.25DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A PLANNINGSRF CONSULTING GROUP INC
5,538.25
103.00DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPSST LOUIS PARK SUNRISE ROTARY
103.00
31.26WEST END TIF DIST G&A LEGAL NOTICESSUN NEWSPAPERS
31.20ELLIPSE ON EXC TIF DIST G&A LEGAL NOTICES
31.26TRUNK HWY 7 G&A LEGAL NOTICES
31.26HSTI G&A LEGAL NOTICES
31.26VICTORIA PONDS G&A LEGAL NOTICES
31.26PARK CENTER HOUSING G&A LEGAL NOTICES
31.26CSM TIF DIST G&A LEGAL NOTICES
31.26MILL CITY G&A LEGAL NOTICES
31.26PARK COMMONS G&A LEGAL NOTICES
31.26EDGEWOOD TIF DIST G & A LEGAL NOTICES
31.26ELMWOOD VILLAGE G & A LEGAL NOTICES
31.26WOLFE LAKE COMMERCIAL TIF G&A LEGAL NOTICES
31.26AQUILA COMMONS G & A LEGAL NOTICES
31.26HWY 7 BUSINESS CENTER G & A LEGAL NOTICES
437.58
Report Totals 102,131.35
EDA Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 5a)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 3
Meeting Date: October 17, 2011
Agenda Item #: 7a
Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance
Presentation Other:
EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other:
Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other:
TITLE:
Authorization to Submit Environmental Cleanup Grant Applications - 3924 Excelsior Boulevard.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
1) Motion to adopt EDA Resolution authorizing the Executive Director and President to submit a
grant application to the Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED)
Contamination Clean-up Grant Program on behalf of Bader Development related to its proposed
E2 project.
2) Motion to adopt EDA Resolution authorizing the Executive Director and President to submit a
grant application to the Metropolitan Council Tax Base Revitalization Grant Program on behalf
of Bader Development related to its proposed E2 project.
3) Motion to adopt EDA Resolution authorizing the Executive Director and President to submit a
grant application to the Hennepin County Environmental Response Fund Program on behalf of
Bader Development related to its proposed E2 project.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Does the EDA support the submittal of grant applications to assist in the environmental cleanup
of 3924 Excelsior Boulevard so as to allow Bader Development’s proposed E2 project to
proceed?
BACKGROUND:
The EDA is the owner 3924 Excelsior Boulevard (the former American Inn property). In 2009,
the EDA retained AMEC (environmental consultants) to conduct both Phase I and Phase II
Environmental Site Assessments on the subject property. It found impacted soils on the subject
property that will require proper removal and disposal. Recently, Liesch Associates conducted a
supplemental Phase II of the property. This more thorough investigation estimated there are
approximately 13,500 cubic yards of fill soil debris (containing hazardous and non-hazardous
materials), 4,100 cubic yards of non-structurally suitable silty clay soil, and 700 cubic yards of
petroleum/arsenic impacted soils that will all need to be excavated, exported from the site and
properly disposed. Liesch estimates that the total cost to remediate the site and prepare it for
residential development is approximately $980,000.
Bader Development is proposing to purchase the subject property, remove the existing
contamination and construct a $12.6 million, 5-story, 58-unit, market rate apartment building that
would integrate with the developer’s recently completed Ellipse on Excelsior project. The
proposed project would be called E2. It will include one level of underground structured parking
as well as surface parking reserved for visitors and customer parking from the Ellipse.
Bader Development’s proposed E2 project was introduced at the October 3, 2011 Study Session
where it was favorably received. The necessity for the submission of contamination cleanup
grant applications to DEED, the Metropolitan Council and Hennepin County was also discussed
EDA Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 7a) Page 2
Subject: Authorization to Submit Environmental Cleanup Grant Applications: 3924 Excelsior Boulevard
at the meeting. At the conclusion of the discussion consensus was reached for supporting the
submittal of grant applications to assist in the environmental cleanup of the property.
Each of the above agencies requires an authorizing resolution from the governing body of the
city where the project site is located and that it is committed to the project. Applications to the
above agencies are due by November 1 and grant awards are typically announced by February.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
Bader Development has requested that the EDA authorize the submission of grant applications to
DEED, the Metropolitan Council and Hennepin County totaling approximately $980,000 to
assist in the environmental cleanup of 3924 Excelsior Boulevard so as to allow the proposed E2
project to proceed.
The DEED grant program requires a 25% local match. This local match can be divided in half
between other government agencies (such as the Metropolitan Council and Hennepin County)
and the authorizing municipality. Within the resolution approving the grant application to DEED
is a statement that the EDA has committed to the sources identified within the application as the
local match requirement and that it is subject to the final approval by the EDA. The Developer is
in the process of requesting financial assistance from the EDA. If approved, a substantial portion
of the assistance will be allocated toward environmental remediation in fulfillment of the DEED
requirement. No additional funds are being requested from the EDA at this time.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
Cleaning up and redeveloping the subject site is consistent with the Strategic Directions of Vision
St. Louis Park as it relates to environmental stewardship. The proposed E2 project is consistent
with the City’s vision to be a community of diverse, high quality housing.
Attachments: DEED Resolution
Metropolitan Council Resolution
Hennepin County Resolution
Prepared by: Greg Hunt, Economic Development Coordinator
Reviewed by: Kevin Locke, Community Development Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, EDA Executive Director and City Manager
EDA Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 7a) Page 3
Subject: Authorization to Submit Environmental Cleanup Grant Applications: 3924 Excelsior Boulevard
EDA RESOLUTION NO. 11-____
RESOLUTION APPROVING A GRANT APPLICATION TO THE DEPARTMENT OF
EMPLOYMENT AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND APPROVING LOCAL
MATCHING FUNDS ON BEHALF OF BADER DEVELOPMENT
WHEREAS, the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority has agreed to act as the legal
sponsor for the Project referred to as E2, contained in the Contamination Cleanup Grant
application submitted to the Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED)
on or before November 1, 2011; and
WHEREAS, the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority has the legal authority to
apply for financial assistance, and the institutional, managerial, and financial capability to ensure
adequate project administration; and
WHEREAS, the sources and amounts of the local match identified in the application are
committed to the project identified and the advance of such funds is subject to the final approval
of the Economic Development Authority; and
WHEREAS, the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority has not violated any Federal,
State or local laws pertaining to fraud, bribery, graft, kickbacks, collusion, conflict of interest or
other unlawful or corrupt practice; and
WHEREAS, upon approval of its application by the state, the St. Louis Park Economic
Development Authority may enter into an agreement with the State of Minnesota for the above
referenced Project, and that the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority certifies that it
will comply with all applicable laws and regulation as stated in all contract agreements;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the President and Executive Director are
hereby authorized to apply to the Department of Employment and Economic Development for
funding of this project on behalf of the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority and
execute such agreements as are necessary to implement the Project on behalf of the applicant.
I CERTIFY THAT the above resolution was adopted by the St. Louis Park Economic
Development Authority on October 17, 2011.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the Economic Development
Authority, October 17, 2011
Executive Director President
Attest
Secretary
EDA Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 7a) Page 4
Subject: Authorization to Submit Environmental Cleanup Grant Applications: 3924 Excelsior Boulevard
EDA RESOLUTION NO. 11-____
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING APPLICATION FOR THE
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL TAX BASE REVITALIZATION ACCOUNT
ON BEHALF OF BADER DEVELOPMENT
WHEREAS, the City of St. Louis Park is a participant in the Livable Communities Act's
Housing Incentives Program for 2011 as determined by the Metropolitan Council, and is
therefore eligible to make application for funds under the Tax Base Revitalization Account; and
WHEREAS, the City of St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority has identified a clean-
up project within the City that meets the Tax Base Revitalization account's purposes and criteria;
and
WHEREAS, the City of St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority has the institutional,
managerial and financial capability to ensure adequate project administration; and
WHEREAS, the City of St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority certifies that it will
comply with all applicable laws and regulations as stated in the contract agreements; and
WHEREAS, the City of St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority agrees to act as legal
sponsor for the project contained in the Tax Base Revitalization Account grant application
submitted on November 1, 2011;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the President and Executive Director are
hereby authorized to apply to the Metropolitan Council for a Tax Base Revitalization Account
grant on behalf of the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority and to execute such
agreements as are necessary to implement the project on behalf of the applicant.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the Economic Development
Authority , October 17, 2011
Executive Director President
Attest
Secretary
EDA Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 7a) Page 5
Subject: Authorization to Submit Environmental Cleanup Grant Applications: 3924 Excelsior Boulevard
EDA RESOLUTION NO. 11-____
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING APPLICATION FOR A GRANT FROM
HENNEPIN COUNTY’S ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE FUND
ON BEHALF OF BADER DEVELOPMENT
WHEREAS, the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority is eligible to make
application for grant funds from Hennepin County’s Environmental Response Fund; and
WHEREAS, an application requesting grant funds from the Hennepin County Environmental
Response Fund has been prepared for submission by the St. Louis Park Economic Development
Authority; and
WHEREAS, the grant funds will be used for environmental clean-up of 3924 Excelsior Blvd in
the City of St. Louis Park to facilitate Bader Development’s proposed E2 project; and
WHEREAS, the State Statute which created the Environmental Response Fund requires
approval by the governing body of the EDA for submission of a grant request to the Hennepin
County Environmental Response Fund; and
WHEREAS, the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority has the institutional,
managerial and financial capability to ensure adequate project administration for any grant funds
received; and
WHEREAS, the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority certifies that it will comply
with all applicable laws and regulations as stated in the contract agreements; and
WHEREAS, the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority agrees to act as legal sponsor
for the project contained in the Environmental Response Fund grant application to be submitted
on or before November 1, 2011;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the President and Executive Director are
hereby authorized to apply to Hennepin County for an Environmental Response Fund grant on
behalf of the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority on or before November 1, 2011
and execute such agreements as are necessary to implement the project on behalf of the
applicant.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the Economic Development
Authority, October 17, 2011
Executive Director President
Attest
Secretary
Meeting Date: October 17, 2011
Agenda Item #:7b
Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance
Presentation Other:
EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other:
Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other:
TITLE:
Authorization to Submit a Grant Application to Hennepin County - Open to Business Program.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Motion to adopt EDA Resolution authorizing the Executive Director and President to submit a
grant application to the Hennepin County Housing and Redevelopment Authority seeking
matching funds for the Open to Business program.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Does the EDA support the submittal of a grant application to Hennepin County seeking matching
funds for the Open to Business program?
BACKGROUND:
In March 2011 the EDA approved a one year contract with the Metropolitan Consortium of
Community Developers (MCCD) to bring its Open to Business program to St. Louis Park. The
term of the contract runs from April 1, 2011 to April 1, 2012. St .Louis Park was the third city in
the metro area to partner with MCCD on this initiative (Brooklyn Park and Minnetonka also
have contracts). The Open to Business program provides one-on-one technical assistance to
existing St. Louis Park businesses, local aspiring entrepreneurs, and parties interested in opening
a business in St. Louis Park. Through the Open to Business program prospective and existing
entrepreneurs receive counseling with a business advisor from MCCD who provides help with
planning and organizing business ideas, financial management, marketing, regulatory
compliance, and assistance with leases or property purchases. The program began in St. Louis
Park in August. Counseling sessions have since been scheduled to occur the fourth Monday of
each month from 9 a.m.to 11 a.m. at City Hall. Walk-in traffic and scheduled appointments will
likely increase as marketing efforts (currently underway) begin to bear fruit. Under our contract,
MCCD is required to provide the EDA with quarterly reports detailing the services provided in
St. Louis Park. The first report is expected prior to the end of the year.
Because of the success of the Open to Business program in the communities mentioned above,
and in an effort to promote economic development, create and retain jobs, and cultivate
entrepreneurs, the Hennepin County Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HCHRA) has
committed funds to support the efforts of all suburban Hennepin municipalities interested in
pursuing this same initiative. To that end, the HCHRA has made $75,000 available for one-to-
one matching grants of $5,000 for municipalities that offer the Open to Business program. Funds
are available on a one-time basis for calendar year 2012. Grant applications are due by October
15 and the notice of awards will be provided by December 1, 2011. The grant requires a
resolution from the governing body of the city which supports the initiative.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
A one-to-one match is required for this grant. The base annual fee for the Open to Business
program in St. Louis Park is $10,000. The maximum grant amount is $5,000. The EDA
EDA Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 7b) Page 2
Subject: Authorization to Submit Grant Application to Hennepin County: Open To Business Program
originally approved the program and its cost of $10,000 on March 14, 2011. If the grant is
awarded, the EDA would extend its Open to Business contract with MCCD another year.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
The Open to Business program supports the strategic direction of providing a well-maintained
and diverse [building] stock.
Attachments: Resolution Authorizing Grant Application to Hennepin County
Prepared by: Greg Hunt, Economic Development Coordinator
Reviewed by: Kevin Locke, Community Development Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, EDA Executive Director and City Manager
EDA Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 7b) Page 3
Subject: Authorization to Submit Grant Application to Hennepin County: Open To Business Program
EDA RESOLUTION NO. 11-____
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING APPLICATION FOR A GRANT FROM
HENNEPIN COUNTY’S HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY FOR THE
“OPEN TO BUSINESS” PROGRAM
WHEREAS, the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority is eligible to make
application for grant funds from Hennepin County’s Housing and Redevelopment Authority; and
WHEREAS, an application requesting grant funds from the Hennepin County Housing and
Redevelopment Authority has been prepared for submission by the St. Louis Park Economic
Development Authority; and
WHEREAS, the grant funds will be used for the City’s “Open to Business” program under
contact with Metropolitan Consortium of Community Developers (MCCD); and
WHEREAS, the State Statute which created the Housing and Redevelopment Authority requires
approval by the governing body of the EDA for submission of a grant request to the Hennepin
County Housing and Redevelopment Authority; and
WHEREAS, the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority has the institutional,
managerial and financial capability to ensure adequate project administration for any grant funds
received; and
WHEREAS, the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority certifies that it will comply
with all applicable laws and regulations as stated in the contract agreements; and
WHEREAS, the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority agrees to fund one half of the
total annual cost of the “Open to Business” program;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the President and Executive Director are
hereby authorized to apply to Hennepin County for an Environmental Response Fund grant on
behalf of the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority on or before October 15, 2011
and execute such agreements as are necessary to implement the project on behalf of the
applicant.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the Economic Development
Authority, October 17, 2011
Executive Director President
Attest
Secretary
Meeting Date: October 17, 2011
Agenda Item #: 2a
Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance
Presentation Other:
EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other:
Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other:
TITLE:
Acceptance of Monetary Donation from St. Louis Park Historical Society for Improvements to
the Depot at Jorvig Park.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Rick Birno, Recreation Superintendent, will be present to accept a donation in the amount of
$3,880 from the Historical Society. Jeanne Andersen, Doug Johnson, Kathy Johnson, Bob
Jorvig, Susan Ainsworth, Faye Ross, and John Olson, members of the St. Louis Park Historical
Society, will be in attendance to present the check to assist in funding for the new furnace
installed in the Depot at Jorvig Park. The donation will be officially accepted by the City Council
as a consent item following the presentation.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Is the proposed use of the funds acceptable to the City Council?
BACKGROUND:
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 St. Louis Park Historical Society is graciously donating to the Parks and Recreation
Department an amount of $3,880. This donation is given to assist in the funding for the furnace
replacement and addition of insulation in the Depot located at Jorvig Park.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
This donation will be used to support the furnace replacement and addition of insulation in the
Depot located in Jorvig Park. The cost of the furnace was $9,020. The City of St. Louis Park will
pay the additional costs out of the Park Improvement Fund and Park Maintenance fund. This
item is budgeted in the 2011 Capital Improvement Plan and 2011 Parks and Recreation budget.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
Collaboration with other organizations is related to the results of Vision St. Louis Park and one
of the adopted Strategic Directions that “St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and
engaged community”.
Attachments: None.
Prepared by: Stacy Voelker, Administrative Secretary
Reviewed by: Cindy Walsh, Director of Parks and Recreation
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Meeting Date: October 17, 2011
Agenda Item #: 3a
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL STUDY SESSION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
SEPTEMBER 19, 2011
The meeting convened at 6:35 p.m.
Councilmembers present: Mayor Jeff Jacobs (arrived at 6:42 p.m.), Anne Mavity, Julia Ross,
Susan Sanger, and Sue Santa.
Councilmembers absent: Phil Finkelstein and Paul Omodt.
Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), City Attorney (Mr. Scott), Planning/Zoning
Supervisor (Ms. McMonigal), Inspection Services Manager (Ms. Boettcher), Communications
Coordinator (Mr. Zwilling), City Engineer (Mr. Brink), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Hughes).
1. Southwest LRT Project and Planning Update
Mr. Harmening presented the staff report and reviewed the policy questions for Council
consideration.
Ms. McMonigal discussed the overall organization for completing the SWLRT project and stated
that 30,000 daily rides are projected, the project is projected to have a capital cost of $1.25
billion, and 17 stations are planned along the 15 mile corridor. She advised that the Federal
Transit Administration (FTA) recently authorized the project to move into the Preliminary
Engineering (PE) phase and the FTA will fund up to 50% of the project, with other funders
including the County Rail Authority, CTIB, and the State. She pointed out that the Met
Council’s job is to design and construct the LRT, including PE. She also provided an update
regarding the Community Works project, intended to maximize economic community
development, and the City’s station area planning efforts intended to guide land use and new
development. She reported that grants have been received from the Met Council to study surface
water management and conduct a public process for creating design guidelines at the Beltline
station area. She indicated that further information regarding this process will be presented to
Council in the coming months.
Councilmember Ross requested further information regarding the various businesses that will be
impacted by the project.
Ms. McMonigal stated that the Met Council and SW Community Works are working together to
form a business advisory team.
Councilmember Santa asked if there will be opportunities for the station area advisory
committees to work together or to at least be kept updated as it relates to station area planning for
all the stations.
Ms. McMonigal agreed this was a good idea and would serve to create a community feel to the
station areas. She advised that the City is working with Barr Engineering and SRF Consulting
on the Beltline station area planning and will look for creative ways to create a system that does
not impede redevelopment.
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 3a) Page 2
Subject: Special Study Session Meeting Minutes of September 19, 2011
Councilmember Sanger stated it will be important that the engineering analysis include looking
at whether to create a grade separated crossing at Beltline.
Councilmember Ross requested further information regarding mitigation, noting that it appears
the FTA sets the preliminary guidelines and will dictate a lot of what will happen during the
project.
Ms. McMonigal stated that the idea is to get ahead of mitigation and to make decisions with
timely thought and analysis, which will be part of the Community Works analysis.
It was the consensus of the City Council to direct staff to outline a structure for community input
and moving forward on activities related to SWLRT.
Mayor Jacobs stated that he liked the idea of incorporating a St. Louis Park theme at the different
stations in the City.
Councilmember Mavity asked if there would be any process for public input during the surface
water management component.
Ms. McMonigal explained that the current work is technical but public input will be sought when
there is something to share. She indicated that the City Engineer serves on the selection
committee for PE, which is expected to start March 1st. She added that Community Works is
using some of the HUD money to do transitional station area planning and will potentially start
in December or January.
Mr. Harmening stated that staff has been working with the City Attorney on a response to the
FTA’s PE letter and proposes to send a letter to the Met Council requesting clarification
regarding certain aspects of the FTA’s PE letter, particularly related to freight rail. He indicated
that the letter will seek clarification regarding the depth of the study, how the study will be
incorporated into the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for SWLRT, and how the Met
Council plans on meeting that particular requirement.
Councilmember Santa stated it was interesting that the FTA focused so much on the freight rail
reroute as part of SWLRT and indicated she would like some idea of the Met Council’s thinking
in their approach to what the FTA is asking for. She added she would also like clarification
regarding the FTA’s reference to a flyover bridge.
Councilmember Sanger agreed that a letter to the Met Council should be sent focusing on the
points outlined in the staff report. She stated that it appears clear that the County has
misrepresented the City’s consultant’s findings and felt that the City’s letter should clarify the
City’s consultant’s findings in terms of relative cost differentials, safety issues, etc. and should
ask Met Council how it is going to incorporate this issue into their PE planning. She felt this was
not an issue that could be ignored by the Met Council in its PE planning and hoped that Met
Council would not spend a lot of money on PE until it has a clear idea regarding freight rail. She
indicated that she has been asked by several members of the community to find out if there will
be opportunities for public input, observation, and/or participation in meetings during the PE
process.
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 3a) Page 3
Subject: Special Study Session Meeting Minutes of September 19, 2011
Councilmember Ross indicated she would also like input regarding not only what is being
planned for the reroute, but whether FTA and Met Council feel that freight rail and light rail can
co-exist.
Councilmember Sanger suggested that the FTA could be helpful to the City in encouraging the
County to communicate with the City.
Mayor Jacobs requested that the letter seek clarification regarding what is being assumed in
terms of co-location or re-routing as part of the PE process. He stated he would also like
clarification regarding how serious FTA is in telling the parties to get this figured out because at
some point, when this matter goes before the Court of Appeals, a judge is going to ask if the
parties have negotiated this and he would like to have this done sooner rather than later.
Councilmember Mavity advised that at two recent meetings, she has reiterated that the City has
sent a letter to the County requesting a meeting and indicating the City’s willingness to sit down
and talk about this with the County.
Mr. Harmening stated that one of the questions to be asked regarding the PE letter relates to what
is being assumed in terms of co-location. He indicated that if a DEIS is being prepared, there is
typically a requirement for some kind of alternatives analysis and the City will ask how that is
being handled.
Councilmember Sanger indicated that the PE letter made a point about needing to resolve
operational funding once the LRT is built. She requested that the letter ask how much clarity and
commitment is needed and the timeframe for this commitment.
It was the consensus of the City Council to direct staff to prepare a letter to the Met Council in
response to the recently issued FTA letter regarding PE for the SWLRT project.
Councilmember Mavity asked if Mn/DOT and/or Met Council should be included in the City’s
discussions with the County.
Mr. Scott stated that the City is currently appealing Mn/DOT’s decision and felt that it would not
be appropriate at this time to include Mn/DOT in the City’s discussions with the County.
2. Project Update – Trunk Highway 169 Proposed Visual Barrier and Access Closure
Project
Mr. Brink presented the staff report.
Councilmember Ross stated that most residents in her ward are supportive of the access closure
project.
Councilmember Santa stated that even though many residents in her ward use this access as a
shortcut, they are generally supportive of the project.
It was the consensus of the City Council to pursue the proposed visual barrier construction and
access closure project as proposed.
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 3a) Page 4
Subject: Special Study Session Meeting Minutes of September 19, 2011
Written Reports provided and documented for recording purposes only:
3. Deer Management Policy
Councilmember Mavity requested clarification regarding notification procedures in the deer
management policy.
Council discussed the deer management policy’s population reduction methods.
Mr. Harmening stated that the language contained in the policy is consistent with the language
used by Edina and Plymouth. He agreed to further review the policy and provide Council with
any proposed revisions.
4. Administrative Rules for Allowing Chickens
Mr. Harmening noted that staff is interested in discussing this further with Council before
moving forward.
The meeting adjourned at 7:22 p.m.
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Nancy Stroth, City Clerk Jeff Jacobs, Mayor
Meeting Date: October 17, 2011
Agenda Item #: 3b
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
SEPTEMBER 26, 2011
The meeting convened at 6:33 p.m.
Councilmembers present: Mayor Jeff Jacobs, Phil Finkelstein, Anne Mavity, Paul Omodt
(arrived at 6:56 p.m.), Julia Ross (arrived at 6:44 p.m.), Susan Sanger, and Sue Santa.
Councilmembers absent: None.
Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), Deputy City Manager/Director of Human
Resources (Ms. Deno), Director of Public Works (Mr. Rardin), Senior Planner (Mr. Walther),
Director of Community Development (Mr. Locke), Director of Inspections (Mr. Hoffman),
Communications Coordinator (Mr. Zwilling), Economic Development Coordinator (Mr. Hunt),
Controller (Mr. Swanson), Housing Programs Coordinator (Ms. Larsen), Housing Supervisor
(Ms. Schnitker), Engineering Project Manager (Mr. Olson), Utilities Superintendent (Mr.
Anderson), Public Works Coordinator (Mr. Merkley), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Hughes).
1. Future Study Session Agenda Planning – October 10, 2011
Mr. Harmening presented the proposed study session agenda for October 10th.
Councilmember Santa requested that staff provide sufficient information with respect to the
discussion regarding Hardcoat’s request for additional CAP funding. She noted that CAP
funding previously provided to Hardcoat exceeded the usual guidelines.
Councilmember Sanger requested that Council hold a future discussion regarding the dial-a-ride
service and any feedback received to date.
2. Housing Improvement Programs Evaluation
Mr. Locke presented the staff report and stated that the Housing Programs Evaluation is intended
to evaluate the effectiveness of the City’s housing improvement programs in accordance with the
City’s commitment to provide a well maintained and diverse housing stock.
Council agreed that the format of the report and analysis of the programs was very helpful.
Ms. Schnitker pointed out that the only program not included in the evaluation is the Louisiana
Court Max 200 Shallow Rent Subsidy program. She advised that the rent subsidy program for
Louisiana Court should have been included, but noted that the City has not yet spent any money
on that program. She stated that as of last month, there were only two vacancies at the property
and the first priority for residency has been applicants applying through the management office.
She felt that the new property manager, combined with implementation of the recent property
improvements, is helping and the new property management company has a leasing agent on-site
whose primary responsibility is to lease the units. She added that the property manager has only
been managing the property since June.
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 3b) Page 2
Subject: Study Session Meeting Minutes of September 26, 2011
Councilmember Mavity felt that the Louisiana Court Shallow Rent Subsidy program should be
evaluated in the future to determine if the program is needed in light of the success that the new
property management company has had in renting the units. She stated that Federal funding of
the CDBG program may be reduced in the future and requested information about the impact of
funding reductions.
Ms. Schnitker stated that staff has heard that future funding of the CDBG program will be
maintained at its existing level and it appears unlikely that future CDBG funding will be totally
cut. She indicated that the emergency repair program and the low income rehab program are
critical programs that provide assistance to the lowest income resident homeowners who
desperately need it. She added that, based on Council feedback, these programs would continue
to get highest priority in the City’s allocation of CDBG funds should funding levels be cut in the
future.
Councilmember Sanger stated that the City previously had a demonstration project (Targeted
Neighborhood) that focused on exterior improvements in the Blackstone neighborhood and felt
this project was successful. She suggested that the City consider doing a similar project in
another neighborhood that is in need of improvement and felt that this type of project not only
provides benefit to the homeowner but to the entire block as well and could increase property
values.
Ms. Larsen indicated that part of the reason the Blackstone project worked so well was that it
was just 100 households and it would be difficult to find a similar neighborhood that is so well-
defined for a project like this. There was discussion on establishing a portion of the
neighborhood for targeted programming. Staff indicated that they would work on defining
appropriate criteria to identify a neighborhood or area.
Council discussed the current rental market and owner occupied housing.
Councilmember Mavity stated that there may be other strategies the City could use to encourage
home ownership.
Councilmember Finkelstein stated that the City may want to consider some type of program that
supports rent with an option to purchase. He requested information regarding the “Move Up in
the Park” program and questioned whether the City should revisit the 120% MAI guideline.
Ms. Larsen explained that the City has received comments from residents that they thought the
income guideline was too low and that the City should go up to 150%-180% of median income
because lower income residents could not afford to make improvements. She indicated that 25%
of the residents who made expansions to their property since 2005 utilized the Move-up Loan
and were able to qualify at the 120% guideline, so this did not appear to be preventing people
from using the program.
Councilmember Sanger disagreed and stated that she has heard complaints about the 120%
guideline particularly now when people are uneasy about spending money and that raising the
threshold would attract more participants. She felt that this was the only program that really gets
at the City’s highest priority housing.
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 3b) Page 3
Subject: Study Session Meeting Minutes of September 26, 2011
Mr. Locke stated that it is important to recognize that this is not a typical loan program and
involves a forgivable loan with no interest, which makes this an expensive program for the City.
Councilmember Santa stated that the senior housing paradigm is shifting towards keeping people
in their homes and suggested that the City consider a one level remodel program for accessibility
purposes that keeps people in their homes as long as possible and keeps long-time residents in
their community, which lends stability to the neighborhood. She indicated that she has seen
more multi-generational homes which have different needs and their household incomes may
include mom and dad, the children, and also grandparents, which means their household income
gets bumped up and the City should factor that in its housing goals for seniors.
Councilmember Mavity suggested that the City be more proactive in looking for potential uses in
the Louisiana Avenue and 394 vicinity and felt there could be a greater level of development
taking place in this area.
3. Bader Development’s Preliminary Tax Increment Financing (TIF) Application –
Redevelopment of 3924 Excelsior Boulevard (former American Inn site)
Mr. Locke presented the staff report and the concept plan for redevelopment of the former
American Inn site. He then introduced Dean Dovolis, DJR Architecture.
Mr. Dovolis expressed his thanks to Council and City staff for all their help and stated that the
Ellipse on Excelsior project has been successful and is enjoying full occupancy. He presented
several architectural renderings of the proposed E2 project which will follow the original
neighborhood guidelines of the Ellipse on Excelsior project. He noted that the E2 project will
provide 73 parking stalls in the underground garage and 31 surface parking stalls, which is more
than required under City Code, is intended to ensure adequate parking is available in the entire
project, and to keep all parking within the development. He stated that the E2 building will
include 58 units and is the same height as the original building. He then presented the shadow
study results.
Mr. Walther stated that during the neighborhood meetings, parking was the number one issue
raised and residents commented that when patrons are looking for parking, residents have seen
cars parking on France Avenue. He indicated that residents also commented that the former
American Inn site is full during peak hours. He explained that Bader Development’s parking
study has indicated that when someone’s car is parked by valet, the car is taken to the former
American Inn site, so even if spaces are available on site, the valet has been instructed to park
vehicles on the American Inn site instead. He added that the City will do another parking study
that will look at the whole site and will include parking counts as well.
Councilmember Mavity expressed concern about the availability of parking not only when the
development is complete but also during construction, particularly when the overflow parking lot
at the American Inn site is removed. She added that the main concern of residents appears to be
the cul-de-sac on Glenhurst and along France Avenue and suggested that the City consider
having permit parking in this area. She requested that the City continue to remain sensitive to
the neighborhood concerns.
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 3b) Page 4
Subject: Study Session Meeting Minutes of September 26, 2011
Councilmember Finkelstein stated that he felt the proposed plan represents a good use of the
space and follows the City’s plan for the neighborhood. He added that he felt the developer was
working hard to deal with the parking issues.
Councilmember Sanger indicated that her recollection was that Council wanted Excelsior
Boulevard to remain primarily commercial and to reserve the American Inn site for commercial
use. She asked if the City’s goal of having a commercial use on the site is no longer relevant.
Councilmember Finkelstein stated that it is difficult to keep commercial uses going and if the
City is going to insist on commercial, then the City ends up paying for it through increased TIF
assistance. He indicated he would rather be realistic and have a use that fits in better with the
overall development.
Councilmember Sanger stated that she has no problem with providing TIF for environmental
cleanup but did not recall that the EDA provides TIF financing for parking structures.
Mr. Hunt advised that the proposed project provides a greater return in terms of market value
than a commercial use. He stated that several projects in the City, including Excelsior and
Grand, the West End, and Wooddale Pointe, have used TIF financing for structured parking and
eligible costs include a portion of structured parking. He stated that Bader Development has met
with DEED, Hennepin County and Met Council representatives regarding grant opportunities;
approximately three-quarters of the site cleanup costs would come from other sources, estimated
to be approximately $350,000 per agency. He added that there is additional tax increment
available from the entire TIF District that could be used to fill any financing gaps relative to the
extraordinary costs of the project.
It was the consensus of the City Council to support Bader Development’s proposed E2 project
and to consider entering into a Purchase and Redevelopment Contract to convey the subject
property and provide financial assistance to facilitate the project. It was also the consensus of
the City Council to support the submittal of grant applications to assist in the environmental
cleanup of the property.
4. Proposed 2012 Utility Rates
Mr. Harmening presented the staff report and policy questions for Council consideration.
Ms. Deno advised that following the rate study last year, staff is recommending no change in the
rate structure for water, sanitary sewer, storm, and solid waste in 2012. She stated that these
rates will be reviewed and adjustments made during the 2013 budget process following the
departure of Nestlé.
Councilmember Santa requested further information regarding the Bassett Creek Water
Management Commission (BCWMC) surcharge.
Mr. Rardin explained that Bassett Creek Water Management Commission is a joint powers
Water Management Organization (WMO) comprised of nine cities and is different than a normal
watershed district, e.g., Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, which is statutorily derived where
commissioners are appointed by the County and the district collects all their revenues via the tax
levy. He stated that the BCWMC collects revenues through a tax levy for capital projects while
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 3b) Page 5
Subject: Study Session Meeting Minutes of September 26, 2011
revenues for commission administrative costs of about $500,000 per year are invoiced directly to
each city on a pro rata basis to each city based on land area and tax capacity. He indicated that
the City’s share of BCWMC administrative costs is approximately $17,000 and is being paid out
of Storm Water Utility Fund so all properties in the City are paying for BCWMC administrative
costs which raises the issue of fairness. He stated that staff proposes to add a rate surcharge in
the amount of $1.60 per quarter for a 1-2 family residential property for those properties in the
City of St. Louis Park located within the BCWMC. This rate surcharge would raise
approximately $17,700 annually.
Councilmember Sanger expressed support for the proposed 2012 rate structure. She requested
further information regarding the Highway 100 reconstruction improvements.
Mr. Rardin explained that the estimated $2.5 million in water system, sanitary sewer system, and
storm water system improvements were identified by staff as city utility relocations associated
with the proposed Highway 100 project. He stated that these improvements will be needed
primarily along Utica Avenue.
It was the consensus of the City Council that the 2012 rates for water, sanitary sewer, storm, and
solid waste rates were acceptable. It was also the consensus of the City Council to support
adding a rate surcharge to properties in the Bassett Creek Water Management Commission area
of the City.
5. Project Update – Hwy 7/Louisiana Avenue Interchange Project
Mr. Olson presented the staff report and update regarding Phase 3 and 4 activities of the project.
He stated that the project will include a bypass that will allow traffic to continue using Highway
7 during construction. He noted that there will be some detours and left turns at Hwy 7 and
Louisiana Ave will not be accommodated during construction. He added that staff has been
working with the hospital staff to educate them about construction detours. He discussed the
public art process and stated that City is using the same consultant used on other projects in the
City.
Councilmember Finkelstein felt that some of the City’s public art has been dismal and suggested
that the City use a different consultant or skip the public art entirely.
Mr. Rardin agreed to have Ms. Walsh further discuss the public art with Council.
Councilmember Sanger stated that all the public art done so far has been sculptures and she did
not want to see a sculpture in the middle of a roundabout because it could create a distraction for
drivers. She indicated that she would rather take the public art money and put it into an
aesthetic, rich design for the bridge or railings.
Mayor Jacobs and Councilmember Mavity agreed with Councilmember Sanger’s idea of putting
the public art money into the bridge or railings.
Mr. Olson provided an update on project costs and stated more work than anticipated is required
on pollution and soil correction, resulting in an increased construction cost estimate of $18.9
million. He also provided an update regarding overall funding and a breakdown on right-of-way
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 3b) Page 6
Subject: Study Session Meeting Minutes of September 26, 2011
acquisitions. He noted that the biggest impact or cost with respect to right-of-way will be for
billboard properties.
Councilmember Sanger indicated that her preference would be to have no billboards at all.
Council discussed the Federal funds sunset date and a possible extension request for those
Federal funds. Council also discussed Mn/DOT’s offer to perform construction and contract
administration activities for the project.
Councilmember Finkelstein asked if there was any way the City can utilize an engineering firm
to analyze the project in the event of cost overruns, in order to prevent a similar situation to what
happened with the Wooddale project.
Councilmember Sanger suggested that the City Attorney be consulted about other legal
approaches available to the City to minimize the City’s risk. She stated that she recently
attended a Metro Cities Policy Committee meeting and learned that another community was
working with Mn/DOT where Mn/DOT was supposed to be doing the improvement. The City
ended up paying for a new bridge but the City was able to negotiate an agreement where
Mn/DOT reimbursed the City for all costs of building the bridge. She asked if this was
something the City could pursue. She stated that she also raised the question about whether the
sunset date on the Federal funds would be extended in light of Mn/DOT’s request to push back
the project dates and the answer she received was that not only does nobody know, but it is not
clear who has the authority to make that decision. She indicated that from her point of view, the
City should spend some time getting that question answered before making any kind of decision
on delaying the project.
Mr. Rardin requested that Councilmember Sanger provide him with further information about
the bridge project she identified, including location and whether the project was a bridge
replacement, so he could research the matter.
Councilmember Mavity asked how much of this project is going to duplicate or feed into the
light rail study and station area planning.
Councilmember Finkelstein requested that staff determine if any of the PE funds for light rail
could be used for part of this project.
It was the consensus of the City Council that it was satisfied with the progress being made on
project development and Phase 4 activities. It was also the consensus of the City Council to
direct staff to request an extension of the Federal funds sunset date due to the uncertainty of
federal funding. It was also the consensus of the City Council that it was comfortable with the
proposed construction staging plans. It was also the consensus of the City Council to delay the
right-of-way acquisition process pending resolution of the Federal funding / sunset date issue. It
was also the consensus of the City Council to support the incorporation of art and beauty and
aesthetics into the project and to direct staff to review the public art process from an architectural
standpoint. It was also the consensus of the City Council to reluctantly support the use of
Mn/DOT personnel to perform construction and contract administration duties. It was also the
consensus of the City Council that it was comfortable with the City’s probable total funding
commitment needed for the project.
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 3b) Page 7
Subject: Study Session Meeting Minutes of September 26, 2011
The following discussion was related to both written reports 9 and 10
Councilmember Sanger requested that the Wooddale discussion include the perspective of a
bicyclist. She stated that it has been her experience that cars coming from the south can see
bicyclists and they stop, but cars from the north are going much faster and bicyclists cannot see
cars coming from the north. She added that this comes down to a question of the need for
signage and/or lights.
Mr. Harmening indicated that staff plans to talk to Council about both sight line and trail
crossing issues at the same time. He added that representatives from Three Rivers Park District
will attend and be part of the discussion.
Councilmember Sanger suggested that the City invite some bicyclists to the meeting who bike in
other jurisdictions.
Councilmember Mavity requested that the meeting include some visual renderings and to invite
someone from the Police Department to help understand the law.
Councilmember Finkelstein requested that traffic counts be included as well.
6. Administrative Rules for Allowing Chickens
Mr. Harmening presented the staff report and explained that the current ordinance allows
chickens and other domesticated animals with written permission from the City, but the City’s
practice has been to not grant permission when asked.
Councilmember Mavity and Councilmember Omodt expressed support for an administrative
approval process that would allow for the keeping of chickens.
Councilmember Sanger stated that she was opposed to a process that would allow for the
keeping of chickens because the City has worked hard to discourage residents from putting feed
on the ground for deer and if chickens are allowed, there will be feed on the ground which will
be a magnet for deer and other vermin. She stated that she is also opposed to this because the
City allows one accessory structure per property and if chicken coops are allowed plus another
accessory structure it will create an ugly, blighted look. She felt that the City is an urban area
and if residents want to raise chickens, they should live on a farm. She also expressed concern
about the possibility of disputes among neighbors if cats mix with the chickens.
Councilmember Santa stated that the City already has residents concerned about their small dogs
because of coyotes and putting chickens in the backyard will create more problems with the
wildlife present in the area. She expressed concern about the chickens in the winter and keeping
the structure warm enough.
Councilmember Ross agreed with Councilmembers Sanger and Santa and stated she would not
be supporting this because of the increased burden on City staff as well as concerns from a
public health perspective.
Councilmember Finkelstein stated that it may not be a good practice to start allowing chickens
but is agreeable to giving the policy proposal a try at this point.
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 3b) Page 8
Subject: Study Session Meeting Minutes of September 26, 2011
Councilmember Omodt stated that residents have kept chickens for several years and the City of
Minneapolis allows residents to keep chickens. He felt that allowing chickens would encourage
the goal of supporting locally grown businesses.
Mayor Jacobs stated that he would support an administrative approval process for keeping
chickens.
Mr. Hoffman clarified that the Ordinance would not need to be changed and staff would create
an administrative approval process to apply what is currently contained in City Code for the
keeping of chickens.
7. Communications/Meeting Check-In (Verbal)
Mr. Harmening indicated that the Cavalia show has been going well and there have been no
issues with congestion and/or parking.
The meeting adjourned at 8:51 p.m.
Written Reports provided and documented for recording purposes only:
8. August 2011 Monthly Financial Report
9. Southwest Regional Trail Crossings (Wooddale and Beltline): Background and
History
10. Wooddale Avenue Bridge Design: Background Information
11. St. Louis Park Outstanding Citizen Award Program
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Nancy Stroth, City Clerk Jeff Jacobs, Mayor
Meeting Date: October 17, 2010
Agenda Item #: 4a
Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance
Presentation Other:
EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other:
Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other:
TITLE:
Bid Tabulation: Sanitary Sewer – Mainline Rehabilitation – Project No. 2011-2200.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Motion to designate Visu-Sewer, Inc. the lowest responsible bidder and authorize execution of a
contract with the firm in the amount of $109,605.00 for the 2011 Sanitary Sewer Mainline
Rehabilitation Project - Project No. 2011-2200.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Does the City Council desire staff to undertake this planned improvement?
BACKGROUND:
History
This project includes relining of the sanitary sewer lines at selected locations. Based on current
video inspections and maintenance records, staff has selected approximately 4550 feet, or about
8 blocks of pipe, to reline as this year’s project. The work will occur at various locations
throughout the city including work in the Fern Hill, Bronx Park, Oak Hill, Cobblecrest, Cedar
Manor, Willow Park and Eliot View Neighborhoods. The relining process will rehabilitate or
renew these sections of aging pipe and is expected to extend their service life another fifty plus
years.
Bids were received and opened on October 10, 2011 for this project. A total of four (4) bids
were received. A summary of the bid results is as follows:
CONTRACTOR BID AMOUNT
Visu-Sewer, Inc. $109,605.00
Veit & Company, Inc. $130,290.00
Insituform Technologies USA, Inc. $132,086.00
Lametti & Sons, Inc. $159,348.00
Engineer’s Estimate $134,512.00
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 4a) Page 2
Subject: Bid Tabulation: Sanitary Sewer – Mainline Rehabilitation – Project No. 2011-2200
Evaluation of Bids
A review of the bids indicates Visu-Sewer, Inc. submitted the lowest responsible bid. Visu-
Sewer is a reputable contractor that has worked for the city before and has successfully
completed previous contracts.
Construction Timeline
This project has a completion date of April 30, 2012. The extended construction period provides
the contractor flexibility in scheduling the work during their slow periods resulting in more
competitive bid pricing. There is no additional inconvenience to residents as a result of the
extended construction period.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
This project is included in the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) with a budget of $170,500.
The source of funds for this project is the Sanitary Sewer Fund.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
Not applicable.
Attachments: None
Prepared by: Jim Olson, Engineering Project Manager
Reviewed by: Scott Anderson, Utilities Superintendent
Scott Brink, City Engineer
Michael P. Rardin, Director of Public Works
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Meeting Date: October 17, 2011
Agenda Item #: 4b
Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance
Presentation Other:
EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other:
Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other:
TITLE:
Final Payment Resolution - Contract No. 111-08 with Bit Tech Installations – Project No. 2007-
1100.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Motion to Adopt Resolution accepting work and authorizing final payment in the amount of
$1,246.21 for the Micro-Surfacing on Monterey Drive, Contract No. 111-08.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Not Applicable.
BACKGROUND:
The City solicited quotes from four (4) contractors for the Micro-Surfacing on Monterey Drive.
Quotes were received and tabulated on August 26, 2008. The City Manager administratively
approved a contract for this project to the Contractor with the lowest quote, Bit Tech Installations on
August 28, 2008 in the amount of $28,305.92. The Contractor completed this work within the
contract time allowed at a final contract cost of $24,924.14 including one change order. Change
Order No. 1, which changed pavement marking paint type from Epoxy to Latex resulted in a price
difference of (-$3,243.78) to the original contract amount. There were also under runs which
totaled $138.00.
Monterey Drive, between Beltline Boulevard and Park Commons Drive, was micro-surfaced in
September 2008. Due to an untimely rain event shortly after the application, the product failed over
the following winter. Due to scheduling difficulties, the Contractor finally returned to resurface the
road in August 2011. The work was performed under warranty with no additional cost to the City.
This surfacing technique, which is similar to sealcoating, was used at the Recreation Center parking
area in 2007, and has been performing very well.
FINANCIAL/BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
Final Contract Cost
The cost of the work performed by the Contractor under Contract 111-08 has now been
determined to be as follows:
Original Contract $ 28,305.92
Change Order No. 1 - 3,243.78
Quantity Under run - 138.00
Previous Payments $23,677.93
Final Payment Due $ 1,246.21
Page 2City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 4b)
Subject: Final Payment Resolution - Contract No. 111-08 with Bit Tech Installations – Project No. 2007-1100
Staff is requesting approval of the final payment by City Council as that is required to obtain State
Aid reimbursement on this project.
Funding Sources
This was a Mn/DOT state Aid approved project. Adequate funds are available in the City’s State
Aid construction account for this work.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
Not applicable.
Attachment: Resolution
Prepared by: Jim Olson, Senior Engineering Project Manager
Reviewed by: Mike Rardin, Public Works Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Page 3City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 4b)
Subject: Final Payment Resolution - Contract No. 111-08 with Bit Tech Installations – Project No. 2007-1100
RESOLUTION NO. 11-____
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK ON
MONTEREY DRIVE ASPHALT MICRO-SURFACING
CITY PROJECT NO. 2007-1100
CONTRACT NO. 111-08
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 August 28, 2008, Bit Tech Installations
has satisfactorily completed the asphalt micro-surfacing on Monterey Drive per Contract
No.111-08.
2. The Director of Public Works has filed his recommendations for 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 $ 28,305.92
Change Order No. 1 - 3,243.78
Quantity Under run - 138.00
Previous Payments $23,677.93
Final Payment Due $ 1,246.21
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council October 17, 2011
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Meeting Date: October 17, 2011
Agenda Item #: 4c
Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance
Presentation Other:
EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other:
Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other:
TITLE:
Acceptance of Donation for Improvements to the Depot at Jorvig Park.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Motion to Adopt Resolution accepting donation from St. Louis Park Historical Society in the
amount of $3,880 to assist with the funding of HVAC and insulation improvements in the Jorvig
Park Depot.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Does the City Council wish to accept the gift with restrictions on its use?
BACKGROUND:
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.
St. Louis Park Historical Society is graciously donating to the Parks and Recreation Department
an amount of $3,880. This donation is given to assist in the funding for the furnace replacement
and addition of insulation in the Depot located at Jorvig Park.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
This donation will be used to support the furnace replacement and addition of insulation in the
Depot located in Jorvig Park. The cost of the furnace was $9,020. The City of St. Louis Park will
pay the additional costs out of the Park Improvement Fund and Park Maintenance fund. This
item is budgeted in the 2011 Capital Improvement Plan and 2011 Parks and Recreation budget.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
Collaboration with other organizations is related to the results of Vision St. Louis Park Strategic
Directions stating that “St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged
community”.
Attachments: Resolution
Prepared by: Stacy Voelker, Administrative Secretary
Reviewed by: Cindy Walsh, Director of Parks and Recreation
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 4c) Page 2
Subject: Acceptance of Donation for Improvements to the Depot at Jorvig Park
RESOLUTION NO. 11-___
RESOLUTION APPROVING ACCEPTANCE OF DONATION
FROM ST. LOUIS PARK HISTORICAL SOCIETY IN THE AMOUNT OF $3,880
TO ASSIST IN FUNDING OF HVAC AND INSULATION IMPROVEMENTS
IN THE DEPOT LOCATED AT JORVIG PARK
WHEREAS, The City of St. Louis Park is required by State statute to authorize acceptance of
any donations; and
WHEREAS, the City Council must also ratify any restrictions placed on the donation by the
donor; and
WHEREAS, the St. Louis Park Historical Society desires to assist in the replacement of the
furnace and insulation in the Depot located at Jorvig Park with a donation of $3,880; and
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park
that the gift is hereby accepted with thanks to the St. Louis Park Historical Society with the
understanding it will be used toward the furnace replacement and insulation addition in the
Jorvig Park Depot.
Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council October 17, 2011
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Meeting Date: October 17, 2011
Agenda Item #: 4d
Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance
Presentation Other:
EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other:
Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other:
TITLE:
Temporary Liquor License for Job’s Daughters Foundation of Minnesota.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Motion to approve a Temporary On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor License for Job’s Daughters
Foundation of Minnesota for an event to be held on Saturday, October 29, 2011 at Paul Revere
Masonic Center at 6509 Walker Street in St. Louis Park.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Does Council wish to approve the Temporary On-Sales Intoxicating Liquor License so that Job’s
Daughters Foundation of Minnesota can serve intoxicating liquor at their event?
BACKGROUND:
Job’s Daughters Foundation of Minnesota has made an application for a temporary on-sale
intoxicating liquor license for their upcoming event. City Ordinance 3-57(8) requires council
approval of temporary liquor licenses. The event is being held at Paul Revere Masonic Center at
6509 Walker Street and is scheduled from 6:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. on Saturday, October 29,
2011.
Job’s Daughters Foundation of Minnesota is a charitable organization that supports educational
and leadership training programs of the International Order of Job’s Daughters in Minnesota to
develop girls and young women (ages 10 to 20) into leaders.
The Police Department has completed the background investigation on the main principals and
has found no reason to deny the temporary liquor license. The applicant has met all requirements
for issuance of the license and staff is recommending approval.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
The fee for a temporary liquor license is $100.00 per day.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
Not applicable
Attachments: None
Prepared by: Debbie Fischer, Office Assistant
Reviewed by: Nancy Stroth, City Clerk
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Meeting Date: October 17, 2011
Agenda Item #: 4e
Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance
Presentation Other:
EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other:
Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other:
TITLE:
Special Assessment - Sewer Service Line Repair at 1401 Flag Avenue South.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Motion to Adopt Resolution authorizing the special assessment for the repair of the sewer service
line at 1401 Flag Avenue South, St. Louis Park, MN - P.I.D. 06-117-21-32-0102.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
The proposed action is consistent with policy previously established by the City Council.
BACKGROUND:
Gary Weinberg, owner of the single family residence at 1401 Flag Avenue South, has requested the
City to authorize the repair of the sewer service line for his/her home and assess the cost against the
property in accordance with the City’s special assessment policy.
Analysis:
The City requires the repair of service lines to promote the general public health, safety and welfare
within the community. The special assessment policy for the repair or replacement of water or sewer
service lines for existing homes was adopted by the City Council in 1996. This program was put into
place because sometimes property owners face financial hardships when emergency repairs like this
are unexpectedly required.
Plans and permits for this service line repair work were completed, submitted, and approved by City
staff. The property owner hired a contractor and repaired the sewer service line in compliance with
current codes and regulations. Based on the completed work, this repair qualifies for the City’s
special assessment program. The property owner has petitioned the City to authorize the sewer
service line repair and special assess the cost of the repair. The total eligible cost of the repair has
been determined to be $3,320.00.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
The City has funds in place to finance the cost of this special assessment.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
Not applicable.
Attachments: Resolution
Prepared by: Scott Anderson, Utility Superintendent
Through: Mike Rardin, Public Works Director
Brian Swanson, Controller
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 4e) Page 2
Subject: Special Assessment – Sewer Service Line Repair at 1401 Flag Avenue South
RESOLUTION NO. 11-____
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT
FOR THE REPAIR OF THE SEWER SERVICE LINE AT
1401 FLAG AVENUE SOUTH, ST. LOUIS PARK, MN
P.I.D. 06-117-21-32-0102
WHEREAS, the Property Owner at 1401 Flag Avenue South has petitioned the City of
St. Louis Park to authorize a special assessment for the repair of the sewer service line for the
single family residence located at 1401 Flag Avenue South; and
WHEREAS, the Property Owner has agreed to waive the right to a public hearing, right
of notice and right of appeal pursuant to Minnesota Statute, Chapter 429; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park has received a report from the
Utility Superintendent related to the repair of the sewer service line.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park, Minnesota, that:
1. The petition from the Property Owner requesting the approval and special assessment for the
sewer service line repair is hereby accepted.
2. The sewer service line repair that was done in conformance with the plans and specifications
approved by the Public Works Department and Department of Inspections is hereby
accepted.
3. The total cost for the repair of the sewer service line is accepted at $3,320.00.
4. The Property Owner has agreed to waive the right to a public hearing, notice and appeal from
the special assessment; whether provided by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, or by other
statutes, or by ordinance, City Charter, the constitution, or common law.
5. The Property Owner has agreed to pay the City for the total cost of the above improvements
through a special assessment over a ten (10) year period at the interest rate of 5.85%.
6. The Property Owner has executed an agreement with the City and all other documents
necessary to implement the repair of the sewer service line and the special assessment of all
costs associated therewith.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council October 17, 2011
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Meeting Date: October 17, 2011
Agenda Item #: 4f
OFFICIAL MINUTES
ST. LOUIS PARK TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
MEETING OF AUGUST 25, 2011
ST. LOUIS PARK COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MEMBERS PRESENT: Bruce Browning, Rick Dworsky, Dale Hartman, Toby Keeler and
Rolf Peterson
MEMBERS ABSENT: Mike Mulligan, Jenna Sheldon (youth member) and Bill Theobald
STAFF PRESENT: Reg Dunlap, Civic TV Coordinator; John McHugh, Community
TV Coordinator; Clint Pires, Chief Information Officer
1. Call to Order
Vice Chair Peterson called the meeting to order at 7:30 PM.
2. Roll Call
Present at roll call were Commissioners Browning, Dworsky, Hartman, Keeler and
Peterson.
3. Approval of Minutes for July 14, 2011
It was moved by Commissioner Browning, seconded by Commissioner Keeler, to approve
the minutes of July 14, 2011, without changes.
The motion passed 5-0.
4. Adoption of Agenda
It was moved by Commissioner Keeler, seconded by Commissioner Browning, to approve
the agenda.
The motion passed 5-0.
5. Public Comment - None
6. New Business
A. Fiber Optic Study Task Force Consultant Recommendation
Mr. Pires, Chief Information Officer, noted that a Fiber Optic Study Task Force was
formed by the City Council and composed of Telecommunications Commissioners, City
and School staff, LOGIS (Local Government Information Systems) staff and community
representatives. The task force studied fiber optic technology and put together a request
for qualifications (RFQ) to find firms to potentially complete the study. Four RFQ’s
were received and two firms were interviewed, Tellus Ventures and Columbia
Telecommunications Corporation (CTC). The Task Force recommended CTC be
deemed the preferred firm.
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 4f) Page 2
Subject: Telecommunications Commission Meeting Minutes of August 25, 2011
Commissioner Keeler added that the task force gathered documents and information to
educate the members about fiber optics uses and benefits to the City by expanding the
network and discussed if they should leave it “as is.” The selection process was very
thorough. Both of the consultants would be qualified to take on the project, but the task
force preferred CTC.
Mr. Pires noted the City had experience working with CTC in the past and they were
helpful to the City after the past wireless project. They were also attracted to their
experience outside the United States, where more fiber optic projects are being done.
Commissioner Dworsky made a motion, Commission Browning seconded to forward a
recommendation to the City Council that CTC be designated the preferred firm to
complete the fiber optic study, and that staff be authorized to enter into an agreement
with CTC not to exceed a cost of $50,000 to complete the fiber optic study based upon a
mutually agreeable Statement of Work. The motion passed 5-0.
Mr. Pires indicated if the City Council takes action in September and an agreement is
reached a study will be completed in the firs half of 2012. The City has budgeted in
Cable TV fund not to exceed $50,000. They expected to see results mid year after a
study and analysis is done, a recommendation will be made.
7. Unfinished Business - None
8. Reports
A. Complaints-None
9. Communication from the Chair-None
10. Communications from City Staff-None
11. Adjournment
Commissioner Browning made a motion, Commission Dworsky seconded to adjourn at
7:44. The motion passed 5-0.
Respectfully submitted by:
Amy L. Stegora-Peterson
Recording Secretary
Meeting Date: October 17, 2011
Agenda Item #: 4g
OFFICIAL MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
September 21, 2011 – 6:00 p.m.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MEMBERS PRESENT: Lynne Carper, Claudia Johnston-Madison, Dennis Morris,
Carl Robertson
MEMBERS ABSENT: Robert Kramer, Richard Person, Larry Shapiro
STAFF PRESENT: Meg McMonigal, Gary Morrison, Nancy Sells
1. Call to Order – Roll Call
2. Approval of Minutes of July 6, 2011 and August 17, 2011
Commissioner Robertson made a motion to approve the minutes of July 6, 2011 and
August 17, 2011. Commissioner Morris seconded the motion and the motion passed on a
vote of 4-0.
3. Hearings
A. Preliminary Plat Fretham Twelfth Addition
Location: 8910 and 8920 Minnetonka Boulevard
Applicant: Lakewest Development
Case No.: 11-18-S
Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator, presented the staff report. Lakewest
Development (Curt Fretham) is requesting a Preliminary Plat to allow for the subdivision
of two lots at 8910 and 8920 Minnetonka Boulevard into six (6) new lots. He stated there
is a proposal for Lots 5 and 6 to share a common driveway access onto Minnetonka Blvd.
Lots 1, 2 and 3 will have access onto Ensign Ave. Lot 4 as a corner lot could have access
onto either street; however Hennepin County and City staff are requesting that the access
be directed onto Ensign Ave.
Mr. Morrison discussed the 7 foot road dedication along Minnetonka Blvd.
He spoke about the stormwater plan for the area which is to create a small area in the
back of Lots 2 and 3, primarily 3. It was originally shown to be a wet pond but most
recently is proposed to be a dry retention pond, only a foot or two deep.
Mr. Morrison spoke about the house on Lot 1, on the north end of the cul-de-sac. He
spoke about the grade change of 29 ft. from the top of the bluff down to the lake. The
idea is to protect that bluff. Staff has asked, and the developer agrees, that the bluff
should not be graded or disturbed in any way. Therefore, it is proposed that the house will
not have a walk-out basement.
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 4g) Page 2
Subject: Planning Commission Minutes September 21, 2011
Mr. Morrison said at the neighborhood meeting held on September 13th there were a
couple of requests regarding placement of the house (Lot 1) in relation to the west
property line and also to the front property line along Ensign. He said this would require
a variance for the front yard setback. As part of that consideration, when the request for a
greater side yard and lesser front yard is combined, it affects the shape of the house.
The lot is somewhat of a pie shape as it is on the end of a cul-de-sac. As the house is
moved forward the width of the house starts to shrink. This results in a house that is more
garage forward. Mr. Morrison said this didn’t come to a resolution at the neighborhood
meeting. Mr. Morrison noted that comments received at the neighborhood meeting,
along with recommendations resulting from the meeting, are included in the staff report.
Mr. Morrison stated that staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat subject to
conditions in the staff report, and six additional conditions: 1) Lot 1 shall not have a
walk-out basement; 2) that the house on Lot 1 shall be a least 7.5 ft. from the west
property line; 3) Lot 4 shall have access to Ensign Ave. S. only; 4) Lot 4 shall have a 30
ft. setback on both Minnetonka Blvd. and Ensign Ave. S.; 5) Lots 5 and 6 shall have a
shared driveway access; and 6) that the pond shall be planted with water tolerant grasses,
shrubs and trees.
Commissioner Carper remarked about the irregular shape of Lot 2.
Mr. Morrison said part of the issue with Lot 2 is the angular shape of the parent parcel,
itself. He said the main part of Lot 2 where the house would sit is a standard rectangular
shape.
Commissioner Carper asked if there was any discussion with the developer about
combining Lots 1 and 2 into something more regular and then expand Lot 3.
Mr. Morrison responded said there were conversations about combining lots but the
conclusion they came to was that Lots 1, 2 and 3 are well over the 9,000 sq. ft. minimum.
Given the size of the lots and the fact that the houses will be up front, it leaves a backyard
area that is fairly typical and common.
Commissioner Carper asked who would be responsible for maintenance of the dry pond.
Mr. Morrison said there will be an easement over the pond and the City will be
responsible for the pond.
Commissioner Morris asked how the City would access the pond.
Mr. Morrison said there will be a 20 foot easement between Lots 2 and 3. There will also
be additional easement along Lot 6 which provides access.
Commissioner Robertson commended staff and the developer for a very straightforward
proposal which meets all zoning and guiding.
Mr. Morrison replied that it was the developer’s intent to have no variances on the plat.
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 4g) Page 3
Subject: Planning Commission Minutes September 21, 2011
Curt Fretham, applicant, spoke about concerns he has with two of the additional six
conditions. He is concerned about No. 2 (Lot 1) with respect to the 7.5 ft. setback from
the west property line. He said the homes will be custom homes and he‘d like the
property owner to have some discretion about placement of garage and some of those
factors. He said he understands and appreciates the neighbors’ concerns. Mr. Fretham
said he wonders if there isn’t another way to provide more space on that side other than a
setback. He added that maybe it won’t be impactful because the house designed there
works well there anyway.
Mr. Fretham spoke about concern with condition No. 4 regarding Lot 4 having a 30 ft.
setback from Minnetonka Blvd. and Ensign Ave. as it restricts what the homeowner
could do. Corner lots generally have the ability to have a reduced setback on one of the
two sides. He said he hoped there would be some latitude from staff and the Commission
on conditions No. 2 and 4.
Commissioner Carper asked if Mr. Fretham was the builder.
Mr. Fretham responded that he is not a builder. He said he works with a number of
builders. He also works with potential homeowners. He said there will probably be one
or two builders on the site.
Commissioner Carper asked if Mr. Fretham would be willing to sell the lots individually
without any criteria for the buildings on it.
Mr. Fretham replied that was a fair statement.
Commissioner Robertson asked what the typical side yard setback is for a corner lot.
Mr. Morrison said the side yard abutting the street is 15 feet. The requirement for the
corner lot in this case came from the request to have the access for Lot 4 onto Ensign
Ave. So the thought was if the house was going to face Ensign, then it should be
consistent with the other houses along Ensign.
Commissioner Robertson commented that many houses have their access off an alley, so
just because the access is off of Ensign doesn’t mean the house will face Ensign. He
thought it should be left to someone with design skills to finesse that and not constrain
through zoning.
Commissioner Morris asked if Mr. Fretham is the land subdivider and could sell off all
parcels or individual parcels, could new owners of lots then come in and ask for
variances?
Mr. Morrison responded the thought was if the standard was established now, 30 ft.
setback off of Ensign, if someone comes forward with a design for the house primarily
facing Minnetonka, the owner would have to come back for a variance for a 15 ft.
setback.
Meg McMonigal, Planning and Zoning Supervisor, said plats are reviewed such that they
don’t have to have variances, but a property owner can always request a variance in the
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 4g) Page 4
Subject: Planning Commission Minutes September 21, 2011
future. She added that the lots are fairly big and there doesn’t appear to be any reason that
variances would be needed in the future.
Commissioner Robertson asked if there are corner lots throughout the city with a 15 ft.
setback, why would this one need 30 ft?
Ms. McMonigal said perhaps the modification would be if the house faces Ensign then it
is setback 30 ft. so it’s in line with the houses on Lots 1, 2 and 3. If it faces Minnetonka
then it should be in line with Lots 5 and 6.
Mr. Fretham had questions about determining which way the house faces. He said he
sees the 30 ft. as overly restrictive and a hardship placed on this corner lot.
Commissioner Robertson commented that street access doesn’t determine the front of
house, but which face the front entry door is on is the perceived front of house.
Ms. McMonigal said the intent was that in either case if it is set back 30 ft. from both
streets there isn’t an issue with it feeling forward compared to the other houses.
Mr. Fretham said even if the normal setback is there, it doesn’t mean that house would
get pushed up.
Chair Johnston-Madison opened the public hearing.
Dean Gutzke, 2920 Ensign Ave. S., asked if any traffic counts have been done in the
area.
Ms. McMonigal responded there might be some traffic counts on Minnetonka Blvd.
Mr. Gutzke said traffic counts should be done now since there are a number of new
developments in the area.
Mr. Gutzke said he appreciated the feedback and consideration given at the neighborhood
meeting. He stated there still isn’t a resolution on the setback for one of the lots. He
asked what the process was for a firm resolution on this issue.
Commissioner Morris asked if Mr. Gutzke’s concern for traffic counts was for
Minnetonka Blvd. or Ensign Ave.
Mr. Gutzke responded he was concerned about both streets.
Commissioner Morris asked about parking on Ensign.
Mr. Gutzke said there is limited parking in front of residences on Ensign. Guests often
have to park across the street and cross Minnetonka Blvd. on foot. Four new driveways
will restrict parking even further.
Mr. Gutzke asked staff to review setbacks.
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 4g) Page 5
Subject: Planning Commission Minutes September 21, 2011
Mr. Morrison said the minimum front setback is 30 ft., minimum sideyard setback is 6 ft.,
and minimum rearyard is 25 ft.
Mr. Gutzke spoke about the Cavell/Boone development which has the same builder and
was approved by the Planning Commission.
Ms. McMonigal noted that there was a picture of the layout of Fretham 9th Addition in
the staff report.
Mr. Gutzke discussed the corner lot, Lot 3, of Fretham 9th Addition. He remarked this is
an example of how houses can be packed on a plat that meet criteria on paper, but the
reality of it is something different. He encouraged commissioners to drive by this site
before a decision is made on Fretham Twelfth Addition.
Mr.Gutzke asked if the project had been discussed with the Minnehaha Creek Watershed.
Mr. Morrison replied that the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District has a copy of the
plan. The City’s Public Works Dept. has also reviewed the plan and has determined that
it essentially meets the requirements, although they haven’t looked at the revision yet.
He said he has not personally had contact with the Watershed District as those
conversations take place with engineers in Public Works.
Mr. Gutzke said he received an email on September 21st from the Watershed District
which said they are not aware of this project. Mr. Gutzke said there will be a significant
drainage impact. He said he will be speaking to the Watershed District about the project.
He spoke about a current drainage area that goes right into the lake. The 100 ft. pipe
freezes up and water goes right into the lake. There is no natural barrier, just pipe which
freezes up every year. More homes and driveways and sidewalks are going to produce
more run-off. He said water won’t flow uphill from all the new lots going into the pond.
It looks good on paper but the reality will be tough. One area is already flooding.
Mr. Gutzke discussed average lot sizes and actual buildable space.
Ms. McMonigal said the proposed lots are not average lot sizes but actual lot sizes. The
minimum requirement is 9,000 sq. ft. Sometimes the lot will be in green space or sloped
area. 9,000 isn’t a minimum buildable area, but a minimum overall lot size. She said
the developer has to show on the plat documents that there is adequate building area to
place a home on the flat portion of the lot.
Robert Slavik, 2962 Ensign Ave. S., asked what would prevent a homeowner from
putting a load of dirt on the dry pond.
Mr. Morrison said there will be a drainage easement over the pond that prevents that
situation.
Mr. Slavik commented that corner lots are always a problem so why not do this right.
He said the neighborhood isn’t against building houses but this proposal is maximizing
everything. The existing lots in the neighborhood are much bigger than the proposed lots.
The code is being met and everything is being maximized but it doesn’t fit in with the
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 4g) Page 6
Subject: Planning Commission Minutes September 21, 2011
neighborhood. He spoke about problems with Fretham 9th Addition and the Westling
Estates. He recommended that 4 lots rather than 6 lots would be a better neighborhood fit.
David Marquis, 2932 Ensign Ave. S., spoke about the character of the neighborhood. He
spoke about the setbacks of all the existing homes in relation to the street. He said he
would prefer to see smaller houses with more reasonable setbacks for some kind of
continuity to the neighborhood. He added that it is very unfortunate that the brick house
on the corner will be torn down as part of this project. He said it is a wonderful structure,
a beautiful home and it is well situated on the lot.
Tom Burt, 2980 Ensign Ave. S., asked about distance between house 4 and 5, and 5 and 6.
Mr. Morrison said at this time it is the minimum setback required which is 6 ft. on each
side. So if the houses are built at the minimum setback they would be 12 feet apart, but
they can be further away from the property line.
In response to Mr. Burt’s question about distance between houses 5 and 3 and 4 and 3,
Mr. Morrison said lot 5 would be the rear yard setback which would have to be at least 25
ft. from the property line. Lot 3 could be as close as 6 ft.; however that is pretty far back
in the lot. Technically they could be 31 ft. at the closest point. Mr. Morrison said these
are standard setbacks in the R-1 zoning district.
Mr. Burt asked if the developer is proposing a 30 ft. setback on house 4.
Mr. Morrison stated the developer has concerns with the 30 ft. setback which staff has
recommended. This recommendation came out of the neighborhood meeting.
In response to Mr. Burt’s questions about setbacks and orientation of the house, Mr.
Morrison said there is a difference in setbacks only for the shape of the lot. In looking at
the shape of the lot for a corner lot, the narrower of the two is considered the front. The
way the house is oriented is up to the owner of the house.
Mr. Burt asked about the city timeline.
Ms. McMonigal said after Planning Commission makes its recommendation preliminary
plat requests go to the City Council in approximately one month. If approved, the
developer has to prepare a final plat which addresses any issues that came up and then
finalize everything and submit a final plat to the City Council at a public meeting for
review and approval. The entire process takes a couple of months.
Stephanie Slavik, 2962 Ensign Ave. S., said her family moved to St. Louis Park 7 ½
years ago for schools, location to employers, character of the mature neighborhoods, the
house, and the street. She remarked the proposal of 6 homes is hard to see happen.
Because it meets code doesn’t make it right. Ms. Slavik is concerned about her home
value and her neighborhood value. She said she is concerned that this is the third
development in their neighborhood in the last two years. It feels like a trend. She said
she’s concerned about the vision of the city overdeveloping every green space and
opportunity that comes along. She doesn’t think this is what the city is about. They will
be sacrificing peace and quiet. It will be disappointing to look at these gigantic homes.
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 4g) Page 7
Subject: Planning Commission Minutes September 21, 2011
It will be very disappointing to see this is the vision of where St. Louis Park is going.
She concluded by saying 6 homes is too many.
Pat Greene, 8900 Minnetonka Blvd., said she agreed with the neighbors’ comments. She
said most of the surrounding homes are single level and now they will surround a big
white elephant. She asked if there would be fencing around the pond.
Commissioner Robertson said the dry pond will have a 1 ½ ft. depression and will hardly
be noticeable. It will collect water, have native vegetation, and become a swampy area
but it is not a pool.
Ms. Greene said she was concerned about children’s safety near the pond. She asked
about the main gas line on Minnetonka Blvd.
Mr. Morrison responded that the gas line won’t be altered or relocated.
Marty Campion, project engineer, said all the small utilities were notified when the
survey was prepared. They were all on site locating their utilities. The gas line runs
parallel to Minnetonka Blvd. It will be within the easement that will be established in the
front yards along Minnetonka Blvd.
As no one else was present wishing to speak, the Chair closed the public hearing.
Chair Johnston-Madison stated that all commissioners are long term residents of the city
and all have seen changes in their own neighborhoods over time.
Commissioner Robertson said he understands the neighborhood reaction. He said the
commission looks at a balance between zoning, setbacks, watershed and green space.
He stated that the City’s Housing Summit identified a disparity or shortage of certain
housing and wants a good healthy mix of housing. The City has been slightly lacking in
larger single family homes. Commissioner Robertson said the developer’s proposal meets
City requirements and long term goals.
Commissioner Morris asked staff to address the problem regarding insufficient capacity
of the outlet pipe from the manhole to the lake. He asked that Public Works be made
aware that it may need to be upgraded, especially since the development will increase
water flow into it.
Commissioner Morris suggested that Ensign Ave. may need to be widened for parking
and increased traffic.
Commissioner Morris said he strongly recommended that the frontage on Minnetonka
Blvd. be established for Lot 4.
Commissioner Carper said he was empathetic and sympathetic with the neighborhood.
He discussed a past study which looked at having different property size minimums
depending on neighborhood characteristics. He said there was no support outside of the
Lake Forest neighborhood. Subsequent to the study, property owners of large lots began
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 4g) Page 8
Subject: Planning Commission Minutes September 21, 2011
subdividing in anticipation that there could be some restrictions. Commissioner Carper
added that the Commission needs to comply with the zoning ordinance.
Commissioner Morris made a motion recommending approval of the Preliminary Plat
subject to all conditions in the staff report and subject to the additional conditions
presented by staff with the exception of condition No. 4. Commissioner Robertson
seconded the motion and the motion passed on a vote of 4-0.
4. Other Business
5. Communications
A. Thank you to Andrew Ford
Commissioners expressed their thanks for Andrew Ford’s exceptional service as
youth member of the Commission.
B. Ms. McMonigal said Planning Commission meetings will be held on October 5th
and 19th.
6. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 7:30
A study session followed.
Respectfully submitted,
Nancy Sells
Administrative Secretary
Meeting Date: October 17, 2011
Agenda Item #: 4h
Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance
Presentation Other:
EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other:
Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other:
TITLE:
Vendor Claims.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Motion to accept for filing Vendor Claims for the period September 24, 2011 through October 7,
2011.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Not applicable.
BACKGROUND:
The Finance Department prepares this report on a monthly basis for Council’s review.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
None.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
Not applicable.
Attachments: Vendor Claims
Prepared by: Connie Neubeck, Account Clerk
10/11/2011CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:48:04R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
1Page -Council Check Summary
10/7/2011 -9/24/2011
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
900.00-GO BONDS-FIRE STATIONS BAL S RETAINED PERCENTAGEA.M.E. CONSTRUCTION CORP
18,000.00GO BONDS-FIRE STATIONS G&A BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES
17,100.00
1,560.29PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYAAA-LICENSE DIVISION
1,560.29
183.00NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESABELSON, SHARON
183.00
165.39ORGANIZED REC G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CARABERNATHY, LISA
165.39
34.52SEWER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT PARTSABLE HOSE & RUBBER INC
34.52
1,237.44GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEABM EQUIPMENT & SUPPLY INC
1,237.44
20.00GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET CLEARING ACCOUNTABUMAYALEH, YOUSEF
20.00
225.00MOVE-UP PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESACACIA ARCHITECTS LLC
225.00
1,410.00WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESACZ LABORATORIES INC
1,410.00
1,020.00MUNICIPAL BLDG BUILDINGS & STRUCTURESAECOM INC
1,020.00
146.36OPERATIONSOPERATIONAL SUPPLIESAIRGAS NORTH CENTRAL
146.36
12,480.87-GO BONDS-FIRE STATIONS BAL S RETAINED PERCENTAGEALBERS MECHANICAL SERVICES INC
249,617.50GO BONDS-FIRE STATIONS G&A BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES
237,136.63
225.00MOVE-UP PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESALBERTSSON HANSEN ARCHITECTURE
225.00
1,335.50H.V.A.C. EQUIP. MTCE BUILDING MTCE SERVICEALLIANCE MECH SRVCS INC
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 4h)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 2
10/11/2011CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:48:04R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
2Page -Council Check Summary
10/7/2011 -9/24/2011
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
12,660.00MUNICIPAL BLDG IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
13,995.50
1,696.67SEALCOAT PREPARATION OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESALLIED BLACKTOP
1,696.67
3,241.70PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDIAMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING I
3,241.70
181.25PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPSAMERICAN PUBLIC WORKS ASSOC
181.25
317.33PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYAMERICAN TIRE DISTRIBUTORS
317.33
137.56PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIESAMERIPRIDE LINEN & APPAREL SER
43.56PARK MAINTENANCE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
188.90ENTERPRISE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
101.46VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
92.73WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
92.73SEWER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
15.45STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
672.39
11.89-IT G & A BANK CHARGES/CREDIT CD FEESANCHOR PAPER CO
1,271.10SUPPORT SERVICES G&A OFFICE SUPPLIES
1,259.21
270.00OPERATIONSEQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEANCOM COMMUNICATIONS INC
270.00
560.03INSTALLATIONOTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESANDERSEN INC, EARL
560.03
131.71GENERAL CUSTODIAL DUTIES CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SUPPLYARAMARK UNIFORM CORP ACCTS
131.71
1,666.70OPERATIONSOPERATIONAL SUPPLIESASPEN MILLS
1,666.70
33.94E-911 PROGRAM TELEPHONEAT&T
33.94
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 4h)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 3
10/11/2011CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:48:04R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
3Page -Council Check Summary
10/7/2011 -9/24/2011
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
1,743.36WATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEAUTOMATIC SYSTEMS INC
1,743.36
783.57GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEAUTOMOBILE SERVICE
783.57
803.22TREE REPLACEMENT TREE REPLACEMENTBAILEY NURSERIES INC
803.22
21.36WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIESBATTERIES PLUS
21.36
150.00HOLIDAY PROGRAMS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESBEALKE INDUSTRIES, ROBERT
150.00
1,400.00GO BONDS-FIRE STATIONS G&A RENTAL BUILDINGSBELT LINE PROPERTIES INC
1,400.00
103.03WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERSBENSON, JOSEPH
103.03
1,000.00ESCROWSPMC ESCROWBERNTSON, AMY
1,000.00
337.44PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A OFFICE SUPPLIESBERTELSON OFFICE PRODUCTS
337.44
2,595.00WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESBLOOMINGTON, CITY OF
2,595.00
198.48-PARK IMPROVE BALANCE SHEET DUE TO OTHER GOVTSBMIL TECHNOLOGIES LLC
3,085.48PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES
2,887.00
130.37INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESBOBIER, HEIDI
130.37
1,835.00ENGINEERING G & A ENGINEERING SERVICESBOLTON & MENK INC
1,835.00
87.98PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYBOYER TRUCK PARTS
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 4h)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 4
10/11/2011CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:48:04R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
4Page -Council Check Summary
10/7/2011 -9/24/2011
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
87.98
100.00GO BONDS-FIRE STATIONS G&A BUILDINGS & STRUCTURESBRAHAM MONUMENT CO
100.00
880.60GO BONDS-FIRE STATIONS G&A LANDBRAUN INTERTEC CORPORATION
7,690.25GO BONDS-FIRE STATIONS G&A BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES
2,097.38CE MATERIALS TESTING IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
490.00CE MATERIALS TESTING GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
11,158.23
815.00-GO BONDS-FIRE STATIONS BAL S RETAINED PERCENTAGEBREDEMUS HARDWARE COMPANY INC
12,500.00GO BONDS-FIRE STATIONS G&A BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES
11,685.00
181.00PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIESBROCK WHITE CO LLC
181.00
1,079.65PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIESBRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS INC
1,079.65
25.60YOUTH PROGRAMS PROGRAM REVENUEBUCHKOSKY, SUZIE
25.60
137.20INSPECTIONS G & A TRAININGCAMILON, MANNY
137.20
1,751.75-GO BONDS-FIRE STATIONS BAL S RETAINED PERCENTAGECAPITAL CITY GLASS INC
35,035.00GO BONDS-FIRE STATIONS G&A BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES
33,283.25
1,532.40EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A TUITIONCAPOBIANCO, JENNIFER
1,532.40
120.18INSPECTIONS G & A TRAININGCARMICHAEL, CANDICE
120.18
660.49IT G & A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICECARTRIDGE CARE
660.49
14,030.93TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENTCDW GOVERNMENT INC
14,030.93
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 4h)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 5
10/11/2011CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:48:04R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
5Page -Council Check Summary
10/7/2011 -9/24/2011
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
18.26SEWER UTILITY G&A HEATING GASCENTERPOINT ENERGY
18.26
10,466.29ENTERPRISE G & A HEATING GASCENTERPOINT ENERGY SERVICES IN
10,466.29
10,270.00EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S OTHER RETIREMENTCENTRAL PENSION FUND
10,270.00
35.80FACILITIES MCTE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIESCINTAS FIRST AID & SAFETY
35.80
12.51-GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET DUE TO OTHER GOVTSCITIZENS INDEPENDENT BANK
48.31ADMINISTRATION G & A MEETING EXPENSE
520.63HUMAN RESOURCES RECOGNITION
279.00HUMAN RESOURCES TRAINING
14.28COMM & MARKETING G & A TELEPHONE
2,332.64IT G & A POLICE EQUIPMENT
104.80IT G & A TELEPHONE
26.19SUPPORT SERVICES G&A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
39.00ASSESSING G & A TRAINING
2,680.18COMM DEV PLANNING G & A TRAINING
481.66GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES
19.08POLICE G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
514.90POLICE G & A POLICE EQUIPMENT
244.20POLICE G & A TRAINING
369.00COMMUNICATIONS/GV REIMBURSEABL TRAINING
85.81E-911 PROGRAM POLICE EQUIPMENT
820.00Justice Assistance Grant -2005 SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
30.20OPERATIONSOFFICE SUPPLIES
257.82OPERATIONSGENERAL SUPPLIES
174.61OPERATIONSFIRE PREVENTION SUPPLIES
313.78OPERATIONSOPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
364.89OPERATIONSSUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
890.00OPERATIONSTRAINING
555.00OPERATIONSSEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
210.00INSPECTIONS G & A TRAINING
48.01PUBLIC WORKS G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
37.15-PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH DUE TO OTHER GOVTS
43.79ORGANIZED REC G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
127.00ORGANIZED REC G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 4h)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 6
10/11/2011CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:48:04R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
6Page -Council Check Summary
10/7/2011 -9/24/2011
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
2,503.19ORGANIZED REC G & A TRAINING
1,000.00-OAK HILL SPLASH PAD GENERAL SUPPLIES
77.11SPECIAL EVENTS GENERAL SUPPLIES
197.01SUMMER PLAYGROUNDS GENERAL SUPPLIES
801.98-PLAYGROUNDS GENERAL SUPPLIES
9.00SUMMER FIELDTRIPS GENERAL SUPPLIES
485.00PARK MAINTENANCE G & A TRAINING
36.24WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
49.00WESTWOOD G & A TRAINING
300.32BUILDING MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT PARTS
119.19INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS GENERAL SUPPLIES
75.07FRONT DESK GENERAL SUPPLIES
136.70CONCESSIONSGENERAL SUPPLIES
306.61CONCESSIONSCONCESSION SUPPLIES
497.60DAILY ADMISSION GENERAL SUPPLIES
25.00TRAININGTRAINING
2.92-CABLE TV BALANCE SHEET DUE TO OTHER GOVTS
165.56TV PRODUCTION GENERAL SUPPLIES
670.00SOLID WASTE RECYCLING GRANT SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
15,392.82
2,180.25PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT MAINTENAN GENERAL SUPPLIESCLEARWATER RECREATION
2,180.25
65.20INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESCOLBORN, CHRISTINE
65.20
159.95IT G & A DATACOMMUNICATIONSCOMCAST
159.95
45,241.20SEALCOAT PREPARATION OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESCOMMERCIAL ASPHALT COMPANY
593.16PATCHING-PERMANENT OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
1,303.96PARK EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
47,138.32
5,456.75EMERGENCY REPAIR GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESCOMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP S
5,456.75
1,069.26-PARK IMPROVE BALANCE SHEET RETAINED PERCENTAGECOOL AIR MECHANICAL INC
21,385.14PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES
20,315.88
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 4h)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 7
10/11/2011CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:48:04R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
7Page -Council Check Summary
10/7/2011 -9/24/2011
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
33.68WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERSCROOM, DAVE
33.68
1,800.00SEWER UTILITY G&A OFFICE EQUIPMENTCUES INC
1,800.00
34.40INSPECTIONS G & A PLUMBINGCULLIGAN
34.40
612.00SOFTBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESCURRAN-MOORE, KIM
612.00
3,002.20GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SUPPLYDALCO ENTERPRISES INC
3,002.20
70.53REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESDENSON, DORIS
70.53
250.00WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERSDETERS, JOE
250.00
5,076.00INSTALLATIONOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESDJ ELECTRIC SERVICES INC
804.44PARK EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,010.50AQUATIC PARK MAINTENANCE BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
22,000.00PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
28,890.94
8,705.69GO BONDS-FIRE STATIONS G&A BUILDINGS & STRUCTURESDLR GROUP KKE
8,705.69
3,826.38SUPPORT SERVICES G&A POSTAGEDO-GOOD.BIZ INC
3,826.38
1,000.00ESCROWSPMC ESCROWDZIUBA, ROMAN
1,000.00
285.23WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERSEDINA REALTY TITLE
285.23
195.37SEWER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT PARTSELECTRIC PUMP INC
195.37
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 4h)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 8
10/11/2011CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:48:04R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
8Page -Council Check Summary
10/7/2011 -9/24/2011
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
175.00SOCCEROTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESELLEFSON, MARK
175.00
478.32PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYEMERGENCY APPARATUS MTNCE
1,679.80PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
2,158.12
989.89PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYEMERGENCY AUTOMOTIVE TECHNOLOG
989.89
2,924.00NETWORK SUPPORT SERVICES GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICESESP SYSTEMS PROFESSIONALS INC
2,924.00
4,519.74STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICEESS BROTHERS & SONS INC
4,519.74
34,710.48SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS RECYCLING SERVICEEUREKA RECYCLING
34,710.48
36.16WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERSEVIOTA, LETICIA
36.16
608.37PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYFACTORY MOTOR PARTS CO
608.37
22.27BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIESFASTENAL COMPANY
22.27
793.01WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESFERGUSON WATERWORKS
793.01
91.63OPERATIONSFIRE EQUIPMENTFIRE EQUIPMENT SPECIALTIES INC
91.63
130.26WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERSFIRST FINANCIAL TITLE AGENCY
130.26
3,500.00ESCROWSPMC ESCROWFLAHERTY, JAMES & COURTNEY
3,500.00
12.07NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESFLORY, MATT
12.07
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 4h)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 9
10/11/2011CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:48:04R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
9Page -Council Check Summary
10/7/2011 -9/24/2011
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
203.56NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESFRAHM, LAURA
203.56
9,389.98-GO BONDS-FIRE STATIONS BAL S RETAINED PERCENTAGEFRATTALONE COMPANIES INC
187,799.41GO BONDS-FIRE STATIONS G&A BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES
178,409.43
153.45WATER UTILITY G&A REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTSFREDERICK, G
153.45
269.43WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERSFREDERICKSON, MICHAEL
269.43
4,836.28-PARK IMPROVE BALANCE SHEET RETAINED PERCENTAGEFRIEDGES LANDSCAPING INC
96,725.74PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
91,889.46
1,322.49NEIGHBORHOOD PUBLIC ART OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESFRIENDS OF THE ARTS
1,322.49
27.00COMM DEV PLANNING G & A MEETING EXPENSEFULTON, ADAM
27.00
172.47WATER UTILITY G&A OFFICE SUPPLIESG S DIRECT
172.47
150.76WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERSGALAXY DRIVE-IN
150.76
75.69REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESGANZ, ERIC
75.69
11,735.50MUNICIPAL BLDG IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDIGELLERMAN CONSTRUCTION CO INC
11,735.50
50.00HUMAN RESOURCES TRAININGGPRS
50.00
34.75PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYGRAFIX SHOPPE
34.75
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 4h)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 10
10/11/2011CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:48:04R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
10Page -Council Check Summary
10/7/2011 -9/24/2011
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
35.65WATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT PARTSGRAINGER INC, WW
35.65
570.00DAMAGE REPAIR OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESGRANITE LEDGE ELECTRICAL CONTR
570.00
236.95IRRIGATION MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESGREEN ACRES SPRINKLER CO
236.95
4,080.72WEED CONTROL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESGREEN HORIZONS
4,080.72
17,487.60STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICEGROTH SEWER & WATER
17,487.60
2,978.37UNINSURED LOSS G&A UNINSURED LOSSH & R CONST CO
2,978.37
2,300.00PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE OTHERHAAG COMPANIES INC
478.75PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE LANDSCAPING SERVICE
2,778.75
150.00ESCROWSPMC ESCROWHAMILTON, GORDON
150.00
204.00SOFTBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESHAMILTON, MIKE
204.00
140.00WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERSHARRINGTON, LEAH
140.00
7,493.01WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIESHAWKINS INC
7,493.01
76.55STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICEHD SUPPLY WATERWORKS LTD
76.55
306.80STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICEHEDBERG AGGREGATES
306.80
43.89WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIESHEGNA, JESSICA
43.89
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 4h)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 11
10/11/2011CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:48:04R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
11Page -Council Check Summary
10/7/2011 -9/24/2011
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
174.33FINANCE G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CARHEINTZ, STEVEN
174.33
306.00SOFTBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESHENDERSON, TRACY
306.00
887.81POLICE G & A SUBSISTENCE SERVICEHENNEPIN COUNTY SHERIFFS OFFIC
887.81
5,490.00POLICE G & A SUBSISTENCE SERVICEHENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER
57,758.30STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
63,248.30
585.00OPERATIONSEMERGENCY PREPAREDNESSHENNEPIN TECHNICAL COLLEGE
585.00
3,320.00SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICEHIGHVIEW PLUMBING INC
3,320.00
87.87WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERSHINTERMEYER, PAUL
87.87
46.82PATCHING-PERMANENT GENERAL SUPPLIESHOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES
3.61PATCHING-PERMANENT OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
10.90ROUTINE MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
30.78ROUTINE MAINTENANCE SMALL TOOLS
39.15INSTALLATIONOTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
47.74TREE MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
179.00
105.23WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIESHOME DEPOT CREDIT SRVCS
105.23
83.30ROUTINE MAINTENANCE OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESHOME HARDWARE
83.30
77.70ASSESSING G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CARHOPPE, MARK
77.70
69.28WATER UTILITY G&A REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTSHOUGHTELIN, PAUL
69.28
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 4h)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 12
10/11/2011CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:48:04R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
12Page -Council Check Summary
10/7/2011 -9/24/2011
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
80.75INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESHOWARD, JENNA
80.75
350.00KICKBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESHOWES, JEFFREY
51.00SOFTBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
401.00
100.00KICKBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESHOWES, KRISTINE
51.00SOFTBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
151.00
600.00IT G & A COMPUTER SERVICESHRGREEN
600.00
98.27PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYI-STATE TRUCK CENTER
98.27
45.00VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPSIATN
45.00
52.58WATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEINDELCO
269.47STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
322.05
288.23PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE LANDSCAPING MATERIALSINDEPENDENT BLACK DIRT CO
288.23
100.00ORGANIZED REC G & A TRAININGINDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT #2
100.00
2,223.64OPERATIONSTELEPHONEINFINITY WIRELESS
2,223.64
75.00OPERATIONSSUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPSINTL ASSOC ARSON INVESTIGATORS
75.00
706.12PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYINVER GROVE FORD
706.12
360.00HUMAN RESOURCES SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPSIPMA-HR
360.00
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 4h)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 13
10/11/2011CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:48:04R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
13Page -Council Check Summary
10/7/2011 -9/24/2011
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
261.57ADMINISTRATION G & A RENTAL EQUIPMENTJ & F REDDY RENTS
261.57
32.68GENERAL REPAIR GENERAL SUPPLIESJERRY'S MIRACLE MILE
32.68
300.00WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICEJM CONSULTING LTD
300.00
466.53IRRIGATION MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIESJOHN DEERE LANDSCAPES/LESCO
484.74PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
951.27
300.00KICKBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESJOHNSON, SUSAN
300.00
2,501.67PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIESJRK SEED & SURG SUPPLY
2,501.67
19.75WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERSKAMPA, STEVE
19.75
664.02-GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET RETAINED PERCENTAGEKASSA CONSTRUCTION, RON
13,280.53ROUTINE MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
2,375.57-PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT B/S RETAINED PERCENTAGE
47,511.41CONSTRUCTION PAYMENTS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
700.80-STORM WATER UTILITY BAL SHEET RETAINED PERCENTAGE
14,015.99CONSTRUCTION PAYMENTS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
71,067.54
276.92EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S WAGE GARNISHMENTSKELLER, JASMINE Z
276.92
144.00ESCROWSGRECO DEVELOP/WOODDALE POINTEKENNEDY & GRAVEN
180.00GREENSBORO HIA OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
324.00
500.00NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESKILMER NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOC
500.00
717.00WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICESKLM ENGINEERING INC.
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 4h)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 14
10/11/2011CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:48:04R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
14Page -Council Check Summary
10/7/2011 -9/24/2011
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
717.00
280.00SOCCEROTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESKOSOWSKI, MARY
280.00
69,144.48GO BONDS-FIRE STATIONS G&A BUILDINGS & STRUCTURESKRAUS-ANDERSON CONSTRUCTION CO
69,144.48
119.88REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESKUTOFF, DANIEL
119.88
64.25ROUTINE MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIESLAKES GAS CO
16.17PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
80.42
270.00GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET CLEARING ACCOUNTLARSON PROPERTIES
270.00
64.60INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESLENTNER, LAURA
64.60
1,395.00IT G & A TRAININGLIFESHINE COACHING AND CONSULT
1,395.00
163.95HALLOWEEN PARTY GENERAL SUPPLIESLITIN PAPER, PACKAGING & CONVE
163.95
46,777.40IT G & A COMPUTER SERVICESLOGIS
46,777.40
452.34GENERAL REPAIR GENERAL SUPPLIESLOWELL'S REFINISH MASTERS
452.34
101.64PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYLUBRICATION TECHNOLOGIES INC
101.64
43.70PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYMACQUEEN EQUIP CO
43.70
700.00FRANCHISE ADMINISTRATION SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTATMACTA
700.00
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 4h)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 15
10/11/2011CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:48:04R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
15Page -Council Check Summary
10/7/2011 -9/24/2011
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
5,332.50GO BONDS-FIRE STATIONS G&A BUILDINGS & STRUCTURESMALKERSON GUNN MARTIN LLP
5,332.50
4,251.68WATER UTILITY G&A BUILDING MTCE SERVICEMANAGED SERVICES INC
4,251.68
150.00GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESMANLOVE, BENJAMIN
150.00
166.62SSD 2 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESMAPLE CREST LANDSCAPE
175.30SSD 3 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
300.38SSD #4 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
642.30
433.50SOFTBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESMCBRIDE, STEPHEN
433.50
19.24PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYMCCOY, WILLIAM PETROLEUM FUELS
19.24
68.45INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESMCGREGOR-HANNAH, MAREN
68.45
1,000.00ESCROWSPMC ESCROWMEDZIUKAITE, IEVA
1,000.00
370.45HALLOWEEN PARTY GENERAL SUPPLIESMENARDS
370.45
300.00POLICE G & A TRAININGMESCA
300.00
1,024.00POLICE G & A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEMETRO SALES INC
1,024.00
12,843.17REILLY BUDGET CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICEMETROPOLITAN COUNCIL
12,843.17
4,593.50WEED CONTROL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESMIDWEST AQUA CARE
4,593.50
1,056.11HUMAN RESOURCES RECOGNITIONMIDWEST BADGE & NOVELTY CO
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 4h)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 16
10/11/2011CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:48:04R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
16Page -Council Check Summary
10/7/2011 -9/24/2011
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
1,056.11
960.00WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESMIDWEST TESTING LLC
960.00
147.25EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S ACCRUED OTHER BENEFITSMINNESOTA BENEFIT ASSOC
147.25
325.00GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET CLEARING ACCOUNTMINNESOTA DEPT OF VETERANS AFF
325.00
16.00EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S ACCRUED OTHER BENEFITSMINNESOTA NCPERS LIFE INS
16.00
31.50OTHER SUMMER CAMPS GENERAL SUPPLIESMINNETONKA, CITY OF
31.50
1,069.21SUPPORT SERVICES G&A OFFICE SUPPLIESMINUTEMAN PRESS
1,069.21
179.17BUILDING MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT PARTSMINVALCO INC
179.17
295.00TRAININGSEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTATMN FALL MAINTENANCE EXPO
295.00
290.00HUMAN RESOURCES TRAININGMOBIUS INC
290.00COMM DEV G & A TRAINING
290.00ORGANIZED REC G & A TRAINING
870.00
62.03PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYMTI DISTRIBUTING CO
62.03
250.00REILLY BUDGET OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESMVTL LABORATORIES
250.00
29.05WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERSMY HOME SOURCE
29.05
1,510.00-GO BONDS-FIRE STATIONS BAL S RETAINED PERCENTAGENAC MECHANICAL & ELECTRICAL SE
30,200.00GO BONDS-FIRE STATIONS G&A BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 4h)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 17
10/11/2011CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:48:04R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
17Page -Council Check Summary
10/7/2011 -9/24/2011
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
28,690.00
13.34OPERATIONSGENERAL SUPPLIESNAPA (GENUINE PARTS CO)
9.00PATCHING-PERMANENT EQUIPMENT PARTS
1,944.91PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORY
272.59GENERAL REPAIR GENERAL SUPPLIES
25.39SEWER UTILITY G&A BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES
2,265.23
129.00PUBLIC WORKS G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPSNATL NOTARY ASSOC
129.00
1,734.00SOFTBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESNEUMANN, NEAL
1,734.00
102.48ADMINISTRATION G & A TELEPHONENEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS
153.66HUMAN RESOURCES TELEPHONE
449.17RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT TELEPHONE
102.48ASSESSING G & A TELEPHONE
153.87FINANCE G & A TELEPHONE
371.45EDA / HA REIMBURSEMENT TELEPHONE
853.25POLICE G & A TELEPHONE
409.32OPERATIONSTELEPHONE
102.69INSPECTIONS G & A TELEPHONE
301.62ENGINEERING G & A TELEPHONE
503.71PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A TELEPHONE
157.33PARK AND REC G&A TELEPHONE
558.11ORGANIZED REC G & A TELEPHONE
349.46PARK MAINTENANCE G & A TELEPHONE
107.82ENVIRONMENTAL G & A TELEPHONE
230.22WESTWOOD G & A TELEPHONE
102.48REC CENTER/AQUATIC PARK SAL TELEPHONE
106.50VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A TELEPHONE
405.78WATER UTILITY G&A TELEPHONE
221.57SEWER UTILITY G&A TELEPHONE
68.74SOLID WASTE G&A TELEPHONE
5,811.71
81.00PRE-SCHOOL PROGRAMS PROGRAM REVENUENIELSEN, VIVIAN
81.00
300.00HUMAN RESOURCES SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPSNPELRA
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 4h)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 18
10/11/2011CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:48:04R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
18Page -Council Check Summary
10/7/2011 -9/24/2011
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
300.00
53.43HUMAN RESOURCES OFFICE SUPPLIESOFFICE DEPOT
22.69GENERAL INFORMATION OFFICE SUPPLIES
974.64OFFICE EQUIP MTCE OFFICE EQUIPMENT
162.94POLICE G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
32.22POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
43.09NEIGHBORHOOD OUTREACH OFFICE SUPPLIES
10.26PATROLOFFICE SUPPLIES
95.40COP SHOP OFFICE SUPPLIES
146.23INSPECTIONS G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
149.67PUBLIC WORKS G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
40.06ORGANIZED REC G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
1,730.63
73.41SEWER UTILITY G&A SMALL TOOLSOLSEN CHAIN & CABLE CO INC
73.41
39.72WATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT PARTSOLSON, DON
39.72
53.44PORTABLE TOILETS/FIELD MAINT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESON SITE SANITATION
96.18NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
149.62
108.22INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESPAPP, MELISSA
108.22
1,774.30NEIGHBORHOOD PUBLIC ART OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESPARK THEATER COMPANY
1,774.30
96.90INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESPARR, MELISSA
96.90
958.86BUILDING MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIESPBBS EQUIPMENT CORP
958.86
8,503.15-PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT B/S RETAINED PERCENTAGEPEARSON BROTHERS INC
170,063.08CONSTRUCTION PAYMENTS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
161,559.93
18.00SAFETY SERVICES SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTATPETTY CASH
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 4h)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 19
10/11/2011CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:48:04R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
19Page -Council Check Summary
10/7/2011 -9/24/2011
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
9.97PAINTINGGENERAL SUPPLIES
32.50VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A POSTAGE
28.00VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A LICENSES
12.75WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
11.49WATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT PARTS
23.97WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
36.50WATER UTILITY G&A LICENSES
5.35SEWER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT PARTS
19.01SOLID WASTE G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
197.54
202.97PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESPHILIP'S TREE CARE INC
202.97
322.42INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESPOLK, MARLA
322.42
220.36WATER UTILITY G&A POSTAGEPOSTMASTER - PERMIT #603
220.36SEWER UTILITY G&A POSTAGE
220.36SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS POSTAGE
220.36STORM WATER UTILITY G&A POSTAGE
881.44
1,155.00SOCCEROTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESPOTAPENKO, VITALII
1,155.00
161.35TREE MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIESPOWERPLAN OIB
161.35
145.98STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICEPRAIRIE RESTORATIONS INC
145.98
15,763.00TREE DISEASE PUBLIC CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICEPRECISION LANDSCAPE & TREE
15,763.00
2,992.77WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICEQ3 CONTRACTING
474.00SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
1,875.00STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
5,341.77
10,250.00ADMINISTRATION G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICESQUALITY BUSINESS SOLUTIONS
10,250.00
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 4h)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 20
10/11/2011CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:48:04R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
20Page -Council Check Summary
10/7/2011 -9/24/2011
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
74.97VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A POSTAGEQUICKSILVER EXPRESS COURIER
74.97
354.39ICE RESURFACER EQUIPMENT PARTSR & R SPECIALTIES
354.39
1,350.00PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE BUILDING MTCE SERVICER&J INSULATION INC
1,350.00
2,437.28FACILITY OPERATIONS GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICERANDY'S SANITATION INC
1,205.69REC CENTER BUILDING GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE
978.67SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE
4,621.64
33.75WATER UTILITY G&A POSTAGERAPID GRAPHICS & MAILING
33.75SEWER UTILITY G&A POSTAGE
33.75SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS POSTAGE
33.75STORM WATER UTILITY G&A POSTAGE
135.00
95.13POLICE G & A OFFICE SUPPLIESREGENCY OFFICE PRODUCTS LLC
95.13
144.28PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE LANDSCAPING MATERIALSREINDERS
144.28
200.00GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESRICHTER, BRIAN
200.00
105.40PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYRMS RENTALS
105.40
1,130.48PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYROSENBAUER MINNESOTA LLC
72.72-PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH DUE TO OTHER GOVTS
1,057.76
29.37OPERATIONSGENERAL SUPPLIESROSHOLT, PAUL
29.37
582.42PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYRUFFRIDGE JOHNSON EQUIPMENT CO
582.42
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 4h)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 21
10/11/2011CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:48:04R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
21Page -Council Check Summary
10/7/2011 -9/24/2011
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
50.00OPERATIONSTRAININGSAFE KIDS WORLDWIDE
50.00
149.15PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYSCHARBER & SONS INC
149.15
153.42INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESSCHMIDT, KELLIE
153.42
147.18ASSESSING G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CARSCHOMER, KELLEY
147.18
31.64NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESSCOTT, ERIKA
31.64
715.48SEWER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICESSEH
715.48
33.68WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERSSELOVER, PETE
33.68
68.36WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERSSHAPIRO, DEVORA
68.36
2,231.60MUNICIPAL BLDG BUILDINGS & STRUCTURESSIGNATURE MECHANICAL INC
2,231.60
114.32WATER UTILITY G&A REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTSSMITH, MERNA
114.32
325.00SOFTBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESSMITH, PERRY
325.00
146.32INSPECTIONS G & A ELECTRICALSOUTH SIDE ELECTRIC
146.32
1,560.00IT G & A DATACOMMUNICATIONSSPRINT
1,560.00
21.06PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYSPS COMPANIES INC
21.06
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 4h)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 22
10/11/2011CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:48:04R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
22Page -Council Check Summary
10/7/2011 -9/24/2011
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
5,480.00TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENTSQUARERIGGER SOFTWARE
5,480.00
3,170.93PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDISRF CONSULTING GROUP INC
2,756.31CE INSPECTION IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
5,927.24
64,665.79CONVENTION & VISITORS BUREAU COST REIMBURSEMENT-VISIONST LOUIS PARK CONV & VISITORS
64,665.79
6,108.00MHFAOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESST LOUIS PARK HOUSING AUTHORIT
6,108.00
15,141.00-GO BONDS-FIRE STATIONS BAL S RETAINED PERCENTAGESTEENBERG-WATRUD CONSTRUCTION
302,820.00GO BONDS-FIRE STATIONS G&A BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES
287,679.00
40,000.00GENERAL INFORMATION OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESSTEP
40,000.00
112.50GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESSTOLZ, ROBERT
112.50
413.45PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYSTREICHER'S
128.82VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
64.24STORM WATER UTILITY G&A SMALL TOOLS
606.51
184.47ADMINISTRATION G & A LEGAL NOTICESSUN NEWSPAPERS
91.52SEWER UTILITY G&A IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
275.99
154.40FINANCE G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CARSWANSON, BRIAN
154.40
6.83SCHOOLGENERAL SUPPLIESTARGET BANK
6.83
37.53-GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET DUE TO OTHER GOVTSTEE'S PLUS
583.49DARE PROGRAM OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
545.96
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 4h)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 23
10/11/2011CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:48:04R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
23Page -Council Check Summary
10/7/2011 -9/24/2011
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
33.54ADMINISTRATION G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESTELELANGUAGE INC
33.54
97.00BUILDING MAINTENANCE BUILDING MTCE SERVICETERMINIX INT
97.00
17.00OPERATIONSGENERAL SUPPLIESTEXA TONKA TAILORING
17.00
218.02INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESTHOMPSON, HOLLY
218.02
12,114.10-GO BONDS-FIRE STATIONS BAL S RETAINED PERCENTAGETHURNBECK STEEL FABRICATION IN
242,282.00GO BONDS-FIRE STATIONS G&A BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES
230,167.90
738.25PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYTOWMASTER
738.25
102.00SOFTBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESTRAUTMANN, KYLE
102.00
5,453.21OPERATIONSOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESTRIANGLE AUTOMOTIVE MACHINE IN
5,453.21
123.37GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE LANDSCAPING MATERIALSTRUGREEN - MTKA 5640
123.37
502.19PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYTURFWERKS
502.19
135.00INSPECTIONS G & A CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCETURNER, TOM
135.00
142.15PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIESTWIN CITY GARAGE DOOR CO
142.15
93.16ADMINISTRATION G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTATTWIN WEST CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
93.16
3,285.00ELECTRICAL SYSTEM MTCE BUILDING MTCE SERVICEUHL CO INC
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 4h)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 24
10/11/2011CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:48:04R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
24Page -Council Check Summary
10/7/2011 -9/24/2011
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
2,758.00POLICE G & A POLICE EQUIPMENT
6,043.00
1,389.78OPERATIONSOPERATIONAL SUPPLIESUNIFORMS UNLIMITED (FIRE)
1,389.78
150.00EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S WAGE GARNISHMENTSUNITED STATES TREASURY
150.00
309.00EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S UNITED WAYUNITED WAY OF MINNEAPOLIS AREA
309.00
50.00TRAININGTRAININGUNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA REGIST
50.00
120.00POLICE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESUNO DOS TRES COMMUNICATIONS
120.00
364.44TREE DISEASE PRIVATE CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICEUPPER CUT TREE SERVICE
364.44
67.83VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A POSTAGEUPS STORE
49.84WATER UTILITY G&A POSTAGE
117.67
9.82WATER UTILITY G&A TELEPHONEUSA MOBILITY WIRELESS INC
9.82
357.90HUMAN RESOURCES RECOGNITIONVAIL, LORI
357.90
8,012.79STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICEVALLEY-RICH CO INC
8,012.79
1,263.27VOICE SYSTEM MTCE TELEPHONEVERIZON WIRELESS
73.62COMMUNICATIONS/GV REIMBURSEABL TELEPHONE
1,336.89
66.00OPERATIONSSUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPSVOLUNTEER FIREFIGHTERS' BENEFI
66.00
150.00GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESWANNEBO, GREG
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 4h)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 25
10/11/2011CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:48:04R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
25Page -Council Check Summary
10/7/2011 -9/24/2011
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
150.00
1,500.45WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICEWATER CONSERVATION SERVICE INC
1,500.45
16.00SPECIAL PROGRAMS PROGRAM REVENUEWATTS, JANE
16.00
2,059.40WATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEWEBER ELECTRIC
2,059.40
10.30WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERSWELLS FARGO
10.30
48.21NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESWHEELER, TRACY
48.21
77.43WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERSWIFFLER, AMY
77.43
23.20OPERATIONSGENERAL SUPPLIESWINDSCHITL, MARK
78.05OPERATIONSOPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
101.25
7,535.00ELECTRICAL SYSTEM MTCE BUILDING MTCE SERVICEWOLNEY ELECTRIC LLC
7,535.00
1,005.48FABRICATIONOTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESWRAP CITY GRAPHICS
1,005.48
22.47OPERATIONSELECTRIC SERVICEXCEL ENERGY
396.98OPERATIONSELECTRIC SERVICE
419.45
412.50GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESYURIK, RICHARD
412.50
14.26PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A GENERAL SUPPLIESZEE MEDICAL SERVICE
14.26PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
14.26VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
14.26WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
57.04
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 4h)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 26
10/11/2011CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 12:48:04R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
26Page -Council Check Summary
10/7/2011 -9/24/2011
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
341.59CLEANING/DEBRIS REMOVAL GENERAL SUPPLIESZEP MFG
341.59
132.59AQUATIC PARK BUDGET PRINTING & PUBLISHINGZIP PRINTING
132.59
Report Totals 2,148,054.90
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 4h)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 27
Meeting Date: October 17, 2011
Agenda Item #: 6a
Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance
Presentation Other:
EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other:
Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other:
TITLE:
Public Hearing - Intoxicating On-Sale Liquor License - Thanh Do.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to approve application from Thanh Do, Inc., dba Thanh
Do for an on-sale intoxicating liquor license upgrade for their establishment located at 8028
Minnetonka Boulevard for the remainder of the license term through March 1, 2012.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Does the Council wish to approve the on-sale intoxicating liquor license for Thanh Do, Inc.?
BACKGROUND:
The City received an application from Thanh Do, Inc. doing business as Thanh Do for an on-sale
intoxicating liquor license located at 8028 Minnetonka Boulevard in the Texa-Tonka Mall. The
new license is an upgrade to their current on-sale wine and 3.2 malt liquor license. The premise
to be licensed consists of indoor seating for approximately 126 and an outdoor patio with seating
for 42. Thomas Richard Pham is the sole owner and Mr. Kou Vang Soua Thao is the manager.
Thanh Do, Inc. was in business with a liquor license since 2001 at 3005 Utah Avenue, and in
2009 Mr. Pham chose to surrender his liquor license for financial reasons and opted to choose a
state payment plan for his past sales taxes which he currently continues to pay as required. In
July 2010, council approved the on-sale wine and 3.2 malt liquor license for their new location at
8028 Minnetonka Boulevard. In February 2011, council approved the renewal of the existing
wine and 3.2 malt liquor license through the March 1, 2012 term.
The Police Department has completed the full investigation and, aside from the findings noted
below, has found nothing that would warrant denial of the license. The application and police
report are on file in the City Clerk’s office should Council members wish to review the
information prior to the public hearing. The required public hearing legal notice was published
in the Sun Sailor Newspaper on October 6, 2011.
According to the police background investigation report, Thomas Pham has no criminal record
and no alcohol compliance violations in St. Louis Park. Thomas Pham and Thanh Do, Inc. are
associated with two other liquor establishments in Minneapolis - Azia and Thom Pham’s
Wondrous Azian Kitchen. Azia in currently being remodeled and is not operating. However, in
2008 there was a compliance incident regarding selling to a minor that was not disclosed on the
license application submitted to the City of St. Louis Park. Thom Pham’s Wondrous Azian
Kitchen, 555 Hennepin Avenue, also had compliance issues with City of Minneapolis that was
not properly disclosed on the application. This incident related to its operations where the
establishment was determined to have been expanded without the proper permits. The City of
Minneapolis has advised us that Mr. Pham has since complied, paid the associated fines,
properly applied for the expanded bar to be licensed, and has been granted the license.
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 6a) Page 2
Subject: Public Hearing - Intoxicating On-Sale Liquor License - Thanh Do
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
The background investigation fee is $500, license fees of $8,700 for intoxicating on-sale and Sunday
license (prorated).
VISION CONSIDERATION:
Not applicable.
Attachments: None
Prepared by: Nancy Stroth, City Clerk
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Meeting Date: October 17, 2011
Agenda Item #:6b(1)
Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance
Presentation Other:
EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other:
Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other:
TITLE:
2012 Budget and Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 1.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to approve resolution setting the 2012 Budget and
Property Owner Service Charge for Special Service District No. 1 and directing staff to certify
the annual service charges to Hennepin County.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Does the City Council wish to approve SSD #1 budget and property owner service charges?
BACKGROUND:
History
On November 6, 2006, the City Council approved a resolution imposing a multi-year service
charge for Special Service District No. 1 (this district is located along Excelsior Boulevard from
Quentin Avenue to Highway 100 and along Park Center Boulevard and Monterey Drive).
Annually, the City Council must set a service charge for the District following a public hearing
on the proposed charge. The Special Service District Advisory Board approved the proposed
2012 budget and service charges. The notice of public hearing was published in the Sun Sailor
on October 5 and October 12, 2011. The public hearing notice was sent to all property owners
within the District more than ten (10) days prior to the public hearing.
Special Service District No. 1 Financial Position
Special Service District No. 1 has an anticipated year-end fund balance of approximately
$35,941.
Maximum Budget / Service Charge Restriction Parameters
The budget and service charge/ special assessment do not have to be the same dollar amount
since excess operating reserves may be used in some years. By ordinance, the maximum budget
increase cannot exceed the previous year’s authorized budget amount by more than the
Consumer Price Index (CPI) increase, up to a maximum of 5%. This adjustment is based upon
the applicable CPI percentage increase for the Minneapolis/St. Paul metropolitan area. The
Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U) in the Minneapolis-St. Paul area rose
3.0 percent from the first half of 2010 to the first half of 2011.
Proposed 2012 Budget and Service Charges
The Advisory Board recommended approval of the following:
2012 budget amount of $126,672, reflecting no increase from 2011; and
2012 service charge amount of $126,672, an increase of $76,672 from 2011. Generally,
expenses typically do not reach 100% of budget. The expected unused budget amount
along with the service charges for 2012 is anticipated to allow the district to achieve the
goal of a 50% fund balance which staff and board agreed should be maintained.
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 6b(1)) Page 2
Subject: 2012Budget and Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 1
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
The Public Works Operations Division budget will incur a service charge for the City-owned
property located within this district at 3700 Monterey Drive (Recreation Center/Wolfe Park).
The proposed service charge for 2012 is $33,326.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
Not applicable.
Attachments: 2012 Proposed Budget
Resolution w/ 2012 Service Charges Attachment A
Prepared by: Mark Hanson, Public Works Operations Superintendent
Ann Boettcher, Inspection Services Manager
Reviewed by: Mike Rardin, Public Work Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 6b(1)) Page 3
Subject: 2012Budget and Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 1
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
Special Service District No. 1
2012 Budget
No.
Item
2011 Revised
Budget
2012
Proposed
Budget
6212 GENERAL SUPPLIES 1,200 1,000
6223.650 BANNER REPLACEMENT 0 3,600
6224 LANDSCAPING MATERIALS 10,000 9,000
6410 GENERAL PROFFESSIONAL
SERVICES
29 0
6410.678 SSD Mgmt Services 4,500 4,500
6630.772 SSD – Snow Removal 53,193 53,000
6630.773 SSD - Site Maintenance 5,660 6,000
6630.774 SSD – Banner Install/Removal 2,500 2,400
6630.775 SSD – Irrigation Service 9,000 9,000
6630.776 SSD – Decorative Install 7,500 7,000
6630.777 SSD – Landscape Service 28,500 28,500
6950 LEGAL NOTICES 110 128
7106 PUBLIC LIABILITY INSURANCE 480 544
7207.880 SSD INFRASTRUCTURE REPAIR 4,000 0
7301.890 SSD ELECTRICAL SERVICE 0 2,000
7302 GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE 0 0
TOTAL EXPENDITURES 126,672 126,672
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 6b(1)) Page 4
Subject: 2012Budget and Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 1
RESOLUTION NO. 11-___
RESOLUTION APPROVING 2012 BUDGET
AND SERVICE CHARGES FOR
SPECIAL SERVICE DISTRICT No. 1
WHEREAS, pursuant to Ordinance No. 2067-96, the City Council created Special
Service District No. 1 (the “District”) . The specific properties located within the District are
identified on Exhibit “A” attached hereto; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 06-167, the City Council is authorized to
impose service charges within the District on a multi-year basis through and including the year
2016 for taxes payable in said year; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 2.04 of Resolution No. 06-167, the maximum budget to
be imposed in any year will be subject to adjustment calculations based on Consumer Price
Index (CPI) data for the Minneapolis/St. Paul Metropolitan Area; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 3 of Resolution No. 06-167, the Service Charges shall
be payable and collected at the same time and in the same manner as provided for payment and
collection of ad valorem taxes; and
WHEREAS, the City is required by Statute to certify assessments to the County by
November 23, 2011.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park as follows:
1. The 2012 Budget for Special Service District No. 1 of $126,672 is hereby
approved as recommended by the Special Service District No. 1 Advisory Board.
2. The authorized 2012 Service Charge for Special Service District No. 1 is
$126,672 in the amounts and against the properties specified on Exhibit “A” attached to this
Resolution.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council October 17, 2011
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 6b(1)) Subject: 2012 Budget and Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 1Page 5
Meeting Date: October 17, 2011
Agenda Item #: 6b(2)
Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance
Presentation Other:
EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other:
Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other:
TITLE:
2012 Budget and Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 2.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to approve resolution setting the 2012 Budget and
Property Owner Service Charge for Special Service District No. 2 and directing staff to certify
the annual service charges to Hennepin County.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Does the City Council wish to approve SSD #2 budget and property owner service charges?
BACKGROUND:
History
On October 20, 2008, the City Council approved a resolution imposing a multi-year service
charge for Special Service District No. 2 (this district is located along Excelsior Boulevard from
Monterey Drive/38th Street to France Avenue). Annually, the City Council must set a service
charge for the District following a public hearing on the proposed charge. The Special Service
District Advisory Board approved the proposed 2012 budget. The notice of public hearing was
published in the Sun Sailor on October 5 and October 12, 2011. The public hearing notice was
sent to all property owners within the District more than ten (10) days prior to the public hearing.
Special Service District No. 2 Financial Position
Special Service District No. 2 has an anticipated year-end fund balance of approximately
$31,571.
Maximum Budget / Service Charge Restriction Parameters
The budget and service charge/ special assessment do not have to be the same dollar amount
since excess operating reserves may be used in some years. By ordinance, the maximum budget
increase cannot exceed the previous year’s authorized budget amount by more than the
Consumer Price Index (CPI) increase, up to a maximum of 5%. This adjustment is based upon
the applicable CPI percentage increase for the Minneapolis/St. Paul metropolitan area. The
Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U) in the Minneapolis-St. Paul area rose
3.0 percent from the first half of 2010 to the first half of 2011.
Proposed 2012 Budget and Service Charges
The Advisory Board recommended approval of the following:
2012 budget amount of $46,534, reflects no increase from 2011
2012 service charge amount of $38,534, a decrease of $8,000 from 2011. This service
charge amount is anticipated to allow the district to achieve the 50% fund balance goal
which staff and board agreed should be maintained.
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 6b(2)) Page 2
Subject: 2012 Budget and Property Owner Service Charge for Special Service District No. 2
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
The Public Works Operations Division budget will incur a service charge for the City owned bus
shelter located within this district at 3929 Excelsior Boulevard. The proposed fee for 2012 is
$51.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
Not applicable.
Attachments: 2012 Proposed Budget
Resolution w/2012 Service Charges Attachment A
Prepared by: Mark Hanson, Public Works Operations Superintendent
Ann Boettcher, Inspection Services Manager
Reviewed by: Mike Rardin, Public Work Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 6b(2)) Page 3
Subject: 2012 Budget and Property Owner Service Charge for Special Service District No. 2
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
Special Service District No. 2
2012 Budget
No.
Item
2011 Revised
Budget
2012
Proposed
Budget
6212 GENERAL SUPPLIES 212 200
6223.650 BANNER REPLACEMENT 0 3,000
6224 LANDSCAPING MATERIALS 3,710 4,000
6410 GENERAL PROFFESSIONAL
SERVICES
53 0
6410.678 SSD Mgmt Services 2,000 2,000
6630.772 SSD – Snow Removal 0 0
6630.773 SSD - Site Maintenance 2,968 3,000
6630.774 SSD – Banner Install/Removal 1,060 1,000
6630.775 SSD – Irrigation Service 5,000 5,000
6630.776 SSD – Decorative Install 5,000 5,000
6630.777 SSD – Landscape Service 20,150 21,000
6950 LEGAL NOTICES 110 136
7106 PUBLIC LIABILITY INSURANCE 165 198
7207.880 SSD INFRASTRUCTURE REPAIR 4,240 0
7301.890 SSD ELECTRICAL SERVICE 1,866 2,000
7302 GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE 0 0
TOTAL EXPENDITURES 46,534 46,534
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 6b(2)) Page 4
Subject: 2012 Budget and Property Owner Service Charge for Special Service District No. 2
RESOLUTION NO. 11 -___
RESOLUTION APPROVING 2012 BUDGET
AND SERVICE CHARGES FOR
SPECIAL SERVICE DISTRICT No. 2
WHEREAS, pursuant to Ordinance No. 2093-97, the City Council created Special
Service District No. 1 (the “District”) . The specific properties located within the District are
identified on Exhibit “A” attached hereto; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 08-133, the City Council is authorized to
impose service charges within the District on a multi-year basis through and including the year
2018 for taxes payable in said year; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 2.04 of Resolution No. 08-133, the maximum budget to
be imposed in any year will be subject to adjustment calculations based on Consumer Price
Index (CPI) data for the Minneapolis/St. Paul Metropolitan Area; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 3 of Resolution No. 08-133, the Service Charges shall
be payable and collected at the same time and in the same manner as provided for payment and
collection of ad valorem taxes; and
WHEREAS, the City is required by Statute to certify assessments to the County by
November 23, 2011.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park as follows:
1. The 2012 Budget for Special Service District No. 2 of $46,534 is hereby approved
as recommended by the Special Service District No. 2 Advisory Board.
2. The authorized 2012 Service Charge for Special Service District No. 2 is $38,534
in the amounts and against the properties specified on Exhibit “A” attached to this Resolution.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council October 17, 2011
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 6b(2)) Subject: 2012 Budget and Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 2Page 5
Meeting Date: October 17, 2011
Agenda Item #: 6b(3)
Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance
Presentation Other:
EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other:
Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other:
TITLE:
2012 Budget and Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 3.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to approve resolution setting the 2012 Budget and
Property Owner Service Charge for Special Service District No. 3 and directing staff to certify
the annual service charges to Hennepin County.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Does the City Council wish to approve SSD#3 budget and property owner service charges?
BACKGROUND:
History
On April 15, 2002, the City Council approved a resolution imposing a service charge for Special
Service District No. 3 (located along Excelsior Boulevard from Quentin Avenue to Monterey
Drive/38th Street). Annually, the City Council must set a service charge for the District
following a public hearing on the proposed charge. The Special Service District Advisory Board
approved the proposed 2012 budget and service charges. The notice of public hearing was
published in the Sun Sailor on October 5 and October 12, 2011. The public hearing notice was
sent to all property owners within the District more than ten (10) days prior to the public hearing.
Special Service District No. 3 Financial Position
Special Service District No. 3 has an anticipated year-end fund balance of approximately
$36,066.
Maximum Budget / Service Charge Restriction Parameters
The budget and service charge/ special assessment do not have to be the same dollar amount
since excess operating reserves may be used in some years. By ordinance, the maximum budget
increase cannot exceed the previous year’s authorized budget amount by more than the
Consumer Price Index (CPI) increase, up to a maximum of 5%. This adjustment is based upon
the applicable CPI percentage increase for the Minneapolis/St. Paul metropolitan area. The
Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U) in the Minneapolis-St. Paul area rose
3.0 percent from the first half of 2010 to the first half of 2011.
Proposed 2012 Budget and Service Charges
The Advisory Board recommended approval of the following:
2012 budget amount of $63,600, reflects no increase from 2011
2012 service charge amount of $55,600, an increase of $12,702 from 2011. As in past
years, expenses typically do not reach 100% of budget. The expected unused budget
amount along with the service charges for 2012 is anticipated to allow the district to
achieve the goal of a 50% fund balance which staff and the board agree should be
maintained.
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 6b(3)) Page 2
Subject: 2011 Budget and Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 3
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
The City incurs a service charge for the property within this district located at 4760 Excelsior
Boulevard, which is undeveloped and owned by the St. Louis Park Economic Development
Authority. The proposed fee for 2012 is $1,211.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
Not applicable.
Attachments: 2012 Proposed Budget
Resolution w/ 2012 Service Charges Attachment A
Prepared by: Mark Hanson, Public Works Operations Superintendent
Ann Boettcher, Inspection Services Manager
Reviewed by: Mike Rardin, Public Work Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 6b(3)) Page 3
Subject: 2011 Budget and Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 3
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
Special Service District No. 3
2012 Budget
No.
Item
2011 Revised
Budget
2012
Proposed
Budget
6212 GENERAL SUPPLIES 500 500
6223.650 BANNER REPLACEMENT 0 2,400
6224 LANDSCAPING MATERIALS 4,300 4,400
6410 GENERAL PROFFESSIONAL
SERVICES
50 0
6410.678 SSD Mgmt Services 2,500 2,500
6630.772 SSD – Snow Removal 28,500 28,500
6630.773 SSD - Site Maintenance 1,000 1,000
6630.774 SSD – Banner Install/Removal 1,000 1,000
6630.775 SSD – Irrigation Service 7,000 6,000
6630.776 SSD – Decorative Install 2,400 2,400
6630.777 SSD – Landscape Service 13,000 12,500
6950 LEGAL NOTICES 110 127
7106 PUBLIC LIABILITY INSURANCE 240 273
7207.880 SSD INFRASTRUCTURE REPAIR 1,000 0
7301.890 SSD ELECTRICAL SERVICE 2,000 2,000
7302 GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE 0 0
TOTAL EXPENDITURES 63,600 63,600
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 6b(3)) Page 4
Subject: 2011 Budget and Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 3
RESOLUTION NO. 11 -___
RESOLUTION APPROVING 2012 BUDGET
AND SERVICE CHARGES FOR
SPECIAL SERVICE DISTRICT NO. 3
WHEREAS, pursuant to Ordinance No. 2224-02, the City Council created Special
Service District No. 3 (the “District”). The specific properties located within the District are
identified on Exhibit “A” attached hereto; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 02-043, the City Council is authorized to
impose service charges within the District on a multi-year basis through and including the year
2012 for taxes payable in said year; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 2.04 of Resolution No. 02-043, the maximum budget to
be imposed in any year will be subject to adjustment calculations based on Consumer Price
Index (CPI) data for the Minneapolis/St. Paul Metropolitan Area; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 3 of Resolution No. 02-043, the Service Charges shall
be payable and collected at the same time and in the same manner as provided for payment and
collection of ad valorem taxes; and
WHEREAS, the City is required by Statute to certify assessments to the County by
November 23, 2011.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park as follows:
1. The 2012 Budget for Special Service District No. 3 of $63,600 is hereby approved
as recommended by the Special Service District No. 3 Advisory Board.
2. The authorized 2012 Service Charge for Special Service District No. 3 is $55,600
in the amounts and against the properties specified on Exhibit “A” attached to this Resolution.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council October 17, 2011
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 6b(3)) Subject: 2012 Budget and Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 3Page 5
Meeting Date: October 17, 2011
Agenda Item #: 6b(4)
Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance
Presentation Other:
EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other:
Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other:
TITLE:
2012 Budget and Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 4.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to Adopt Resolution Approving 2012 Budget and
Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 4 and directing staff to certify
the annual service charges to Hennepin County.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Does the City Council wish to approve SSD #4 budget and property owner service charges?
BACKGROUND:
History
On July 18, 2005, the City Council approved a resolution imposing a service charge for Special
Service District No. 4. (located along Excelsior Boulevard west of Highway 100 to Louisiana
Avenue). Annually, the City Council must set a service charge for the District following a public
hearing on the proposed charge. The Special Service District Advisory Board approved the
proposed 2012 budget and service charges. The notice of public hearing was published in the
Sun Sailor on October 5 and October 12, 2011. The public hearing notice was sent to all
property owners within the District more than ten (10) days prior to the public hearing.
Special Service District No. 4 Financial Position
Special Service District No. 4 has an anticipated year-end fund balance of approximately
$57,501.
Maximum Budget / Service Charge Restriction Parameters
The budget and service charge/ special assessment do not have to be the same dollar amount
since excess operating reserves may be used in some years. By ordinance, the maximum budget
increase cannot exceed the previous year’s authorized budget amount by more than the
Consumer Price Index (CPI) increase, up to a maximum of 5%. This adjustment is based upon
the applicable CPI percentage increase for the Minneapolis/St. Paul metropolitan area. The
Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U) in the Minneapolis-St. Paul area rose
3.0 percent from the first half of 2010 to the first half of 2011.
Proposed 2012 Budget and Service Charges
The Advisory Board recommended approval of the following:
2012 budget amount of $38,664, an increase of $569 (1.5%) from 2011
2012 service charge amount of $14,664, an increase of $2,837 from 2011. The expected
unused budget amount along with the service charges for 2012 is anticipated to allow the
district to achieve the goal of a 50% fund balance which staff and the board agree should
be maintained.
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 6b(4)) Page 2
Subject: 2012 Budget and Property Owner Service Charge for Special Service District No. 4
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
The Public Works Operations Division budget will incur a service charge for the Municipal
Parking Lot within this district, located on Excelsior Boulevard. The proposed fee for 2012 is
$428.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
Not applicable.
Attachments: 2012 Proposed Budget
Resolution w/2012 Service Charges Attachment A
Prepared by: Mark Hanson, Public Works Operations Superintendent
Ann Boettcher, Inspection Services Manager
Reviewed by: Mike Rardin, Public Work Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 6b(4)) Page 3
Subject: 2012 Budget and Property Owner Service Charge for Special Service District No. 4
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
Special Service District No. 4
2012 Budget
No.
Item
2011Revised
Budget
2012
Proposed
Budget
6212 GENERAL SUPPLIES 1,000 1,000
6223.650 BANNER REPLACEMENT 0 600
6224 LANDSCAPING MATERIALS 2,700 4,500
6410 GENERAL PROFFESSIONAL
SERVICES
50 0
6410.678 SSD Mgmt Services 2,500 2,500
6630.772 SSD – Snow Removal 0 0
6630.773 SSD - Site Maintenance 2,000 2,000
6630.774 SSD – Banner Install/Removal 1,500 1,500
6630.775 SSD – Irrigation Service 5,000 5,000
6630.776 SSD – Decorative Install 3,500 3,500
6630.777 SSD – Landscape Service 16,000 16,000
6950 LEGAL NOTICES 50 50
7106 PUBLIC LIABILITY INSURANCE 145 164
7207.880 SSD INFRASTRUCTURE REPAIR 1,850 1,850
7301.890 SSD ELECTRICAL SERVICE 1,800 0
7302 GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE 0 0
TOTAL EXPENDITURES 38,095 38,664
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 6b(4)) Page 4
Subject: 2012 Budget and Property Owner Service Charge for Special Service District No. 4
RESOLUTION NO. 11-___
RESOLUTION APPROVING 2012 BUDGET
AND PROPERTY OWNER SERVICE CHARGES FOR
SPECIAL SERVICE DISTRICT NO. 4
WHEREAS, pursuant to Ordinance No. 2298-05, the City Council created Special
Service District No. 4 (the “District”). The specific properties located within the District are
identified on Attachment “A” attached hereto; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 05-100, the City Council is authorized to
impose service charges within the District on a multi-year basis through and including the year
2015 for taxes payable in said year; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 2.04 of Resolution No. 05-100, the maximum budget to
be imposed in any year will be subject to adjustment calculations based on Consumer Price
Index (CPI) data for the Minneapolis/St. Paul Metropolitan Area; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 3 of Resolution No. 05-100, the Service Charges shall
be payable and collected at the same time and in the same manner as provided for payment and
collection of ad valorem taxes; and
WHEREAS, the City is required by Statute to certify assessments to the County by
November 23, 2011.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park as follows:
1. The 2012 Budget for Special Service District No. 4 of $38,664 is hereby approved
as recommended by the Special Service District No. 4 Advisory Board.
2. The authorized 2012 Service Charge for Special Service District No. 4 is $14,664
in the amounts and against the properties specified on Attachment “A” attached to this
Resolution.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council October 17, 2011
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK Attachment A
Special Service District #4
Estimated Annual Cost Per Parcel
Proposed 2012 Service Charge
Proposed Actual
2012 2011
PAR Service Service
NO. PID # Owner Charge Charge
1 2111721320022 6127 Excelsior Blvd Gregory White 279 285
2 2111721320021 6121 Excelsior Blvd Hung LLC 345 353
3 2111721320006 6111 Excelsior Blvd Joseph Hendrickson & Lisa Roberts 562 574
4 2111721230100 6011 Excelsior Blvd How Enterprises, Inc 554 567
5 2111721230097 6001 Excelsior Blvd Sew What Corporation 268 275
6 2111721240195 5925 Excelsior Blvd Dys Properties 734 751
7 2111721240185 5825 Excelsior Blvd Kil-Ben Excelsior, LLC 704 720
8 2111721240209 5813 Excelsior Blvd Universal Outdoor, Inc. 35 35
9 2111721240208 5809 Excelsior Blvd C.B.S. Real Est Prtnr II LLP 239 244
10 2111721240161 5801 Excelsior Blvd Hentges Properties, Inc. 276 282
11 2111721240193 5717 Excelsior Blvd LMC, Inc 624 639
12 2111721240141 5707 Excelsior Blvd Len Paul/Gene Pretty Good 475 486
13* 2011721410009 6600 Excelsior Blvd Creekside 2,028 0
14* 2011721140026 6500 Excelsior Blvd Asbury Methodist Hospital 1,074 0
15** 6200 & 6250 Excelsior Blvd 1,541 1,577
16 2111721230130 6112 Excelsior Blvd Snyder Electric Co. 306 313
17 2111721230155 6100 Excelsior Blvd James & Laurene Meger 213 218
18 2111721230128 6006 Excelsior Blvd Stephen J. Carney 154 157
19 2111721230127 6002 Excelsior Blvd Himmelman Properties 296 303
20 City Municipal Parking Lot City of St. Louis Park 428 439
21 2111721230011 5930 Excelsior Blvd Leonard Criley 210 215
22 2111721230010 5922 Excelsior Blvd Gerald B. Frederick 99 101
23 2111721230156 5916 Excelsior Blvd Rackner & Rackner 518 530
24 2111721240083 5900 Excelsior Blvd Speedway Superamerica, LLC 469 480
25 2111721240067 5810 Excelsior Blvd 5812 Excelsior Blvd. Co 396 405
26 2111721240066 5804 Excelsior Blvd 5804 Excelsior Blvd., LLC 338 345
27 2111721240040 5720 Excelsior Blvd Erickson Petroleum Corp 597 610
28 2111721240202 5608 Excelsior Blvd Helmut Mauer 367 376
29 2111721240019 5600 Excelsior Blvd Payday America Inc. 535 547
14,664 $11,827
**6200 & 6250 Excelsior Blvd Charges 2012 2011
2111721320133 6200 Excelsior Blvd 101 RE 1 LLC $90 $91
2111721320134 6200 Excelsior Blvd 102 Charles and Janice Woodson $94 $95
2111721320135 6200 Excelsior Blvd 103 Laurie G Holasek $91 $92
2111721320136 6200 Excelsior Blvd 104 Laurie G Holasek $102 $103
2111721320137 6200 Excelsior Blvd 201 Dennis and Lois Schlutter $87 $88
2111721320138 6200 Excelsior Blvd 202 Dennis and Lois Schlutter $91 $92
2111721320139 6200 Excelsior Blvd 203 Unite Rope Holland Dist $119 $120
2111721320140 6200 Excelsior Blvd 204 Dennis and Lois Schlutter $105 $106
2111721320141 6250 Excelsior Blvd 101 Nemer Fieger & Assoc Inc $96 $97
2111721320142 6250 Excelsior Blvd 102 Lgh Properties LLC $89 $90
2111721320143 6250 Excelsior Blvd 103 Donald J & Joyce E Borgen $98 $99
2111721320144 6250 Excelsior Blvd 104 Lgh Properties LLC $88 $89
2111721320145 6250 Excelsior Blvd 201 James V and June M Fieger $94 $95
2111721320146 6250 Excelsior Blvd 202 Skads Travel Service Inc $85 $86
2111721320147 6250 Excelsior Blvd 203 Lgh Properties LLC $124 $125
2111721320148 6250 Excelsior Blvd 204 Joseph Urista $88 $89
$1,541 $1,577
Notes:
* The Excelsior Blvd construction project is expected to be completed this year, so these properties will be charged
for the first time in 2012.
** Denotes properties with a single street address but have sub-units that are independently owned.
1) The proposed 2012 service charge calculations are based upon the same methodology / formulas
used for the initial service charge collection.
2)The 2012 budget is $38,664 but the service charge is only $14,664 because $24,000 was transferred from reserves to lower the fund balance.
Address
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 6b(4))
Subject: 2012 Budget and Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 4 Page 5
Meeting Date: October 17, 2011
Agenda Item #: 6b(5)
Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance
Presentation Other:
EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other:
Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other:
TITLE:
2012 Budget and Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 5.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to approve resolution setting the 2012 Budget and
Property Owner Service Charge for Special Service District No. 5 and directing staff to certify
the annual service charges to Hennepin County.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Does the City Council wish to approve SSD #5 budget and property owner service charges?
BACKGROUND:
History
On February 2, 2009, the City Council approved a resolution imposing a service charge for
Special Service District No. 5 (located along Park Place Boulevard between I-394 and Cedar
Lake Road). Annually, the City Council must set a service charge for the District following a
public hearing on the proposed charge. The Special Service District Advisory Board approved
the proposed 2012 budget and service charges. The notice of public hearing was published in the
Sun Sailor on October 5 and October 12, 2011. The public hearing notice was sent to all
property owners within the District more than ten (10) days prior to the public hearing.
Special Service District No. 5 Financial Position
Special Service District No. 5 has an anticipated year-end fund balance of approximately
$32,370.
Maximum Budget / Service Charge Restriction Parameters
The budget and service charge/ special assessment do not have to be the same dollar amount
since excess operating reserves may be used in some years. By ordinance, the maximum budget
increase cannot exceed the previous year’s authorized budget amount by more than the
Consumer Price Index (CPI) increase, up to a maximum of 5%. This adjustment is based upon
the applicable CPI percentage increase for the Minneapolis/St. Paul metropolitan area. The
Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U) in the Minneapolis-St. Paul area rose
3.0 percent from the first half of 2010 to the first half of 2011. The budget presented in the
October 10th Study Session report for SSD #5 has been reduced to ensure compliance with the
CPI cap. The fund balance surplus used to lower the service charge was also reduced so the
service charges did not change.
Proposed 2012 Budget and Service Charges
The Advisory Board recommended approval of the following:
2012 budget amount of $26,698, an increase of $318 (1.2%) from 2011
2012 service charge amount of $12,698, a decrease of $2,302 from 2011. The expected
unused budget amount along with the service charges for 2012 is anticipated to allow the
district to achieve the goal of a 50% fund balance which staff and the board agree should
be maintained.
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 6b(5)) Page 2
Subject: 201 Budget and Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 5
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
Not applicable.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
Not applicable.
Attachments: 2012 Proposed Budget
Resolution w/2012 Service Charges Attachment A
Prepared by: Mark Hanson, Public Works Operations Superintendent
Ann Boettcher, Inspection Services Manager
Reviewed by: Mike Rardin, Public Work Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 6b(5)) Page 3
Subject: 201 Budget and Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 5
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
Special Service District No. 5
2012 Budget
No.
Item
2011Revised
Budget
2012
Proposed
Budget
6212 GENERAL SUPPLIES 500 500
6223.650 BANNER REPLACEMENT 0 0
6224 LANDSCAPING MATERIALS 2,000 2,000
6410 GENERAL PROFFESSIONAL
SERVICES
50 0
6410.678 SSD Mgmt Services 3,250 3,250
6630.772 SSD – Snow Removal 0 0
6630.773 SSD - Site Maintenance 1,000 1,000
6630.774 SSD – Banner Install/Removal 1,000 1,000
6630.775 SSD – Irrigation Service 5,000 5,000
6630.776 SSD – Decorative Install 3,000 3,000
6630.777 SSD – Landscape Service 9,000 9,000
6950 LEGAL NOTICES 200 135
7106 PUBLIC LIABILITY INSURANCE 80 113
7207 SSD INFRASTRUCTURE REPAIR 1,300 300
7301.890 SSD ELECTRICAL SERVICE 0 1,400
7302 GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE 0 0
TOTAL EXPENDITURES 26,380 26,698
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 6b(5)) Page 4
Subject: 201 Budget and Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 5
RESOLUTION NO. 11-____
RESOLUTION APPROVING 2012 BUDGET
AND SERVICE CHARGES FOR
SPECIAL SERVICE DISTRICT NO. 5
WHEREAS, pursuant to Ordinance No. 2371-09, the City Council created Special
Service District No. 5 (the “District”). The specific properties located within the District are
identified on Exhibit “A” attached hereto; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolutions No. 09-021, the City Council is authorized to
impose service charges within the District on a multi-year basis through and including the year
2019 for taxes payable in said year; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 2.04 of Resolution No. 09-021, the maximum budget to
be imposed in any year will be subject to adjustment calculations based on Consumer Price
Index (CPI) data for the Minneapolis/St. Paul Metropolitan Area; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 3 of Resolution No. 09-021, the Service Charges shall
be payable and collected at the same time and in the same manner as provided for payment and
collection of ad valorem taxes; and
WHEREAS, the City is required by Statute to certify assessments to the County by
November 23, 2011.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park as follows:
1. The 2011 Budget for Special Service District No. 5 of $26,698 is hereby approved
as recommended by the Special Service District No. 5 Advisory Board.
2. The authorized 2011 Service Charge for Special Service District No. 5 is $12,698
in the amounts and against the properties specified on Exhibit “A” attached to this Resolution.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council October 17, 2011
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK Attachment A
Special Service District #5
Estimated Annual Cost Per Parcel
Proposed 2012 Service Charge
Proposed Actual
2012 2011
PID Address Owner Service Charge
Service
Charge
411721310018 5611 Wayzata Blvd KK Corporation $490 $578
411721310019 1500 Park Place Blvd W2005 Wyn Hotels LP $2,875 $3,396
411721340043 5600 Cedar Lake Rd Inland Real Estate Corp $1,029 $1,215
411721340044 1690 Park Place Blvd James E Oslund $453 $536
411721340045 1650 Park Place Blvd Inland Real Estate Corp $556 $657
411721340046 1620 Park Place Blvd Inland Real Estate Corp $505 $596
411721340047 5699 16th St W Inland Real Estate Corp $507 $599
411721340049 1700 Park Place Blvd Costco Wholesale $397 $469
411721340050 5601 16th St W Inland Ryan LLC $388 $459
3002924320026 5353 Wayzata Blvd 5353 Wayzata LLC $1,003 $1,185
3002924330011 5401 Gamble Dr Parkdale Property LLC $886 $1,047
3002924330015 5402 Parkdale Dr Parkdale Property LLC $1,603 $1,893
3002924320022 5370 16th St W AD West End LLC $453 $535
3002924330031 1600 West End Blvd AD West End LLC $1,553 $1,835
$12,698 $15,000
Notes:
1) The proposed 2012 service charge calculations are based upon the same methodology / formulas
used for the initial service charge collection.
2) The 2012 budget is $26,698 but the service charge is only $12,698 because $14,000 was paid from reserves
to lower the fund balance.
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 6b(5))
Subject: 2012 Budget and Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 5 Page 5
Meeting Date: October 17, 2011
Agenda Item #: 6b(6)
Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance
Presentation Other:
EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other:
Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other:
TITLE:
2012 Budget and Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 6.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to Adopt Resolution Approving 2012 Budget and
Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 6 and directing staff to certify
the annual service charges to Hennepin County.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Does the City Council wish to approve SSD #6 budget and property owner service charges?
BACKGROUND:
History
On June 15, 2009, the City Council approved a resolution imposing a service charge for Special
Service District No. 6 (located along 36th Street W. from Wooddale Avenue to Highway 100).
Annually, the City Council must set a service charge for the District following a public hearing
on the proposed charge. The Special Service District Advisory Board approved the proposed
2012 budget and service charges. The notice of public hearing was published in the Sun Sailor
on October 5 and October 12, 2011. The public hearing notice was sent to all property owners
within the District more than ten (10) days prior to the public hearing.
Special Service District No. 6 Financial Position
Special Service District No. 6 has an anticipated year-end fund balance of approximately
$22,839.
Maximum Budget / Service Charge Restriction Parameters
The budget and service charge/ special assessment do not have to be the same dollar amount
since excess operating reserves may be used in some years. By ordinance, the maximum budget
increase cannot exceed the previous year’s authorized budget amount by more than the
Consumer Price Index (CPI) increase, up to a maximum of 5%. This adjustment is based upon
the applicable CPI percentage increase for the Minneapolis/St. Paul metropolitan area. The
Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U) in the Minneapolis-St. Paul area rose
3.0 percent from the first half of 2010 to the first half of 2011. The budget presented in the
October 10th Study Session report for SSD #6 has been reduced to ensure compliance with the
CPI cap. The fund balance surplus used to lower the service charge was also reduced so the
service charges did not change.
Proposed 2012 Budget and Service Charges
The Advisory Board recommended approval of the following:
2012 budget amount of $24,655, an increase of $175 (0.7%) from 2011
2012 service charge amount of $16,655, a decrease of $1,345. The expected unused
budget amount along with the service charges for 2012 is anticipated to allow the district
to achieve the goal of a 50% fund balance which staff and the board agree should be
maintained.
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 6b(6)) Page 2
Subject: 2012 Budget and Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 6
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
The City incurs service charges within this district for properties located at 3575 Wooddale
Avenue, 5814 36th St W. and 5816 36th St W. The proposed total service charges for 2012 are
$1,527.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
Not applicable.
Attachments: 2012 Proposed Budget
Resolution w/2012 Service Charges Attachment A
Prepared by: Mark Hanson, Public Works Operations Superintendent
Ann Boettcher, Inspection Services Manager
Reviewed by: Mike Rardin, Public Works Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 6b(6)) Page 3
Subject: 2012 Budget and Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 6
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
Special Service District No. 6
2012 Budget
No.
Item
2011 Revised
Budget
2012
Proposed
Budget
6212 GENERAL SUPPLIES 400 400
6223.650 BANNER REPLACEMENT 0 0
6224 LANDSCAPING MATERIALS 2,500 3,700
6410 GENERAL PROFFESSIONAL
SERVICES
50 0
6410.678 SSD Mgmt Services 2,500 2,500
6630.772 SSD – Snow Removal 0 0
6630.773 SSD - Site Maintenance 1,000 1,000
6630.774 SSD – Banner Install/Removal 1,000 1,000
6630.775 SSD – Irrigation Service 3,300 3,300
6630.776 SSD – Decorative Install 3,500 3,500
6630.777 SSD – Landscape Service 9,000 9,000
6950 LEGAL NOTICES 150 150
7106 PUBLIC LIABILITY INSURANCE 80 105
7207.880 SSD INFRASTRUCTURE REPAIR 1,000 0
7301.890 SSD ELECTRICAL SERVICE 0 0
7302 GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE 0 0
TOTAL EXPENDITURES 24,480 24,655
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 6b(6)) Page 4
Subject: 2012 Budget and Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 6
RESOLUTION NO. 11-___
RESOLUTION APPROVING 2012 BUDGET
AND PROPERTY OWNER SERVICE CHARGES FOR
SPECIAL SERVICE DISTRICT NO. 6
WHEREAS, pursuant to Ordinance No. 2374-09, the City Council created Special
Service District No. 6 (the “District”). The specific properties located within the District are
identified on Attachment “A” attached hereto; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 09-078, the City Council is authorized to
impose service charges within the District on a multi-year basis through and including the year
2019 for taxes payable in said year; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 2.04 of Resolution No. 09-078, the maximum budget to
be imposed in any year will be subject to adjustment calculations based on Consumer Price
Index (CPI) data for the Minneapolis/St. Paul Metropolitan Area; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 3 of Resolution No. 09-078, the Service Charges shall
be payable and collected at the same time and in the same manner as provided for payment and
collection of ad valorem taxes; and
WHEREAS, the City is required by Statute to certify assessments to the County by
November 23, 2011.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park as follows:
1. The 2012 Budget for Special Service District No. 6 of $24,655 is hereby approved
as recommended by the Special Service District No. 6 Advisory Board.
2. The authorized 2012 Service Charge for Special Service District No. 6 is $16,655
in the amounts and against the properties specified on Attachment “A” attached to this
Resolution.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council October 17, 2011
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK Attachment A
Special Service District #6
Estimated Annual Cost Per Parcel
Proposed 2012 Service Charge
Proposed Actual
2012 2011
PID Address Owner Service Charge Service
Charge
1611721340027 3601 Wooddale Ave The Rottlund Company Inc $2,882 $3,115
1611721340355 5600 36th St W SLP Harmoney Marketplace LLC $2,697 $2,915
1611721340073 5605 36th St W 36th Street LLC $2,566 $2,774
1611721340068 5800 36th St W Standal Properties Inc $1,526 $1,649
1611721340040 5700 36th St W Standal Properties Inc $1,526 $1,649
1611721340077 5721 36th St W Arnold R Bloomquist $1,071 $1,157
1611721340072 5701 36th St W MA Lerner & SO Lerner $963 $1,041
1611721340024 3575 Wooddale Ave City of St. Louis Park $509 $550
1611721340042 5814 36th St W City of St. Louis Park $509 $550
1611721340041 5816 36th St W City of St. Louis Park $509 $550
1611721340038 5724 36th St W LJR of Minnesota Ltd Partnership $509 $550
1611721340071 5718 36th St W MA Lerner & SO Lerner $509 $550
1611721340046 5727 36th St W R & SA Investment LLC $509 $550
1611721340015 3536 State Hwy No 100 S SLMB LLC $370 $400
1611721340001 5810 37th St W The Rottlund Company Inc $0 $0
Total $16,655 $18,000
Notes:
1) The proposed 2012 service charge calculations are based upon the same methodology / formulas
used for the initial service charge collection.
2) The 2012 budget is $24,655 but the service charge is only $16,655 because $8,000 was paid from reserves to lower the fund balance.
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 6b(6))
Subject: 2012 Budget and Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 6 Page 5
Meeting Date: October 17, 2011
Agenda Item #: 6c
Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance
Presentation Other:
EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other:
Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other:
TITLE:
Public Hearing for Assessment of Delinquent Utilities, Tree Removal/Injection, Mowing, False
Alarms, and Other Miscellaneous Charges.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Mayor to open the public hearing, solicit comments, and close the public hearing. Motion to
adopt resolution to assess delinquent water, sewer, storm water, refuse, abating grass/weed
cutting, tree removal/injection, false alarm fees and other miscellaneous charges.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Does the City Council wish to collect outstanding fees and charges through the special
assessment process?
BACKGROUND:
Each of the customers involved in this special assessment process received a City service.
Subsequently, the customers were then billed through our regular billing process. The invoice(s)
is/are now past due, and the recommended method of collecting the past due amounts is through
certification as a special assessment to the property for the next year or years taxes depending on
the delinquency. In advance of the public hearing date, individual letters were mailed to
property owners and tenants, if applicable, advising them of the assessment and their right to be
heard before the City Council. The table below shows comparison data from 2008 - 2011 in
relation to number of letters mailed and value of delinquent amounts.
Year Number of Letters Delinquent Amounts
2011 1631 $834,605
2010 1634 $743,023
2009 1687 $753,624
2008 1800 $674,705
Each year there are a number of residents who pay their delinquent amount(s) before the
certification deadline, thereby reducing the final amount certified and sent to Hennepin County.
In addition, during the month of October, there are several hundred property owners who contact
the City with questions about their outstanding balance(s) and the certification process. The
delinquent balance was $734,816 as of the close of business on October 10, 2011. Staff will
provide the delinquent amount balance as of the close of business on October 17, 2011 at the
Council meeting. Customers have until November 4, 2011 at 4:30 p.m. to pay the delinquent
amount or contact the City to make payment arrangements (when applicable). The amounts
shown do not include interest or the $30.00 per account administrative fee. A copy of the
assessment roll is on file with the City Clerk’s office for review.
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 6c) Page 2
Subject: Public Hearing for Assessment of Delinquent Accounts
NEXT STEPS:
After conducting a public hearing, the City Council is asked to direct the assessment of delinquent
water, sewer, storm water, refuse, abating grass/weed cutting, tree removal/injection, false alarm fees
and other miscellaneous charges against the benefiting property.
Staff will continue to collect payments related to the delinquent accounts and work with residents
to resolve issues related to their delinquent accounts. All delinquent accounts outstanding as of
November 4, 2011 will be certified to Hennepin County for collection as part of the owner’s
property tax bill. Upon certification, the delinquent amounts will become a lien on the individual
properties.
At this time, the Accounting Division has not received notice of anyone wanting to speak at the
Public Hearing.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
Collection of these charges is vital to the financial stability of our utility systems and to
reimburse the city for expenses incurred in providing services.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
Not Applicable
Attachments: Sample Certification Letter
Resolution Levying Assessment
Prepared by: Steven Heintz, Finance Supervisor
Reviewed by: Brian A. Swanson, Controller
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 6c) Page 3
Subject: Public Hearing for Assessment of Delinquent Accounts
Date of Notice: October 3, 2011
Customer
Mailing Address
Mailing City, Mailing State, Mailing Zip
RE: Charges Owed:
Service Address :
Delinquent Amount:
Account Number:
Customer Number:
Property I.D. Number:
Dear:
The City of St. Louis Park encourages its customers to remain current in the payment of their utility bills.
When accounts become delinquent, according to Minnesota law, they may be certified to Hennepin
County to be collected with property taxes payable in the next year.
City of St. Louis Park records show this account was delinquent as of September 21, 2011. In an effort to
avoid the account from being certified to the property taxes, the City is requesting that payment in full be
received at City Hall by Friday, November 4, 2011 at 4:30 p.m. If payment in full is not received by that
date and time, the outstanding delinquent amount, plus an administrative charge of $30.00, and interest at
a rate of 5.85% for 13 months will be sent to Hennepin County for collection with the property taxes in
2012.
The City Council will consider final action on all delinquent accounts at a public hearing during the
regular Council meeting on October 17, 2011 at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 5005 Minnetonka
Blvd. A written appeal may be presented to the Council at that time or appeals may be made to Brian
Swanson – Controller, 5005 Minnetonka Blvd., St. Louis Park, MN 55416.
Please feel free to contact our office at (952) 924-2111 if you have questions regarding this notice.
Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.
Brian Swanson
Controller
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 6c) Page 4
Subject: Public Hearing for Assessment of Delinquent Accounts
RESOLUTION NO. 11-____
LEVYING ASSESSMENT FOR DELINQUENT UTILITY ACCOUNTS, TREE
REMOVAL/INJECTION, FALSE ALARM FEES AND OTHER MISCELLANEOUS
CHARGES
WHEREAS, the City Council has heretofore determined by ordinance the rates and
charges for water, sewer, storm water and refuse services of the city and has provided for the
abatement of tree removal/injection, grass/weed cutting and other miscellaneous charges to a
home or business shall be at the expense of the owners of the premises involved; and
WHEREAS, all such sums become delinquent and assessable against the property served
under Section 6-158, Section 6-206, Section 9-103, Section 9-110, Section 11-2004 of the St.
Louis Park Ordinance Code and Minnesota Statutes 18.023, 18.271, 443 and 429; and
WHEREAS, the City Clerk has prepared an assessment roll setting forth an assessment
against each tract or parcel of land served by water, sewer, storm water and refuse services of the
City or charged for the costs of abating grass/weed cutting, tree removal/injection, false alarm fees
and other miscellaneous charges which remain unpaid at the close of business on November 4,
2011; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park that said assessment roll is hereby adopted and approved, and there is hereby levied and
assessed against each and every tract of land described therein an assessment in the amounts
respectively therein abating water, sewer, storm water , refuse, grass/weed cutting, tree
removal/injection, false alarm fees and other miscellaneous charges which remain unpaid at the
close of business on November 4, 2011; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby authorized to deliver said
assessment roll to the Auditor of Hennepin County for collection of the assessment in the same
manner as other municipal taxes are collected and payment thereof enforced with interest from the
date of this resolution at the rate of five point eight five percent (5.85 %) per annum.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council October 17, 2011
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Meeting Date: October 17, 2011
Agenda Item #: 8a
Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance
Presentation Other:
EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other:
Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other:
TITLE:
ParkAlert Citizen Notification System Policy.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Motion to adopt ParkAlert Citizen Notification Policy.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Does the City Council wish to adopt the proposed policy regarding the ParkAlert Citizen
Notification System?
BACKGROUND:
At its October 10, 2011 study session, Council received a draft policy regarding use of a citizen
notification system (aka, Reverse-911). Based on Council’s review of that report, staff is
presenting the attached policy for formal adoption. Adoption of this policy would allow
ParkAlert to start being used in conjunction with the 2011 – 2012 snow season.
Based on discussion at the October 10 study session, staff will ensure that information about not
sharing registrant data beyond what is required by law is conveyed to users of the ParkAlert
program. In addition, these conditions are included in the various documents between
Everbridge, the system provider, and the City. It should also be emphasized that, while weather-
related parking bans are included in the Emergency category of alerts, the policy calls for using
discretion on what time to send related alerts. It is the intent of this discretion that such alerts not
be sent at unreasonable times of the day or night. Finally, staff will use a variety of
communications tools to encourage people without land line phones or listed phone numbers to
register to receive alerts. Staff feels a significant number of these residents live in multiple
dwelling units.
PROPOSED USE POLICY:
The attached policy sets out parameters for use of ParkAlert. It specifies the purposes of
ParkAlert, categories of notifications for which it could be used, who is authorized to manage the
system and initiate alerts, registrant contact paths, website portal parameters, sources of message
receivers, and some minimal message content requirements. This policy is intended to provide a
general guideline that provides staff some common sense discretion while also defining
boundaries for when ParkAlert may or may not be employed.
The policy emphasizes an opt-in approach (only published phone numbers and people who
register) to respect the privacy of individuals and businesses. The registration component of
ParkAlert is very important as it is estimated that, on average, 25% of households do not have
landline (published) phone numbers. It is also important to emphasize that, while ParkAlert is
potentially very powerful, it is just another communication tool. Like most other
communications tools, it is not intended to replace any policy provisions or satisfy official
notification requirements.
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 8a) Page 2
Subject: ParkAlert Citizen Notification System Policy
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
Funds for this service (approximately $15,000 per year) are included in the City’s Capital
Improvement Program for 2011 and beyond. It should be noted that the annual cost includes
unlimited City use of the citizen notification system, and use by staff for its own (mostly
emergency) notification needs. To put this in perspective, the cost to send one citywide postcard
through the United States Postal Service is approximately $7,500. Of course, non-emergency
notifications sent through ParkAlert reach only those who register, while emergency notifications
are sent to those who register and those listed in the white / yellow pages.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
Use of a more robust Citizen Notification System is consistent with the City Council’s Strategic
Direction to be a connected and engaged community. ParkAlert can be used to send notifications
throughout the community, or to selected geographical areas. In addition, people who register
can receive alerts related to up to 5 addresses (e.g., home, school, parents’ home, work) in the
city.
Attachments: ParkAlert Citizen Notification System Policy
Prepared by: Clint Pires, Chief Information Officer
Jamie Zwilling, Communications Coordinator
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 8a) Page 3
Subject: ParkAlert Citizen Notification System Policy
ParkAlert (PA) Citizen Notification System Policy
Policy Statement
The City of St. Louis Park has implemented the ParkAlert Citizen Notification system to provide
mass communication in the event of an emergency or particular non-emergency event as noted in
this policy. ParkAlert is an additional communications tool, intended to be a courtesy to residents
and businesses in St. Louis Park. ParkAlert is not a replacement for any specific existing
communications tool or official form of notification. ParkAlert and its related components are for
exclusive use of and by the City of St. Louis Park. The notification system may be used to
provide pertinent information and instructions to City of St. Louis Park residents and businesses
through land line phones, cell phones, smart phones, text messaging, E-mail, and other devices.
ParkAlert is a web-based mass notification system that sends messages to devices using the
contact path / order configured by the receiving party until that party has confirmed message
receipt.
1.1 Reason For Policy
This policy establishes the proper use and testing of the ParkAlert system.
1.2 Who Should Read This Policy
City of St. Louis Park employees with the responsibility of ordering or sending out messages
using ParkAlert, and City Council members responsible for governance of the City of St. Louis
Park.
Overview
ParkAlert is an additional courtesy communications tool that will be used to convey information
for both emergency and selected non-emergency events. In the event of an emergency
(dangerous situation), the City of St. Louis Park may utilize ParkAlert to warn of impending
danger, or as a tool to be used during and/or after an event to communicate with those affected
by the emergency. Weather-related parking bans are likely to be the most common notification-
causing emergencies.
All relevant white and yellow pages-listed St. Louis Park phone numbers are contacted in the
event of an emergency, as are those who sign up via the registration portal on the City’s website.
Such contact would typically begin as soon as practical after the proper authorizations have been
given and a message created and sent, 24 hours a day / 7 days a week. Here’s an important
exception: In the case of weather-related parking bans, notifications would be sent based on the
time of day or night, using a common sense approach. For example, notifications may be sent
during the daytime / early evening hours if the ban goes into effect then. On the other hand, if the
forecast is for the possibility of snow reaching three inches or more sometime during the later
night or early morning hours, a “reminder” notification may be sent earlier in the night. The
notification would remind people of the parking ban policy in the event snow reaches three
inches or more. In this case, it is a courtesy reminder, not an official declaration. Additional
notifications may or may not be sent based on subsequent conditions.
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 8a) Page 4
Subject: ParkAlert Citizen Notification System Policy
Citizens, businesses and other organizations in the City of St. Louis Park can also register via the
registration portal on the City’s website for specific non-emergency events for which they wish
to receive alerts/reminders.
The non-emergency groups available for opt-in are:
Non-Weather Related Parking Bans
Significant Road Detours / Work
Significant City Service Interruptions
Other Meetings / Events
Such non-emergency contact would begin after the proper authorizations have been given and a
message created. Importantly, such non-emergency messages would typically be sent only in a
particular timeframe during the hours of 6 a.m. and 9 p.m., subject to the type of non-emergency
and other events (e.g., holidays, religious observances).
Messages sent using ParkAlert include the option of sending text and voice messages to multiple
devices in a contact path / order until message receipt is confirmed. The path and type of
message sent are controlled and configured by the citizen / business / organization using the
ParkAlert registration portal on the City of St. Louis Park website. It is the responsibility of the
City staff member initiating the message to create the message.
Notification Groups
Following is a list of currently configured notification groups and their definitions:
EMERGENCY
Dangerous Situation
A predicted event or sudden unforeseen crisis that affects public safety and
requires immediate or predictable action. This may impact all or parts of
the City. Weather-related parking bans are a common example. Weather-
related parking ban policies remain in effect and provide the official
requirements with respect to weather events.
NON‐EMERGENCY
Non-Weather
Related Parking Ban
A non-weather related event causing the need to ban parking in all or
part(s) of the City.
Significant Road
Detours / Work
Construction involving roads, especially when detours or delays in traffic
flow are involved.
Significant City
Service Interruptions
This includes planned or unplanned interruptions in City services such as,
but not limited to, water; sewer; garbage, yard waste, or recycling
collection; parks; or Rec Center facilities.
Other Meetings /
Events
This category may include, but is not limited to, particular or special
council meetings and city project meetings, as determined by the City
Manager or designee.
NOTE: Notification groups may be added, deleted, or modified over time. However, to ensure
its long-term effectiveness, ParkAlert will typically not be used for routine meetings and annual
events.
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 8a) Page 5
Subject: ParkAlert Citizen Notification System Policy
Policy
4.1 Proper Use of the ParkAlert Notification System
The ParkAlert Notification System may be used to convey information for both emergency
and non-emergency events. In the event of an emergency, the City of St. Louis Park may
utilize the ParkAlert Notification System to warn of impending danger or as a tool to be used
during and/or after an emergency event to communicate with those affected by the event.
Everyone listed in the white and yellow pages and those who register on the City’s web
portal will be sent emergency notifications. In this sense, ParkAlert leans towards being an
opt-in system – people who choose to register or be listed in the white or yellow pages get
alerts. This respects those who do not have their phone numbers published and minimizes
spam-like effects.
For non-emergency events, citizens / businesses / organizations of the City of St. Louis Park
can register for specific categories of events about which they wish to receive
alerts/reminders. The available non-emergency groups are outlined in the table above. Note
that judgment will be used on whether or not to issue a notification on events in these
categories, based on their significance.
To help maintain system awareness and test for proper functioning of the notification system,
the City of St. Louis Park Chief Information Officer or Communications Coordinator will
work with the City Manager to create and send up to two emergency test messages per year
to the community, and other test messages to selected staff.
Another OPTION is to send non-emergency communications to gather information or public
opinion data using the polling functionality of the ParkAlert system. This method of
communication will be used sparingly to be respectful, or coupled with the tests, so as to not
create a spam effect in which citizens begin ignoring vital messages from the system.
4.2 Authorized Alert System Personnel
Employees of the City of St. Louis Park will be given rights to specific areas of the ParkAlert
Notification System. Under no circumstances shall the employees share their user name or
password with anyone else. Employees who share their log-in information with anyone will
immediately lose all rights to the system. The employee will also be subject to disciplinary
action up to and including termination of employment.
4.2.1 System Administration: System administration is the responsibility of the Chief
Information Officer. The backup administrator is the Communications Coordinator. A
third administrator is the Web Coordinator / Applications Developer.
4.2.2 Emergencies (Dangerous Situation): In emergency situations, the Police Chief,
Fire Chief, Public Works Director, City Manager, and Deputy City Manager have the
authority to order or send emergency communications. As administrators of the ParkAlert
system, the City of St. Louis Park Chief Information Officer and Communications
Coordinator, or designee may send emergency messages, but only as directed by the
Police Chief, Fire Chief, Public Works Director, City Manager, Deputy City Manager, or
designee.
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 8a) Page 6
Subject: ParkAlert Citizen Notification System Policy
4.2.3 Non-Weather Related Parking Bans: The Public Works Director and designee
will have rights and authority to order or send notifications to the “Non-Weather Related
Parking Ban” group in the ParkAlert system. The timing and the circumstances that
determine when parking ban messages are sent are determined by Public Works Director,
the City Manager, or designee
4.2.4 Significant Road Detours / Work: The Public Works Director and designee will
have rights and authority to order or send notifications to the “Significant Road Detours /
Work” group in the ParkAlert system. The timing and the circumstances that determine
when Road Detours / Work messages are sent are governed by Public Works policy or
specific circumstances, the City Manager, or designee.
4.2.5 Significant City Service Interruptions: The City Manager, Deputy City Manager,
or designee shall have the rights to send or direct sending notifications to the “City
Service Interruptions” group in ParkAlert. This notification may include consultation
with relevant City staff or may be pre-delegated based on the situation (e.g., watermain
break, sewer backup).
4.2.6 Other Meetings / Events: The City Manager, Deputy City Manager, or designee
shall have the rights to send or direct sending notifications to the ”Other Meetings /
Events” group in ParkAlert. This may include consultation with relevant City staff.
4.3 Message Creation
Authorized ParkAlert System personnel have the responsibility to write and disseminate
the appropriate text / voice message to be sent. For consistency, simplicity, and to
minimize confusion, whenever possible, the sender shall follow the guidelines in section
4.3.1 Message Guidelines
Messages shall be written in a manner to support automated text to speech translation.
Minimal or, preferably, no use of acronyms is ideal. All messages must contain an
appropriate lead-in, for example:
Non-emergency message lead-in “The City of St. Louis Park has an important
message for you. Please listen to the entire message before selecting an option. Thank
you.”
Emergency message lead-in “This is an emergency message from the City of St. Louis
Park. Please listen to the entire message before selecting an option.”
Test message lead-in “This is a test of the City of St. Louis Park emergency and non-
emergency notification system. Please listen to or read the entire message before
selecting an option. This is only a test. Had this been a real notification, you would
have received additional instructions. Again, this is only a test. Thank you.”
City Council Meeting of October 17, 2011 (Item No. 8a) Page 7
Subject: ParkAlert Citizen Notification System Policy
Lead-in messages are pre-programmed and do not need to be added in when creating a
new message. The lead-in messages are the responsibility of the City of St. Louis Park
Chief Information Officer and Communications Coordinator.
The follow-up core message sent using the ParkAlert System should be as brief as
possible and typically contain the following information:
The reason for the message / brief description of event
Any response required
Duration of emergency or event with dates and times where applicable
Methods to obtain further information
The name of the office sending the message
In emergency situations, when circumstances permit, authorized senders should review
messages with the City Manager, Deputy City Manager, or designee prior to sending.
The City Manager, Deputy City Manager, or designee must be kept apprised of all
emergency situations and be informed of any communications that will be or have been
sent using the ParkAlert Notification System.