HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010/06/07 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - RegularAGENDA
JUNE 7, 2010
(Councilmember Sanger and Councilmember Ross absent)
6:15 p.m. SPECIAL STUDY SESSION – Council Chambers
Discussion Items
1. 6:15 p.m. Proposed Rental Licensing Ordinance Changes
2. 6:45 p.m. Update on Convention and Visitors Bureau
Written Reports
3. Fire Stations & Northside Park Updates
7:15 p.m. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY – Council Chambers
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Minutes
3a. Economic development Authority Minutes May 17, 2010
4. Approval of Agenda
5. Reports
5a. Economic Development Authority Vendor Claims
6. Old Business
7. New Business
7a. Issuance of a $4.3 million Tax Exempt TIF Revenue Note (Series 2010A)--Hoigaard
Village Project.
Recommended Action: Motion to adopt a resolution awarding the sale of, and providing
the form, terms, covenants, and directions for the issuance of a $4,300,000 tax exempt tax
increment revenue refunding Note (Hoigaard Village Project), Series 2010A.
7b. Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living LLC (Wooddale Pointe
project).
Recommended Action: Motion to adopt the resolution approving the updated Contract
for Private Redevelopment between the EDA and Wooddale Catered Living LLC (Greco
Development).
8. Communications
9. Adjournment
7:30 p.m. CITY COUNCIL MEETING – Council Chambers
1. Call to Order
1a. Pledge of Allegiance
1b. Roll Call
Meeting of June 7, 2010
Special Study Session, Economic Development Authority and City Council Agenda
2. Presentations - None
3. Approval of Minutes
3a. Study Session Minutes May 10, 2010
3b. City Council Minutes May 17, 2010
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 to approve items on the consent calendar.
(Alternatively: Motion to add or remove items from the agenda, motion to move items from consent
calendar to regular agenda for discussion and to approve those items remaining on the consent calendar.)
5. Boards and Commissions -- None
6. Public Hearings
6a. Public Hearing and First Reading of housekeeping amendments to Home Rule
Charter/City Code regarding staff positions and municipal elections
Recommended Action: Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to approve First Reading
of an ordinance amending the St. Louis Park Home Rule Charter Sections 4.03, 4.06,
6.09, and 6.10 concerning municipal elections and city position titles and to set Second
Reading on June 28, 2010. Motion to approve First Reading of an ordinance amending
the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code Sections 2-350, 2-351, 18-203, 32-34, and 32-99
concerning city position titles and to set Second Reading on June 28, 2010.
6b. Public Hearing Wine & 3.2 Liquor License – Sauce West End
Recommended Action: Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to approve application
from Sauce West End. LLC, dba Sauce Pizza and Wine for an on-sale wine and 3.2 malt
liquor license to be located at 1601 West End Boulevard with the license term through
March 1, 2011
6c. Public Hearing and Preliminary Resolution Authorizing the Pre-Sale of Educational
Facility Revenue Notes for the Groves Academy Project - Series 2010.
Recommended Action: Mayor to open and close the public hearing. Motion to adopt a
“Resolution Giving Preliminary Approval to the Proposed Issuance of Revenue Bonds
under Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.152 through 469.165” for the Groves Academy
Project-Series 2010.
7. Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public
8. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions and Discussion Items -- None
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 June 7, 2010
Special Study Session, Economic Development Authority and City Council Agenda
4. CONSENT CALENDAR
4a. Approve Temporary On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor License – Church of the Holy Family at
5900 & 5925 West Lake Street for August 20 and August 21, 2010.
4b. Adopt Resolution Accepting Donation to the City to support the Environmental
Coordinator’s Attendance at the 2010 International Society of Arboriculture Conference.
4c. Adopt Resolution authorizing the special assessment for the repair of the water service line at
2311 Sumter Avenue South, St. Louis Park, MN - P.I.D. 08-117-21-23-0093.
4d. Adopt Resolution authorizing the special assessment for the repair of the water service line at
3049 Edgewood Avenue South, St. Louis Park, MN - P.I.D. #17-117-21-11-0012.
4e. Adopt Resolution granting Conditional Use Permit under Section 36-79 Relating to Zoning
to Permit Excavation of over 400 Cubic Yards of Material for Property Zoned C-2 – General
Commercial located at 3745 Louisiana Avenue South.
4f. Approve a Joint Operations Agreement for operation and maintenance of Educational Access
Channel 14 and the Community TV Studio.
4g. Approve Policy Statement in support of Resolution regarding minority-owned, women’s
business enterprises and small business in contracting, professional services and purchasing.
4h. Adopt first reading of Ordinance setting fees for Multiple Re-inspection Fee for Licensed
Businesses and Massage Therapist License and set second reading for June 14, 2010.
4i. Adopt a Resolution approving the EDA’s awarding the sale of, and providing the form,
terms, covenants, and directions for the issuance of a $4,300,000 tax exempt tax increment
revenue refunding Note (Hoigaard Village Project), Series 2010A.
4j. Approval for Filing Planning Commission Minutes April 21, 2010
4k. Approval for Filing Planning Commission Minutes May 5, 2010
4l. Approval of Filing of Vendor Claims
4m. Approval for Filing Telecommunication Commission Minutes February 11, 2010
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: June 7, 2010
Agenda Item #: 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:
Proposed Rental Licensing Ordinance Changes.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
No formal action at this time. Staff would like to review the proposed program enhancements with
Council and receive direction before presenting the draft ordinance to the licensed apartment
business owners for discussion.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Does Council want staff to continue developing ordinance amendments to include additional tools
for encouraging well managed and properly maintained rental property in the City?
BACKGROUND:
The City has performed rental inspections for apartment buildings since 1978 and today includes
over 7,000 apartment units in 300 buildings and 700 single family and duplex units. Inspection of
rental units is part of our city-wide property maintenance program and has continued to evolve over
the recent years. The most recent significant change occurred in 2008 with incorporation of the
crime-free provisions to ensure that tenants creating livability issues are dealt with effectively.
Apartment owners have formed a good working relationship with City Police and Inspection staff
implementing these requirements.
While the crime-free provisions are an integral part of our current program, they do not take into
account the potential community issues which can develop when a property owner is not managing
the apartment complex, behavior, or properly implementing the crime-free provisions. The neglect
of proper management can lead to significant livability issues for the community.
To consider program improvements, staff presented concepts for City Council discussion on March
1, 2010. Recognizing that nearly all properties are well managed with good intentions, Council
directed staff to develop a draft ordinance for further review before proceeding with public process
and any resulting ordinance adoption.
DISCUSSION:
Two significant components are evolving as potentially helpful tools which are presented in the draft
ordinance. The first would be establishment of a “provisional license” as an intermediate step before
suspension or revocation of a license for a troubled building. This would apply only to rental
buildings with three or more units as issues in rental single family and duplex units have been
addressed successfully using the existing crime-free provisions.
Special Study Session Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 1) Page 2
Subject: Proposed Rental Licensing Ordinance
A provisional license would be triggered when deficiencies in the business operation lead to one or
more of these three conditions developing:
1) The average number of police contacts per dwelling unit in the preceeding twelve month period
exceeds a threshold. Establishing an appropriate threshold number will require further review of
data now being collected for presentation to Council during the meeting. Ensuring fairness between
a four-plex and a large building may require a sliding scale formula or other method. The number of
contacts would be based on Police responding to disorderly use, drug, and criminal activity as
identified in our crime-free section, excluding domestic abuse and medical calls.
2) Activities occurring in the building or on the property that create an on-going public safety
concerns, including severity of issues, intimidation of tenants, and failure to comply with crime-free
provisions.
3) Failure to maintain properties in continued compliance with property maintenance codes.
Issuing a provisional license would establish a mitigation plan for the owner with specific
requirements to assist in returning the business to a regular license. The plan may include steps to
reduce Police contact, changes in tenant screening procedures, security measures, building repairs, 24
hour on-site management, and other related criteria. Operating under a provisional license would
require the licensee to provide the City with a monthly written report describing the progress and
status of the approved mitigation plan. To compensate the City for the additional time to review
and manage a provisional license, a higher license fee would be proposed so as not to penalize owners
of all other regular licensed establishments.
The second program component being proposed would provide substantial more detail to the
process and implications if a license were not to be renewed, suspended, or revoked. Currently,
operating a rental building without a license creates the difficulty of needing to remove good families
from their home due to the actions of the manager and/or owner. In reality this is impractical and
difficult to enforce since it would require relocating many residents and their belongings. The
proposal would establish that existing tenants in good standing could remain in their units in a
building with a suspended license provided the building remains in habitable condition. Vacant
units however, could not be rented by the owner until a valid license is restored to the building.
An additional program concept to notify a licensee’s insurance company if a provisional license was
issued was briefly discussed during the March meeting. The city attorney has verified that as part of
developing a mitigation plan for a provisional license, the owner could be required to provide
insurance information to the city. City verification with the insurance carrier could include the
provisional license status. If Council believes insurance information would be helpful to implement
positive change on a provisionally licensed apartment, then staff will develop a proposed provision
for public discussion.
Special Study Session Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 1) Page 3
Subject: Proposed Rental Licensing Ordinance
The program changes being considered through the proposed ordinance would hopefully never be
utilized. Being prepared with the tools to help motivate correction of a deteriorating business
property would be proactive in maintaining public livability.
Staff from the Police and Inspection Departments will be present during the Study Session
discussion.
NEXT STEPS:
If Council agrees with the intent of the proposed ordinance, staff will notify the current multi-family
license holders and provide information and notice of informational meetings for discussion. A final
ordinance version would then be prepared and presented to Council for consideration at a first
reading. Staff is projecting the public process to be completed this summer and returning to Council
in time to allow any ordinance changes to be effective before annual license renewals begin in
November.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
No budget changes are proposed at this time. Licensing and inspection are intended to be a fee for
service program.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
The proposed ordinance is consistent with the Strategic Direction of “St. Louis Park is committed to
providing a well maintained and diverse housing stock”
Attachments: Draft Ordinance
Existing Rental Housing Ordinance
Prepared by: Brian Hoffman, Director of Inspections
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 8 OF THE
ST. LOUIS PARK CODE OF ORDINANCES TO PROVIDE
FOR A PROVISIONAL RENTAL HOUSING LICENSE FOR
PROPERTIES WITH A HIGH NUMBER OF POLICE CONTACTS
THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DOES ORDAIN:
Section 1. Chapter 8 of the St. Louis Park Code of Ordinances is amended by adding the
following section:
Sec. 8-333. Provisional Licenses.
(a) A licensed premises with three or more dwelling units that has generated an average of ____
or more police contacts per dwelling unit in a preceding one year, has otherwise caused
substantial on-going public safety concerns or has consistently failed to maintain compliance
with property maintenance and other City Code requirements is only eligible for a
provisional license.
(b) Police contacts counted to determine whether a provisional license is required include
disorderly use activities, criminal activity and drug related criminal activity defined in
Section 8-331. The police contact shall be counted if it involves an incident that occurs
anywhere on the licensed premises regardless of who is involved, or near the licensed
premises if the contact involves tenants or guests of the licensed premises.
(c) Police contacts will not be counted for purposes of determining whether a provisional license
is required where the victim and suspect are “family or household members” as defined in
the Domestic Abuse Act, Minnesota Statutes, Section 518B.01, Subd. 2 (b) and where there
is a report of “Domestic Abuse” as defined in the Domestic Abuse Act, Minnesota Statutes,
Section 518B.01, Subd. 2 (a).
(d) The period of time used to determine whether a provisional license is required based upon
the number of police contacts is the twelve (12) month period ending two months before the
expiration of the existing license. Additionally, upon sixty (60) days notice to the licensee, a
regular license may be converted to a provisional license if substantial on-going public safety
concerns exist.
(e) The existence of substantial on-going public safety concerns that make a licensed premises
only eligible for a provisional license even though the number of police calls does not meet
the above threshold shall be determined by the Chief of Police. Factors that will be
Special Study Session Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 1)
Subject: Proposed Rental Licensing Ordinance Page 4
considered include the nature and severity of the incidents giving rise to the police contacts,
any evidence that tenants are being discouraged or intimidated from making police contacts,
the level of community policing activity compared to similar properties, the number of
guests and other non-tenants at the premises and the licensee’s timeliness and diligence in
evicting or otherwise addressing public safety concerns.
(f) If a licensee is determined to be only eligible for a provisional license, the licensee must
submit to the City manager or designee for review a mitigation plan for the license period.
The mitigation plan shall describe steps proposed by the applicant to reduce the number of
police contacts and public safety concerns to a level that qualifies for a regular license. The
mitigation plan may include such steps as changes in tenant screening procedures, changes in
lease terms, security measures, rules and regulations for tenant conduct and security
personnel. If there has been a consistent failure to promptly meet property maintenance and
other code requirements, the mitigation plan shall describe the steps to eliminate the
problem.
(g) A provisional license shall only be issued for a licensed premises that has an owner and
manager or managers who have all successfully completed, or will promptly complete, a
training program provided or specified by the City. Managers must be resident managers or
on-site managers who are on site or available 24 hours a day.
(h) After giving the applicant an opportunity to be heard, the City Manager or designee shall
approve, disapprove, or approve with conditions the application and the mitigation plan. In
evaluating a mitigation plan, the City Manager or designee will consider, among other
things, the facility, its management practices, the nature and seriousness of the causes for
police contacts and general public safety concerns, and the expected effectiveness of measures
identified in the plan to reduce the number of police contacts or incidents of property
maintenance and other code violations. In evaluating a mitigation plan submitted by an
applicant already under a provisional license, the City Manager or designee will also consider
the effectiveness of measures identified in any previous mitigation plan and the need for
different or additional measures to reduce police contacts and address overall public safety
concerns and reduce property maintenance and other code violations.
(i) The licensee shall comply with the mitigation plan as approved or modified by the City
Manager or designee. No later than the tenth day after each calendar month, the licensee
shall mail or deliver to the City Manager or designee a written report describing all steps
taken in furtherance of the mitigation plan during the preceding month.
(j) The fee for a provisional license shall be established by ordinance.
Section 2. Chapter 8 of the St. Louis Park Code of Ordinances is amended by adding the
following section:
Special Study Session Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 1)
Subject: Proposed Rental Licensing Ordinance Page 5
Sec. 8-334. License Suspension, Revocation, Denial and Non-Renewal.
(a) Every regular or provisional rental housing license issued under the provisions of Section 8-
326 to 8-333 is subject to suspension, revocation or non-renewal pursuant to Section 8-36.
(b) The City may revoke, suspend or decline to renew any regular or provisional rental housing
license issued pursuant to Sections 8-326 to 8-333 upon any of the following grounds:
(1) false statements on any application or other information or report required by this
Chapter to be given by the applicant or licensee.
(2) failure to pay any application, penalty, reinspection or reinstatement fee required by
this Chapter and City Council resolution.
(3) failure to correct deficiencies noted in notices of violation in the time specified in the
notice.
(4) failure to comply with the provisions of an approved mitigation plan in the case of
provisional licenses.
(5) failure to operate or maintain the licensed premises in conformity with all applicable
state laws and regulations and this Code of Ordinances.
(6) any other violation of this Chapter.
(c) Licenses may be suspended for up to six (6) months and may, after the period of suspension,
be reinstated subject to compliance with this Chapter and any conditions imposed by the
City at the time of suspension. Licenses that are revoked will not be reinstated until the
owner has applied for and secured a new license and complied with all conditions imposed at
the time of revocation. Upon a decision to revoke, deny or not renew a license, no new
application for the same premises will be accepted for the period of time specified in the City
Manager’s written decision, which shall not exceed two years.
d) In the event that a license is suspended, revoked or not renewed, it shall be unlawful for the
owner or the owner’s duly authorized agent to thereafter permit any new occupancies of
vacant or thereafter vacated rental units until such time as a valid license may be restored.
Revocation, suspension or non-renewal of a license shall not excuse the owner from
compliance with all state laws and regulations and this Code of Ordinances for as long as any
units in the facility are occupied. Failure to comply with all terms of this Chapter during the
term of revocation, suspension or non-renewal is a misdemeanor and grounds for extension
of the term of such revocation or suspension or continuation of non-renewal, or for a
Special Study Session Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 1)
Subject: Proposed Rental Licensing Ordinance Page 6
decision not to reinstate the license, notwithstanding any limitations on the period of
suspension, revocation or non-renewal.
Section 3. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen days after its publication.
ADOPTED this ______ day of _______________, 2010, by the City Council of the City
of St. Louis Park.
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
By:
Jeffrey W. Jacobs, Mayor
ATTEST:
Nancy Stroth, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney
Special Study Session Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 1)
Subject: Proposed Rental Licensing Ordinance Page 7
Subdivision VIII. Rental Housing
Sec. 8-326. License required.
(a) The owner of a residential building or portion thereof operated as rental
housing with one or more dwelling units must obtain a rental housing license. The license
shall contain a statement that the tenant or tenants may contact the attorney general for
information regarding the rights and obligations of owners and tenants under state law. The
statement shall include the telephone number and address of the attorney general.
(b) The term “rental housing” means any dwelling unit that is not owner occupied. The
term includes any dwelling unit which is either unoccupied or occupied by a relative of the
owner.
(c) Exceptions. No license shall be required under the following circumstances:
(1) A dwelling unit occupied by the owner for a minimum of six months per
calendar year.
(2) Rented rooms within an owner occupied dwelling unit.
(3) Unoccupied dwelling units being offered for sale which have been issued a
Certificate of Property Maintenance that remains in effect.
(d) The term “Owner” means the owner as determined by an examination of
record title to the property at the office of the Hennepin County Recorder.
(Ord. No. 2181-00, § 4(16-309A.), 11-6-2000, Ord. No. 2282-04, 11-15-2004, Ord. No.
2334-07, 08-10-2007; Ord. No. 2361-08, 1-1-2009)
Sec. 8-327. Required Application Information.
The owner must identify a designated property manager responsible for operation and
maintenance of each licensed property. Contact information for the owner and property
manager must be provided on the license application, and the owner must provide the city
with any changes occurring within the license period. The owner may be the designated
property manager. The owner must submit verification with the license application that the
designated property manager has attended required training as specified in this section and
that the Crime Free/Drug Free and Disorderly Use language required by this section is
contained in the licensed property tenant lease or leases.
(Ord. No. 2334-07, 08-10-2007; Ord. No. 2361-08, 1-1-2009)
Special Study Session Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 1)
Subject: Proposed Rental Licensing Ordinance Page 8
Sec. 8-328. Crime Free/Drug Free Training.
The owner or property manager must have attended an approved training program
in The Minnesota Crime Free Multi-Housing Program before any rental license is issued. A
Provisional License may be issued for six months to accommodate the training schedule. An
owner whose only rental housing is either unoccupied or a dwelling unit homesteaded by a
relative is exempted from the training program.
(Ord. No. 2334-07, 08-10-2007; Ord. No. 2361-08, 1-1-2009)
Sec. 8-329. Maintenance.
The owner of a residential building or portion thereof operated as rental housing must
maintain all dwelling units, common space and exteriors of such buildings within the
owner’s control in compliance with the City Code, and state and federal laws and
regulations. The owner of such rental housing shall perform a periodic assessment of all
portions of the building and correct any inadequacies to ensure the building is maintained in
good repair.
(Ord. No. 2334-07, 08-10-2007; Ord. No. 2361-08, 1-1-2009)
Sec. 8-330. City Inspections.
(a) The owner of rental housing shall permit access by the City to perform a minimum
of one inspection every two years of every dwelling unit and common space within the
owner’s control. The City may perform or require additional inspections if deemed necessary
by the City or by the request of a tenant. The owner shall notify the tenant or tenants of the
time when the City inspection will be conducted and provide access to the units.
(b) The owner’s rental housing license may be suspended, revoked or denied renewal for
failing to maintain the licensed building in compliance with the property maintenance code
as set forth in chapter 6, article V of this Code or otherwise failing to comply with the
requirements of the City Code or applicable state or federal law.
(Ord. No. 2334-07, 08-10-2007; Ord. No. 2361-08, 1-1-2009)
Sec. 8-331. Crime Free/Drug Free and Disorderly Use Lease Requirements.
(a) All tenant leases, except for state licensed residential facilities and subject to all
preemptory state and federal laws, shall contain the following Crime Free/Drug Free and
Disorderly Use language:
(1) Crime Free/Drug Free.
Special Study Session Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 1)
Subject: Proposed Rental Licensing Ordinance Page 9
1. Resident, any members of the resident’s household or a guest or other
person affiliated with resident shall not engage in criminal activity, including
drug-related criminal activity, on or near the premises.
2. Resident, any member of the resident’s household or a guest or other person
affiliated with resident shall not engage in any act intended to facilitate
criminal activity, including drug-related criminal activity, on or near the
premises.
3. Resident or members of the household will not permit the dwelling unit to
be used for, or to facilitate criminal activity, including drug-related criminal
activity, regardless of whether the individual engaging in such activity is a
member of the household, or a guest.
4. Resident, any member of the resident’s household or a guest, or other
person affiliated with the resident shall not engage in the unlawful
manufacturing, selling, using, storing, keeping, or giving of a controlled
substance at any locations, whether on or near the premises or otherwise.
5. VIOLATION OF THE ABOVE PROVISIONS SHALL BE A
MATERIAL AND IRREPARABLE VIOLATION OF THE LEASE AND
GOOD CAUSE FOR IMMEDIATE TERMINATION OF TENANCY.
(2) Disorderly Use.
1. Resident, members of the resident’s household, guests, or other persons
under the resident’s control shall not engage in the following Disorderly Use
activities: violations of state law relating to alcoholic beverages, trespassing
or disorderly conduct; and violation of the St. Louis Park City Code relating
to zoning, nuisance and prohibited noise.
2. THREE DISORDERLY USE VIOLATIONS INVOLVING THE SAME
TENANCY WITHIN A CONTINUOUS TWELVE MONTH PERIOD
SHALL BE A SUBSTANTIAL AND MATERIAL VIOLATION OF
THE LEASE AND GOOD CAUSE FOR TERMINATION OF THE
TENANCY.
(3) Definitions.
1. The term “criminal activity” means prostitution, criminal street gang
activity, threatening, intimidating or assaultive behavior, the unlawful
discharge of firearms, or any other criminal activity on or near the premises
Special Study Session Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 1)
Subject: Proposed Rental Licensing Ordinance Page 10
that jeopardizes the health, safety and welfare of the landlord, his agent,
other resident, neighbor or other third party, or involving imminent or
actual serious property damage.
2. The term “drug related criminal activity” means the illegal manufacture,
sale, distribution, use, or possession with intent to manufacture, sell,
distribute, or use of a controlled substance or any substance represented to
be drugs (as defined in Section 102 of the Controlled Substance Act [21
U.S.C. 802]).
(4) Non-Exclusive Remedies. The Crime Free/Drug Free and Disorderly Use
provisions are in addition to all other terms of the lease and do not limit or
replace any other provisions.
(b) These lease provisions shall be incorporated into every new lease for a tenancy
beginning January 1, 2008 and all renewed leases by January 1, 2009.
(c) Upon determination by the Police Department that a licensed premises or
unit within a licensed premise was used in violation of the Crime Free/Drug Free provisions
of Subsection (a) (1) herein, the Police Department shall cause notice to be made to the
owner and property manager of the violation. The owner or property manager shall notify
the tenant or tenants within ten days of the notice of violation of the Crime Free/Drug Free
lease language and proceed with termination of the tenancy of all tenants occupying the unit.
The owner shall not enter into a new lease for a unit located in the licensed property with an
evicted tenant for a period of one year after the eviction.
(d) Upon determination by the Police Department that a licensed premises or
unit within a licensed premises was used for Disorderly Use activities as set forth in
Subsection (a)(2) herein, the Police Department shall cause notice to be made to the owner
and property manager of the violation and direct the owner and property manager to take
steps to prevent further Disorderly Use violations.
(e) If a second Disorderly Use violation as determined by the Police Department
occurs within a continuous twelve month period involving the same tenancy, the Police
Department shall cause notice to be made to the owner and property manager of the second
violation. The owner or property manager shall respond in writing within ten (10) days of
receipt of the notice with an action plan to prevent further Disorderly Use violations.
(f) If a third Disorderly Use violation as determined by the Police Department
occurs within a continuous twelve month period involving the same tenancy, the Police
Department shall cause notice to be made to the owner and property manager of the third
violation. The owner or property manager shall notify the tenant or tenants within ten days
Special Study Session Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 1)
Subject: Proposed Rental Licensing Ordinance Page 11
of the Notice of Disorderly Use violation of the Crime Free/Drug Free lease language within
the lease and proceed with termination of the tenancy of all tenants occupying the unit. The
owner shall not enter into a new lease for a unit located in the licensed property with an
evicted tenant for a period of one year after the eviction.
(g) The provisions of Subsections (c), (d), (e), and (f) herein do not apply if the
determination that the premises have been used in violation of the Crime Free/Drug Free
provisions of Subsections (a)(1) and (a)(2) herein originates from a call from or at the request
of one or more of the tenants occupying the premises for police or emergency assistance, or
in the case of domestic abuse, from a call for assistance from any source. The term “domestic
abuse” has the meaning given in Minn. Stat. § 518B.01, subd. 2.
(Ord. No. 2334-07, 08-10-2007, Ord. No. 2361-08, 1-1-2009)
Sec. 8-332. Administrative License Violation Fee.
An owner failing to proceed with an action to terminate the tenancy after Police
Department notification in accordance with a Crime Free/Drug Free violation or the third
Disorderly Use violation shall pay an administrative license violation fee of $750.00 for each
calendar month that the owner fails to proceed. Any outstanding fees must be paid prior to
the city renewing a rental license for the licensed premises.
(Ord. No. 2334-07, 08-10-2007)
Special Study Session Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 1)
Subject: Proposed Rental Licensing Ordinance Page 12
Meeting Date: June 7, 2010
Agenda Item #: 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:
Update on Convention and Visitors Bureau.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
No formal action is required at this time. This report and related discussion at the study session is
intended to update the City Council and solicit feedback regarding the continued exploration of
creating a convention and visitors bureau (CVB) in St. Louis Park.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Does the City Council want staff to continue to actively pursue the formation of a convention and
visitors bureau for St. Louis Park?
Is the direction and mission for a CVB as outlined in the Concept Plan (attached) consistent with
the Council’s vision of such an organization?
BACKGROUND:
On September 29, 2009 staff provided the City Council with information regarding its investigation
regarding the formation of a convention & visitors bureau (CVB) to further promote St. Louis Park
within the Twin Cities region and beyond. It was explained that in order for such an organization to
be financially viable it would require approval of a local lodging tax of up to 3%. The creation of
such a lodging tax is allowed by state statute. The City Council then directed staff to continue its
exploration of the concept.
Since that time City staff and the President of the TwinWest Chamber of Commerce have been
meeting with local hoteliers informing them of the exploration of a CVB and discussed with them
the benefits and concerns they may have with forming such an organization. Staff also held focus
groups with additional partners in the community which included businesses, the school district,
and recreation groups to solicit their feedback. Based on the tone and comments from these
meetings staff felt it appropriate to continue with the exploration.
As a result of the above meetings, staff was asked to draft a Concept Plan (see attached) which would
more clearly express the need for a convention and visitors bureau, what might be its mission and
marketing focus, as well as how such an organization could be structured and funded. Staff, along
with the TwinWest Chamber of Commerce President, then presented the Concept Plan to five of
the six local hoteliers and asked that they review it. Staff also discussed the CVB concept with the St.
Louis Park Business Council and the TwinWest Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors. Staff
then followed up with the area hoteliers to obtain their feedback.
Special Study Session Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 2) Page 2
Subject: Update on Convention and Visitors Bureau
Reaction from area businesses to the idea of a St. Louis Park CVB in general, and the Concept Plan
in particular, has been positive. Reaction from area hoteliers has been mixed. Some are quite
supportive of the idea, believe it would be valuable to them and the community, and feel the
proposed organization and its focus is appropriate. Others, while not cheerleaders, acknowledge the
concept has merit and would be willing to cooperate. There are others however that are doubtful
that such an organization would provide an adequate return on investment. More specifically, they
indicated that the room revenue generated by such an organization would have to be approximately
10 times the room tax revenue provided in order for them to feel such an investment was financially
advantageous. They recognize the long-term benefit but have concerns about putting their
properties at a competitive disadvantage with neighboring communities without such a room tax.
NEXT STEPS:
Staff would suggest one remaining step be taken in the public process to consider the formation of a
CVB. In this case staff believes a town hall-type meeting with area stakeholders would be in order.
With the city’s commitment to community engagement, it is important that entities most impacted
by a CVB have a voice in its development. Those invited to such a meeting would include, but not
be limited to: hoteliers, restaurants, TwinWest Chamber representatives, Parks & Recreation,
School District, Park Nicollet, Parktacular, merchants, entertainment venues, other area businesses,
and the JCC.
Staff would also further investigate the logistics of other CVBs. Staff would investigate how other
CVBs are structured, as well as review their by-laws, budget, staffing and other organizational
elements.
Assuming all goes well with the above public process, staff would then prepare the organizational
documents to create a CVB and put a lodging tax into effect.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
The formation of a convention and visitors bureau would require approval by the City Council and
a lodging tax of up to 3% to serve as the organization’s primary revenue source. Over time, such an
organization would generate additional economic activity within the city.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged community.
Attachments: Convention and Visitors Bureau Concept Plan
Prepared by: Greg Hunt, Economic Development Coordinator
Reviewed by: Kevin Locke, Community Development Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Special Study Session Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 2)
Subject: Convention and Visitors Bureau Page 3
22
Background
In 2009, the St. Louis Park City Council asked City staff to explore the viability of a convention and visitors
bureau for St. Louis Park given the increasing number of hotel rooms and other amenities within the city.
The City partnered with the TwinWest Chamber of Commerce as it began this process, met with each St
Louis Park hotelier, and held focus groups with other community partners, including business, recreation,
and educational institutions.
While each stakeholder group had its own observations and questions, several things became clear:
• St. Louis Park has unrealized market potential for increasing its annual number of business and leisure
travels;
• St. Louis Park has a sufficient number of hotel rooms, meeting spaces, and community amenities to a
commodate such travelers;
• St. Louis Park could benefit greatly from community marketing efforts and the services that a convention
and visitors bureau could provide;
• St. Louis Park could likely financially support a convention and visitors bureau; and
• St. Louis Park is a destination that should be marketed for all it has to offer
Although the City began introducing coordinated marketing efforts into its general operations through the
creation of a communications division approximately three years ago, this division is tasked with marketing
the City’s services, programs, initiatives and goals to residents, business owners and the Twin Cities at large.
The City’s role is not to engage in the promotion and marketing of private business, which should be the role
of a convention and visitors bureau.
What Makes St. Louis Park a Destination?
Location
St. Louis Park offers a central location within the inner ring of the Twin Cities that is both safe and con-
venient. Located immediately west of Minneapolis, the city is less than 5 miles from downtown and 15
miles from Minneapolis/St. Paul International Airport (MSP). From St. Louis Park the travelling public can
enjoy direct access to I-394, US169, SH7, SH100 as well as close proximity to SH62. Given its ease of ac-
cess, meeting and event planners are increasingly seeing St. Louis Park as a desirable hub for functions and
overnight stays. Within the next few years, getting to and from St. Louis Park will be even easier when the
Southwest Light Rail Transit (SWLRT) opens three stations in the city providing direct access to downtown
Minneapolis. These stations will be located in proximity to Highway 25 & Belt Line Blvd., Highway 7 &
Wooddale Ave., and Louisiana Ave. & Oxford St.
2
Special Study Session Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 2)
Subject: Convention and Visitors Bureau Page 4
3
Amenities
As a result of its pivotal location, St. Louis Park is a convenient place to hold an event and is home to one
of the largest offerings of hotel rooms outside of Minneapolis and St. Paul. St. Louis Park augments these
offerings with a growing and unique mix of amenities. The following list is representational and not all
inclusive.
Hopitality
Hotel Rooms
• Double Tree 297
• Minneapolis Marriott West 195
• Spring Hill Suites 126
• Homewood Suites 124
• Towne Place Suites 106
• Lakeland Inn 24
Subtotal 872
Planned Hotels Rooms
• Marriott Courtyard 162
Subtotal 162
Total 1,034
Travelers Assistance
• American Automobile Association (AAA), St. Louis Park
Shopping Venues
Local Restaurants Shops/Services
• The West End 9 15
• Knollwood Mall 6 29
• Excelsior and Grand 4 12
• TexaTonka 6 10
• Costco/Home Depot 7 8
• Byerlys/Target
• Excelsior Boulevard
• NordicWare Factory Outlet
Immediate Area
• Ridgedale Shopping Center
• Southdale Shopping Center
• Galleria Shopping Center
• Uptown
• 50th & France
• Downtown Minneapolis
• Mall of America
• Eden Prairie Center
Special Study Session Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 2)
Subject: Convention and Visitors Bureau Page 5
44
Restaurants
A wide variety of dining choices from comfortable elegance to fast food, from American to various ethnici-
ties are available throughout St. Louis Park and in close proximity. Within the last few years, St. Louis Park
has greatly expanded its restaurant offerings and has become a dining destination within the Twin Cities.
Entertainment
Local
• Kerasotes ShowPlace Theatres - state-of-the-art 14 screen movie complex
• Mann St. Louis Park Cinema 6
• Jewish Community Center
• St. Louis Park High School
• St. Louis Park Library
• Wolfe Park Veterans’ Memorial Amphitheater
• Roller Garden Skating Center
• Park Tavern
• TexaTonka Lanes
Immediate Area
• Guthrie Theater, Minneapolis
• Orchestra Hall, Minneapolis
• Ordway Center for the Performing Arts, St. Paul
• Northrop Auditorium, Minneapolis
• Target Center, Minneapolis
• Xcel Energy Center, St. Paul
• Orpheum Theater, Minneapolis
• Children’s Theater, Minneapolis
• The Dakota, Minneapolis
• First Avenue, Minneapolis
• Famous Dave’s, Uptown Minneapolis
• Lake Harriett Band Shell
• Target Field, Minneapolis
• Midway Stadium, St. Paul
• HHH Metro Dome, Minneapolis
• Minneapolis Convention Center
• Mall of America, Bloomington
• Minnesota Zoo, Apple Valley
• Como Zoo, St. Paul
• ValleyFair, Shakopee
• Canterbury Downs, Shakopee
• Chanhassen Dinner Theatre, Chanhassen
• Plymouth Playhouse, Plymouth
• Old Log Theater, Excelsior
Special Study Session Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 2)
Subject: Convention and Visitors Bureau Page 6
5
Museums/Historical Places
Local
• Pavek Museum of Broadcasting
• Historic Milwaukee Rd Depot, Jorvig Park, St. Louis Park
• Jewish Historical Society of the Upper Midwest
Immediate Area
• General Mills Betty Crocker Kitchens, Golden Valley
• The Works Technology Discovery Center, Edina
• Walker Art Center, Minneapolis
• Minneapolis Institute of Arts, Minneapolis
• Mill City Museum, Minneapolis
• Minnesota Historical Society
• Science Museum of Minnesota, St. Paul
• Minnesota Children’s Museum, St. Paul
• Historic Fort Snelling, St. Paul
Recreational Facilities
Local
• Westwood Nature Center (160- acre nature preserve)
• 24 miles of biking/hiking trails that connects from Chaska to downtown Minneapolis
• 52 city parks (including two off-leash dog parks)
• 5 Park Pavilions
• 6 Park Picnic Shelters
• The Rec Center (2 indoor ice arenas, outdoor Aquatic Park & Skateboard Park)
• Oak Hill Splash Pad
• Skippy Field baseball complex
• Bally Total Fitness
• LA Fitness
• Lifetime Fitness
• St. Louis Park school facilities
• Minneapolis Golf Club, St. Louis Park
• Minikahda Club, border of St. Louis Park & Minneapolis
• Meadowbrook Golf Course, border of St. Louis Park & Minneapolis
• Interlachen Country Club, Edina
• Edina Country Club, Edina
• Brookview Golf Course, Golden Valley
• Golden Valley Country Club, Golden Valley
• Oak Ridge Country Club, Hopkins
Immediate Area
• Edinborough Park, Edina
• Chain of Lakes, Minneapolis (including Cedar Lake, Lake Calhoun, Lake Harriet, and Lake of the
Isles)
• Three Rivers Park District
• Hyland Park Reserve, Bloomington
• MN Landscape Arboretum, Chanhassen
• Water Park of America, Bloomington
Special Study Session Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 2)
Subject: Convention and Visitors Bureau Page 7
66
Community Festivals and Events
Local
• Parktacular
• Summer Concert Series
• Jewish Humor Festival
• July 4th Fireworks
• Farmers Market on the Plaza
• Various sports tournaments
Immediate Area
• Uptown Art Festival
• Edina Art Fair
• Aquatennial
• Holidazzle
• State Fair
• Art a Whirl
• Winter Carnival
• Twin Cities Marathon
Outdoor Public Art
Local
• Allegory of Excelsior, Excelsior & Grand
• Aurora Organ, The West End
• Bee Way, The West End
• Family Celebration, Homewood Suites
• Windtrace, Ellipse on Excelsior Plaza
• Harmony, Hoigaard Village
• W. 36th Street
• Dream Elevator, Wooddale Pointe Plaza
Immediate Area
• Various pieces on the grounds of General Mills Corporate Headquarters
• Minneapolis Sculpture Garden
• Various outdoor art pieces downtown Minneapolis
Medical Facilities
Local
• Park Nicollet Clinic
• Methodist Hospital
• Frauenshuh Cancer Center
• Melrose Institute
• The Emily Program
• Davita Kidney Dialysis Center
• St. Louis Park Dialysis
• LifeScan Upright, MRI
Special Study Session Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 2)
Subject: Convention and Visitors Bureau Page 8
7
Office Facilities
There is approximately 2.75 million square of office space within a mile of The West End area. An additional
1.1 million square feet of office space has been approved for development at The West End. International
companies and other major employers are located here and in close proximity.
Why should St. Louis Park create a Convention & Visitors Bureau?
As a result of St. Louis Park's location and facilities, it’s understandable why St. Louis Park is increasingly
being seen as a desirable hub for overnight stays.
Given all the amenities in St. Louis Park as well as nearby, St. Louis Park is a logical destination for business
and leisure travelers. Yet St. Louis Park lacks a means for making the travelling public fully aware of all that
it has to offer. Currently there is no organization charged with marketing the city and packaging its venues
and amenities. Such activities do not coincide with the mission of the City of St. Louis Park or that of the
TwinWest Chamber of Commerce. Nor are convention and visitors bureaus in nearby cities likely to promote
St. Louis Park as a destination beyond “overflow facilities”. Area businesses have indicated that they would
appreciate the convenience of a local convention and visitors bureau and would utilize its services so as to
direct their guests to places to stay, eat, shop, and recreate while in town. Local meeting, event, and sports
tournament organizers have likewise expressed a need for event planning, visitor services and promotion.
If a convention and visitors bureau were formed in St. Louis Park it could fill the above needs, drive addi-
tional travelers and visitors to St. Louis Park as well as generate additional economic activity within the city.
What would be the purpose of a Convention & Visitors Bureau?
The creation of a convention and visitors bureau would allow St. Louis Park to realize its market potential
for attracting travelers, meetings and events. A convention and visitors bureau could specialize in developing
conventions, meetings, conferences, community events and visitations within St. Louis Park.
A convention and visitors bureau would be charged with marketing St. Louis Park locally, regionally and
nationally as a convenient location within the Twin Cities and to provide customer service to
business and leisure travelers; area facilities; employers, as well as community organizations.
Special Study Session Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 2)
Subject: Convention and Visitors Bureau Page 9
88
Why not partner with other local bureaus?
St. Louis Park is in a competitive marketplace with the cities of Minneapolis, St. Paul, Bloomington as well
as northern suburbs; each offering a tourism bureau. If created, the St. Louis Park convention and visitors
bureau would need to develop strategic partnerships with not only the aforementioned tourism bureaus, but
also other local and regional tourism bureaus (Eagan, Minneapolis North, Burnsville, etc.) in the area. St.
Louis Park provides one of the larger offerings of hotel rooms in the metro area and the community is ripe
for promoting itself as a great destination hub in the region.
How would a Convention & Visitors Bureau be Funded?
Minn. Stat. §469.190, Subd. 1 authorizes the City Council the ability to adopt an ordinance imposing a tax
of up to three percent (3%) of the gross receipts of lodging at a hotel, motel, rooming house, tourist court or
resort.
Ninety-five percent of the gross proceeds from any lodging tax must be used to fund a local convention or
tourism bureau for the purpose of marketing and promoting the city as a tourist or convention destination.
A convention and visitors bureau could also explore business memberships, grants and other revenue op-
portunities to augment its budget.
Expenditures
According to the opinion of the Minnesota Attorney General, the tax proceeds collected are limited to ex-
penditures for advertising or similar types of marketing or promotion of the City as a tourist or convention
center that enhances the attractiveness of the community.
How could a Convention & Visitors Bureau be managed?
A board of directors would be appointed representatives by the City of St. Louis Park, with representatives from
TwinWest Chamber of Commerce, hotels, retailers, schools and other businesses. The board would set policy,
approve annual budgets and hire staff. The bureau would likely be operated by a small staff headed by an
executive director.
Who stands to benefit from a Convention & Visitors Bureau?
A convention and visitors bureau could market on behalf of a wide variety of St. Louis Park businesses
which serve the traveling public. These may include lodging providers, restaurants, local attractions and
festivals, parks, museums, services, retail stores, golf courses, area employers and community organizations.
Special Study Session Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 2)
Subject: Convention and Visitors Bureau Page 10
9
Would the Convention and Visitors Bureau have a marketing strategy?
A convention and visitors bureau, in cooperation and consultation with its community partners, could focus
on:
• promoting St. Louis Park as a leisure tourism destination;
• developing St. Louis Park as a meetings and conventions destination;
• stimulating economic growth in the community in collaboration with the EDA;
• marketing all the amenities the community offers; and
• providing exceptional customer service
Leisure Tourism
Studies show that in the leisure travel market, consumers are planning shorter, regional vacations to drive
markets, which bodes well for St. Louis Park. Ensuring that St. Louis Park is thought of as a great “destina-
tion hub” will require innovative marketing efforts, such as direct advertising and marketing and dovetailing
on the recent success and media coverage on the Shops at West End and Excelsior & Grand. Consideration
should also be given to leveraging partnerships to boost regional marketing efforts with travel packaging –
e.g., hotel stay, dinner and transportation to and/from a Twins Game, for example.
Meetings and Conventions
St. Louis Park has many facilities within the community that can service the meeting and small convention
markets, and a convention and visitors bureau could develop this untapped market an recruit groups to the
community. Primary target market segments are state, regional and local business associations, medical,
sports and recreation groups, and religious and multi-cultural organizations.
St. Louis Park, with its close proximity to the Minneapolis Convention Center, could also be promoted as
an auxiliary location for larger national conventions.
Economic Growth
A convention and visitors bureau could work with the community’s Economic Development Authority
(EDA) to promote economic growth in the community. With the EDA fostering the development, redevel-
opment and revitalization of the business centers in St. Louis Park, while working to retain its base of exist-
ing businesses, the convention and visitors bureau could also augment efforts to recruit businesses that are
complementary with the community.
Marketing and Communications
An effective convention and visitors bureau requires a strong marketing and communications plan. The con-
vention and visitors bureau would maximize its advertising dollars by actively pursuing national, regional
and local media coverage through press releases, media and familiarization tours, and develop a strong
internet and social media presence, as well as traditional print and broadcast media.
Special Study Session Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 2)
Subject: Convention and Visitors Bureau Page 11
1010
Customer Service
A convention and visitors bureau would ensure that visitors enjoy St. Louis Park to the fullest extent possible
to stimulate return visits. It would focus on developing relationships with local, regional and national meet-
ing planners, including our large sports and recreation segment, in addition to servicing the individual tourist.
As customer expectations require sophisticated services to maintain a competitive advantage in the market-
place, a convention and visitors bureau would need to deliver outstanding levels of personal assistance to all
who utilize their services, from the large corporate meeting planner to the individual tourist.
See Attachment, “CVB Focus Areas” for possible goals for each marketing focus area.
What is the projected timeline for creating a Convention and Visitors Bureau and
what does the projected budget look like?
Projected Timeline
May/ June 2010
July/August 2010
September/October 2010
October/November 2010
November/December 2010
January/March 2011
April/May 2011
June 1, 2011
Receive direction from City Council on CVB formation
Prepare governance documents for presentation to City
Council and others
Adopt ordinance authorizing up to a 3% lodging tax
Begin collecting lodging tax
Determine final Board Makeup/Selection
Undertake office space needs assessment
Determine final staffing needs
Hire Staff
Marketing Development
Open for Business
Special Study Session Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 2)
Subject: Convention and Visitors Bureau Page 12
11
Revenue
Approx. Available Lodging Tax
Expenses
Staffing
Equipment/Misc
Space
Marketing
Special Fund
$566,000
$250,000
(Executive Director, Sales and Marketing, Support)
$100,000
$ 50,000
$100,000
$ 50,000 (consideration for transportation, promotions, etc.)
$550,000
Preliminary Projected Budget
It’s anticipated that a Convention & Visitors Bureau would have an annual budget of approximately
$550,000. Revenues from a lodging tax would significantly support the budget, however, additional rev-
enue would be captured from other businesses through the sale of advertising and sponsorships. Addition-
ally, it’s anticipated that the CVB would pursue other funding sources such as grants and partnerships. It’s
anticipated that more than $100,000 would be spent directly on marketing St. Louis Park and its hotels and
amenities annually.
Why is now the right time to create a Convention & Visitors Bureau?
In 2006, as part of Vision St. Louis Park, the St. Louis Park City Council reviewed and discussed the work
of eight vision action teams which consisted of participants from throughout the community. These groups
worked for six months to put together goals, action steps, timelines and suggestions for additional partner-
ships. The teams also developed a one-page statement on what St. Louis Park will look like in 2016 should
their dreams come true.
With the involvement of more than 750 residents, workers, businesspeople, organizations and agencies, the
initiative created a roadmap for the future of the City and fostered a strong community spirit.
Conclusions for the visioning process included a commitment to connecting and engaging our comunity,
being a leader in environmental stewardship, providing a well-maintained and diverse housing stock, and
promoting and integrating arts, culture, and community aesthetics in all City initiatives.
What this process taught us was that this community is proud of all that we have to offer and it’s time to
share all of that with the rest of our region, state and nation. A convention and visitors bureau will allow
us to accomplish that. In addition, the time is right given recent development in St. Louis Park. Significant
investments in the West End and neighboring hotel and medical facilities have added to the community buzz
and position St. Louis Park as an even stronger destination for visitors and travelers.
The traveling public, area facilities, employers and community organizations are currently in need of the
services that a convention and visitors bureau would provide, and the sooner such an entity is organized and
operating, the sooner they all would benefit.
Special Study Session Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 2)
Subject: Convention and Visitors Bureau Page 13
1212
Potential CVB Focus Areas
Leisure Tourism
A convention and visitors bureau could promote St. Louis Park as a leisure destination to the local, regional,
state and national travel markets by developing and implementing programs designed to generate room
nights; increase visitation to attractions; promote community offerings, such as festivals and sporting events,
and to impact retail establishments and restaurants.
Goal/Initiative – Increase Room Nights. A convention and visitors bureau could work to increase room night
stays, visits and business by leisure travelers from the local, regional, state and national markets.
Goal/Initiative - Maximize Vehicle Visitor Market. An initiative of a convention and visitors bureau could
be to work with AAA Minneapolis and others to promote St. Louis Park as a leisure destination to its local,
regional, state and national branches to capture and maximize the vehicle visitor market. A convention and
visitors bureau could also work with local, regional and state tour bus operators to provide same.
Goal/Initiative – Develop Local Support and Education. A convention and visitors bureau could work to edu-
cate the local community about St. Louis Park as a highly desirable leisure travel destination, which would
include working with our local festival and sporting event organizers. This could then be branched out to
regional, state and national markets.
Goal/Initiative – Develop Customer Promotions. A convention and visitors bureau could develop innovative
promotions to increase awareness of and travel to St. Louis Park as a leading leisure travel destination, which
may involve travel discounts or incentives.
Meetings, Conventions and Events
A convention and visitors bureau could develop the community as a meeting, convention and event
destination. Examples of some related goals could be:
Goal/Initiative – Promotion of Brand Presence to Market Segments. Allocate appropriate proportion of per-
sonnel to market St. Louis Park as a meeting and convention destination. This could include sales trips,
tradeshows, site visits and familiarization tours.
Goal/Initiative – Develop Promotional Budget. Allocate funds to promote brand presence to appropriate
market segments to market St. Louis Park as a meetings and conventions destination. In addition to advertis-
ing, this may include a transportation reserve fund or other resource pool that could provide a competitive
advantage to a convention and visitors bureau.
1
Special Study Session Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 2)
Subject: Convention and Visitors Bureau Page 14
13
Goal/Initiative – Training. Develop and utilize training to increase effectiveness of personnel devoted to
promoting St. Louis Park as a meeting and convention destination.
Goal/Initiative – Develop Multi-Cultural Market. St. Louis Park is a diverse community and a convention
and visitors bureau could look at ways to maximize this advantage and leverage St. Louis Park’s reputa-
tion for diversity and unique characteristics to attract these groups (i.e., Jewish, Seniors, Women, Asian and
Hispanic, etc.).
Goal/Initiative – Develop Sports Market. Continue to further develop St. Louis Park as a destination for lo-
cal, regional, state and national amateur sports teams.
Goal/Initiative – Develop Medical Market. Continue to further develop St. Louis Park as a destination for
renowned medical services – cancer center, eating disorder clinic, vascular center, working collaboratively
with our partners in the medical industry.
Goal/Initiative – Develop Event Market. Explore the expansion or creation of community events that would
attract visitors from the region, state or even nationally that could further enhance the community’s profile
(i.e., community festivals, art fairs, concert series, etc.).
Economic Growth
A convention and visitors bureau could work with the community’s Economic Development Authority
(EDA) to promote economic growth in the community. With the EDA fostering the development, redevel-
opment and revitalization of the business centers in St. Louis Park and working to retain its base of existing
businesses, the convention and visitors bureau could also compliment these efforts to recruiting businesses
that are compatible and complimentary.
Goal/Initiative – Develop Partnership with Economic Development Authority (EDA). Develop a strong
partnership with the EDA to assist in accomplishing its goals which in turn benefits a convention and visi-
tors bureau by allowing it to promote St. Louis Park as a viable and attractive community in which to visit
and do business.
Goal/Initiative – Develop Joint Marketing Goals. The EDA and convention and visitors bureau could work
collaboratively on joint marketing initiatives to encourage and promote all aspects of what St. Louis Park
has to offer.
Special Study Session Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 2)
Subject: Convention and Visitors Bureau Page 15
1414
Goal/Initiative – Maximize Resources. Many of the goals and desired outcomes of a convention and visitors
bureau and the EDA will be the same – promoting St. Louis Park as a desired location where people can live,
work, visit and play. These two entities could work collaboratively together (i.e., business retention, new job
creation, etc.) to identify these common goals and find ways to maximize the collective resources.
Marketing and Communications
A convention and visitors bureau should strive to increase awareness in the media and the public that St.
Louis Park is a meeting, convention and leisure destination. This could be accomplished with effective
public relations and advertising and marketing campaigns that promote St. Louis Park through advertising,
promotions, publications, website, research and public and media relations.
Goal/Initiative – Develop Media and Public Relations. Develop proactive media and public relations through
press releases to local, regional, state and national media and others.
Goal/Initiative – Develop Advertising Campaigns. Develop creative concepts that promote St. Louis Park as
an outstanding destination for meetings and conventions, group and trade shows, and the business, sporting,
medical and leisure tourism markets.
Goal/Initiative – Develop Promotional Materials. Develop promotional materials to support the efforts of
promoting St. Louis Park as a top destination for meetings and conventions, group and trade shows, and the
business, sporting, medical and leisure tourism markets.
Goal/Initiative – Implement E-Marketing Plan. Create and implement a comprehensive E-Marketing Plan to
reach that large number of the travel market that utilizes the internet to plan trips. This will include develop-
ment and implementation of a website and web-based marketing for the convention and visitors bureau.
Goal/Initiative – Training and Education. A convention and visitors bureau should encourage ongoing train-
ing, education and site visits for staff and volunteers to enhance first-hand knowledge of the attractions and
amenities in St. Louis Park and the surrounding area to result in the highest level of customer service pos-
sible.
14
Special Study Session Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 2)
Subject: Convention and Visitors Bureau Page 16
15
Visitors Center/Office
The main purpose of a convention and visitors bureau in St. Louis Park is to promote the community as a
year-round destination to identified market segments and to provide superior customer service to the leisure
and business travelers that visit the City. A convention and visitors bureau should provide thorough and effi-
cient customer service with outstanding collateral materials to visitors in order to facilitate longer overnight
stays and encourage return visits.
Goal/Initiative – Store-front Presence. A convention and visitors bureau may wish to consider a storefront
presence in a highly visible location within the community.
A few reasons why a store front is important are:
• Customer Service
• Convenience
• Credibility
• Visibility
Goal/Initiative – Awareness of Visitors Center. A convention and visitors bureau would be charged with
creating an awareness of the benefits of maintaining a visitors center to the local, regional, state and national
markets and the service offerings it can provide.
Special Study Session Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 2)
Subject: Convention and Visitors Bureau Page 17
Meeting Date: June 7, 2010
Agenda Item #: 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:
Fire Stations & Northside Park Updates.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Not applicable. This report is intended to update the Council on progress made on these projects.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Not applicable.
BACKGROUND:
Fire Stations
The design process for the fire stations is expected to take about 10 months from initial schematic
design to letting bids for construction. The design process has 3 major components:
1. the initial design work or schematic design;
2. design development when the initial designs are refined, and
3. construction documents, when the design concepts are transformed into plans and
specifications ready for bidding.
Cost estimates for each station will be prepared at each step in the design process to help with
decision making; and at each stage staff will meet with City Council before proceeding to the next
stage of design. The first cost estimates from construction manager Kraus-Anderson will be
presented to City Council in August.
Schedule
A revised schematic design schedule and overall project schedule is attached for your information.
The most notable changes are in the dates for Neighborhood Meeting #2 and #3. Neighborhood
Meeting #2 has been moved to Thursday, June 24. Neighborhood Meeting #3 is tentatively
scheduled for September.
Also, staff proposes to discuss the progress on the Fire Stations site planning in more detail at a
special study session on June 21 prior the regular City Council meeting.
Neighborhood Meeting #1
A neighborhood meeting was held on May 20, 2010. Notices were mailed to 1,500 residences
within 1,000 feet of the fire stations. Notices were also emailed to all neighborhood leaders in the
City. The meetings were also advertised on the city website, Park Update and other citywide
communications.
Special Study Session Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 3) Page 2
Subject: Fire Stations & Northside Park Updates
Only 12 people attended the first meeting. Most were neighbors living very near the station and
with a particular interest in the station nearest their house. Still, the conversations were helpful and
several goals and ideas were shared with staff and consultants. A summary of public input from the
meeting is attached for your information.
Northside Park
Parks and Recreation Staff prepared an application for Twins Stadium grant funds. Staff received
word this week that St. Louis Park was awarded $200,000. One stipulation of the grant funds is that
work begins in 2010. The Northside Park improvements were budgeted in the 2011 Capital
Improvements Plan. To meet the criteria of the grant, Parks and Recreation staff intends to begin
some work at the end of the 2010 baseball season. The work will include removing backstop fences,
etc.
The maximum grant award under this funding is $400,000. Parks and Recreation Staff intend to
apply again in 2011 for an additional $200,000.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
The projected cost is $14 million dollars for the fire station project. The estimated project cost for
Northside Park is $1 million.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
Not applicable.
Attachments: Schematic Design Schedule (as of June 1, 2010)
Neighborhood Meeting #1 Summary
Prepared by: Sean Walther, Senior Planner
Reviewed by: Kevin Locke, Community Development Director
Luke Stemmer, Fire Chief
Cindy Walsh, Parks and Recreation Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Two New Fire Stations
St. Louis Park, MN
Project no. 1007.1307.01
Tasks Attending Date Remarks Packet Due/Notification
Data Gathering 04/15/2010 to Property Surveys
Present Previous Studies
Project Directory
1 Kick-Off Meeting Design Team 5/3/2010 Fire Deparement Goals
Program Verification Review previous information
City Council Presentation 5/3/2010 Council to Approve Selection
2 Schematic Site Planning Design Team 5/10/2010 1 - 3:30pm Concept site plans
3 Scope Verification Working Group 5/17/2010 1 -2 pm Project Scope Verification
Schematic Building Planning Design Team 5/17/2010 2 - 3:30 pm Concept building plans
Neighborhood Meeting No. 1 5/20/2010 Vision Setting Session
4 Building Planning Massing Design Team 5/24/2010 1-3:30 pm Reivew of Neighborhood Mtg. Goals
5 Building Planning/Massing Design Team 5/28/2010 1-3:30 pm Mtg moved due to Memorial Day
5a Fire Department Update Fire Department 6/3/2010 8 - 9 am Review Progress with FD Staff
6 Building Planning/Massing Working Group 6/7/2010 1-2:00 pm Project Review
Design Team Sites and preliminary plans
City Council (Written Report)6/7/2010 Sean Walthers to prepare report Packet Due 6/2
7 Building Planning - Station no. 2 Design Team 6/14/2010 1-3:30 pm Detailed Planning/Massing
8 Building Planning - Station no. 1 Design Team 6/21/2010 1-3:30 pm Detailed Planning/Massing
City Council (Presentation)6/21/2010 6:00 -7:30pm Special Study Session Packet Due 6/16
Neighborhood Meeting No. 2 6/24/2010 Site/Plan Concepts w/ massing Notice Due 6/7
9 Project Update Working Group 6/28/2010 1-2 pm Resolve Parks Boundaries
Building Planning -Administration Design Team 2-3:30 pm Training Components
10 Building Planning - Living Quarters Design Team 7/12/2010 1-3:30 Building Imagery
Pricing Package to KA 7/14/2010
11 Project Update Working Group 7/19/2010 1-2 pm Review Results of Neigborhood Mtg.
Building Planning - Apparatus Bay Design Team 2-3:30 pm Building Imagery
City Council (Written Report)7/19/2010 Sean Walthers to prepare report Packet Due 7/14
12 Pricing Review Working Group 7/26/2010 Budget reconciliation
City Council (Study Session)8/2/2010 Packet Due 7/28
Neighborhood Meeting No. 3 9/16/2010 Site/Plan Concepts w/ massing Notice Due 8/30
Other Critical Dates
Pricing Package to KA 7/14/2010
Board Packet Due 28-Jul-10
Coucil Approval of Schematic Design 2-Aug-10
Schematic Design Schedule
June 1, 2010
Special Study Session Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 3)
Subject: Firestation and Northside Park Updates Page 3
MEETING NOTES Fire Stations Project
Date: May 20, 2010
Time: 6:45 p.m. – 8:15 p.m.
Location: Rec Center Banquet Room
Fire Station Neighborhood Meeting #1
Meeting Summary
KKE Architects and representatives from the City of St. Louis Park Fire, Community Development
and Parks and Recreation departments held the first of three planned neighborhood meetings for the
new fire station projects on May 20, 2010. The lists below are compilations of the concerns and
opportunities for each site that were raised by community members in attendance.
Station #1 Neighborhood Concerns and Opportunities
1. Will the park be expanded if there is leftover site?
2. How will the truck (apparatus) access be improved?
3. Could there be a warming house?
4. Could there be a public restroom for park users?
5. How will you address training noise and smoke (live fire training)?
6. How is the building going to relate to and/or be buffered from the adjacent properties?
7. Can the trees along Goodrich be protected?
8. Will the building be LEED certified? If so, what level?
9. Could the new building employ day lighting? Roof monitors? Solar tubes?
10. Where will the exterior lighting be, how will it affect the neighbors?
11. Could the trees along the Western edge of the property be replaced?
12. What are the alternatives to a large parking lot? Could it be grass for overflow parking?
Station #2 Neighborhood Concerns and Opportunities.
1. How will the views from homes be impacted?
2. Are there opportunities to better utilize the ice rink?
3. Are we planning for the future? (i.e. larger and more equipment)
4. Are we planning for alternative fuel vehicles?
5. Facility should be flexible.
6. Will there be a community meeting space?
7. Is hazard response included?
8. Can the loss to the park be balanced at the Eliot school site?
9. Will this be a polling/voting location?
Special Study Session Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 3)
Subject: Firestation and Northside Park Updates Page 4
Special Study Session Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 3) Subject: Firestation and Northside Park UpdatesPage 5
Special Study Session Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 3) Subject: Firestation and Northside Park UpdatesPage 6
Special Study Session Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 3) Subject: Firestation and Northside Park UpdatesPage 7
Special Study Session Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 3) Subject: Firestation and Northside Park UpdatesPage 8
Special Study Session Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 3) Subject: Firestation and Northside Park UpdatesPage 9
Special Study Session Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 3) Subject: Firestation and Northside Park UpdatesPage 10
Special Study Session Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 3) Subject: Firestation and Northside Park UpdatesPage 11
Special Study Session Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 3) Subject: Firestation and Northside Park UpdatesPage 12
Special Study Session Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 3) Subject: Firestation and Northside Park UpdatesPage 13
Special Study Session Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 3) Subject: Firestation and Northside Park UpdatesPage 14
Special Study Session Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 3) Subject: Firestation and Northside Park UpdatesPage 15
Special Study Session Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 3) Subject: Firestation and Northside Park UpdatesPage 16
Special Study Session Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 3) Subject: Firestation and Northside Park UpdatesPage 17
Meeting Date: June 7, 2010
Agenda Item #: 3a
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
MAY 17, 2010
1. Call to Order
President Finkelstein called the meeting to order at 7:20 p.m.
Commissioners present: President Finkelstein, Jeff Jacobs, Anne Mavity, Paul Omodt, Julia Ross,
Susan Sanger, and Sue Santa.
Commissioners absent: None.
Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), Economic Development Coordinator (Mr. Hunt),
Community Development Director (Mr. Locke), Public Works Director (Mr. Rardin), Assistant
Zoning Administrator (Mr. Morrison), Assistant Planner (Mr. Fulton), and Recording Secretary
(Ms. Wirth).
Also present: Stephen Bubul, Kennedy & Graven.
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Minutes
3a. Economic Development Authority Minutes of April 19, 2010
3b. Economic Development Authority Minutes of April 26, 2010
The minutes were approved as presented.
4. Approval of Agenda
The agenda was approved as presented.
5. Reports
5a. EDA Vendor Claims
It was moved by Commissioner Santa, seconded by Commissioner Ross, to approve the
EDA Vendor Claims.
The motion passed 7-0.
6. Old Business
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 3a) Page 2
Subject: Economic Development Authority Meeting Minutes of May 17, 2010
6a. Amended and Restated Redevelopment Contract with Duke Realty Limited
Partnership and related Taxable TIF Note.
EDA Resolutions No. 10-07 and 10-08
Mr. Hunt reviewed the proposed key revisions to the Redevelopment Contract which were
as follows: extend the commencement and completion deadlines for Phases IIb (the first
office building), IIc (the hotel), and III (the remaining office buildings) by five years;
eliminate the references to the Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) with the City of Golden
Valley; remove the Utica utility relocations and completion of Utica Avenue from Phase I
with substantial completion by the earlier of December 31, 2016 or the date required by the
Metropolitan Council; and authorize the incorporation of multifamily housing into the
project with at least 100 multifamily housing units and a provision that the total number of
multifamily rental housing units in all Phases combined may not exceed 300 units
contingent upon approval by the Council of an amendment to the PUD. A fifth key
revision is that all subsequent Phases must comply with the City’s Green Building Policy.
Mr. Hunt noted the staff report details other minor revisions to the proposed contract but
none alter the contract’s intent.
Mr. Hunt explained that in the current contract, the EDA agreed to reimburse Duke Realty
for redeveloper public improvements and other public redevelopment costs it incurred
related to The West End project with TIF notes in an aggregate amount not to exceed $21.1
million. The initial Note will be secured by available tax increment generated by the entire
TIF District with a term of 20 years and be subordinate to the previously issued Senior TIF
Bonds of $5 million for street improvements to Park Place Boulevard in conjunction with
The West End project. Staff recommended approval of the amended and restated contract
as well as the related TIF note since the developer met all the required conditions.
Commissioner Sanger stated her support for the development and that she understands the
need to push back the completion dates for the office buildings due to the current market
conditions. She stated she also agrees with the proposal to change the hotel site to multi-
family, which was part of the first plan considered by the Council.
Commissioner Mavity thanked staff for its work on this matter. She noted the final contract
indicates “hotel or housing” and asked if it is an open item. Mr. Hunt explained the
amended contract allows for the possibility of multi family housing but the exact details have
yet to be worked out with the developer.
Commissioner Mavity stated her support for staff to pursue the possibility of including
affordable units.
President Finkelstein noted the action being considered does not impose additional financial
obligation on the City. Mr. Hunt stated that is correct and the Senior TIF bond takes
precedence over the TIF note being considered tonight.
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 3a) Page 3
Subject: Economic Development Authority Meeting Minutes of May 17, 2010
President Finkelstein stated that while he does not want to require affordable housing, he
thinks it would be desirable and worthy of discussion with the developer...
It was moved by Commissioner Sanger, seconded by Commissioner Mavity, to adopt EDA
Resolution No. 10-07 approving an amended and restated contract for private
redevelopment among the City of St. Louis Park, the St. Louis Park Economic Development
Authority, and Duke Realty Limited Partnership.
The motion passed 7-0.
It was moved by Commissioner Sanger, seconded by Commissioner Mavity, to adopt EDA
Resolution No. 10-08 awarding the sale of, and providing the form, terms, covenants, and
directions for the issuance of its $21,100,000 Taxable Tax Increment Revenue Note, Series
2010A.
The motion passed 7-0.
Pat Mascia, Duke Realty Corp., advised that they have signed a purchase agreement with a
housing developer and anticipate a meeting with staff this week regarding that project. With
regard to the retail component, The West End has signed leases or leases in process for
almost 70% of the space. Mr. Mascia reviewed the retail businesses that had already opened
and indicated that two restaurants would be expanding their space. He stated they hope to
get an office tenant for the second level space and while there were still some challenges given
the economy, activity is picking up.
7. New Business – None.
8. Communications – None.
9. Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 7:34 p.m.
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Secretary President
Meeting Date: June 7, 2010
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 May 15, 2010 through May 31, 2010.
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
6/2/2010CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 6:33:39R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
1Page -Council Check Summary
5/31/2010 -5/15/2010
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
888.24DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A TRAININGCITIZENS INDEPENDENT BANK
888.24
1,250.00DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICESGALLAGHER RISK MGMT SERVICES I
1,250.00
1,757.00DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESHOISINGTON KOEGLER GROUP INC
1,757.00
704.00AMERICAN INN PROP DEVELOPMENT LEGAL SERVICESKENNEDY & GRAVEN
750.00DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A LEGAL SERVICES
1,454.00
2,980.00AMERICAN INN PROP DEVELOPMENT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESMCCOMBS FRANK ROOS ASSOC INC.
2,980.00
42.27DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A OFFICE SUPPLIESOFFICE DEPOT
42.27
5,559.80DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A PLANNINGSEH
5,559.80
1,711.60DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESSRF CONSULTING GROUP INC
1,711.60
103.00DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPSST LOUIS PARK SUNRISE ROTARY
103.00
574.00DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPSTWIN WEST CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
135.00DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
709.00
225.00DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPSULI-THE URBRAN LAND INSTITUTE
225.00
Report Totals 16,679.91
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 5a)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 2
Meeting Date: June 7, 2010
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:
Issuance of a $4.3 million Tax Exempt TIF Revenue Note (Series 2010A)--Hoigaard Village Project.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Motion to adopt a resolution awarding the sale of, and providing the form, terms, covenants, and
directions for the issuance of a $4,300,000 tax exempt tax increment revenue refunding Note
(Hoigaard Village Project), Series 2010A.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Does the EDA find that the conditions required for the issuance of the proposed tax exempt TIF
Note related to the Hoigaard Village project have been met?
BACKGROUND:
On April 26th, the EDA extended the maturity date for the taxable TIF Note Series 2006A related to
the Hoigaard Village project. The extension was approved in anticipation of the EDA issuing a new
$4.3 million tax exempt TIF revenue refunding Note. On May 10th, the Redeveloper updated the
EDA on the status of the Hoigaard Village project and discussed in detail the need for the issuance
of a new tax exempt TIF revenue refunding Note. The attached Resolution authorizes issuance of
the new tax exempt TIF Note and the attached draft Note is consistent with the discussion of May
10th. The conditions for issuance of the tax exempt Note have been met by the Redeveloper. Staff
and the EDA’s Bond Counsel recommend adoption of the attached resolution authorizing the
issuance of the proposed tax exempt TIF revenue Note for Hoigaard Village.
Past Action and Description of TIF Note
On March 6, 2006, the EDA entered into a Redevelopment Contract with Union Land II LLC
(Redeveloper) in which the Redeveloper committed to acquire 6 parcels (generally at the northwest
corner of 36th Street and Highway 100), consisting of a combined 9.6 acres, remove the existing
structures, remediate the contaminated soils, and prepare the area for redevelopment. In their place,
the Redeveloper agreed to construct a two-phase, four-stage, mixed use redevelopment called
“Hoigaard Village”. To facilitate the project the EDA agreed to provide the Redeveloper with Tax
Increment Financing once certain “Public Redevelopment Costs” had been incurred in connection with
the redevelopment of the site.
The Contract was subsequently amended by a First Amendment dated as of July 10, 2006, a Second
Amendment dated as of March 5, 2007, a Third Amendment dated as of April 28, 2008, and a Fourth
Amendment dated as of August 17, 2009 pursuant to which, among other things, the EDA agreed to
issue Taxable Tax Increment Revenue Notes to reimburse the Redeveloper for certain eligible costs
related to the redevelopment property.
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7a) Page 2
Subject: Issuance of a $4.3 million Tax Exempt TIF Revenue Note (Series 2010A) – Hoigaard Village project
Pursuant to the Contract, the EDA issued and sold a $1,663,000 Taxable TIF Note, Series 2006A
for the Phase I portion of the project (Harmony Vista) and a $2,540,000 Taxable TIF Note, Series
2007A for the Phase II portion of the project (Camerata Apartments). The revenue notes were
issued with a taxable interest rate of 7.25%, had maturity dates of February 1, 2010 and February 1,
2011 respectively and were secured by the pledge of 95% of the tax increment generated from all
parcels located within the project area (whether developed upon or not). As allowed in the Contract
the Redeveloper may request that the EDA refinance the outstanding principal amount of any of its
initial taxable tax increment revenue notes, by issuing tax-exempt tax increment revenue notes, provided
that the Redeveloper meets certain conditions and secures a purchaser for any such notes.
Recently the Redeveloper secured a purchaser for the two taxable TIF notes. In order to successfully
complete negotiations with such purchaser, the EDA approved extensions related to the maturity
date of the Series 2006A Taxable TIF Note, so as to aid the Redeveloper’s efforts to refinance the
project. Pursuant to Section 7.4 of the Redevelopment Contract, the Redeveloper has approached
the EDA to complete the tax exempt refinancing of the two taxable TIF notes.
The current structure of the taxable TIF revenue notes have maturity dates of July 1, 2010 and
February 1, 2011 respectively and therefore need to be paid in full via a refinancing. It was
anticipated when these revenue notes were issued in 2006 and 2007 that the EDA would do tax
exempt “take out” financing as outlined in the Redevelopment Contract. The reason for the EDA
agreeing to tax exempt financing is that it reduces the interest cost associated with the financing
(7.25% vs. the proposed 5% rate). Also, under the taxable financing, the Redeveloper has personal
guarantees for payments on the notes, which will go away when they are refinanced as tax exempt.
Dougherty Funding LLC, the registered owner of the Notes, has consented to their proposed
refinancing.
The proposed tax exempt Series 2010A Note will be issued in the maximum aggregate principal
amount of $4,300,000 and will be secured by available tax increment generated from the Stage 1 and 4
properties (the stages that have already been constructed). Tax increment from Stages 2 and 3 would
be pledged to any additional Initial Notes. The Series 2010A Note will bear interest at a rate of 5%,
and will have a term of 13 years. Consistent with the City’s TIF Policy, Fiscal Disparities would be
taken from inside the district. A 5% administrative fee would also be charged to the district which is
the EDA’s typical rate.
Tax exempt take out financing reduces interest costs to the project which means a greater likelihood
that there will be sufficient TIF to repay the debt and payoff the obligation sooner. If the obligation
is paid off sooner, the EDA can have the choice to use any future increment generated from the
project to complete other redevelopment projects in the city (within pooling restrictions) or chose to
decertify the district early. However, it should be noted that the tax exempt financing contemplated
here will require 95 percent of the increment generated to pay off the obligation and that the entire
term of the original district will be required (payment through February 1, 2023). The extended
term of the district (7 years) that was approved through special legislation in 2009 is not pledged or
available to pay debt service on this revenue note.
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7a) Page 3
Subject: Issuance of a $4.3 million Tax Exempt TIF Revenue Note (Series 2010A) – Hoigaard Village project
The Redeveloper understands that the EDA makes no warranties regarding the amount of available
Tax Increment, or that revenues pledged to the Note will be sufficient to pay the principal and
interest on the Note. The Redeveloper further understands that estimates of Tax Increment prepared
by the EDA or its financial advisors in connection with the applicable portions of the Elmwood
Village TIF District are not intended as representations on which the Redeveloper may rely.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
In accordance with the Redevelopment Contract, the EDA agreed to reimburse Union Land II for
certain Redeveloper Public Improvements and Other Public Redevelopment Costs it incurred related to
the Hoigaard Village project through issuance of one or more pay-as-you-go TIF notes and those Notes
may be refinanced with one or more tax exempt Notes. The Redeveloper is required to meet certain
parameters under the Contract for the EDA to consider issuing take out financing. Given that the
Redeveloper has met the required conditions the EDA’s consent to the refinancing cannot be
unreasonably withheld provided the terms of the refinancing are reasonable due to market
conditions.
The EDA is being asked to authorize the issuance of a tax exempt TIF Note in the maximum
aggregate principal amount of $4,300,000 secured by available tax increment generated from the Stage
1 and 4 properties within the Hoigaard Village redevelopment. The issuance of the tax exempt TIF
revenue note will not require any cash payments from the EDA or City. All costs associated with the
Note issuance (Kennedy & Graven, Ehlers and Dougherty) are paid from gross proceeds of the tax
increment.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
The Hoigaard Village project is consistent with the City’s Vision; especially the Strategic Directions
concerning gathering places, public art, trails, sidewalks and transportation.
Attachments: Resolution of Approval
Prepared by: Greg Hunt, Economic Development Coordinator
Reviewed by: Kevin Locke, Community Development Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, EDA Executive Director and City Manager
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7a) Page 4
Subject: Issuance of a $4.3 million Tax Exempt TIF Revenue Note (Series 2010A) – Hoigaard Village project
EDA RESOLUTION NO. 10-______
RESOLUTION AWARDING THE SALE OF, AND
PROVIDING THE FORM, TERMS, COVENANTS AND
DIRECTIONS FOR THE ISSUANCE OF A TAX EXEMPT
TAX INCREMENT REVENUE REFUNDING NOTE
(HOIGAARD VILLAGE PROJECT), SERIES 2010A, IN THE
PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF $____________.
BE IT RESOLVED BY the Board of Commissioners ("Board") of the St. Louis Park Economic
Development Authority, St. Louis Park, Minnesota (the "Authority") as follows:
Section 1. Authorization; Award of Sale.
1.01. Background. Pursuant to that certain Contract for Private Redevelopment between
the Authority and Union Land II LLC and assigns (the “Redeveloper”), dated as of March 6, 2006,
as amended (the “Agreement”), the Authority issued and sold two Initial Notes, consisting of its
$1,663,000 Amended Taxable Tax Increment Revenue Note (Hoigaard Village Project), Series
2006A, dated May 1, 2010, and its $2,540,000 Taxable Tax Increment Revenue Note (Hoigaard
Village Project), Series 2007A, dated April 26, 2007 (together, the “Refunded Notes”), for the
purpose of financing certain public redevelopment costs of Redevelopment Project No. 1 in the City
of St. Louis Park (the “City”), secured by a parity pledge of Available Tax Increment (all capitalized
terms herein have the meaning assigned in the Agreement unless the context clearly requires
otherwise).
1.02. Issuance of Series 2010A Note. The Agreement provides for the issuance of
Refunding Notes to refinance the outstanding principal amount of any Initial Note, secured by a
pledge of Available Tax Increment, upon satisfaction of certain conditions described in the
Agreement. The Authority hereby finds and determines that (a) it is in the best interests of the
Authority that it issue and sell its Tax Increment Revenue Refunding Note (Hoigaard Village
Project), Series 2010A in the aggregate principal amount of $________ (the “Series 2010A Note”)
for the purpose of refinancing the outstanding principal amount of the Refunded Notes, and (b) that
the conditions described in the Agreement for issuance of Refunding Notes have been met.
1.03. Issuance, Sale, and Terms of the Series 2010A Note. The Series 2010A Note is
issued pursuant to the Agreement. The Authority hereby authorizes issuance of the Series 2010A
Note in accordance with terms set forth in this Resolution to ________________ (the “Purchaser”),
at a price of par. The Series 2010A Note shall be dated as of the date of delivery thereof and shall
bear interest at the rate of 5.0% per annum to maturity. The Series 2010A Note shall be payable in
semi-annual installments of principal and interest in the amounts, at the rates and on the dates (the
"Payment Dates"), and shall bear such other terms, all as provided in the form of the Series 2010A
Note set forth in Section 2 hereof.
Section 2. Form of Series 2010A Note. The Series 2010A Note shall be in substantially
the following form, with the blanks to be properly filled in as of the date of issue:
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7a) Page 5
Subject: Issuance of a $4.3 million Tax Exempt TIF Revenue Note (Series 2010A) – Hoigaard Village project
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
No. R-1 $
ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
TAX INCREMENT REVENUE NOTE
(HOIGAARD VILLAGE PROJECT),
SERIES 2010
Interest Rate
Maturity Date
Date of Original
Issue
5.0 % February 1, 2023 June __, 2010
The St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority (the “Authority”), for value received,
certifies that it is indebted and hereby promises to pay to ___________________ or registered
assigns (the “Owner”), but solely from the sources and according to the terms described herein, the
principal sum of $___________, and to pay interest thereon at the interest rate set forth above, as
and to the extent set forth herein. This Note is issued pursuant to the Resolution (defined hereafter)
and that certain Contract for Private Redevelopment between the Authority and Union Land II,
LLC (“Redeveloper”) dated as of March 6, 2006, as amended by a First Amendment thereto dated as
of July 10, 2006, a Second Amendment thereto dated as of March 5, 2007, a Third Amendment
thereto dated as of April 28, 2008, and a Fourth Amendment thereto dated as of August 17, 2009
(collectively, the “Agreement”). Capitalized terms herein have the meaning assigned in the
Agreement unless the context clearly requires otherwise.
1. Payments. Principal and interest (“Payments”) shall be paid on August 1, 2010 and
each February 1 and August 1 thereafter to and including February 1, 2023 (“Payment Dates”) solely
from and to the extent of the sources set forth in Section 3 hereof. Payments shall be applied first to
accrued interest, and then to unpaid principal.
Payments are payable by mail to the address of the Owner as set forth in the Authorization and
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7a) Page 6
Subject: Issuance of a $4.3 million Tax Exempt TIF Revenue Note (Series 2010A) – Hoigaard Village project
Registration provisions of this Note, or such other address as the Owner may designate upon 30 days
written notice to the Authority. Payments on this Note are payable in any coin or currency of the
United States of America which, on the Payment Date, is legal tender for the payment of public and
private debts.
2. Interest. Interest at the rate stated herein shall accrue on the unpaid principal,
commencing on the date of original issue. Interest shall be computed on the basis of a year of 360
days and charged for actual days principal is unpaid.
3. Available Tax Increment. Payments on this Note are payable on each Payment Date
solely from and in the amount of the Available Tax Increment. The term “Available Tax Increment”
means, on each Payment Date, 95% of the Tax Increment attributable to those portions of the
Redevelopment Property described in the Agreement as Stage 1 and Stage 4 as described in Exhibit
A attached hereto (the “Stage 1 and 4 Property”) and received by the Authority from the County
pursuant to the Tax Increment Act in the six month period before each Payment Date. The term
Tax Increment does not include any amounts retained by or payable to the State auditor under
Section 469.177, subd. 11 of the Tax Increment Act, or any amounts described in Section 469.174,
subd. 25, clauses (2) through (4) of the Tax Increment Act.
The Owner acknowledges that the TIF District includes properties other than the Stage 1
and 4 Property, and that the County remits Tax Increments to the Authority on the basis of the
captured tax capacity of the entire TIF District. Consequently, the Authority will need to determine
the amount of Available Tax Increment received from the entire TIF District that is properly
allocable to the Stage 1 and 4 Property. The Owner acknowledges and agrees that the Available Tax
Increment allocable to the Stage 1 and 4 Property, if the Redeveloper has paid the property taxes on
the Stage 1 and 4 Property in accordance with law, will be calculated by the Authority by
determining the captured tax capacity of the Stage 1 and 4 Property and the percentage that such
captured tax capacity of the Stage 1 and 4 Property bears to the total captured tax capacity of the
TIF District excluding parcels on which taxes are delinquent (the “Redeveloper’s Percentage”). The
Available Tax Increment allocated by the Authority to the Stage 1 and 4 Property will be equal to
the total Available Tax Increment received by the Authority from the TIF District multiplied by the
Redeveloper’s Percentage.
The Owner acknowledges that the amount of Available Tax Increment that is determined by the
Authority to be properly allocable to the Stage 1 and 4 Property could be less than the property taxes
paid by the Redeveloper on the captured tax capacity of the Stage 1 and 4 Property as a result of
decreases in valuation of other properties in the TIF District to a valuation that is less than that upon
which the original tax capacity was based.
Failure by the Authority to pay all accrued interest on this Note on any Payment Date is defined
as and declared to be and to constitute an Event of Default under this Note; provided that the Authority
shall have no obligation to pay principal of and interest on this Note on each Payment Date from any
source other than the Available Tax Increment and the failure of the Authority to pay all or any portion of
principal on this Note on any Payment Date shall not constitute a default hereunder as long as the
Authority pays interest hereon to the extent of the Available Tax Increment.
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7a) Page 7
Subject: Issuance of a $4.3 million Tax Exempt TIF Revenue Note (Series 2010A) – Hoigaard Village project
4. Redemption of Note. This Note shall be subject to redemption on any date, at a
price of par plus accrued interest to the date of prepayment and redemption.
5. Default; Termination. At the Authority’s option, this Note shall terminate and the
Authority’s obligation to make any payments under this Note shall be discharged upon the
occurrence of certain Events of Default by the Redeveloper, as described in Section 9.2(b) and (c) of
the Agreement and relating to non-payment or delinquent payment of taxes, or willful reduction of
taxes, after expiration of the one-year cure period set forth in Section 9.2(c) of the Agreement.
6. Nature of Obligation. This Note is one of an issue in the total principal amount of
$__________ issued pursuant to an authorizing resolution (the “Resolution”) duly adopted by the
Authority on June 7, 2010, for the purpose of providing money to refund the outstanding principal
amount of certain tax increment revenue notes of the Authority, pursuant to and in full conformity
with the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota, including Minnesota Statutes, Sections
469.174 to 469.1799, as amended. This Note is a limited obligation of the Authority which is
payable solely from Available Tax Increment pledged to the payment hereof under the Resolution.
This Note and the interest hereon shall not be deemed to constitute a general obligation of the State
of Minnesota or any political subdivision thereof, including, without limitation, the Authority.
Neither the State of Minnesota, nor any political subdivision thereof shall be obligated to pay the
principal of or interest on this Note or other costs incident hereto except out of Available Tax
Increment, and neither the full faith and credit nor the taxing power of the State of Minnesota or
any political subdivision thereof is pledged to the payment of the principal of or interest on this
Note or other costs incident hereto.
This Note has been designated by the Authority as a “qualified tax-exempt obligation” for
purposes of Section 265(b)(3) of the federal Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended.
7. Registration and Transfer. This Note is issuable only as a fully registered note
without coupons to one (1) Registered Owner. As provided in the Resolution, and subject to certain
limitations set forth therein, this Note is transferable upon the books of the Registrar kept for that
purpose at the principal office of the Authority, by the Registered Owner hereof in person or by such
Registered Owner's attorney duly authorized in writing, upon surrender of this Note together with a
written instrument of transfer satisfactory to the Authority, duly executed by the Registered Owner.
Upon such transfer or exchange and the payment by the Registered Owner of any tax, fee, or
governmental charge required to be paid by the Authority with respect to such transfer or exchange,
there will be issued in the name of the transferee a new Note of the same aggregate principal
amount, bearing interest at the same rate and maturing on the same dates.
This Note shall be transferred or assigned only to an “accredited investor” within the meaning of
Regulation D of the Securities and Exchange Commission and only upon execution and delivery by
the purchaser of an investment letter substantially in the form described in the Resolution.
IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED AND RECITED that all acts, conditions, and things required by
the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota to be done, to exist, to happen, and to be
performed in order to make this Note a valid and binding limited obligation of the Authority
according to its terms, have been done, do exist, have happened, and have been performed in due
form, time and manner as so required.
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7a) Page 8
Subject: Issuance of a $4.3 million Tax Exempt TIF Revenue Note (Series 2010A) – Hoigaard Village project
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Board of Commissioners of the St. Louis Park Economic
Development Authority has caused this Note to be executed with the manual or facsimile signatures
of its President and Executive Director, all as of the Date of Original Issue specified above.
Executive Director President
AUTHENTICATION AND REGISTRATION PROVISIONS
This is the Note described in the within mentioned Resolution. The ownership of the unpaid
balance of the within Note is registered in the bond register of the Registrar, in the name of the
person last listed below.
Date of Registration Registered Owner Signature of Finance Director
______________, 2010
________________________
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7a) Page 9
Subject: Issuance of a $4.3 million Tax Exempt TIF Revenue Note (Series 2010A) – Hoigaard Village project
Exhibit A
Stage 1 and 4 Property
Lot 2, Block 1, Hoigaard Village Addition
And
Lot 2, Block 1, Hoigaard Village 2nd Addition
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7a) Page 10
Subject: Issuance of a $4.3 million Tax Exempt TIF Revenue Note (Series 2010A) – Hoigaard Village project
Section 3. Terms, Execution and Delivery.
3.01. Denomination, Payment. The Series 2010A Note shall be issued as a
typewritten note numbered R-l in the amount of $_________. The Series 2010A Note shall be
issuable only in fully registered form. Principal of and interest on the Series 2010A Note shall be
payable by check or draft issued by the Registrar described herein.
3.02. Dates; Interest Payment Dates. The Series 2010A Note shall be dated as of its
date of original issue. Principal of and interest on the Series 2010A Note shall be payable by
mail to the owner of record thereof as of the close of business on the fifteenth day of the month
preceding the Payment Date, whether or not such day is a business day.
3.03. Registration. The Authority hereby appoints the City Controller to perform the
functions of registrar, transfer agent and paying agent (the "Registrar"). The effect of
registration and the rights and duties of the Authority and the Registrar with respect thereto shall
be as follows:
(a) Register. The Registrar shall keep at its office a bond register in which the
Registrar shall provide for the registration of ownership of the Series 2010A Note and the
registration of transfers and exchanges of the Series 2010A Note.
(b) Transfer of Note. Upon surrender for transfer of the Series 2010A Note duly
endorsed by the Owner thereof or accompanied by a written instrument of transfer, in form
reasonably satisfactory to the Registrar, duly executed by the Owner thereof or by an attorney duly
authorized by the Owner in writing, the Registrar shall authenticate and deliver, in the name of the
designated transferee or transferees, a new Series 2010A Note of a like aggregate principal amount
and maturity, as requested by the transferor. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Series 2010A Note
shall be transferred only to an “accredited investor” within the meaning of Regulation D of the
Securities and Exchange Commission and only upon execution and delivery by the purchaser to the
Registrar of an investment letter substantially in the form of Schedule A hereto. The Registrar may
close the books for registration of any transfer after the fifteenth day of the month preceding each
Payment Date and until such Payment Date.
(c) Cancellation. The Series 2010A Note surrendered upon any transfer shall be
promptly cancelled by the Registrar and thereafter disposed of as directed by the Authority.
(d) Improper or Unauthorized Transfer. When the Series 2010A Note is presented
to the Registrar for transfer, the Registrar may refuse to transfer the same until it is satisfied that the
endorsement on such Series 2010A Note or separate instrument of transfer is legally authorized.
The Registrar shall incur no liability for its refusal, in good faith, to make transfers which it, in its
judgment, deems improper or unauthorized.
(e) Persons Deemed Owners. The Authority and the Registrar may treat the person
in whose name the Series 2010A Note is at any time registered in the bond register as the absolute
owner of the Series 2010A Note, whether the Series 2010A Note shall be overdue or not, for the
purpose of receiving payment of, or on account of, the principal of and interest on such Series
2010A Note and for all other purposes, and all such payments so made to any such registered owner
or upon the owner's order shall be valid and effectual to satisfy and discharge the liability of the
Authority upon such Series 2010A Note to the extent of the sum or sums so paid.
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7a) Page 11
Subject: Issuance of a $4.3 million Tax Exempt TIF Revenue Note (Series 2010A) – Hoigaard Village project
(f) Taxes, Fees and Charges. For every transfer or exchange of the Series 2010A
Note, the Registrar may impose a charge upon the owner thereof sufficient to reimburse the
Registrar for any tax, fee, or other governmental charge required to be paid with respect to such
transfer or exchange.
(g) Mutilated, Lost, Stolen or Destroyed Note. In case the Series 2010A Note shall
become mutilated or be lost, stolen, or destroyed, the Registrar shall deliver a new Series 2010A
Note of like amount, maturity date and tenor in exchange and substitution for and upon
cancellation of such mutilated Series 2010A Note or in lieu of and in substitution for such Series
2010A Note lost, stolen, or destroyed, upon the payment of the reasonable expenses and charges of
the Registrar in connection therewith; and, in the case the Series 2010A Note is lost, stolen, or
destroyed, upon filing with the Registrar of evidence satisfactory to it that such Series 2010A Note
was lost, stolen, or destroyed, and of the ownership thereof, and upon furnishing to the Registrar of
an appropriate bond or indemnity in form, substance, and amount satisfactory to it, in which both
the Authority and the Registrar shall be named as obligees. The Series 2010A Note so surrendered
to the Registrar shall be cancelled by it and evidence of such cancellation, shall be given to the
Authority. If the mutilated, lost, stolen, or destroyed Series 2010A Note has already matured or
been called for redemption in accordance with its terms, it shall not be necessary to issue a new
Series 2010A Note prior to payment.
(h) Redemption. In the event the Series 2010A Note is called for redemption, notice
thereof shall be given by the Registrar by mailing a copy of the redemption notice by first class mail
(postage prepaid) to the registered owner of the Series 2010A Note at the address shown on the
registration books kept by the Registrar, at least 30 days before the date of redemption of the Series 2010A
Note. Failure to give notice by mail to any registered owner, or any defect therein, shall not affect the
validity of the proceedings for the redemption of the Series 2010A Note. The Series 2010A Note shall
cease to bear interest after the specified redemption date, provided that the funds for the redemption are
on deposit with the place of payment at that time.
3.04. Preparation and Delivery. The Series 2010A Note shall be prepared under the
direction of the Executive Director and shall be executed on behalf of the Authority by the
signatures of its President and Executive Director. In case any officer whose signature shall appear
on the Series 2010A Note shall cease to be such officer before the delivery of the Series 2010A Note,
such signature shall nevertheless be valid and sufficient for all purposes, the same as if such officer
had remained in office until delivery. Notwithstanding such execution, the Series 2010A Note shall
not be valid or obligatory for any purpose or entitled to any security or benefit under this Resolution
unless and until a certificate of authentication on such Series 2010A Note has been duly executed by
the manual signature of an authorized representative of the Registrar. Certificates of authentication
on different Series 2010A Note certificates need not be signed by the same representative. The
executed certificate of authentication on each Series 2010A Note shall be conclusive evidence that it
has been authenticated and delivered under this Resolution. When the Series 2010A Note has been
so executed and authenticated, it shall be delivered by the Executive Director to the Owner upon
payment of the purchase price therefor, and the Owner shall not be obligated to see to the
application of the purchase price. Upon delivery, any preconditions to the delivery of the Series
2010A Note shall be deemed satisfied or waived by the Authority.
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7a) Page 12
Subject: Issuance of a $4.3 million Tax Exempt TIF Revenue Note (Series 2010A) – Hoigaard Village project
Section 4. Security Provisions.
4.01. Pledge. The Authority hereby pledges to the payment of the principal of and
interest on the Series 2010A Note all Available Tax Increment as defined in the Series 2010A Note.
Available Tax Increment shall be deposited in the Debt Service Fund in accordance with Section
4.02 hereof and applied to payment of the principal of, interest on and redemption price of the
Series 2010A Note in accordance with the terms of the form of Series 2010A Note set forth in
Section 2 of this Resolution.
4.02. Debt Service Fund. The Series 2010A Note is payable from the Tax Increment
Revenue Refunding Note (Hoigaard Village Project) Series 2010A Debt Service Fund (the "Debt
Service Fund") hereby created, to be used for no purpose other than the payment of the principal of
and interest on the Series 2010A Note, except to the extent provided otherwise herein. The
Authority appropriates and irrevocably pledges to the Debt Service Fund: (a) Available Tax
Increment pledged pursuant to Section 4.01 of this Resolution; and (b) all investment earnings on
funds held in the Debt Service Fund. The Debt Service Fund and all moneys deposited therein
pursuant to this Resolution are hereby pledged to the payment of principal of and interest on the
Series 2010A Note.
4.03. Refunding; Findings; Redemption of Refunded Notes. It is hereby found and
determined that based upon information presently available from the Authority’s financial advisers,
the issuance of the Series 2010A Note is consistent with covenants made with the holders of the
Refunded Notes and is necessary and desirable for the reduction of debt service costs to the
Authority. It is additionally found and determined that the Proceeds will be sufficient to prepay all
of the principal of and interest on the Refunded Notes. The Refunded Notes will be redeemed and
prepaid on July 1, 2010 in accordance with their terms. Any funds remaining in the debt service
funds for the Refunded Notes after redemption shall be transferred to the Debt Service Fund for the
Series 2010A Note.
4.04. Additional Obligations. The Authority may not issue any additional obligations
secured in whole or in part by Available Tax Increment as defined in the Series 2010A Note unless
such obligations are subordinate to the Series 2010A Note.
4.05. Investment of Funds. All amounts held in the Debt Service Fund will be
invested in accordance with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 118A, governing the
investment of funds of governmental entities.
Section 5. Certification of Proceedings. The officers of the Authority are hereby
authorized and directed to prepare and furnish to the Registered Owner of the Series 2010A Note
certified copies of all proceedings and records of the Authority, and such other affidavits, certificates,
and information as may be required to show the facts relating to the legality and marketability of the
Series 2010A Note as the same appear from the books and records under their custody and control
or as otherwise known to them, and all such certified copies, certificates, and affidavits, including
any heretofore furnished, shall be deemed representations of the Authority as to the facts recited
therein.
Section 6. Tax Covenant .
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7a) Page 13
Subject: Issuance of a $4.3 million Tax Exempt TIF Revenue Note (Series 2010A) – Hoigaard Village project
6.01. The Authority covenants and agrees with the holders from time to time of the
Series 2010A Note that it will not take or permit to be taken by any of its officers, employees or
agents any action which would cause the interest on the Series 2010A Note to become subject to
taxation under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), and the Treasury
Regulations promulgated thereunder, in effect at the time of such actions, and that it will take or
cause its officers, employees or agents to take, all affirmative action within its power that may be
necessary to ensure that such interest will not become subject to taxation under the Code and
applicable Treasury Regulations, as presently existing or as hereafter amended and made applicable to
the Bonds.
6.02. The City will comply with requirements necessary under the Code to establish
and maintain the exclusion from gross income of the interest on the Series 2010A Note under
Section 103 of the Code, including without limitation requirements relating to temporary periods
for investments and limitations on amounts invested at a yield greater than the yield on the Series
2010A Note.
6.03. The City further covenants not to use the proceeds of the Series 2010A Note or
to cause or permit them or any of them to be used, in such a manner as to cause the Series 2010A
Note to be a “private activity bond” within the meaning of Sections 103 and 141 through 150 of the
Code.
6.04. In order to qualify the Series 2010A Note as a “qualified tax-exempt obligation”
within the meaning of Section 265(b)(3) of the Code, the Authority makes the following factual
statements and representations:
(a) the Series 2010A Note is not a “private activity bond” as defined in Section
141 of the Code;
(b) the Authority hereby designates the Series 2010A Note as a “qualified tax-
exempt obligation” for purposes of Section 265(b)(3) of the Code;
(c) the reasonably anticipated amount of tax-exempt obligations (other than
private activity bonds, that are not qualified 501(c)(3) bonds) which will be issued by the
City (and all subordinate entities of the City, including the Authority) during calendar year
2010 will not exceed $30,000,000; and
(d) not more than $30,000,000 of obligations issued by the City during calendar
year 2010 have been designated for purposes of Section 265(b)(3) of the Code.
Section 7. Continuing Disclosure. The continuing disclosure requirements of Rule
l5c2-l2 promulgated by the Securities and Exchange Commission under the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934 (the “Rule”) do not apply to the Series 2010A Note, because the offering is exempt from
such requirements under Section 15c2-12(d)(1)(i). Consequently, the Authority will not enter into
any undertaking to provide continuing disclosure of any kind with respect to the Series 2010A Note.
Section 8. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect and be in force from and
after its approval and publication.
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7a) Page 14
Subject: Issuance of a $4.3 million Tax Exempt TIF Revenue Note (Series 2010A) – Hoigaard Village project
Section 9. Execution of Closing Certificates and Other Necessary Documents. The
President and the Executive Director are hereby authorized and directed to furnish to the purchaser
of the Series 2010A Note at the closing such certificates as are required as a condition of sale. In
addition, the President and the Executive Director are hereby authorized and directed to execute
such other documents as may be necessary, depending on the terms of the Series 2010A Note.
(The remainder of this page is intentionally left blank.)
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the Economic Development Authority
June 7, 2010
Executive Director President
Attest
Secretary
Meeting Date: June 7, 2010
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:
Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living LLC (Wooddale Pointe project).
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Motion to adopt the resolution approving the updated Contract for Private Redevelopment between
the EDA and Wooddale Catered Living LLC (Greco Development).
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Does the EDA wish to approve the proposed updated Contract for Private Redevelopment with
Wooddale Catered Living LLC which would allow for up to $490,000 in tax increment assistance?
BACKGROUND:
Wooddale Catered Living LLC (Greco Development) has an option agreement with The Rottlund
Company to purchase the two vacant parcels (3601 Wooddale Avenue and 5810 37th Street West) at
the southeast corner of 36th Street and Wooddale Avenue. This 2-acre redevelopment site is located
directly across the street from the future Southwest Light Rail Transit (LRT) station. Upon purchase
Greco is proposing to clean up the property and construct a five story, mixed use, assisted senior
housing complex. The building would include 115 senior rental units on the second through fifth
floors. The first floor would consist of 10,000 SF of commercial space and 6,000 SF of common area
for the residents, guests, and neighborhood.
Also proposed on the redevelopment site is a public gathering area at the very corner of the 36th
Street/Wooddale Avenue intersection. This corner plaza area or “pocket park” would feature
benches, landscaping planters, and public art. Proposed parking for the project would include 69
underground stalls, 62 off-street parking stalls, and 16 on-street parking stalls for employees, guests,
and commercial customers. Bike racks will also be integrated into the site furnishings and the
building so as to make it easier for employees, retail customers, and visitors to arrive by bicycle.
Property Value
The subject site (consisting of two parcels) currently has a total market value of approximately $1.6
million. The market value of the site upon redevelopment is estimated at approximately $13.65
million. The property taxes payable in 2010 on these same properties are $45,439. Upon
redevelopment, the site would generate an estimated $228,157 in property taxes.
Job Creation
Greco estimates that approximately 85 total jobs will be created between the commercial and
residential portions of the proposed project.
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b) Page 2
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living LLC
Updated Redevelopment Contract
On April 20, 2009 the EDA approved a Contract for Private Redevelopment with Wooddale
Catered Living LLC (Greco Development) related to the proposed Wooddale Pointe project. Since
that time Greco has been seeking project financing with Oak Grove Capital and HUD. Such
approvals took substantially longer to obtain than previously anticipated but Greco now estimates it
should receive final HUD approval by the end of June with closing to occur in August.
Since project financing was uncertain, Greco did not execute the previous Redevelopment Contract
and several things changed in the interim that required modification in the Contract. The most
notable change was the Redeveloper’s request for additional tax increment assistance. After extensive
discussions, an increase of $180,000 in assistance was negotiated as a justifiable increase in assistance.
At the May 10th Study Session staff reviewed with the EDA/City Council the updated Business
Terms for a Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living LLC including the
Redeveloper’s revised TIF request of $490,000 (see attached staff report from May 10th). Upon
discussion, those terms were favorably received and served as the basis for the updated
Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living LLC.
The proposed financial assistance to be provided under the Contract would reimburse the
Redeveloper for a portion of the costs associated with contamination remediation, site preparation,
and underground structured parking. Ehlers & Associates reviewed Greco’s revised project pro forma
and concluded that that Greco’s latest request for tax increment assistance was considered reasonable
given the complexity, quality, projected total value, and other residual economic benefits derived
from the proposed redevelopment. The EDA’s participation would leverage approximately $13.6
million in new market value. The requested amount of financial assistance, as a percentage of total
project value, is less than 4%. This is consistent with the level of assistance provided by the EDA to
other redevelopment projects.
The proposed TIF Note would be “pay-as-you-go” which is the desired financing method under the
EDA's TIF Policy. The Note would be issued in the maximum aggregate principal amount of
$490,000 upon satisfactory written evidence that the above qualified costs were incurred. The Note
would bear interest at a rate of approximately 6.5%. It is estimated that financial obligations to the
Redeveloper would be satisfied within approximately five (5) years after project completion. That
assumes fiscal disparities are taken from within the district (as per the EDA’s TIF Policy), a 5% EDA
administrative fee from the TIF generated by the project, and no inflation. Tax increment needed to
facilitate the proposed project would be derived from the existing Elmwood TIF District.
Construction on the proposed project is expected to commence by September 1, 2010 and be
completed by February 1, 2012 however the required commencement (December 31, 2010) and
completion dates (March 31, 2012) within the updated Contract are slightly broader so as to allow
for contingencies.
The Redeveloper also agreed to comply with the City’s recently adopted Green Building Policy. As a
condition for the issuance of a Certificate of Completion, the Redeveloper must submit either a
green certificate related to the project or evidence of its efforts to obtain such certification and an
explanation as to why certification could not be achieved.
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b) Page 3
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living LLC
The updated Redevelopment Contract was prepared by the EDA’s legal counsel, Kennedy &
Graven. A Summary of the Contract is attached. The authorizing resolution allows for modifications
to the Contract that do not alter the substance of the transaction without bringing the Contract back
to the EDA.
Business Subsidy
Neither the TOD grant from Hennepin County nor the tax increment assistance provided to the
Redeveloper under the Contract constitute a “business subsidy” under the Business Subsidy Act
(Section 116J.993 to 116J.995) because this is a redevelopment where “the recipient’s investment in the
purchase of the site and in site preparation is 70% or more of the assessor’s current year’s estimated
market value”.
Summary
The proposed Wooddale Pointe project has numerous benefits over the current land use. Most
notably, the density of the proposed project would result in a substantial increase in the market value
for the site and hence a greater property tax yield. Visually, it would aesthetically enhance a key
intersection in the city that is directly across the street from the future light rail station. Additionally
it would provide an opportunity for 115 senior assisted living apartments, neighborhood commercial
businesses, a public gathering place and public art. The proposed project conforms to the criteria
outlined in the EDA’s TIF Policy for the provision of tax increment. The purpose for providing the
proposed tax increment is to preserve and enhance the tax base, remediate contamination, redevelop
a substandard area, and provide an impetus for mixed use development which is desirable for
increased population and life-cycle housing within the city.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
It is proposed that $490,000 in tax increment be provided to Wooddale Catered Living LLC in
order to offset some of the Public Redevelopment Costs associated with the proposed Wooddale
Pointe redevelopment enabling the project to move forward.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
This project supports the Strategic Directions of providing a well-maintained and diverse housing
stock, being a connected and engaged community, as well as promoting and integrating arts and
community aesthetics in all city initiatives where appropriate.
Attachments: Resolution
Staff report from May 10, 2010
Contract Summary
Contract for Private Redevelopment with Wooddale Catered Living LLC
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 June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b) Page 4
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living LLC
ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
EDA RESOLUTION NO. 10-____
RESOLUTION APPROVING CONTRACT FOR PRIVATE
REDEVELOPMENT WITH WOODDALE CATERED LIVING, LLC
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Commissioners (“Board”) of the St. Louis Park Economic
Development Authority, St. Louis Park, Minnesota (“Authority”) as follows:
Section 1. Recitals.
1.01. On August 2, 2004, the Authority and the City of St. Louis Park approved the
establishment of the Elmwood Village Tax Increment Financing District (the “TIF District”) within
Redevelopment Project No. 1 (the “Project”) and adopted a tax increment financing plan for the
purpose of financing certain improvements within the Project, all pursuant to Minnesota Statutes,
Sections 469.001 to 469.047, Sections 469.090 to 469.1082, and Sections 469.174 to 469.1799, as
amended.
1.02. The Authority and Wooddale Catered Living, LLC (the “Redeveloper") have proposed
to enter into a Contract for Private Redevelopment (the “Contract”), setting forth the terms and
conditions of redevelopment of certain property within the Project and the TIF District, including tax
increment financing assistance to the Redeveloper.
1.03. The Authority has reviewed the tax increment financing plan for the TIF District and
finds that the improvements to be assisted through tax increment do not require any amendments or
modifications of the tax increment financing plan for the TIF District.
1.04. By Resolution No. 09-06, the Authority approved a version of the Contract on April
20, 2009, but such version was not fully executed. The parties have negotiated several changes to the
terms of the Contract since initial approval, which changes are as set forth in the Contract presented to
the Board.
1.05. The Board has reviewed the Contract and finds that the execution thereof and
performance of the Authority's obligations thereunder are in the best interest of the City and its
residents.
Section 2. Authority Approval; Further Proceedings.
2.01. The Board hereby approves the Contract as presented to the Board, subject to
modifications that do not alter the substance of the transaction and that are approved by the President
and Executive Director, provided that execution of the Contract by those officials shall be conclusive
evidence of their approval.
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b) Page 5
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living LLC
2.02. Authority staff and officials are authorized to take all actions necessary to perform the
Authority’s obligations under the Contract as a whole, including without limitation execution of any
documents to which the Authority is a party referenced in or attached to the Contract.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the Economic Development Authority
June 7, 2010
Executive Director President
Attest
Secretary
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b) Page 6
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living LLC
Meeting Date: May 10, 2010
Agenda Item #: 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:
Updated Business Terms for Redevelopment Contract with Greco Development (Wooddale Pointe
project).
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff would like to discuss and receive feedback from the EDA on the updated business terms that
would be the basis for a new Redevelopment Contract with Greco Development related to its
proposed Wooddale Pointe project. If it is the consensus of the EDA that the updated business
terms outlined in the attached Summary are acceptable, the EDA will be asked to consider approval
of an updated Redevelopment Contract at its June 7th meeting.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Does the EDA support the updated business terms proposed for inclusion within a new
Redevelopment Contract with Greco Development to facilitate the Wooddale Pointe project?
BACKGROUND AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Greco Development has an option agreement with The Rottlund Company to purchase the two
vacant parcels (3601 Wooddale Avenue and 5810 37th Street West) at the southeast corner of 36th
Street and Wooddale Avenue. This 2-acre redevelopment site is located directly across the street
from the future Southwest Light Rail Transit (LRT) station. Upon purchase Greco is proposing to
clean up the property and construct a five story, mixed use, senior residential housing complex. The
building would include 115 senior rental units on the second through fifth floors (see proposed
building rendering at the end of this document).
SITE
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b) Page 7
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living LLC
Wooddale Pointe would be an “age in place” facility, in which seniors would receive various levels of
care as their health needs dictated. Health care services would range from medication monitoring to
complete memory care. The advantage of this type of facility is that it allows couples and/or friends
to remain together in the same building, even though their individual health care needs may be
different. The facility will be managed by Ebenezer Management Services; a part of Fairview Health
Services. Ebenezer Management Services manages a broad portfolio of senior properties in the Twin
Cities and greater Minnesota. Managed properties include: senior condominiums and cooperatives;
market-rate senior rentals; adult day centers; independent living, assisted living and memory care;
skilled nursing facilities and quality affordable senior housing.
The first floor of the project would be a combination of 10,000 SF of commercial space, and 6,000
SF of common area for the residents, guests, and neighborhood. The Redeveloper has a Letter of
Intent (LOI) with a potential tenant that would lease 80% of the space. Also proposed on the
redevelopment site is a public gathering area at the very corner of the 36th Street/Wooddale Avenue
intersection. This corner plaza area or “pocket park” would feature benches, landscaping planters,
and public art. Proposed parking for the project would include 69 underground stalls, 62 off-street
parking stalls, and 16 on-street parking stalls for employees, guests, and commercial customers. Bike
racks will also be integrated into the site furnishings and the building so as to make it easier for
employees, retail customers, and visitors to arrive by bicycle.
The Redeveloper also plans to seek green certification for the project.
Construction on the proposed project is expected to commence by September 1, 2010 and be
completed by February 1, 2012.
Representatives of Greco Development, the Elmwood neighborhood and the City/EDA have worked
collaboratively to develop a master plan for the subject redevelopment area that features:
¾ An attractive building with upscale image
¾ Urban design with distinctive architecture and human scale
¾ Mixed use –residential & neighborhood commercial
¾ Pedestrian friendly & transit accommodating design
¾ Functional and attractive gathering space that includes public art
¾ Surface and underground parking
Greco’s proposed project incorporates many principles of Livable Communities, Transit Oriented
Development and sustainable design. Upon completion, Wooddale Pointe is expected to present a
highly attractive, quality image at one of the city’s key intersections and future LRT stops.
Redevelopment Contract Update
On April 20, 2009 the EDA approved a Contract for Private Redevelopment with Wooddale
Catered Living LLC (Greco Development) related to the proposed Wooddale Pointe project. Since
that time Greco has been seeking project financing with Oak Grove Capital and HUD. Such
approvals have taken substantially longer to obtain than previously anticipated but Greco now
estimates it should receive final HUD approval by the end of June with closing to occur in August.
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b) Page 8
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living LLC
Since project financing was uncertain, Greco did not execute the previous Redevelopment Contract
and a few things have changed in the interim that now require modification in the Contract. The
most notable change is the requested amount of financial assistance. The Redevelopment Contract
authorized up to $650,000 in tax increment assistance to the Redeveloper to offset some of the
Public Redevelopment Costs associated with the proposed project site. The EDA additionally
authorized the submittal of an application for a Transit Oriented Development (TOD) grant from
Hennepin County to fund certain TOD related public improvements related to the subject
property. The Redevelopment Contract stipulated that if such a grant was approved the maximum
principal amount of the TIF Note would be decreased by the amount of the grant to reflect the
benefit of the grant to the Redeveloper. The EDA was subsequently awarded a grant of $355,000, of
which the EDA would retain $15,000 for administrative costs. Therefore the amount of TIF to be
provided to the Redeveloper would have been reduced to $310,000 under the terms of the previous
Contract. The goal was to save as much increment from the Wooddale Pointe project for other
purposes within the Elmwood Village TIF District; most notably the Hwy 7/Wooddale interchange.
Redeveloper’s Revised TIF Request
Since the Redevelopment Contract was approved, Greco secured a tenant for the first floor
commercial space and bid the project out. Unfortunately construction and financing costs (including
tenant improvements) came in about $430,000 higher than previously estimated. In addition, Oak
Grove Capital and HUD increased their equity requirements to secure financing which meant Greco
had to increase its investment in the project by $2.4 million. These resulted in a larger financial gap
in Greco’s project proforma. Greco has therefore requested that the EDA help fill a portion of the
gap and a proposed $180,000 in additional TIF was negotiated. This would bring the total amount
of TIF in the project to $490,000.
When the EDA approved the Redevelopment Contract last year, it was anticipated that if the entire
$650,000 in TIF was needed it would take approximately seven (7) years to pay the obligation. If
that amount was reduced to $310,000 based upon receipt of the grant, it would take approximately
3 ½ years to pay the obligation. Based upon the updated request of a total of $490,000 in TIF, it is
now estimated that it will take approximately five (5) years to pay the obligation.
Ehlers & Associates, reviewed Greco Development’s revised project proforma in order to determine
whether the increased level of TIF assistance was warranted. Ehlers analyzed the latest proforma in
comparison with general industry standards for land price, construction costs, lease rates, return on
equity/profit, various fees, etc. Ehlers confirmed that Greco’s updated cost and revenue assumptions
are reasonable and appropriate. In addition, the projected market values per square foot in the
project have been reviewed by the City’s Assessor who concurs they are still within appropriate
market ranges.
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b) Page 9
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living LLC
Through its analysis, Ehlers verified the financial gap in the Redeveloper’s project proforma has
increased and that the project is not feasible without $490,000 in TIF assistance. Such assistance
would reimburse the Redeveloper for a portion of the costs associated with contamination
remediation, site preparation, and underground structured parking. Ehlers concluded that Greco’s
revised tax increment request was considered reasonable given the complexity, quality, projected
total value, and other residual economic benefits derived from the proposed redevelopment. The
EDA’s participation would leverage approximately $13.6 million in new market value. The
requested amount of financial assistance, as a percentage of total project value, is less than 4%. This
is consistent with the level of assistance provided by the EDA to other redevelopment projects.
The proposed TIF Note would be “pay-as-you-go” which is the desired financing method under the
EDA's TIF Policy. Fiscal Disparities would be taken from inside the district which is likewise
consistent with the EDA’s TIF Policy. The Note would be issued in the maximum aggregate principal
amount of $490,000 upon satisfactory written evidence that the above qualified costs were incurred.
The Note would bear interest at a rate of approximately 6.5%. It is estimated that financial obligations
to the Redeveloper would be satisfied within approximately five (5) years after project completion. That
assumes fiscal disparities are taken from within the district (as per EDA policy), a 5% EDA
administrative fee from the TIF generated by the project, and no inflation. Tax increment needed to
facilitate the proposed project would be derived from the existing Elmwood TIF District.
TIF Lookback
As with other projects involving TIF, the proposed Redevelopment Contract with Greco contains a
“Lookback” provision. The EDA will perform a “lookback” calculation on the earliest of (i) the date
when 95% of the Apartments are leased; (ii) the date of any Transfer in whole or in part of the
Apartments; or (iii) three years after the date of issuance of the Certificate of Completion for the
project. The Redeveloper must submit evidence of its actual annualized cumulative internal rate of
return (the “IRR”) from the apartments, calculated as of the applicable Lookback Date, along with
the estimated annualized cumulative IRR from the Apartments assuming a sale in the tenth year
after the date of issuance of the Certificate of Completion for the Apartments. The amount by which
the IRR exceeds 20% (annual cash-on-cash return of 10% and 10% from net sale proceeds) is
considered Excess Income. If the EDA determines that there is Excess Income, it will apply fifty
percent (50%) of that amount toward prepayment of the outstanding principal amount of the
Notes.
REDEVELOPMENT CONTRACT:
A list of the updated business terms related to a Redevelopment Contract with Greco Development
(Wooddale Pointe Catered Living LLC) is attached for review and discussion. The terms are
consistent with previous redevelopment projects. If these terms are generally acceptable the EDA
will be asked to consider formal approval of the resulting Redevelopment Contract at its upcoming
June 7th meeting.
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b) Page 10
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living LLC
Summary
The proposed Wooddale Pointe project has numerous benefits over the current land use. Most
notably, the density of the proposed project would result in a substantial increase in the market value
for the site and hence a greater property tax yield. Visually, it would aesthetically enhance a key
intersection in the city that is directly across the street from the future light rail station. Additionally
it would provide an opportunity for 115 senior assisted living apartments, neighborhood commercial
businesses, a public gathering place and public art. The proposed project conforms to the criteria
outlined in the EDA’s TIF Policy for the provision of tax increment. The purpose for providing the
proposed tax increment is to preserve and enhance the tax base, remediate contamination, redevelop
a substandard area, and provide an impetus for mixed use development which is desirable for
increased population and life-cycle housing within the city.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
It is proposed that $490,000 in tax increment be provided to Wooddale Catered Living LLC in
order to offset some of the Public Redevelopment Costs associated with the proposed Wooddale
Pointe redevelopment enabling the project to move forward.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
This project supports the Strategic Directions of providing a well-maintained and diverse housing
stock, being a connected and engaged community, as well as promoting and integrating arts and
community aesthetics in all city initiatives where appropriate.
Attachments: Updated Business Terms for Contract for Private Redevelopment with
Wooddale Pointe Catered Living LLC
Prepared by: Greg Hunt, Economic Development Coordinator
Reviewed by: Kevin Locke, Community Development Director
Approved by: Nancy Gohman, Deputy EDA Executive Director and
Deputy City Manager
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b) Page 11
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living LLC
SUMMARY OF THE UPDATED
CONTRACT FOR PRIVATE REDEVELOPMENT
BETWEEN THE ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND
WOODDALE CATERED LIVING, LLC
The following is summary of the updated Contract for Private Redevelopment (“Contract”) between the
St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority (“EDA”) and Wooddale Catered Living, LLC
(“Redeveloper”) for “The Wooddale Pointe” mixed use building to be constructed at the SE quadrant of
W 36th Street & Wooddale Ave., St. Louis Park.
1. All parties agree that the Redeveloper will be solely responsible for the acquisition of the subject two
parcels that constitute the Redevelopment Property (Exhibit A) and that the City/EDA has no
obligation to acquire the Redevelopment Property.
2. Redeveloper agrees to hold the EDA and the City harmless from any claim arising out of the
presence of any hazardous wastes or pollutants existing on or in the Redevelopment Property.
3. Redeveloper agrees to submit a Voluntary Response Action plan to the MPCA and obtain all
necessary approvals to properly remediate the subject property so as to allow for the construction of
the Minimum Improvements.
4. Redeveloper agrees that it will pay the reasonable costs of consultants and attorneys retained by the
EDA in connection with the creation of the TIF District and the negotiation in preparation of the
Contract and other incidental agreements and documents related to the development contemplated
hereunder. Upon termination of the Contract, the Redeveloper remains obligated for costs incurred
through the effective date of termination.
5. The Redeveloper must remediate the contaminated soils on the Redevelopment Property in
compliance with MPCA requirements. The Redeveloper also agrees to prepare plans and
specifications for and construct all street, sanitary and storm sewer improvements; sidewalks;
landscaping; and other related amenities and utility work related to the proposed Minimum
Improvements.
6. Before commencing such construction, the Redeveloper must submit plans and specifications
regarding the Minimum Improvements for approval by the City. Plans related to the soil
remediation however do not require approval by the City. All work on the Minimum
Improvements shall be in accordance with the approved construction plans and shall comply
with all City requirements regarding such improvements. The parties agree and understand that
the City will accept the Improvements in accordance with City procedures.
7. Redeveloper agrees to undertake the “Minimum Improvements” as shown in the Master Site Plan
(Exhibit B). In summary, the Redeveloper agrees to purchase the subject two parcels, remediate
the soils, construct a five story, mixed use building consisting of approximately 115 age restricted
apartments, approximately 10,000 square feet of ground floor commercial space, as well as
necessary underground and surface parking along with all associated infrastructure, sidewalks,
landscaping and corner plaza.
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b) Page 12
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living LLC
8. The Redeveloper shall construct an outdoor Plaza as depicted in the Site Plan for the use and
enjoyment of residents and invitees of the Minimum Improvements and members of the general
public. The Plaza shall incorporate amenities to be mutually agreed upon by the City and
Redeveloper, and which may include public art, street furnishings or landscaping, and or
decorative lighting elements. The parties agree that the City shall be responsible for the cost of
any maintenance and repair of the public art. The Redeveloper shall be allowed to perform these
same duties if the EDA fails to do so after the appropriate notice and cure opportunity and to be
reimbursed its costs and expenses.
9. Subject to Unavoidable Delays, the Redeveloper agrees to commence construction on the
Minimum Improvements by December 31, 2010 and complete construction of the same by
March 1, 2012.
10. The Redeveloper agrees to comply with the City’s recently adopted Green Building Policy. As a
condition for the issuance of a Certificate of Completion, the Redeveloper must submit either a
green certificate related to the project or evidence of its efforts to obtain such certification and an
explanation as to why certification could not be achieved.
11. The Redeveloper is initially responsible for: all Public Redevelopment Costs. All Public
Redevelopment Costs are Redeveloper’s initial responsibility and are subject to reimbursement
through tax increment financing and/or the TOD grant from Hennepin County.
12. The EDA agrees to disburse proceeds of the Hennepin County Transit Oriented Development
grant it obtained (totaling $355,000) to Redeveloper, minus the $15,975 Application Fee paid by
the EDA to Hennepin County, for specified pedestrian improvements associated with the
Minimum Improvements in accordance with the EDA’s grant agreement with the agency. In order
to reimburse the EDA for its Application Fee the EDA will retain the first $15,975 worth of
qualified reimbursement costs due Redeveloper from Hennepin County.
13. In order to offset the Public Redevelopment Costs incurred by the Redeveloper associated with
the subject property (contamination clean up, site preparation and underground structed
parking), the EDA agrees to issue a pay-as-you-go TIF Note in the maximum principal amount
of $490,000. Tax Increment is to be generated by the proposed Minimum Improvements
located within the existing Elmwood Village Tax Increment Financing District.
14. The tax increment from the Renewal & Renovation TIF District will be payable to Redeveloper
in the form of a single “TIF Note”, which would be structured on the following basis:
¾ Issue total: Up to $490,000
¾ Type: Pay-as-you-go
¾ Term: Up to 5 years
¾ Interest Rate: Approx 6.5%
¾ Admin Fee: 5%
¾ Fiscal Disparities: Paid from within the district
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b) Page 13
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living LLC
15. Lookback Provision:
The EDA will perform a “lookback” calculation on the earliest of (i) the date when 95% of the
Apartments are leased; (ii) the date of any Transfer in whole or in part of the Apartments; or (iii)
three years after the date of issuance of the Certificate of Completion for the project. The
Redeveloper must submit evidence of its actual annualized cumulative internal rate of return (the
“IRR”) from the Apartments, calculated as of the applicable Lookback Date, along with the
estimated annualized cumulative IRR from the Apartments assuming a sale in the tenth year
after the date of issuance of the Certificate of Completion for the Apartments. The amount by
which the IRR exceeds twenty percent (20%) is considered Excess Income. If the EDA
determines that there is Excess Income, it will apply fifty percent (50%) of that amount toward
prepayment of the outstanding principal amount of the Notes.
16. Both parties agree that any assistance provided to the Redeveloper under this Agreement is not a
“business subsidy” under Minnesota Statutes, Section 116J.993, subd. 3 because the assistance is for
redevelopment.
17. If Redeveloper requires mortgage financing for the development of the Project, the EDA agrees to
subordinate its rights under the Agreement to the Holder of any Mortgage securing construction or
permanent financing, in accordance with the terms of a mutually-approved subordination
agreement.
18. Redeveloper agrees that the EDA and the City will not be held liable for any loss or damage to
property or any injury to or death of any person occurring at or about or resulting from any defect
in the Redevelopment Property or the Minimum Improvements.
19. The parties agree that the Redeveloper shall be responsible for all maintenance (including snow
and ice removal) and repair costs associated with the Redeveloper Public Improvements on the
Redevelopment Property (“Maintenance Costs”) including:
• Private streets, alleys, driveways, service drives, surface parking stalls and parking lots.
• Boulevards (excluding public street right of ways)
• Parking structures
• Sidewalks
• Public plaza
• Landscaping
Redeveloper agrees to keep the above Redeveloper Public Improvements in good condition and
is resposibile for all repairs of same. Redeveloper shall not be responsible for the maitenance and
repair of those public improvements typically maintained by the city’s Special Sercvice District
20. Redeveloper agrees to participate in the Special Service District No. 6 for the continued
maintenance of the streetscaping along the W 36th Street right of way.
21. By no later than December 31, 2011, the Redeveloper shall submit to the EDA for review and
approval a plan for maintenance and operation of all pedestrian and landscaping improvements
located within the Redevelopment Property. The Maintenance Plan must address, at a
minimum: snow removal from pedestrian connections and sidewalks; maintenance and
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b) Page 14
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living LLC
replacement of landscaping, irrigation and other streetscaping; snow removal and maintenance of
any surface parking and parking lots; and maintenance of the Plaza, but excluding maintenance
covered by the City’s Special Service District, a description of how the Maintenance costs will be
assessed to tenants; and enforcement mechanisms.
If the Redeveloper fails to perform the Maintenance in accordance with the Maintenance Plan,
the EDA, at its option and following thirty (30) days written notice to the Redeveloper, may
enter the Redevelopment property and perform the Maintenance. The Redeveloper agrees to
permit the City to specially assess any costs of the Maintenance proportionately against the
Minimum Improvements.
22. Upon satisfactory completion of the Minimum Improvements, the EDA will provide the
Redeveloper with a Certificate of Completion which shall provide that the Redeveloper’s
obligation to construct the Minimum Improvements pursuant to the Redevelopment Agreement
is deemed satisfied.
23. Redeveloper agrees not to transfer the Redevelopment Agreement or the Redevelopment
Property (except to an affiliate) prior to receiving a Certificate of Completion without the prior
written consent of the EDA, except for construction mortgage financing and/or permanent
financing. The EDA's consent shall not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned or delayed. The
EDA agrees to provide its consent or refusal to consent to Redeveloper in writing within 10 days
after a request for such consent from Redeveloper.
24. The Redeveloper agrees to submit to the EDA written reports so as to allow the EDA to remain in
compliance with reporting requirements under state statutes. The EDA will provide information to
the Redeveloper regarding the required forms.
25. The Redeveloper agrees that no portion of the Redevelopment Property will be used for a
sexually-oriented business as defined in City Code, Section 14:5-3(28), a pawnshop, a check-
cashing business, payday loan agency, a tattoo business; or a gun business, and that such
restrictions may be placed in the Redevelopment Deed.
26. The Redeveloper agrees not to discriminate upon the basis of race, color, creed, sex or national
origin in the construction and maintenance of the Minimum Improvements and Public
Improvements as well as lease, rental, use or occupancy of the Redevelopment Property or any
improvements erected thereon.
27. Redeveloper acknowledges that the City/EDA makes no representations or warranties as to the
condition of the soils on the Redevelopment Property or its fitness for construction of the
Minimum Improvements.
28. Redeveloper, City and EDA agree to indemnify, defend and hold harmless each other and their
officers, employees, and agents from and against all cost, loss, claim, damage or expense, including
reasonable attorney fees, arising out of (i) any injury, property loss or damage whatsoever that results
or arises from the undertakings of the Contract except to the extent such injury, loss or damage
arises from the negligence of the Indemnified Parties; and (ii) any work performed for the benefit of
the Redevelopment Property by a person or entity not a party to this Contract, except to the extent
such claim arises from a party directly engaged by the Indemnified Parties.
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b) Page 15
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living LLC
EXHIBIT A
REDEVELOPMENT PROPERTY
The subject Redevelopment Property includes all or portions of the following two (2) properties
and as reflected in the Master Site Plan.
PID: 1611721340027
City Address: 3601 WOODDALE AVE
PID: 1611721340001
City Address: 5810 37th St W
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b) Page 16
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living LLC
EXHIBIT B
Master Site Plan
Sixth Draft, May 20, 2010
CONTRACT
FOR
PRIVATE REDEVELOPMENT
By and Between
ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
and
WOODDALE CATERED LIVING, LLC
Dated as of: June 7, 2010
This document was drafted by:
KENNEDY & GRAVEN, Chartered (MNI)
470 U.S. Bank Plaza
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
(612) 337-9300
http://www.kennedy-graven.com
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 17
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
PREAMBLE ...................................................................................................................................1
ARTICLE I
Definitions
Section 1.1. Definitions................................................................................................................2
ARTICLE II
Representations and Warranties
Section 2.1. Representations by the Authority.............................................................................6
Section 2.2. Representations and Warranties by the Redeveloper...............................................6
ARTICLE III
Property Acquisition; Public Redevelopment Costs
Section 3.1. Status of Redevelopment Property...........................................................................8
Section 3.2. Environmental Conditions.......................................................................................8
Section 3.3 Issuance of Notes.....................................................................................................8
Section 3.4. TOD Grant.............................................................................................................10
Section 3.5. TIF Lookback.........................................................................................................11
Section 3.6. Business Subsidy ...................................................................................................12
Section 3.7. Payment of Authority Costs...................................................................................12
ARTICLE IV
Construction of Minimum Improvements
Section 4.1. Construction of Improvements ..............................................................................14
Section 4.2. Construction Plans.................................................................................................14
Section 4.3. Commencement and Completion of Construction.................................................15
Section 4.4. Certificate of Completion ......................................................................................15
Section 4.5. Management...........................................................................................................16
Section 4.6. Records and Reports..............................................................................................16
Section 4.7. Plaza.......................................................................................................................16
Section 4.8. Special Service District; Maintenance...................................................................17
ARTICLE V
Insurance
Section 5.1. Insurance................................................................................................................18
Section 5.2. Subordination.........................................................................................................19
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 18
ARTICLE VI
Tax Increment; Taxes
Section 6.1. Right to Collect Delinquent Taxes.........................................................................20
Section 6.2. Review of Taxes ....................................................................................................20
Section 6.3. Assessment Agreement..........................................................................................20
ARTICLE VII
Other Financing
Section 7.1. Generally................................................................................................................21
Section 7.2. Authority’s Option to Cure Default on Mortgage..................................................21
Section 7.3. Modification; Subordination..................................................................................21
ARTICLE VIII
Prohibitions Against Assignment and Transfer; Indemnification
Section 8.1. Representation as to Development.........................................................................22
Section 8.2. Prohibition Against Redeveloper’s Transfer of Property and
Assignment of Agreement.....................................................................................22
Section 8.3. Release and Indemnification Covenants................................................................23
ARTICLE IX
Events of Default
Section 9.1. Events of Default Defined .....................................................................................25
Section 9.2. Remedies on Default..............................................................................................25
Section 9.3. No Remedy Exclusive............................................................................................26
Section 9.4. No Additional Waiver Implied by One Waiver ....................................................26
Section 9.5. Attorney Fees.........................................................................................................26
ARTICLE X
Additional Provisions
Section 10.1. Conflict of Interests; Representatives Not Individually Liable.............................27
Section 10.2. Equal Employment Opportunity............................................................................27
Section 10.3. Restrictions on Use................................................................................................27
Section 10.4. Provisions Not Merged With Deed........................................................................27
Section 10.5. Titles of Articles and Sections...............................................................................27
Section 10.6. Notices and Demands ............................................................................................27
Section 10.7. Counterparts...........................................................................................................28
Section 10.8. Recording...............................................................................................................28
Section 10.9. Amendment............................................................................................................28
Section 10.10. Authority Approvals..............................................................................................28
TESTIMONIUM ...........................................................................................................................29
SIGNATURES ..............................................................................................................................29
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 19
347980v6 MNI SA285-90 iii
SCHEDULE A Redevelopment Property
SCHEDULE B Authorizing Resolution
SCHEDULE C Certificate of Completion
SCHEDULE D Subordination Agreement
SCHEDULE E Pro Forma
SCHEDULE F Site Plan
SCHEDULE G Assessment Agreement
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 20
CONTRACT FOR PRIVATE REDEVELOPMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, made as of the __ day of June, 2010, by and between the St. Louis
Park Economic Development Authority (the “Authority”), a public body corporate and politic
under the laws of Minnesota, and Wooddale Catered Living, LLC (the “Redeveloper”), a
Minnesota limited liability company.
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the Authority was created pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Sections 469.090
to 469.1081 (the “Act”) and was authorized to transact business and exercise its powers by a
resolution of the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota (the “City”); and
WHEREAS, the Authority has undertaken a program to promote the development and
redevelopment of land which is underutilized within the City, and in this connection created the
Redevelopment Project No. 1 (hereinafter referred to as the “Project”) in an area (hereinafter
referred to as the “Project Area”) located in the City pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections
469.001 to 469.047 (the “HRA Act”); and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the Act, the Authority is authorized to undertake certain
activities to prepare such real property for development and redevelopment by private enterprise;
and
WHEREAS, the Redeveloper intends to acquire certain property (the “Redevelopment
Property”) in the Project Area to develop on that property a mixed-use facility consisting of
senior rental housing and commercial space, further described herein (the “Minimum
Improvements”); and
WHEREAS, the Authority has previously established the Elmwood Village Tax
Increment Financing District (the “TIF District”) pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections
469.174 to 469.1799, as amended (the “TIF Act”), made up of property in the Project Area
including the Redevelopment Property; and
WHEREAS, the Authority believes that the development of the Redevelopment Property
pursuant to and in general fulfillment of this Agreement, is in the vital and best interests of the
City, will promote the health, safety, morals, and welfare of its residents, and will be in accord
with the public purposes and provisions of the applicable State and local laws and requirements
under which the Project has been undertaken and is being assisted.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the mutual obligations of the
parties hereto, each of them does hereby covenant and agree with the other as follows:
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 21
ARTICLE I
Definitions
Section 1.1. Definitions. In this Agreement, unless a different meaning clearly appears
from the context:
“Act” means Minnesota Statutes Sections 469.090 to 469.1081, as amended.
“Affiliate” means with respect to any entity (a) any corporation, partnership, limited
liability company or other business entity or person controlling, controlled by or under common
control with the entity, and (b) any successor to such party by merger, acquisition, reorganization
or similar transaction involving all or substantially all of the assets of such party (or such
Affiliate). For the purpose hereof the words “controlling”, “controlled by” and “under common
control with” shall mean, with respect to any corporation, partnership, limited liability company
or other business entity, the ownership of fifty percent or more of the voting interests in such
entity or possession, directly or indirectly, of the power to direct or cause the direction of
management policies of such entity, whether through ownership of voting securities or by
contract or otherwise.
“Agreement” means this Agreement, as the same may be from time to time modified,
amended, or supplemented.
“Authority” means the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority.
“Authority Representative” means the Executive Director of the Authority, or any person
designated by the Executive Director to act as the Authority Representative for the purposes of
this Agreement.
“Authorizing Resolution” means the resolution of the Authority, substantially in the form
of attached Schedule B to be adopted by the Authority to authorize the issuance of the Note.
“Available Tax Increment” has the meaning provided in the Authorizing Resolution.
“Business Day” means any day except a Saturday, Sunday, legal holiday, a day on which
the City is closed for business, or a day on which banking institutions in the City are authorized
by law or executive order to close.
“Business Subsidy Act” means Minnesota Statutes, Sections 116J.993 to 116J.995, as
amended.
“City” means the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota.
“Certificate of Completion” means the certification provided to the Redeveloper pursuant
to Section 4.4 of this Agreement.
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 22
“Construction Plans” means the plans, specifications, drawings and related documents on
the construction work to be performed by the Redeveloper on the Redevelopment Property
which (a) shall be as detailed as the plans, specifications, drawings and related documents which
are submitted to the appropriate building officials of the City, and (b) shall include at least the
following for each building: (1) site plan; (2) foundation plan; (3) underground parking plans;
(4) floor plan for each floor; (5) cross sections of each (length and width); (6) elevations (all
sides); (7) landscape plan; and (8) such other plans or supplements to the foregoing plans as the
Authority may reasonably request to allow it to ascertain the nature and quality of the proposed
construction work.
“County” means the County of Hennepin, Minnesota.
“Development Pro Forma” means the financial pro forma for the Minimum
Improvements attached hereto as Schedule E.
“Event of Default” means an action by the Redeveloper listed in Article IX of this
Agreement.
“Grant” has the meaning provided in Section 3.4.
“Grant-Eligible Costs” means the costs eligible for funding under the grant agreement for
the Grant.
“Holder” means the owner of a Mortgage.
“HRA Act” means Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.001 to 469.047, as amended.
“Maturity Date” means the date that the Note has been paid in full or terminated in
accordance with its terms, whichever is earlier.
“Minimum Improvements” means construction on the Redevelopment Property of a five-
story mixed use building consisting of approximately 115 units of rental housing for seniors and
approximately 10,000 square feet of commercial space, and associated surface and structured
underground parking, along with all associated infrastructure, sidewalks, landscaping and corner
plaza.
“Mortgage” means any mortgage made by the Redeveloper that is secured, in whole or in
part, with the Redevelopment Property and that is a permitted encumbrance pursuant to the
provisions of Article VIII of this Agreement.
“Note” means a Tax Increment Revenue Note, substantially in the form contained in the
Authorizing Resolution, to be delivered by the Authority to the Redeveloper in accordance with
Section 3.4 hereof to reimburse the Redeveloper for Public Redevelopment Costs.
“Parcel” means any parcel of the Redevelopment Property.
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 23
“Project” means the Authority’s Redevelopment Project No. 1.
“Public Redevelopment Costs” has the meaning provided in Section 3.3(a) hereof.
“Project Area” means the geographic area within the boundaries of the Project.
“Redeveloper” means Wooddale Catered Living, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability
company, or its permitted successors and assigns.
“Redevelopment Plan” means the Redevelopment Plan for the Project.
“Redevelopment Property” means the real property described in Schedule A of this
Agreement, provided that upon filing of a final plat of such property, the platted legal description
will control.
“State” means the state of Minnesota.
“Tax Increment” means that portion of the real property taxes that is paid with respect to
the Redevelopment Property and that is remitted to the Authority as tax increment pursuant to
the Tax Increment Act.
“Tax Increment Act” or “TIF Act” means the Tax Increment Financing Act, Minnesota
Statutes Sections 469.174 to 469.179, as amended.
“Tax Increment District” or “TIF District” means the Elmwood Village Tax Increment
Financing District created by the City and the Authority and certified by Hennepin County on
May 31, 2005.
“Tax Increment Plan” or “TIF Plan” means the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the
TIF District approved by the City Council on August 2, 2004, and as it may be amended.
“Tax Official” means any County assessor, County auditor, County or State board of
equalization, the commissioner of revenue of the State, or any State or federal district court, the
tax court of the State, or the State Supreme Court.
“Termination Date” means the earlier of the following: (a) the date of receipt by the
Authority of the final payment from Hennepin County of Tax Increments from the Elmwood
Village Tax Increment Financing District, (b) the date when the Note has been fully paid,
defeased or terminated in accordance with its terms; or (c) the date of termination of the Note
and this Agreement by the Authority due to an Event of Default as set forth in Section 9.2 hereof.
“Transfer” has the meaning set forth in Section 8.2(a) hereof.
“Unavoidable Delays” means delays beyond the reasonable control of the party seeking
to be excused as a result thereof which are the direct result of strikes, other labor troubles,
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 24
prolonged adverse weather or acts of God, fire or other casualty to the Minimum Improvements,
litigation commenced by third parties which, by injunction or other similar judicial action,
directly results in delays, or acts of any federal, state or local governmental unit (other than the
Authority or City in exercising their rights under this Agreement), including without limitation
condemnation or threat of condemnation of any portion of the Redevelopment Property, which
directly result in delays. Unavoidable Delays shall not include delays experienced by the
Redeveloper in obtaining permits or governmental approvals necessary to enable construction of
the Minimum Improvements by the dates such construction is required under Section 4.3 of this
Agreement, so long as the Construction Plans have been approved in accordance with
Section 4.2 hereof.
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 25
ARTICLE II
Representations and Warranties
Section 2.1. Representations by the Authority. (a) The Authority is an economic
development authority duly organized and existing under the laws of the State. Under the
provisions of the Act and the HRA Act, the Authority has the power to enter into this Agreement
and carry out its obligations hereunder.
(b) The Authority will use its best efforts to facilitate development of the Minimum
Improvements, including but not limited to cooperating with the Redeveloper in obtaining
necessary administrative and land use approvals and construction financing pursuant to
Section 7.1 hereof.
(c) The Authority will issue the Note, subject to all the terms and conditions of this
Agreement.
(d) The activities of the Authority are undertaken for the purpose of fostering the
redevelopment of certain real property that is occupied by substandard and obsolete buildings,
which will revitalize this portion of the Project Area, increase tax base, and increase housing
opportunities.
Section 2.2. Representations and Warranties by the Redeveloper. The Redeveloper
represents and warrants that:
(a) The Redeveloper is a limited liability company, duly organized and in good
standing under the laws of the State of Minnesota, is not in violation of any provisions of its
articles of organization or bylaws, is duly qualified as a foreign limited liability company and
authorized to transact business within the State, has power to enter into this Agreement and has
duly authorized the execution, delivery, and performance of this Agreement by proper action of
its members.
(b) If the conditions precedent to construction occur, the Redeveloper will construct
the Minimum Improvements in accordance with the terms of this Agreement, the Redevelopment
Plan and all local, state and federal laws and regulations (including, but not limited to,
environmental, zoning, building code and public health laws and regulations).
(c) The Redeveloper will use reasonable efforts to secure all permits, licenses and
approvals necessary for construction of the Minimum Improvements.
(d) The Redeveloper has received no written notice or other written communication
from any local, state or federal official that the activities of the Redeveloper or the Authority in
the Project Area may be or will be in violation of any environmental law or regulation (other
than those notices or communications of which the Authority is aware). The Redeveloper is
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 26
aware of no facts the existence of which would cause it to be in violation of or give any person a
valid claim under any local, state or federal environmental law, regulation or review procedure.
(e) Neither the execution and delivery of this Agreement, the consummation of the
transactions contemplated hereby, nor the fulfillment of or compliance with the terms and
conditions of this Agreement is prevented, limited by or conflicts with or results in a breach of,
the terms, conditions or provisions of any corporate restriction or any evidences of indebtedness,
agreement or instrument of whatever nature to which the Redeveloper is now a party or by which
it is bound, or constitutes a default under any of the foregoing.
(f) The proposed development by the Redeveloper hereunder would not occur but for
the tax increment financing assistance being provided by the Authority hereunder.
[The remainder of this page is intentionally left blank.]
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 27
ARTICLE III
Property Acquisition; Public Redevelopment Costs
Section 3.1. Status of Redevelopment Property. (a) The Redevelopment Property
consists of the Parcels described in Schedule A. As of the date of this Agreement the
Redeveloper has entered into purchase agreements to acquire all Parcels of the Redevelopment
Property. The Authority has no obligation to acquire the Redevelopment Property.
(b) The Redeveloper shall prepare and obtain City approval of a plat of the
Redevelopment Property (the “Redevelopment Plat”) at Redeveloper’s cost and subject to all
City ordinances and procedures. Nothing in this Agreement is intended to limit the City’s
authority in reviewing the preliminary plat, or to preclude revisions requested or required by the
City.
Section 3.2. Environmental Conditions. (a) The Redeveloper shall prepare a voluntary
response action plan providing for remediation of hazardous wastes and contaminants on the
Redevelopment Property (the “VRAP”) for approval by the Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency. The Redeveloper shall promptly undertake remediation and any other actions required
under the VRAP, a portion of which may be reimbursed through issuance of the Note by the
Authority.
(b) The Redeveloper acknowledges that the Authority makes no representations or
warranties as to the condition of the soils on the Redevelopment Property or the fitness of the
Redevelopment Property for construction of the Minimum Improvements or any other purpose
for which the Redeveloper may make use of such property, and that the assistance provided to
the Redeveloper under this Agreement neither implies any responsibility by the Authority or the
City for any contamination of the Redevelopment Property nor imposes any obligation on such
parties to participate in any cleanup of the Redevelopment Property.
(c) Without limiting its obligations under Section 8.3 of this Agreement the
Redeveloper further agrees that it will indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the Authority, the
City, and their governing body members, officers, and employees, from any claims or actions
arising out of the presence, if any, of hazardous wastes or pollutants existing on or in the
Redevelopment Property (including without limitation any asbestos in any existing building),
unless and to the extent that such hazardous wastes or pollutants are present as a result of the
actions or omissions of the indemnitees. Nothing in this section will be construed to limit or
affect any limitations on liability of the City or Authority under State or federal law, including
without limitation Minnesota Statutes Sections 466.04 and 604.02.
Section 3.3. Issuance of Note. (a) Generally. The Authority has determined that, in
order to make development of the Minimum Improvements financially feasible, it is necessary to
reimburse Redeveloper for a portion of the cost of site preparation, environmental remediation,
and underground structured parking (collectively referred to as “Public Redevelopment Costs”),
related to the Redevelopment Property, subject to the terms of this Section.
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 28
(b) Terms. To reimburse the Public Redevelopment Costs incurred by Redeveloper,
the Authority shall issue and the Redeveloper shall purchase the Note in the maximum principal
amount of $490,000. The Authority shall issue and deliver the Note upon Redeveloper having:
(i) delivered to the Authority written evidence satisfactory to the Authority
that Redeveloper has incurred Public Redevelopment Costs in an amount least equal to
the principal amount of the Note, which evidence must include copies of the paid
invoices or other comparable evidence for costs of allowable Public Redevelopment
Costs;
(ii) submitted and obtained Authority approval of financing in accordance
with Section 7.1; and
(iii) delivered to the Authority an investment letter in a form reasonably
satisfactory to the Authority.
The terms of the Note will be substantially those set forth in the form of the Note shown
in Schedule B, and the Note will be subject to all terms of the Authorizing Resolution, which is
incorporated herein by reference.
(c) Termination of right to Note. All conditions for delivery of the Note must be met
by no later than March 31, 2012, which date is less than ten (10) years after the date of
certification of the TIF District by the County and complies with the so-called five-year rule
under Section 469.1763, subd. 3(c) of the TIF Act, as amended during the 2009 State legislative
session. If the conditions for delivery of the Note are not satisfied by the date described in this
paragraph, the City has no further obligations under this Section 3.3.
(d) Assignment of Note. The Authority acknowledges that the Redeveloper may
assign the Note to a third party. The Authority consents to such an assignment, conditioned upon
receipt of an investment letter from such third party in a form reasonably acceptable to the
Authority.
(e) Qualifications. The Redeveloper understands and acknowledges that all Public
Redevelopment Costs must be paid by the Redeveloper and will be reimbursed from Available
Tax Increment pursuant to the terms of the Note. The Authority makes no representations or
warranties regarding the amount of Tax Increment, or that revenues pledged to the Note will be
sufficient to pay the principal and interest on the Note. Any estimates of Tax Increment prepared
by the Authority or its financial advisors in connection with the TIF District or this Agreement
are for the benefit of the Authority, and are not intended as representations on which the
Redeveloper may rely. Public Redevelopment Costs exceeding the principal amount of the Note
are the sole responsibility of Redeveloper.
Section 3.4. TOD Grant. (a) To finance a portion of the costs of developing the
Redevelopment Property, the Authority has been awarded a grant (the “Grant”) in the principal
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 29
amount of $355,000 through the Transit Oriented Development (“TOD”) Program administered
by the County.
(b) The Authority will pay or reimburse the Redeveloper for Grant-Eligible Costs from
and to the extent of the grant proceeds, less the amount described in Section 3.4(c) hereof, in
accordance with the terms of the grant agreement between the Authority and County and the terms
of this section. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary herein, if Grant-Eligible Costs exceed the
amount to be reimbursed under this Section, such excess shall be the sole responsibility of the
Redeveloper (except to the extent reimbursable under the Note).
(c) The Redeveloper agrees and acknowledges that the Authority has paid a grant
application fee of $15,975 to the County (the “Grant Application Fee”) in connection with the
Grant, and that the Authority shall retain the first $15,975 in grant proceeds disbursed for Grant-
Eligible Costs from the County as reimbursement for the Grant Application Fee.
(d) All disbursements will be made subject to the conditions precedent that on the date
of such disbursement:
(1) The Authority has received a written statement from the Redeveloper’s
authorized representative certifying with respect to each payment: (i) that none of the items
for which the payment is proposed to be made has formed the basis for any payment
theretofore made under this section or has been submitted as a Public Redevelopment Cost
under Section 3.3 hereof; (ii) that each item for which the payment is proposed is a Grant-
Eligible Cost as described in the grant agreement, and (iii) the Redeveloper reasonably
anticipates completion of the Grant-Eligible Costs and the Minimum Improvements in
accordance with the terms of this Agreement.
(2) No Event of Default under this Agreement or event which would constitute
such an Event of Default but for the requirement that notice be given or that a period of
grace or time elapse, shall have occurred and be continuing.
(3) No license or permit necessary for undertaking the Grant-Eligible Costs or
constructing the Minimum Improvements shall have been revoked or the issuance thereof
subjected to challenge before any court or other governmental authority having or asserting
jurisdiction thereover.
(4) Redeveloper has submitted, and the Authority has approved, Construction
Plans for the Minimum Improvements in accordance with Article IV hereof, and financing
commitment in accordance with Article VII hereof.
(e) Whenever the Redeveloper desires a disbursement to be made hereunder, which
shall be no more often than bi-weekly, the Redeveloper shall submit to the Authority a draw request
in a form reasonably satisfactory to the Authority, duly executed on behalf of the Redeveloper
accompanied by paid invoices or other comparable evidence that the cost has been incurred and
paid or is payable by Redeveloper. Each draw request shall constitute a representation and warranty
by the Redeveloper that all representations and warranties set forth in this Agreement are true and
correct as of the date of such draw request.
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 30
(f) If the Redeveloper has performed all of its agreements and complied with all
requirements theretofore to be performed or complied with hereunder, including satisfaction of all
applicable conditions precedent contained in Article III hereof, the Authority shall make a
disbursement to the Redeveloper in the amount of the requested disbursement or such lesser amount
as shall be approved, within twenty Business Days after the date of the Authority’s receipt of the
draw request, or, if later, upon receipt of grant proceeds from the County.
(g) The making of the final disbursement by the Authority under this Section shall be
subject to the condition precedent that the Redeveloper shall be in compliance with all conditions
set forth in this Section and further, that the Authority shall have received a lien waiver from each
contractor for all work done and for all materials furnished by it for the Grant-Eligible Costs.
(h) The Authority may, in its sole discretion, without notice to or consent from any other
party, waive any or all conditions for disbursement set forth in this Article. However, the making of
any disbursement prior to fulfillment of any condition therefor shall not be construed as a waiver of
such condition, and the Authority shall have the right to require fulfillment of any and all such
conditions prior to authorizing any subsequent disbursement.
Section 3.5. TIF Lookback.
(a) Generally. The financial assistance to the Redeveloper under this Agreement is based
on certain assumptions regarding likely costs and expenses associated with constructing the
Minimum Improvements. The Authority and the Redeveloper agree that those assumptions will
be reviewed at the times described in this Section, and that the amount of Tax Increment
assistance provided under Section 3.3 may be adjusted accordingly.
(b) Definitions. For the purposes of this Section, the following terms have the following
definitions:
“Calculation Date” means 60 days after the earliest of (i) the date of Stabilization for the
Minimum Improvements; (ii) the date of any Transfer in whole or in part of the Minimum
Improvements; or (iii) three years after the date of issuance of the Certificate of Completion for
the Minimum Improvements.
“Net Operating Income” means all net rental income from the Minimum Improvements
received in the last fiscal year prior to the Calculation Date, subject to the following adjustments:
(i) if the Minimum Improvements have not reached Stabilization as of the Calculation Date,
income will be calculated as the sum of actual rent, parking and miscellaneous income plus
assumed rent, parking and miscellaneous income for the space needed to reach 95% lease-up at
rates equal to the average rent and parking income from actual leases and miscellaneous income
as of the Calculation Date; (ii) from that total will be deducted actual fees, operating and
management expenses as outlined on Schedule E hereto (if Stabilization has occurred) or
estimated fees, operating and management expenses as if the Minimum Improvements were 95%
leased (if Stabilization has not occurred).
“Stabilization” means 95% of the Minimum Improvements are leased.
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 31
(c) Lookback Calculation. On the applicable Calculation Date, the Redeveloper shall
deliver to the Authority reasonable evidence of its actual annualized cumulative internal rate of
return (the “IRR”) from the Minimum Improvements, calculated as of the applicable Calculation
Date, along with the estimated annualized cumulative IRR from the Minimum Improvements
assuming a sale in the tenth year after the date of issuance of the Certificate of Completion for
the Minimum Improvements. The IRR shall be calculated based on equity, revenues and
expenses in substantially in the format of the lookback pro forma attached as Schedule E hereto.
The Redeveloper agrees to provide to the Authority any background documentation reasonably
related to the financial data, upon written request from the Authority or the Authority’s financial
consultant. The Authority may, by written request, require Redeveloper to deliver to the
Authority a written certificate of a certified public accountant regarding total redevelopment
costs and revenues, to be provided at Redeveloper’s expense.
The amount by which the IRR exceeds twenty percent (20%) shall be referred to as the
“Excess Percentage.” The Excess Percentage, multiplied by Redeveloper’s equity in the
Minimum Improvements (as calculated for purposes of determining the IRR), is the
“Participation Amount.” If the Authority determines that there is a Participation Amount, the
Authority shall deliver written notice to the Redeveloper stating the Participation Amount and
applying fifty percent (50%) of the Participation Amount as prepayment of the outstanding
principal amount of the Note in accordance with Section 5(b) of the Note, effective upon
delivery of such notice.
Section 3.6. Business Subsidy. The Redeveloper warrants and represents that the
Redeveloper’s investment in the purchase of the Redevelopment Property equals at least seventy
percent (70%) of the County assessor’s estimated market value of the Redevelopment Property
for the 2009 assessment year (which is the most current year for which values have been
finalized by the County), calculated as follows:
Aggregate cost of acquisition of Redeveloper Parcels ................$1,620,000
Assessor’s estimated market value of Redevelopment
Property (pay 2010).....................................................................$1,356,000
The acquisition cost) is 119.5% of the assessor’s most recent estimated fair market value
of the Redevelopment Property.
Accordingly, the parties agree and understand that the financial assistance described in
this Agreement does not constitute a business subsidy within the meaning of the Business
Subsidy Act. The Redeveloper releases and waives any claim against the Authority and its
governing body members, officers, agents, servants and employees thereof arising from
application of the Business Subsidy Act to this Agreement, including without limitation any
claim that the Authority failed to comply with the Business Subsidy Act with respect to this
Agreement.
Section 3.7. Payment of Authority Costs. The Redeveloper agrees that it will pay, within
fifteen (15) days after written notice from the Authority, the reasonable costs of consultants and
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 32
attorneys retained by the Authority in connection with the creation of the TIF District and the
negotiation in preparation of this Agreement and other incidental agreements and documents
related to the development contemplated hereunder. The Authority will provide written reports
describing the costs accrued under this Section upon request from the Redeveloper, but not more
often than intervals of forty-five (45) days. Any amount deposited by the Redeveloper upon
filling its application for tax increment financing with the Authority will be credited to the
Redeveloper’s obligation under this Section. Upon termination of this Agreement in accordance
with its terms, the Redeveloper remains obligated under this section for costs incurred through
the effective date of termination.
[The remainder of this page is intentionally left blank.]
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 33
ARTICLE IV
Construction of Minimum Improvements
Section 4.1. Construction of Improvements. The Redeveloper agrees that it will
construct or cause construction of the Minimum Improvements on the Redevelopment Property
in accordance with the approved Construction Plans and that it will, during any period while the
Redeveloper retains ownership of any portion of the Minimum Improvements, operate and
maintain, preserve and keep the Minimum Improvements or cause the Minimum Improvements
to be maintained, preserved and kept with the appurtenances and every part and parcel thereof, in
good repair and condition.
Section 4.2. Construction Plans. (a) Before commencing construction of the Minimum
Improvements, the Redeveloper shall submit to the Authority Construction Plans for the
Minimum Improvements. The Construction Plans shall provide for the construction of the
Minimum Improvements and shall be in conformity with this Agreement, the Redevelopment
Plan and all applicable State and local laws and regulations. The Authority will approve the
Construction Plans in writing if (i) the Construction Plans conform to all terms and conditions of
this Agreement; (ii) the Construction Plans conform to the goals and objectives of the
Redevelopment Plan; (iii) the Construction Plans conform to all applicable federal, state and
local laws, ordinances, rules and regulations; (iv) the Construction Plans are adequate to provide
for construction of the Minimum Improvements; (v) the Construction Plans do not provide for
expenditures in excess of the funds available to the Redeveloper for construction of the
Minimum Improvements; and (vi) no Event of Default has occurred. No approval by the
Authority shall relieve the Redeveloper of the obligation to comply with the terms of this
Agreement, applicable federal, state and local laws, ordinances, rules and regulations, or to
construct the Minimum Improvements in accordance therewith. No approval by the Authority
shall constitute a waiver of an Event of Default. If approval of the Construction Plans is
requested by the Redeveloper in writing at the time of submission, such Construction Plans shall
be deemed approved unless rejected in writing by the Authority, in whole or in part. Such
rejections shall set forth in detail the reasons therefor based upon the criteria set forth in
(i) through (vi) above, and shall be made within twenty (20) days after the date of receipt of final
plans from the Redeveloper. If the Authority rejects any Construction Plans in whole or in part,
the Redeveloper shall submit new or corrected Construction Plans within twenty (20) days after
written notification to the Redeveloper of the rejection. The provisions of this Section relating to
approval, rejection and resubmission of corrected Construction Plans shall continue to apply
until the Construction Plans have been approved by the Authority. The Authority’s approval
shall not be unreasonably withheld. Said approval shall constitute a conclusive determination
that the Construction Plans (and the Minimum Improvements, constructed in accordance with
said plans) comply to the Authority’s satisfaction with the provisions of this Agreement relating
thereto.
The Redeveloper hereby waives any and all claims and causes of action whatsoever
resulting from the review of the Construction Plans by the Authority and/or any changes in the
Construction Plans requested by the Authority. Neither the Authority, the Authority, nor any
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 34
employee or official of the Authority or City shall be responsible in any manner whatsoever for
any defect in the Construction Plans or in any work done pursuant to the Construction Plans,
including changes requested by the Authority.
(b) If the Redeveloper desires to make any material change in the Construction Plans
or any component thereof after their approval by the Authority, the Redeveloper shall submit the
proposed change to the Authority for its approval. For the purpose of this section, the term
“material” means changes that increase or decrease construction costs by $500,000 or more. If
the Construction Plans, as modified by the proposed change, conform to the requirements of this
Section 4.2 of this Agreement with respect to such previously approved Construction Plans, the
Authority shall approve the proposed change and notify the Redeveloper in writing of its
approval. Such change in the Construction Plans shall, in any event, be deemed approved by the
Authority unless rejected, in whole or in part, by written notice by the Authority to the
Redeveloper, setting forth in detail the reasons therefor. Such rejection shall be made within
ten (10) days after receipt of the notice of such change. The Authority’s approval of any such
change in the Construction Plans will not be unreasonably withheld.
Section 4.3. Commencement and Completion of Construction. (a) Subject to
Unavoidable Delays, the Redeveloper shall commence construction of the Minimum
Improvements by December 31, 2010. Subject to Unavoidable Delays, the Redeveloper shall
complete the construction of the Minimum Improvements by March 31, 2012. All work with
respect to the Minimum Improvements to be constructed or provided by the Redeveloper on the
Redevelopment Property shall be in conformity with the Construction Plans as submitted by the
Redeveloper and approved by the Authority.
(b) The Redeveloper agrees for itself, its successors, and assigns, and every successor in
interest to the Redevelopment Property, or any part thereof, that the Redeveloper, and such
successors and assigns, shall promptly begin and diligently prosecute to completion the
development of the Redevelopment Property through the construction of the Minimum
Improvements thereon, and that such construction shall in any event be commenced and
completed within the period specified in this Section 4.3 of this Agreement. After the date of
this Agreement and until the Minimum Improvements have been fully leased, the Redeveloper
shall make reports, in such detail and at such times as may reasonably be requested by the
Authority, but no more than monthly, as to the actual progress of the Redeveloper with respect to
such construction and leasing.
(c) The Redeveloper shall comply with the City’s Green Building Policy, adopted by the
City Council on February 16, 2010 and as such policy may be amended as of the date of issuance of
a building permit for the Minimum Improvements, and shall use commercially reasonable efforts to
obtain “green” certification for the Minimum Improvements. As a condition to issuance of a
Certificate of Completion for the Minimum Improvements, Redeveloper shall submit to the
Authority either (a) evidence of certification from Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design
or similar certification or (b) in absence of actual certification, evidence in a form satisfactory to the
Authority of Redeveloper’s best efforts to obtain such certification and an explanation of why
certification was not feasible.
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 35
Section 4.4. Certificate of Completion. (a) Promptly after completion of the Minimum
Improvements in accordance with those provisions of the Agreement relating solely to the
obligations of the Redeveloper to construct the Minimum Improvements (including the dates for
beginning and completion thereof and the efforts regarding LEED certification described in this
Section), the Authority Representative shall deliver to the Redeveloper a Certificate in
substantially the form shown as Schedule C, in recordable form and executed by the Authority.
(b) If the Authority Representative shall refuse or fail to provide any certification in
accordance with the provisions of this Section 4.4 of this Agreement, the Authority
Representative shall, within thirty (30) days after written request by the Redeveloper, provide the
Redeveloper with a written statement, indicating in adequate detail in what respects the
Redeveloper has failed to complete the Minimum Improvements in accordance with the
provisions of the Agreement, or is otherwise in default, and what measures or acts it will be
necessary, in the opinion of the Authority, for the Redeveloper to take or perform in order for the
Authority to issue the Certificate of Completion.
(c) The construction of the Minimum Improvements shall be deemed to be
substantially complete upon issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the Minimum
Improvements, and upon determination by the Authority Representative that all related site
improvements on the Redevelopment Property have been substantially completed in accordance
with approved Construction Plans, subject to landscaping and/or public art that cannot be
completed until seasonal conditions permit.
Section 4.5. Management. The Redeveloper shall at all times engage a property
management company with substantial experience in operating mixed use developments, subject to
approval by the Authority, which approval will not be unreasonably withheld. The Redeveloper
will annually submit evidence of such management by February 1 of each year.
Section 4.6. Records and Reports. (a) The Authority and the City, through any
authorized representatives, shall have the right at all reasonable times after reasonable notice to
inspect, examine and copy all books and records of Redeveloper relating to the Minimum
Improvements. Such records shall be kept and maintained by Redeveloper through the
Termination Date.
(b) The Redeveloper also agrees to submit to the Authority written reports so as to allow
the Authority to remain in compliance with reporting requirements under state statutes. The
Authority will provide information to the Redeveloper regarding the required forms.
Section 4.7. Plaza. The Redeveloper shall construct an outdoor Plaza as depicted in
the Site Plan attached hereto as Schedule F, for the use and enjoyment of residents and invitees
of the Minimum Improvements and members of the general public. The Plaza shall incorporate
amenities to be mutually agreed upon by the Authority and Redeveloper, and which shall include
public art (the “Public Art”) and may include street furnishings or landscaping, and/or decorative
lighting elements. The parties agree and understand that the City shall be responsible for the cost
of any maintenance and repair of the Public Art (the “Art Maintenance”). If the City fails to
perform the Art Maintenance after thirty (30) days written notice from Redeveloper of the City’s
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 36
obligation to perform such maintenance, then the Redeveloper may perform the Art Maintenance
and forward evidence of the costs incurred in such Art Maintenance to the City and Authority.
The City shall pay the Redeveloper the costs of the Art Maintenance within sixty (60) days of
receipt of such evidence.
Section 4.8 Special Service District; Maintenance. (a) The Redeveloper understands
that the Redevelopment Property currently lies within the City’s Special Service District No. 6
(the “Special Service District”) and is subject to existing special service charges. Upon written
request of the Authority or City, the Redeveloper will file any petition required under Minnesota
Statutes, Chapter 428A in order to renew any levy of special service charges within the Special
Service District. The detailed special services and service charges to be assessed will be
determined by mutual agreement of the parties, provided that parties hereby agree on the
following general principles: (a) the special services will include maintenance of all
streetscaping, streelighting and sidewalks within the right of way, but will not include snow
removal; and (b) the special service charges will be allocated to properties within the special
service district based on front footage. In accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 428A,
special services will not include any service that is ordinarily provided throughout the City from
general fund revenues except to the extent an increased level of service is provided in the special
service district. Special service charges may be imposed only against that portion of the
Redevelopment Property classified for commercial use. The Redeveloper further waives all
rights to veto, appeal or otherwise object to imposition of a service charge levied in accordance
with this paragraph.
(b) By no later than December 31, 2011, the Redeveloper shall submit to the
Authority for review and approval a plan for maintenance and operation of all pedestrian and
landscaping improvements located within the Redevelopment Property (the “Maintenance
Plan”). The Maintenance Plan must address, at a minimum: snow removal from pedestrian
connections and sidewalks; maintenance and replacement of landscaping, irrigation and other
Streetscaping; snow removal and maintenance of any surface parking and parking lots; and
maintenance of the Plaza, but excluding maintenance covered by the Special Service District (the
“Maintenance”); a description of how the Maintenance costs will be assessed to tenants; and
enforcement mechanisms. Within sixty (60) days after receipt of the Maintenance Plan, the
Authority will approve or deny the Maintenance Plan in writing, which approval shall not be
unreasonably withheld, delayed or denied. If the Authority denies approval of the Maintenance
Plan, the denial shall set forth in detail the reasons therefor, and Redeveloper shall submit a new
or corrected Maintenance Plan within thirty (30) days after written notification to the
Redeveloper of the denial.
(c) If the Redeveloper fails to perform the Maintenance in accordance with the
Maintenance Plan, the Authority, at its option and following thirty (30) days written notice to the
Redeveloper, may enter the Redevelopment property and perform the Maintenance. The
Redeveloper agrees to permit the City to specially assess any costs of the Maintenance
proportionately against the Minimum Improvements. The Redeveloper, on behalf of itself and
its successors and assigns, acknowledges the benefit to the lots within the Redevelopment
Property of the Maintenance and consents to such assessment and waives the right to a hearing,
notice of hearing, or any appeal.
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 37
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 38
ARTICLE V
Insurance
Section 5.1. Insurance. (a) The Redeveloper will provide and maintain at all times
during the process of constructing the Minimum Improvements an All Risk Broad Form Basis
Insurance Policy and, from time to time during that period, at the request of the Authority,
furnish the Authority with proof of payment of premiums on policies covering the following:
(i) Builder’s risk insurance, written on the so-called “Builder’s Risk --
Completed Value Basis,” in an amount equal to 100% of the principal amount of the
Note, and with coverage available in nonreporting form on the so-called “all risk” form
of policy. The interest of the Authority shall be protected in accordance with a clause in
form and content satisfactory to the Authority;
(ii) Comprehensive general liability insurance (including operations,
contingent liability, operations of subcontractors, completed operations, and contractual
liability insurance) together with an Owner’s Protective Liability Policy with limits
against bodily injury and property damage of not less than $1,000,000 for each
occurrence (to accomplish the above-required limits, an umbrella excess liability policy
may be used). The Authority shall be listed as an additional insured on the policy; and
(iii) Workers’ compensation insurance, with statutory coverage, provided that
the Redeveloper may be self-insured with respect to all or any part of its liability for
workers’ compensation.
(b) Upon completion of construction of the Minimum Improvements and prior to the
Maturity Date, the Redeveloper shall maintain, or cause to be maintained, at its cost and expense,
and from time to time at the request of the Authority shall furnish proof of the payment of
premiums on, insurance as follows:
(i) Insurance against loss and/or damage to the Minimum Improvements
under a policy or policies covering such risks as are ordinarily insured against by similar
businesses.
(ii) Comprehensive general public liability insurance, including personal
injury liability (with employee exclusion deleted), against liability for injuries to persons
and/or property, in the minimum amount for each occurrence and for each year of
$1,000,000, and shall be endorsed to show the City and Authority as additional insureds.
(iii) Such other insurance, including workers’ compensation insurance
respecting all employees of the Redeveloper, in such amount as is customarily carried by
like organizations engaged in like activities of comparable size and liability exposure;
provided that the Redeveloper may be self-insured with respect to all or any part of its
liability for workers’ compensation.
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 39
(c) All insurance required in Article V of this Agreement shall be taken out and
maintained in responsible insurance companies selected by the Redeveloper that are authorized
under the laws of the State to assume the risks covered thereby. Upon request, the Redeveloper
will deposit annually with the Authority policies evidencing all such insurance, or a certificate or
certificates or binders of the respective insurers stating that such insurance is in force and effect.
Unless otherwise provided in this Article V of this Agreement each policy shall contain a
provision that the insurer shall not cancel nor modify it in such a way as to reduce the coverage
provided below the amounts required herein without giving written notice to the Redeveloper
and the Authority at least thirty (30) days before the cancellation or modification becomes
effective. In lieu of separate policies, the Redeveloper may maintain a single policy, blanket or
umbrella policies, or a combination thereof, having the coverage required herein, in which event
the Redeveloper shall deposit with the Authority a certificate or certificates of the respective
insurers as to the amount of coverage in force upon the Minimum Improvements.
(d) The Redeveloper agrees to notify the Authority immediately in the case of
damage exceeding $100,000 in amount to, or destruction of, the Minimum Improvements or any
portion thereof resulting from fire or other casualty. In such event the Redeveloper will
forthwith repair, reconstruct, and restore the Minimum Improvements to substantially the same
or an improved condition or value as it existed prior to the event causing such damage and, to the
extent necessary to accomplish such repair, reconstruction, and restoration, the Redeveloper will
apply the net proceeds of any insurance relating to such damage received by the Redeveloper to
the payment or reimbursement of the costs thereof.
The Redeveloper shall complete the repair, reconstruction and restoration of the
Minimum Improvements, regardless of whether the net proceeds of insurance received by the
Redeveloper for such purposes are sufficient to pay for the same. Any net proceeds remaining
after completion of such repairs, construction, and restoration shall be the property of the
Redeveloper.
(e) In lieu of its obligation to reconstruct the Minimum Improvements as set forth in
this Section, the Redeveloper shall have the option of: (i) paying to the Authority an amount
that, in the opinion of the Authority and its fiscal consultant, is sufficient to pay or redeem the
outstanding principal and accrued interest on the Note, or (ii) so long as the Redeveloper is the
owner of the Note, waiving its right to receive subsequent payments under the Note.
(f) The Redeveloper and the Authority agree that all of the insurance provisions set
forth in this Article V shall terminate upon the termination of this Agreement.
Section 5.2. Subordination. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary herein, the rights
of the Authority with respect to the receipt and application of any insurance proceeds shall, in all
respects, be subordinate and subject to the rights of any Holder under a Mortgage allowed
pursuant to Article VII of this Agreement.
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 40
ARTICLE VI
Tax Increment; Taxes
Section 6.1. Right to Collect Delinquent Taxes. The Redeveloper acknowledges that the
Authority is providing substantial aid and assistance in furtherance of the development through
reimbursement of land acquisition costs. The Redeveloper understands that the Tax Increments
pledged to payment on the Note are derived from real estate taxes on the Redevelopment
Property, which taxes must be promptly and timely paid. To that end, the Redeveloper agrees
for itself, its successors and assigns, in addition to the obligation pursuant to statute to pay real
estate taxes, that it is also obligated by reason of this Agreement to pay before delinquency all
real estate taxes assessed against the Redevelopment Property and the Minimum Improvements.
The Redeveloper acknowledges that this obligation creates a contractual right on behalf of the
Authority to sue the Redeveloper or its successors and assigns to collect delinquent real estate
taxes and any penalty or interest thereon and to pay over the same as a tax payment to the county
auditor. In any such suit, the Authority shall also be entitled to recover its costs, expenses and
reasonable attorney fees.
Section 6.2. Review of Taxes. The Redeveloper agrees that prior to the Maturity Date it
will not cause a reduction in the real property taxes paid in respect of the Redevelopment
Property through: (A) willful destruction of the Redevelopment Property or any part thereof; or
(B) willful refusal to reconstruct damaged or destroyed property pursuant to Section 5.1 of this
Agreement, except as provided in Section 5.1(e). The Redeveloper also agrees that it will not,
prior to the Maturity Date, seek exemption from property tax for the Redevelopment Property or
any portion thereof or transfer or permit the transfer of the Redevelopment Property to any entity
that is exempt from real property taxes and state law (other than any portion thereof dedicated or
conveyed to the City in accordance with platting of the Redevelopment Property), or apply for a
deferral of property tax on the Redevelopment Property pursuant to any law.
Section 6.3. Assessment Agreement. (a) Upon execution of this Agreement, the
Redeveloper shall, with the Authority, execute an Assessment Agreement pursuant to Minnesota
Statutes, Section 469.177, subd. 8, specifying an assessor's minimum Market Value for the
Redevelopment Property and Minimum Improvements constructed thereon. The amount of the
minimum Market Value shall be $2,050,000 as of January 2, 2011, and $13,650,000 as of January
2, 2012 and each January 2 thereafter, notwithstanding the status of construction by such dates.
(b) The Assessment Agreement shall be substantially in the form attached hereto as
Schedule G. Nothing in the Assessment Agreement shall limit the discretion of the assessor to
assign a market value to the property in excess of such assessor's minimum Market Value. The
Assessment Agreement shall remain in force for the period specified in the Assessment Agreement.
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 41
ARTICLE VII
Other Financing
Section 7.1. Generally. Before issuance of the Note, the Redeveloper shall submit to the
Authority or provide access thereto for review by Authority staff, consultants and agents,
evidence reasonably satisfactory to the Authority that Redeveloper has available funds, or
commitments to obtain funds, whether in the nature of mortgage financing, equity, grants, loans,
or other sources sufficient for paying the cost of the developing the Minimum Improvements,
provided that any lender or grantor commitments shall be subject only to such conditions as are
normal and customary in the commercial lending industry.
Section 7.2. Authority’s Option to Cure Default on Mortgage. In the event that any
portion of the Redeveloper’s funds is provided through mortgage financing, and there occurs a
default under any Mortgage authorized pursuant to Article VII of this Agreement, the
Redeveloper shall cause the Authority to receive copies of any notice of default received by the
Redeveloper from the holder of such Mortgage. Thereafter, the Authority shall have the right,
but not the obligation, to cure any such default on behalf of the Redeveloper within such cure
periods as are available to the Redeveloper under the Mortgage documents.
Section 7.3. Modification; Subordination. The Authority agrees to subordinate its rights
under this Agreement to the Holder of any Mortgage securing construction or permanent
financing, in accordance with the terms of a subordination agreement substantially in the form
attached as Schedule D, or such other form as the Authority approves.
[The remainder of this page is intentionally left blank.]
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 42
ARTICLE VIII
Prohibitions Against Assignment and Transfer; Indemnification
Section 8.1. Representation as to Development. The Redeveloper represents and agrees
that its purchase of the Redevelopment Property, and its other undertakings pursuant to the
Agreement, are, and will be used, for the purpose of development of the Redevelopment
Property and not for speculation in land holding.
Section 8.2. Prohibition Against Redeveloper’s Transfer of Property and Assignment of
Agreement. The Redeveloper represents and agrees that prior to issuance of a Certificate of
Completion for all of the Minimum Improvements:
(a) Except only by way of security for, and only for, the purpose of obtaining
financing necessary to enable the Redeveloper or any successor in interest to the Redevelopment
Property, or any part thereof, to perform its obligations with respect to undertaking the
redevelopment contemplated under this Agreement, and any other purpose authorized by this
Agreement, the Redeveloper has not made or created and will not make or create or suffer to be
made or created any total or partial sale, assignment, conveyance, or lease, or any trust or power,
or transfer in any other mode or form of or with respect to this Agreement or the Redevelopment
Property or any part thereof or any interest therein, or any contract or agreement to do any of the
same, to any person or entity whether or not related in any way to the Redeveloper (collectively,
a “Transfer”), without the prior written approval of the Authority (whose approval will not be
unreasonably withheld, subject to the standards described in paragraph (b) of this Section) unless
the Redeveloper remains liable and bound by this Redevelopment Agreement in which event the
Authority’s approval is not required. Any such Transfer shall be subject to the provisions of this
Agreement. For the purposes of this Agreement, the term Transfer does not include
(i) acquisition of a controlling interest in Redeveloper by another entity or merger of
Redeveloper with another entity; or (ii) any sale, conveyance, or transfer in any form to any
Affiliate.
(b) In the event the Redeveloper, upon Transfer of the Redevelopment Property or
any portion thereof either before or after issuance of the final Certificate of Completion, seeks to
be released from its obligations under this Redevelopment Agreement as to the portions of the
Redevelopment Property that is transferred, the Authority shall be entitled to require, except as
otherwise provided in the Agreement, as conditions to any such release that:
(i) Any proposed transferee shall have the qualifications and financial
responsibility, in the reasonable judgment of the Authority, necessary and adequate to
fulfill the obligations undertaken in this Agreement by the Redeveloper as to the portion
of the Redevelopment Property to be transferred.
(ii) Any proposed transferee, by instrument in writing satisfactory to the
Authority and in form recordable in the public land records of Hennepin County,
Minnesota, shall, for itself and its successors and assigns, and expressly for the benefit of
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 43
the Authority, have expressly assumed all of the obligations of the Redeveloper under
this Agreement as to the portion of the Redevelopment Property to be transferred and
agreed to be subject to all the conditions and restrictions to which the Redeveloper is
subject as to such portion; provided, however, that the fact that any transferee of, or any
other successor in interest whatsoever to, the Redevelopment Property, or any part
thereof, shall not, for whatever reason, have assumed such obligations or so agreed, and
shall not (unless and only to the extent otherwise specifically provided in this Agreement
or agreed to in writing by the Authority) deprive the Authority of any rights or remedies
or controls with respect to the Redevelopment Property, the Minimum Improvements or
any part thereof or the construction of the Minimum Improvements; it being the intent of
the parties as expressed in this Agreement that (to the fullest extent permitted at law and
in equity and excepting only in the manner and to the extent specifically provided
otherwise in this Agreement) no transfer of, or change with respect to, ownership in the
Redevelopment Property or any part thereof, or any interest therein, however
consummated or occurring, and whether voluntary or involuntary, shall operate, legally,
or practically, to deprive or limit the Authority of or with respect to any rights or
remedies on controls provided in or resulting from this Agreement with respect to the
Redevelopment Property that the Authority would have had, had there been no such
transfer or change. In the absence of specific written agreement by the Authority to the
contrary, no such transfer or approval by the Authority thereof shall be deemed to relieve
the Redeveloper, or any other party bound in any way by this Agreement or otherwise
with respect to the Redevelopment Property, from any of its obligations with respect
thereto.
(iii) Any and all instruments and other legal documents involved in effecting
the transfer of any interest in this Agreement or the Redevelopment Property governed by
this Article VIII, shall be in a form reasonably satisfactory to the Authority.
(iv) At the written request of Redeveloper, the Authority shall execute and
deliver to Redeveloper and the proposed transferee an estoppel certificate containing
commercially customary and reasonable certifications.
In the event the foregoing conditions are satisfied then the Redeveloper shall be released from its
obligation under this Agreement, as to the portion of the Redevelopment Property that is
transferred, assigned, or otherwise conveyed.
Section 8.3. Release and Indemnification Covenants. (a) Except for any willful
misrepresentation or any willful or wanton misconduct or negligence of the Indemnified Parties
as hereinafter defined, and except for any breach by any of the Indemnified Parties of their
obligations under this Agreement, the Redeveloper releases from and covenants and agrees that
the Authority, the City, and the governing body members, officers, agents, servants, and
employees thereof (the “Indemnified Parties”) shall not be liable for and agrees to indemnify and
hold harmless the Indemnified Parties against any loss or damage to property or any injury to or
death of any person occurring at or about or resulting from any defect in the Redevelopment
Property or the Minimum Improvements.
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 44
(b) Except for any willful misrepresentation or any willful or wanton misconduct or
negligence of the Indemnified Parties, and except for any breach by any of the Indemnified
Parties of their obligations under this Agreement (including without limitation any failure by the
Authority to perform any procedure required under law in connection with establishment of the
TIF District), the Redeveloper agrees to protect and defend the Indemnified Parties, now and
forever, and further agrees to hold the aforesaid harmless from any claim, demand, suit, action,
or other proceeding whatsoever by any person or entity whatsoever arising or purportedly arising
from this Agreement, or the transactions contemplated hereby or the acquisition, construction,
installation, ownership, maintenance, and operation of the Redevelopment Property.
(c) Except for any willful misrepresentation or any willful or wanton misconduct or
negligence of the Indemnified Parties as hereinafter defined, and except for any breach by any of
the Indemnified Parties of their obligations under this Agreement, the Indemnified Parties shall
not be liable for any damage or injury to the persons or property of the Redeveloper or its
officers, agents, servants, or employees or any other person who may be about the
Redevelopment Property or Minimum Improvements.
(d) All covenants, stipulations, promises, agreements and obligations of the Authority
contained herein shall be deemed to be the covenants, stipulations, promises, agreements, and
obligations of such entity and not of any governing body member, officer, agent, servant, or
employee of such entities in the individual capacity thereof.
[The remainder of this page is intentionally left blank.]
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 45
ARTICLE IX
Events of Default
Section 9.1. Events of Default Defined. The following shall be “Events of Default”
under this Agreement and the term “Event of Default” shall mean, whenever it is used in this
Agreement, any one or more of the following events, after the non-defaulting party provides
thirty (30) days written notice to the defaulting party of the event, but only if the event has not
been cured within said thirty (30) days or, if the event is by its nature incurable within thirty (30)
days, the defaulting party does not, within such thirty-day period, provide assurances reasonably
satisfactory to the party providing notice of default that the event will be cured and will be cured
as soon as reasonably possible:
(a) Failure by the Redeveloper or Authority to observe or perform any covenant,
condition, obligation, or agreement on its part to be observed or performed under this
Agreement.
(b) If, before issuance of the certificate of completion for all the Minimum
Improvements, the Redeveloper shall
(i) file any petition in bankruptcy or for any reorganization, arrangement,
composition, readjustment, liquidation, dissolution, or similar relief under the United
States Bankruptcy Act or under any similar federal or State law, which action is not
dismissed within sixty (60) days after filing; or
(ii) make an assignment for benefit of its creditors; or
(iii) admit in writing its inability to pay its debts generally as they become due;
or
(iv) be adjudicated a bankrupt or insolvent.
Section 9.2. Remedies on Default. Whenever any Event of Default referred to in
Section 9.1 of this Agreement occurs, the non-defaulting party may:
(a) Suspend its performance under this Agreement until it receives assurances that the
defaulting party will cure its default and continue its performance under the Agreement.
(b) Upon a default by the Redeveloper under this Agreement, the Authority may
terminate the Note and this Agreement.
(c) Take whatever action, including legal, equitable, or administrative action, which
may appear necessary or desirable to collect any payments due under this Agreement, or to
enforce performance and observance of any obligation, agreement, or covenant under this
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 46
Agreement, provided that nothing contained herein shall give the Authority the right to seek
specific performance by Redeveloper of the construction of the Minimum Improvements.
Section 9.3. No Remedy Exclusive. No remedy herein conferred upon or reserved to any
party is intended to be exclusive of any other available remedy or remedies, but each and every
such remedy shall be cumulative and shall be in addition to every other remedy given under this
Agreement or now or hereafter existing at law or in equity or by statute. No delay or omission to
exercise any right or power accruing upon any default shall impair any such right or power or
shall be construed to be a waiver thereof, but any such right and power may be exercised from
time to time and as often as may be deemed expedient. To entitle the Authority to exercise any
remedy reserved to it, it shall not be necessary to give notice, other than such notice as may be
required in this Article IX.
Section 9.4. No Additional Waiver Implied by One Waiver. In the event any agreement
contained in this Agreement should be breached by either party and thereafter waived by the
other party, such waiver shall be limited to the particular breach so waived and shall not be
deemed to waive any other concurrent, previous or subsequent breach hereunder.
Section 9.5. Attorney Fees. Whenever any Event of Default occurs and if the non-
defaulting party employs attorneys or incurs other expenses for the collection of payments due or
to become due or for the enforcement of performance or observance of any obligation or
agreement on the part of the defaulting party under this Agreement, the defaulting party shall,
within ten (10) days of written demand by the non-defaulting party, pay to the non-defaulting
party the reasonable fees of such attorneys and such other expenses so incurred by the non-
defaulting party.
[The remainder of this page is intentionally left blank.]
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 47
ARTICLE X
Additional Provisions
Section 10.1. Conflict of Interests; Representatives Not Individually Liable. The
Authority and the Redeveloper, to the best of their respective knowledge, represent and agree
that no member, official, or employee of the Authority shall have any personal interest, direct or
indirect, in the Agreement, nor shall any such member, official, or employee participate in any
decision relating to the Agreement that affects his personal interests or the interests of any
corporation, partnership, or association in which he, directly or indirectly, is interested. No
member, official, or employee of the City or Authority shall be personally liable to the
Redeveloper, or any successor in interest, in the event of any default or breach by the Authority
or for any amount that may become due to the Redeveloper or successor or on any obligations
under the terms of the Agreement.
Section 10.2. Equal Employment Opportunity. The Redeveloper, for itself and its
successors and assigns, agrees that during the construction of the Minimum Improvements
provided for in the Agreement it will comply with all applicable federal, state, and local equal
employment and non-discrimination laws and regulations.
Section 10.3. Restrictions on Use. The Redeveloper agrees that until the Maturity Date,
the Redeveloper, and such successors and assigns, shall devote the Redevelopment Property to
the operation of the Minimum Improvements as described in Section 4.1 hereof, and shall not
discriminate upon the basis of race, color, creed, sex or national origin in the sale, lease, or rental
or in the use or occupancy of the Redevelopment Property or any improvements erected or to be
erected thereon, or any part thereof. Redeveloper agrees that no portion of the Redevelopment
Property will be used for a sexually-oriented business, a pawnshop, a check-cashing business, a
tattoo business, a gun business, or a payday loan agency.
Section 10.4. Provisions Not Merged With Deed. None of the provisions of this
Agreement are intended to or shall be merged by reason of any deed transferring any interest in
the Redevelopment Property and any such deed shall not be deemed to affect or impair the
provisions and covenants of this Agreement.
Section 10.5. Titles of Articles and Sections. Any titles of the several parts, Articles, and
Sections of the Agreement are inserted for convenience of reference only and shall be
disregarded in construing or interpreting any of its provisions.
Section 10.6. Notices and Demands. Except as otherwise expressly provided in this
Agreement, a notice, demand, or other communication under the Agreement by either party to
the other shall be sufficiently given or delivered if it is dispatched by registered or certified mail,
postage prepaid, return receipt requested, or delivered personally, to the following addresses (or
to such other addresses as either party may notify the other):
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 48
To Redeveloper: Wooddale Catered Living, LLC
Attn: Arnold J. Gregory
129 North 2nd Street, Suite 100
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401
To Authority: St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority
Attn: Executive Director
5005 Minnetonka Boulevard
St. Louis Park, Minnesota 55416-2518
Section 10.7. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in any number of
counterparts, each of which shall constitute one and the same instrument.
Section 10.8. Recording. The Authority may record this Agreement and any
amendments thereto with the Hennepin County recorder. The Redeveloper shall pay all costs for
recording. The Redeveloper’s obligations under this Agreement are covenants running with the
land for the term of this Agreement, enforceable by the Authority against the Redeveloper, its
successor and assigns, and every successor in interest to the Redevelopment Property, or any part
thereof or any interest therein.
Section 10.9 Amendment. This Agreement may be amended only by written agreement
approved by the Authority and the Redeveloper.
Section 10.10. Authority Approvals. Unless otherwise specified, any approval required
by the Authority under this Agreement may be given by the Authority Representative, except
that final approval of issuance of the Note shall be made by the Authority’s board of
commissioners.
[The remainder of this page is intentionally left blank.]
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 49
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Authority and Redeveloper have caused this Agreement
to be duly executed by their duly authorized representatives as of the date first above written.
ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY
By
Its President
By
Its Executive Director
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) SS.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ____ day of _________,
2010 by ______________________ and ___________________ the President and Executive
Director of the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority, on behalf of the Authority.
Notary Public
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 50
347980v6 MNI SA285-90 31
WOODDALE CATERED LIVING, LLC
By
Arnold J. Gregory
Its Chief Manager
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) SS.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of __________,
2010, by Arnold J. Gregory, the Chief Manager of Wooddale Catered Living, LLC, a Minnesota
limited liability company, on behalf of the company.
Notary Public
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 51
SCHEDULE A
REDEVELOPMENT PROPERTY
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 52
SCHEDULE B
AUTHORIZING RESOLUTION
ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
RESOLUTION NO. ______
RESOLUTION AWARDING THE SALE OF, AND
PROVIDING THE FORM, TERMS, COVENANTS AND
DIRECTIONS FOR THE ISSUANCE OF ITS TAX
INCREMENT REVENUE NOTE, SERIES 20__ TO
WOODDALE CATERED LIVING, LLC.
BE IT RESOLVED BY the Board of Commissioners (“Board”) of the St. Louis Park
Economic Development Authority, St. Louis Park, Minnesota (the “Authority”) as follows:
Section 1. Authorization; Award of Sale.
1.01. Authorization. The Authority and the City of St. Louis Park have heretofore
approved the establishment of its Elmwood Village Tax Increment Financing District (the “TIF
District”) within Redevelopment Project No. 1 (“Project”), and have adopted a tax increment
financing plan for the purpose of financing certain improvements within the Project.
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.178, the Authority is authorized to issue and
sell its bonds for the purpose of financing a portion of the public development costs of the
Project. Such bonds are payable from all or any portion of revenues derived from the TIF
District and pledged to the payment of the bonds. The Authority hereby finds and determines that
it is in the best interests of the Authority that it issue and sell its Tax Increment Revenue Note,
Series 20__ (the “Note”) for the purpose of financing certain public redevelopment costs of the
Project.
1.02. Issuance, Sale, and Terms of the Note. (a) The Authority hereby authorizes the
President and Executive Director to issue the Note in accordance with the Contract for Private
Redevelopment dated as of _______, 2010, between the Authority and Wooddale Catered
Living, LLC (the “Agreement”), and approved on June __, 2010 by the Authority. All
capitalized terms in this resolution have the meaning provided in the Agreement unless the
context requires otherwise.
(b) The Note shall be issued in the maximum aggregate principal amount of $490,000 to
Wooddale Catered Living, LLC (the “Owner”) in consideration of certain eligible costs incurred
by the Owner under the Agreement, shall be dated the date of delivery thereof, and shall bear
interest at the lesser of 6.5% or the actual rate of financing obtained by the Owner, from the date
of issue per annum to the earlier of maturity or prepayment. The Note will be issued in the
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 53
principal amount of Public Redevelopment Costs submitted and approved in accordance with
Section 3.4 of the Agreement. The Note is secured by Available Tax Increment, as further
described in the form of the Note herein. The Authority hereby delegates to the Executive
Director the determination of the date on which the Note is to be delivered, in accordance with
the Agreement.
Section 2. Form of Note. The Note shall be in substantially the following form, with
the blanks to be properly filled in and the principal and interest rate amounts adjusted as of the
date of issue:
[The remainder of this page is intentionally left blank.]
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 54
UNITED STATE OF AMERICA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
No. R-1 $_____________
TAX INCREMENT REVENUE NOTE
SERIES 20__
Date
Rate of Original Issue
__% ___________, 20__
The St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority (the “Authority”) for value
received, certifies that it is indebted and hereby promises to pay to Wooddale Catered Living,
LLC or registered assigns (the “Owner”), the principal sum of $__________ and to pay interest
thereon at the rate of ______ percent (__%) per annum, solely from the sources and to the extent
set forth herein. Capitalized terms shall have the meanings provided in the Contract for Private
Redevelopment between the Authority and the Owner, dated as of June __, 2010 (the
“Agreement”), unless the context requires otherwise.
1. Payments. Principal and interest (“Payments”) shall be paid on August 1, 20__
and each February 1 and August 1 thereafter to and including February 1, 20__ (“Payment
Dates”) in the amounts and from the sources set forth in Section 3 herein. Payments shall be
applied first to accrued interest, and then to unpaid principal. Interest accruing from the date of
issue through and including _________ 1, 20__ shall be compounded semiannually on
February 1 and August 1 of each year and added to principal.
Payments are payable by mail to the address of the Owner or such other address as the
Owner may designate upon thirty (30) days written notice to the Authority. Payments on this
Note are payable in any coin or currency of the United States of America which, on the Payment
Date, is legal tender for the payment of public and private debts.
2. Interest. Interest at the rate stated herein shall accrue on the unpaid principal,
commencing on the date of original issue. Interest shall be computed on the basis of a year of
360 days and charged for actual days principal is unpaid.
3. Available Tax Increment. (a) Payments on this Note are payable on each
Payment Date solely from and in the amount of Available Tax Increment, which shall mean, on
each Payment Date, Ninety-five percent (95%) of the Tax Increment attributable to the Minimum
Improvements and Redevelopment Property that is paid to the Authority by Hennepin County in
the six months preceding the Payment Date.
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 55
(b) The Authority shall have no obligation to pay principal of and interest on this
Note on each Payment Date from any source other than Available Tax Increment and the failure
of the Authority to pay the entire amount of principal or interest on this Note on any Payment
Date shall not constitute a default hereunder as long as the Authority pays principal and interest
hereon to the extent of Available Tax Increment. The Authority shall have no obligation to pay
any unpaid balance of principal or accrued interest that may remain after the final Payment on
February 1, 20__.
4. Default. If on any Payment Date there has occurred and is continuing any Event
of Default under the Agreement, the Authority may withhold from payments hereunder under all
Available Tax Increment. If the Event of Default is thereafter cured in accordance with the
Agreement, the Available Tax Increment withheld under this Section shall be deferred and paid,
without interest thereon, within thirty (30) days after the Event of Default is cured. If the Event
of Default is not cured in a timely manner, the Authority may terminate this Note by written
notice to the Owner in accordance with the Agreement.
5. Prepayment. (a) The principal sum and all accrued interest payable under this
Note is prepayable in whole or in part at any time by the Authority without premium or penalty.
No partial prepayment shall affect the amount or timing of any other regular Payment otherwise
required to be made under this Note.
(b) Upon receipt by Redeveloper of the Authority’s written statement of the
Participation Amount as described in Section 3.5 of the Agreement, fifty percent (50%) of such
Participation Amount will be deemed to constitute, and will be applied to, prepayment of the
principal amount of this Note. Such deemed prepayment is effective as of the date of delivery of
such statement to the Owner, and will be recorded by the Registrar in its records for the Note.
Upon request of the Owner, the Authority will deliver to the Owner a statement of the
outstanding principal balance of the Note after application of the deemed prepayment under this
paragraph.
6. Nature of Obligation. This Note is one of an issue in the total principal amount of
$_________, issued to aid in financing certain public redevelopment costs and administrative
costs of a Project undertaken by the Authority pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.001
through 469.047, and is issued pursuant to an authorizing resolution (the “Resolution”) duly
adopted by the Authority on ________, 2010, and pursuant to and in full conformity with the
Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota, including Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174
to 469.179, as amended. This Note is a limited obligation of the Authority which is payable
solely from Available Tax Increment pledged to the payment hereof under the Resolution. This
Note and the interest hereon shall not be deemed to constitute a general obligation of the State of
Minnesota or any political subdivision thereof, including, without limitation, the Authority.
Neither the State of Minnesota, nor any political subdivision thereof shall be obligated to pay the
principal of or interest on this Note or other costs incident hereto except out of Available Tax
Increment, and neither the full faith and credit nor the taxing power of the State of Minnesota or
any political subdivision thereof is pledged to the payment of the principal of or interest on this
Note or other costs incident hereto.
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 56
7. Registration and Transfer. This Note is issuable only as a fully registered note
without coupons. As provided in the Resolution, and subject to certain limitations set forth
therein, this Note is transferable upon the books of the Authority kept for that purpose at the
principal office of the City Finance Director, by the Owner hereof in person or by such Owner’s
attorney duly authorized in writing, upon surrender of this Note together with a written
instrument of transfer satisfactory to the Authority, duly executed by the Owner. Upon such
transfer or exchange and the payment by the Owner of any tax, fee, or governmental charge
required to be paid by the Authority with respect to such transfer or exchange, there will be
issued in the name of the transferee a new Note of the same aggregate principal amount, bearing
interest at the same rate and maturing on the same dates.
Except as otherwise provided in Section 3.4(d) of the Agreement, this Note shall not be
transferred to any person or entity, unless the Authority has provided written consent to such
transfer and the Authority has been provided with an opinion of counsel or a certificate of the
transferor, in a form satisfactory to the Authority, that such transfer is exempt from registration
and prospectus delivery requirements of federal and applicable state securities laws.
IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED AND RECITED that all acts, conditions, and things
required by the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota to be done, to exist, to happen,
and to be performed in order to make this Note a valid and binding limited obligation of the
Authority according to its terms, have been done, do exist, have happened, and have been
performed in due form, time and manner as so required.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Board of Commissioners of the St. Louis Park Economic
Development Authority have caused this Note to be executed with the manual signatures of its
President and Executive Director, all as of the Date of Original Issue specified above.
ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Executive Director President
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 57
REGISTRATION PROVISIONS
The ownership of the unpaid balance of the within Note is registered in the bond register
of the City Finance Director, in the name of the person last listed below.
Date of
Registration
Registered Owner
Signature of
City Finance Director
_________, 20__ Wooddale Catered Living, LLC
Federal Tax I.D No_____________
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 58
Section 3. Terms, Execution and Delivery.
3.01. Denomination, Payment. The Note shall be issued as a single typewritten note
numbered R-1.
The Note shall be issuable only in fully registered form. Principal of and interest on the
Note shall be payable by check or draft issued by the Registrar described herein.
3.02. Dates; Interest Payment Dates. Principal of and interest on the Note shall be
payable by mail to the owner of record thereof as of the close of business on the fifteenth day of
the month preceding the Payment Date, whether or not such day is a business day.
3.03. Registration. The Authority hereby appoints the City Finance Director to perform
the functions of registrar, transfer agent and paying agent (the “Registrar”). The effect of
registration and the rights and duties of the Authority and the Registrar with respect thereto shall
be as follows:
(a) Register. The Registrar shall keep at its office a bond register in which the
Registrar shall provide for the registration of ownership of the Note and the registration of
transfers and exchanges of the Note.
(b) Transfer of Note. Upon surrender for transfer of the Note duly endorsed by the
registered owner thereof or accompanied by a written instrument of transfer, in form reasonably
satisfactory to the Registrar, duly executed by the registered owner thereof or by an attorney duly
authorized by the registered owner in writing, the Registrar shall authenticate and deliver, in the
name of the designated transferee or transferees, a new Note of a like aggregate principal amount
and maturity, as requested by the transferor. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Note shall not
be transferred to any person other than an affiliate, or other related entity, of the Owner unless
the Authority has been provided with an opinion of counsel or a certificate of the transferor, in a
form satisfactory to the Authority, that such transfer is exempt from registration and prospectus
delivery requirements of federal and applicable state securities laws. The Registrar may close
the books for registration of any transfer after the fifteenth day of the month preceding each
Payment Date and until such Payment Date.
(c) Cancellation. The Note surrendered upon any transfer shall be promptly
cancelled by the Registrar and thereafter disposed of as directed by the Authority.
(d) Improper or Unauthorized Transfer. When the Note is presented to the Registrar
for transfer, the Registrar may refuse to transfer the same until it is satisfied that the endorsement
on such Note or separate instrument of transfer is legally authorized. The Registrar shall incur
no liability for its refusal, in good faith, to make transfers which it, in its judgment, deems
improper or unauthorized.
(e) Persons Deemed Owners. The Authority and the Registrar may treat the person in
whose name the Note is at any time registered in the bond register as the absolute owner of the
Note, whether the Note shall be overdue or not, for the purpose of receiving payment of, or on
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 59
account of, the principal of and interest on such Note and for all other purposes, and all such
payments so made to any such registered owner or upon the owner’s order shall be valid and
effectual to satisfy and discharge the liability of the Authority upon such Note to the extent of the
sum or sums so paid.
(f) Taxes, Fees and Charges. For every transfer or exchange of the Note, the
Registrar may impose a charge upon the owner thereof sufficient to reimburse the Registrar for
any tax, fee, or other governmental charge required to be paid with respect to such transfer or
exchange.
(g) Mutilated, Lost, Stolen or Destroyed Note. In case any Note shall become
mutilated or be lost, stolen, or destroyed, the Registrar shall deliver a new Note of like amount,
maturity dates and tenor in exchange and substitution for and upon cancellation of such mutilated
Note or in lieu of and in substitution for such Note lost, stolen, or destroyed, upon the payment
of the reasonable expenses and charges of the Registrar in connection therewith; and, in the case
the Note lost, stolen, or destroyed, upon filing with the Registrar of evidence satisfactory to it
that such Note was lost, stolen, or destroyed, and of the ownership thereof, and upon furnishing
to the Registrar of an appropriate bond or indemnity in form, substance, and amount satisfactory
to it, in which both the Authority and the Registrar shall be named as obligees. The Note so
surrendered to the Registrar shall be cancelled by it and evidence of such cancellation shall be
given to the Authority. If the mutilated, lost, stolen, or destroyed Note has already matured or
been called for redemption in accordance with its terms, it shall not be necessary to issue a new
Note prior to payment.
3.04. Preparation and Delivery. The Note shall be prepared under the direction of the
Executive Director and shall be executed on behalf of the Authority by the signatures of its
President and Executive Director. In case any officer whose signature shall appear on the Note
shall cease to be such officer before the delivery of the Note, such signature shall nevertheless be
valid and sufficient for all purposes, the same as if such officer had remained in office until
delivery. When the Note has been so executed, it shall be delivered by the Executive Director to
the Owner thereof in accordance with the Agreement.
Section 4. Security Provisions.
4.01. Pledge. The Authority hereby pledges to the payment of the principal of and
interest on the Note all Available Tax Increment as defined in the Note.
Available Tax Increment shall be applied to payment of the principal of and interest on the Note
in accordance with the terms of the form of Note set forth in Section 2 of this resolution.
4.02. Bond Fund. Until the date the Note is no longer outstanding and no principal
thereof or interest thereon (to the extent required to be paid pursuant to this resolution) remains
unpaid, the Authority shall maintain a separate and special “Bond Fund” to be used for no
purpose other than the payment of the principal of and interest on the Note. The Authority
irrevocably agrees to appropriate to the Bond Fund on or before each Payment Date the
Available Tax Increment in an amount equal to the Payment then due, or the actual Available
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 60
Tax Increment, whichever is less. Any Available Tax Increment remaining in the Bond Fund
shall be transferred to the Authority’s account for the TIF District upon the termination of the
Note in accordance with its terms.
4.03. Additional Obligations. The Authority will issue no other obligations secured in
whole or in part by Available Tax Increment unless such pledge is on a subordinate basis to the
pledge on the Note.
Section 5. Certification of Proceedings.
5.01. Certification of Proceedings. The officers of the Authority are hereby authorized
and directed to prepare and furnish to the Owner of the Note certified copies of all proceedings
and records of the Authority, and such other affidavits, certificates, and information as may be
required to show the facts relating to the legality and marketability of the Note as the same
appear from the books and records under their custody and control or as otherwise known to
them, and all such certified copies, certificates, and affidavits, including any heretofore
furnished, shall be deemed representations of the Authority as to the facts recited therein.
Section 6. Effective Date. This resolution shall be effective upon approval.
[The remainder of this page is intentionally left blank.]
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 61
347980v6 MNI SA285-90 B-10
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the St. Louis Park Economic
Development Authority __________, 20__
Executive Director President
Attest
Secretary
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 62
SCHEDULE C
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION
WHEREAS, the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority (the “Authority”) and
Wooddale Catered Living, LLC (the “Redeveloper”) entered into a certain Contract for Private
Redevelopment dated ____________, 2010 (the “Contract”), filed of record as Document
No. _____________ on ___________, 2010; and
WHEREAS, the Contract contains certain covenants and restrictions set forth in Articles
III and IV thereof related to completing certain Minimum Improvements; and
WHEREAS, the Redeveloper has performed said covenants and conditions insofar as it is
able in a manner deemed sufficient by the Authority to permit the execution and recording of this
certification;
NOW, THEREFORE, this is to certify that all construction and other physical
improvements related to the Minimum Improvements specified to be done and made by the
Redeveloper have been completed and the agreements and covenants in Articles III and IV of the
Contract have been performed by the Redeveloper, and this Certificate is intended to be a
conclusive determination of the satisfactory termination of the covenants and conditions of
Articles III and IV of the Contract related to completion of the Minimum Improvements, but any
other covenants in the Contract shall remain in full force and effect.
Dated: _______________, 20__. ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY
By
Authority Representative
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 63
347980v6 MNI SA285-90 C-2
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ____ day of _________,
20__ by ______________________, the __________________ of the St. Louis Park Economic
Development Authority, on behalf of the Authority.
Notary Public
This document drafted by:
Kennedy & Graven, Chartered
470 U.S. Bank Plaza
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 64
SCHEDULE D
Form of Subordination Agreement
THIS SUBORDINATION AGREEMENT (this “Agreement”) is made as of this _____
day of __________, 20__, between _______________ (the “Lender”), whose address is at
_________________________, and the ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY, a public body corporate and politic (“Authority”), whose address is 5005
Minnetonka Boulevard, St. Louis Park, Minnesota, 55416.
RECITALS
A. Wooddale Catered Living, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company (the
“Redeveloper”), is the owner of certain real property situated in Hennepin County, Minnesota
and legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein (the “Property”).
B. Lender has made a mortgage loan to Redeveloper in the original principal amount
of $__________ (the “Loan”). The Loan is the evidenced and secured by the following
documents:
(i) a certain promissory note (the “Note”) made by Redeveloper dated
__________, 20__, in the amount of $___________; and
(ii) a certain mortgage, security agreement and fixture financing statement
(the “Mortgage”) made by Redeveloper dated __________, 20__, filed __________,
200_, as Hennepin County Recorder/Registrar of Titles Doc. No. __________
encumbering the Property; and
(iii) a certain assignment of leases and rents (the “Assignment”) made by
Redeveloper dated __________, 20__, filed __________, 200_, as Hennepin County
Recorder/Registrar of Titles Doc. No. __________ encumbering the Property.
The Note, the Mortgage, the Assignment, and all other documents and instruments
evidencing, securing and executed in connection with the Loan, are hereinafter collectively
referred to as the “Loan Documents.”
C. Authority is the owner and holder of certain rights under a certain Contract for
Private Redevelopment (the “Contract”) by and between Redeveloper and Authority dated
__________, 2010.
D. Redeveloper is entitled under the Contract to acquire a certain Tax Increment Tax
Revenue Note, Series 20__ in the original principal amount of $____________ (the “TIF Note”).
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and as an inducement to Lender
to make the Loan, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of
which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto represent, warrant and agree as follows:
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 65
1. Consent. The Authority acknowledges that the Lender is making the Loan to the
Redeveloper and consents to the same. The Authority also consents to and approves the
collateral assignment of the Contract and TIF Note (when and if issued) by the Redeveloper to
the Lender as collateral for the Loan; provided, however, that this consent shall not deprive the
Authority of or otherwise limit any of the Authority’s rights or remedies under the Contract and
TIF Note and shall not relieve the Redeveloper of any of its obligations under the Contract and
TIF Note; provided further, however, the limitations to the Authority’s consent contained in this
Paragraph 1 are subject to the provisions of Paragraph 2 below.
2. Subordination. The Authority hereby agrees that the rights of the Authority with
respect to [_____________________] under the Contract are and shall remain subordinate and
subject to liens, rights and security interests created by the Loan Documents and to any and all
amendments, modifications, extensions, replacements or renewals of the Loan Documents;
provided, however, that nothing herein shall be construed as subordinating (a) the requirement
contained in the Contract the Property be used in accordance with the provisions of Section 10.3
of the Contract, (b) the Authority’s rights under the TIF Note to suspend payments in accordance
with the TIF Note, and (c) the Authority’s rights under the Assessment Agreement referenced in
Section 6.3 of the Contract.
3. Notice to Authority. Lender agrees to use commercially reasonable efforts to
notify Authority of the occurrence of any Event of Default given to Redeveloper under the Loan
Documents, in accordance with Section 7.2 of the Contract. The Lender shall not be bound by
the other requirements in Section 7.2 of the Contract.
4. Statutory Exception. Nothing in this Agreement shall alter, remove or affect
Lender’s obligation under Minnesota Statutes, §469.029 to use the Property in conformity to
Section 10.3 of the Contract.
5. No Assumption. The Authority acknowledges that the Lender is not a party to the
Contract and by executing this Agreement does not become a party to the Contract, and
specifically does not assume and shall not be bound by any obligations of the Redeveloper to the
Authority under the Contract, and that the Lender shall incur no obligations whatsoever to the
Authority except as expressly provided herein.
6. Notice from Authority. So long as the Contract remains in effect, the Authority
agrees to give to the Lender copies of notices of any Event of Default given to Redeveloper
under the Contract.
7. Governing Law. This Agreement is made in and shall be construed in accordance
with the laws of the State of Minnesota.
8. Successors. This Agreement and each and every covenant, agreement and other
provision hereof shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and their
respective successors and assigns, including any person who acquires title to the Property
through the Lender of a foreclosure of the Mortgage.
9. Severability. The unenforceability or invalidity of any provision hereof shall not
render any other provision or provisions herein contained unenforceable or invalid.
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 66
10. Notice. Any notices and other communications permitted or required by the
provisions of this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been properly given
or served by depositing the same with the United States Postal Service, or any official successor
thereto, designated as registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, bearing adequate
postage, or delivery by reputable private carrier and addresses as set forth above.
11. Transfer of Title to Lender. The Authority agrees that in the event the Lender, a
transferee of Lender, or a purchaser at foreclosure sale, acquires title to the Property pursuant to
a foreclosure, or a deed in lieu thereof, the Lender, transferee, or purchaser shall not be bound by
the terms and conditions of the Contract except as expressly herein provided. Further the
Authority agrees that in the event the Lender, a transferee of Lender, or a purchaser at
foreclosure sale acquires title to the Property pursuant to a foreclosure sale or a deed in lieu
thereof, then the Lender, transferee, or purchaser shall be entitled to all rights conferred upon the
Redeveloper under the Contract, provided that no condition of default exists and remains
uncured beyond applicable cure periods in the obligations of the Redeveloper under the Contract.
12. Estoppel. The Authority hereby represents and warrants to Lender, for the
purpose of inducing Lender to make advances to Redeveloper under the Loan Documents that:
(a) No default or event of default by Redeveloper exists under the terms of the
Contract on the date hereof;
(b) The Contract has not been amended or modified in any respect, nor has any
material provision thereof been waived by either the Authority or the
Redeveloper, and the Contract is in full force and effect;
(c) Such other reasonable certifications as the Lender may request.
13. Amendments. The Authority hereby represents and warrants to Lender for the
purpose of inducing Lender to make advances to Redeveloper under the Loan Documents that
Authority will not agree to any amendment or modification to the or any TIF Note issued under
the Contract that materially affects the collection of Available Tax Increment (as defined in the
Contract) in any way affects the Property without the Lender’s written consent.
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 67
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement has been executed and delivered as of the day
and year first written above.
ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
By
Its President
By
Its Executive Director
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of
___________, 20__, by _______________________ and ______________________ the
President and Executive Director, respectively, of the St. Louis Park Economic Development
Authority, a public body corporate and politic, on behalf of such public body.
Notary Public
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 68
[LENDER]
By:
Its
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of
___________, 20__, by _______________________ and ______________________ the
__________________, of __________________, a ________________, on behalf of
such____________________.
Notary Public
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 69
Exhibit A of Subordination Agreement
PROPERTY
347980v6 MNI SA285-90 D-6
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 70
SCHEDULE E
PRO FORMA
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 71
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 72
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 73
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 74
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 75
347980v6 MNI SA285-90 E-6
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 76
SCHEDULE F
SITE PLAN
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 77
SCHEDULE G
ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT
______________________________________________________________________________
ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT
and
ASSESSOR’S CERTIFICATION
By and Between
ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
and
WOODDALE CATERED LIVING, LLC
This Document was drafted by:
KENNEDY & GRAVEN, Chartered
470 U.S. Bank Plaza
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 78
ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, made on or as of the ___________, 20__ by and between the St.
Louis Park Economic Development Authority, a public body, corporate and politic (the
“Authority”) and Wooddale Catered Living, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company (the
“Redeveloper”).
WITNESSETH, that
WHEREAS, on or before the date hereof the Authority and Redeveloper have entered
into a Contract for Private Redevelopment dated ___________, 2010 (the “Redevelopment
Contract”), pursuant to which the Authority is to facilitate development of certain property in the
Authority of St. Louis Park hereinafter referred to as the “Property” and legally described in
Exhibit A hereto; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the Redevelopment Contract the Redeveloper is obligated to
construct certain improvements (the “Minimum Improvements”) upon the Property; and
WHEREAS, the Authority and Redeveloper desire to establish a minimum market value
for the Property and the Minimum Improvements to be constructed thereon, pursuant to
Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.177, Subdivision 8; and
WHEREAS, the Authority and the City Assessor (the “Assessor”) have reviewed the
preliminary plans and specifications for the improvements and have inspected such
improvements;
NOW, THEREFORE, the parties to this Agreement, in consideration of the promises,
covenants and agreements made by each to the other, do hereby agree as follows:
1. The minimum market value which shall be assessed for ad valorem tax purposes
for the Property described in Exhibit A, together with the Minimum Improvements constructed
thereon, shall be $2,050,000 as of January 2, 2011, and $13,650,000 as of January 2, 2012
notwithstanding the progress of construction by such date, and as of each January 2 thereafter
until termination of this Agreement under Section 2 hereof.
2. The minimum market value herein established shall be of no further force and
effect and this Agreement shall terminate on the earlier of the following: (a) the date of receipt
by the Authority of the final payment from Hennepin County of Tax Increments from the
Elmwood Village Tax Increment Financing District, or (b) the date when the Note, as defined in
the Redevelopment Contract, has been fully paid, defeased or terminated in accordance with its
terms.
The event referred to in Section 2(b) of this Agreement shall be evidenced by a certificate
or affidavit executed by the Authority.
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 79
3. This Agreement shall be promptly recorded by the Authority. The Redeveloper
shall pay all costs of recording.
4. Neither the preambles nor provisions of this Agreement are intended to, nor shall
they be construed as, modifying the terms of the Redevelopment Contract between the Authority
and the Redeveloper.
5. This Agreement shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the successors
and assigns of the parties.
6. Each of the parties has authority to enter into this Agreement and to take all
actions required of it, and has taken all actions necessary to authorize the execution and delivery
of this Agreement.
7. In the event any provision of this Agreement shall be held invalid and
unenforceable by any court of competent jurisdiction, such holding shall not invalidate or render
unenforceable any other provision hereof.
8. The parties hereto agree that they will, from time to time, execute, acknowledge
and deliver, or cause to be executed, acknowledged and delivered, such supplements,
amendments and modifications hereto, and such further instruments as may reasonably be
required for correcting any inadequate, or incorrect, or amended description of the Property or
the Minimum Improvements or for carrying out the expressed intention of this Agreement,
including, without limitation, any further instruments required to delete from the description of
the Property such part or parts as may be included within a separate assessment agreement.
9. Except as provided in Section 8 of this Agreement, this Agreement may not be
amended nor any of its terms modified except by a writing authorized and executed by all parties
hereto.
10. This Agreement may be simultaneously executed in several counterparts, each of
which shall be an original and all of which shall constitute but one and the same instrument.
11. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws
of the State of Minnesota.
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 80
ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
By
Its President
By
Its Executive Director
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) SS.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ____ day of ________, 20__
by ____________________ and ___________________________, the President and Executive
Director of the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority, on behalf of the Authority.
Notary Public
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 81
WOODDALE CATERED LIVING, LLC
By
Arnold J. Gregory
Its Chief Manager
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) SS.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of __________,
20__, by Arnold J. Gregory, the Chief Manager of Wooddale Catered Living, LLC, a Minnesota
limited liability company, on behalf of the company.
Notary Public
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 82
CERTIFICATION BY CITY ASSESSOR
The undersigned, having reviewed the plans and specifications for the improvements to
be constructed and the market value assigned to the land upon which the improvements are to be
constructed, hereby certifies as follows: The undersigned Assessor, being legally responsible for
the assessment of the above described property, hereby certifies that the values assigned to the
land and improvements are reasonable.
City Assessor for the City of St. Louis Park
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ___ day of ____________,
20__ by _____________________, the City Assessor of the City of St. Louis Park.
Notary Public
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 83
EXHIBIT A of ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT
Legal Description of Property
347980v6 MNI SA285-90 G-7
EDA Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 7b)
Subject: Updated Redevelopment Contract with Wooddale Catered Living Page 84
Meeting Date: June 7, 2010
Agenda Item #: 3a
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION
MAY 10, 2010
The meeting convened at 7:00 p.m.
Councilmembers present: Mayor Jeff Jacobs, Phil Finkelstein, Anne Mavity, Paul Omodt, Julia
Ross, Susan Sanger, and Sue Santa.
Councilmembers absent: None.
Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), Deputy City Manager (Ms. Gohman), City Clerk
(Ms. Stroth), City Attorney (Mr. Scott), Director of Park and Recreation (Ms. Walsh), Finance
Accountant (Mr. Swanson), Recreation Superintendent (Mr. Birno), Community Development
Director (Mr. Locke), Economic Development Coordinator (Mr. Hunt), Planning/Zoning
Supervisor (Ms. McMonigal), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Russo).
Guests: Frank Dunbar, Dunbar Development; Stacy Kvilvang, Ehlers & Associates.
1. Hoigaard Village Project and Redevelopment Contract Update – EDA Discussion
Mr. Locke presented the staff report and introduced Mr. Frank Dunbar.
Mr. Dunbar presented a brief recap of the Hoigaard Village project including current status updates
on Harmony Vista, The Adagio, The Medley Row, and The Camerata.
Councilmember Sanger asked what caused the delay in financing. Mr. Dunbar explained that once
a member of the ownership offered to acquire the TIF Notes, it changed the direction of financing,
which he believes is a better option than offering notes to the public. Mr. Dunbar explained they
believe it is safer from a global perspective because the buyer of the note also owns the project and
will not do anything to damage their investment in the TIF. In addition, being the buyer allowed
them to reduce the amount to be financed by TIF, making for a better financial environment and
long-term opportunity. Mr. Dunbar explained it also took some time for the partner making the
purchase to clearly understand the investment requirements and dynamics of changing from a public
sale to a private sale.
Councilmember Sanger asked whether they will meet the construction deadline for the two
additional phases. Mr. Dunbar explained they have over $3 million invested in the townhomes
(Medley Row) and feel the construction will occur after the market comes back and the light rail
system comes to fruition.
Mr. Dunbar stated he thinks the horizon for the condos (The Adagio) is a ways off and that product
first needs to come down to marketability. He believed there was a great market for senior housing
if seniors are able to sell their homes at their expectations. Mr. Dunbar noted that Volunteers of
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 3a) Page 2
Subject: Study Session Meeting Minutes May 10, 2010
America have pulled back their interest as contributions have declined and their support from the
State was also reduced. Thus, they have moved on to conversations with other providers such as
Presbyterian Homes. Mr. Dunbar noted they are working daily on these properties, have invested
approximately $2.89 million into the project, and have much to gain from developing the sites.
Councilmember Sanger clarified the developer would not meet the required deadlines for the
remaining phases and the condos may now be senior housing and rentals. Mr. Locke replied that is
correct and indicated he would be stunned if either project started on schedule because the market
conditions are uncertain. He added the Council does not need to make amendments to the
Redevelopment Contract at this time.
Councilmember Mavity clarified that the TIF dollars are not impacted at this point and would only
be impacted if the construction schedule changes in the future. Mr. Locke agreed the impact would
not be determined until that time.
Councilmember Omodt referred to the values noted on page 4, asking what happens if the
developments don’t meet the expected value. Stacy Kvilvang replied this would then affect the
developer, not the City; therefore, the developer has every motivation to meet the estimated assessed
value.
Councilmember Sanger indicated she is nervous about the project and while she appreciated Mr.
Dunbar’s efforts, felt the City is never going to see the other two buildings. Mr. Dunbar replied the
City would see the other buildings as they have too much money invested in them. Mr. Hunt
agreed with Mr. Dunbar, adding it is just a question of “when.” He stated interest in the property
will accelerate as plans for the nearby LRT station move forward.
There was consensus to consider the refinancing of the developer’s two taxable TIF notes at the June
7, 2010 EDA meeting.
2. Updated Business Terms for Redevelopment Contract with Greco Development
(Wooddale Pointe project) – EDA Discussion
Mr. Locke presented the staff report and indicated staff feels this is a very nice project and would be
an asset to the City. He requested direction regarding the additional financing
Mr. Hunt added this is a very high quality, mixed use project and would be worth the investment in
the long run. He also noted the developer has likely secured a major tenant for the first floor
commercial space; a child daycare.
There was consensus to consider the updated Wooddale Point Redevelopment Contract at the June
7, 2010 EDA meeting.
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 3a) Page 3
Subject: Study Session Meeting Minutes May 10, 2010
3. Cedar Knoll Dog Park
Mr. Harmening presented the staff report asking if there is anything else staff should undertake.
Councilmember Mavity stated she had taken her dog to the park and walked the perimeter. She
indicated that if noise ordinances are not being violated, she is not sure what else could be done.
Councilmember Sanger stated she also has been to the dog park and only found one location in the
park where she could see the home of the resident whom complained.
Councilmember Ross asked if there had been any other complaints. Ms. Walsh replied no.
Councilmember Ross stated she spoke with other residents and it is not just an issue of privacy, but
how their dogs are being affected by the dogs in the park.
Councilmember Sanger added when she was at the park, this resident’s dog was barking, not the
dogs in the park.
Councilmember Ross noted the resident indicated one reason they purchased their property was
because there were no abutting properties. She noted that users of the dog park have expressed a
reluctance to use the park because of this resident.
It was the consensus of the City Council to complete efforts to raise the berm, place additional
vegetation, and to continue the current operation of the dog park.
4. Council Policy Discussion – Environmental Stewardship – Councilmembers Sanger and
Mavity
Councilmember Mavity presented background information stating she and Councilmember Sanger
would like to discuss a policy question regarding the City’s role with environmental stewardship, as
related to Vision St. Louis Park, and the City’s strategic direction related to the environment.
Councilmember Sanger stated she most often hears about environmental issues from residents, such
as recycling, recycling in the park, and why water bottles are still in use. She stated many residents
are frustrated and feel a better process should be created to provide input on a variety of
environmental stewardship ideas. She recommended creating a time limited Task Force to gain
community input on how to create a process to gather information, which would eventually be an
ongoing process.
Councilmember Santa asked Ms. Walsh if this would fall under the purview of the Park and
Recreation Commission. Ms. Walsh replied that it could be but was not a primary focus of theirs at
this time.
Councilmember Mavity stated staff had started the E-Group, a vehicle to coordinate staff actions,
and asked how the City could best funnel and incorporate resident’s ideas.
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 3a) Page 4
Subject: Study Session Meeting Minutes May 10, 2010
Mayor Jacobs agreed stating there is no structure to gather community input.
Councilmember Omodt noted it is every Councilmember’s responsibility to take input from
residents and residents can, at any time, contact Councilmembers. He stated he is not convinced
there is a need to set up something additional. Councilmember Mavity stated she and
Councilmember Sanger are not proposing to create a commission.
Councilmember Ross stated she sees this more as a communication issue, encouraging residents to
write, email or call. She noted this should be an on-going process that is communicated throughout
the City and expressed concern that residents who are very passionate about an issue may only act for
their own benefit. Councilmember Ross stated she feels leadership needs to come through the staff
and Council.
Councilmember Santa indicated she is unfamiliar with the mission of the E-Group and would like
information on work that has been accomplished or underway relating to the environment since the
recent Vision process. It was the consensus of the City Council to direct staff to inventory and
report back on what groups are currently doing from an environmental standpoint, obtain a status
from the E-Group, and review and report on previous meeting minutes and past actions by the
Council, staff or others in the community.
5. Future Study Agenda Planning
Mr. Harmening presented the proposed study session agenda for May 17, and May 24, 2010.
6. Communications (Verbal)
Mr. Harmening reported he would be meeting with Hennepin County and raise Councilmember
Sanger’s question regarding the freight rail location options, conditions, constraints, and time frame.
Councilmember Sanger referenced report #7, potential EDA acquisition of 7015 Walker Street
(formerly Reynolds Welding Supply Building), and asked if it is possible for the City to acquire this
property and not be liable for future clean up costs. Mr. Harmening stated he would research that
matter. Councilmember Santa expressed concerns with the Reilly site and indicated she would like
additional information on soil conditions if the City is going to purchase the Reynolds site.
Councilmember Ross indicated she would be on vacation June 5 through June 12, 2010. She
advised she will attend a meeting on June 4, 2010, with a group of African American civic leaders
and asked the Council to let her know if there is anything Council would like addressed.
The meeting adjourned at 8:25 p.m.
Written Reports provided and documented for recording purposes only:
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 3a) Page 5
Subject: Study Session Meeting Minutes May 10, 2010
7. Potential EDA acquisition of 7015 Walker Street (formerly Reynolds Welding Supply
Building)
8. Groves Academy Private Activity Revenue Bonds Refinancing for Phase I and Debt
Issuance for Phase II
9. Proposed Housekeeping Amendments regarding Staff Positions and Municipal
Election
10. City Council Bike Ride
11. Fire Stations Project Update
12. Reilly Site – Update on the Proposed Soil Vapor Gas Study
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Nancy Stroth, City Clerk Jeff Jacobs, Mayor
Meeting Date: June 7, 2010
Agenda Item #: 3b
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MAY 17, 2010
1. Call to Order
Mayor Jacobs called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m.
Councilmembers present: Mayor Jeff Jacobs, Phil Finkelstein, Anne Mavity, Paul Omodt, Julia
Ross, Susan Sanger, and Sue Santa.
Councilmembers absent: None.
Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), City Attorney (Mr. Scott), Community
Development Director (Mr. Locke), Public Works Director (Mr. Rardin), Economic Development
Coordinator (Mr. Hunt), Planning/Zoning Supervisor (Ms. McMonigal), Assistant Zoning
Administrator (Mr. Morrison), Assistant Planner (Mr. Fulton), and Recording Secretary (Ms.
Wirth).
1a. Pledge of Allegiance
1b. Roll Call
2. Presentations
2a. 2010 National Public Works Week Proclamation
Mayor Jacobs read a proclamation declaring May 16 – 22, 2010, as “National Public Works
Week.” Mayor Jacobs expressed the City’s appreciation for the Public Works Department.
Mr. Rardin thanked Council and the citizens for their continued support of the Public
Works Department. He stated National Public Works Week is a highlight for staff. Posters
will be displayed and a video highlighting the activities of Public Works will be aired over
cable and posted to the City’s website.
2b. Acceptance of Monetary Donation in Memory of Jean Doering
Mayor Jacobs referenced an e-mail describing Jean Doering’s past support of Westwood
Nature Center’s work with Red Tail Hawk, the Raptor Center, and that her 80th birthday
party was held at Westwood. In addition, Jean was an involved grandmother, attending
grandchildren’s events. Mayor Jacobs noted the attendance of the family of Jean Doering
and acknowledged the generous donation being made in her memory.
Zack Doering, son to Jean Doering, stated the family is pleased to find an opportunity to
support the Raptor Education Program at Westwood Nature Center. He noted his mother
had looked back at the occasion of her 80th birthday party, which was also attended by
several wild turkeys, as a highlight of the last year of her life.
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 3b) Page 2
Subject: Council Meeting Minutes May 17, 2010
Mark Oestreich, Manager of the Westwood Hills Nature Center, expressed their
appreciation for the Doering’s generosity.
3. Approval of Minutes
3a. City Council Minutes of May 3, 2010
The minutes were approved as presented.
4. Approval of Agenda and Items on Consent Calendar
NOTE: The Consent Calendar lists those items of business which are considered to be routine
and/or which need no discussion. Consent items are acted upon by one motion. If discussion is
desired by either a Councilmember or a member of the audience, that item may be moved to an
appropriate section of the regular agenda for discussion.
4a. Approve Amendment No. 1 to Tower Site Lease Agreement No. 68-99 with Global
Signal for space west of the groundwater treatment facility at 7120 W. Lake Street.
4b. Adopt Resolution No. 10-050 authorizing the special assessment for the repair of the
sewer service line at 1644 Blackstone Avenue - P.I.D. 04-117-21-33-0076.
4c. Adopt Resolution No. 10-051 approving acceptance of monetary donations from the
Family and Friends of Jean Doering in the amount of $1,395 for Westwood Hills
Nature Center’s Raptor Program.
4d. Approve bid tabulation designating Jorgenson Construction, Inc. the lowest responsible
bidder and authorize execution of contract with the firm in the amount of $14.65 per
ton for Municipal Service Center (MSC) Soil Removal and Disposal Project 2008-
1900.
4e. Adopt Resolution No. 0-052 granting approval for a Conditional Use Permit for
Excavation at 2701 Zarthan Ave S.
4f. Approve bid tabulation designating Valley Paving, Inc. the lowest responsible bidder
and authorize execution of a contract with the firm in the amount of $137,890.60 for
the 2010 MSA Street Improvement Project No. 2009-1101.
4g. Approve Resolution No. 10-053 authorizing Park Tavern Lounge & Lanes to provide
alcohol during the hours 5:30 p.m. to 10:30 p.m. at the Parktacular Block Party to be
held on June 19, 2010.
4h. Adopt Resolution No. 10-054 approving the Amended and Restated Contract for
Private Redevelopment By & between SLP EDA, City of St. Louis Park, and Duke
Realty Limited Partnership related to The West End project.
4i. Approve for Filing Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission Minutes March 17,
2010.
4j. Approve for Filing Police Advisory Commission Minutes March 3, 2010.
4k. Approval of Filing of Vendor Claims.
4l. Approve for Filing Housing Authority Minutes April 14, 2010.
Mr. Harmening advised of the request from Jason Londer, applicant, to remove Agenda Item
6a and reschedule consideration to the June 7, 2010, meeting of the Council.
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 3b) Page 3
Subject: Council Meeting Minutes May 17, 2010
It was moved by Councilmember Mavity, seconded by Councilmember Finkelstein, to
approve the Agenda as amended to remove and postpone Item 6a, public hearing to consider
appeal of BOZA decision of 3541 Glenhurst Avenue S. Variances, and to approve items
listed on the Consent Calendar; and to waive reading of all resolutions and ordinances.
The motion passed 7-0.
5. Boards and Commissions - None
6. Public Hearings
6a. Public Hearing to consider appeal of BOZA decision of 3541 Glenhurst
Avenue S. Variances
This item was removed from the agenda and tabled to the June 7, 2010 regular City Council
meeting.
7. Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public – None
8. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions and Discussion Items
8a. Beth El Synagogue Conditional Use Permit for Renovations and Addition
Resolution No. 10-055
Mr. Fulton presented the staff report regarding the request of Beth El Synagogue for a
Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to allow for renovations and an addition. He displayed
slides depicting the site plan and identified the area where entrances would be consolidated,
green spaces added, library and education center expanded, and interior renovations. He
drew attention to the additional turnaround, driveway entrance, and modification to the
drive circle to create better function. The south exterior elevation was displayed and Mr.
Fulton described the different design approach being used from the current brick structure,
noting it exceeds the architectural standards found in the Zoning Ordinance. Landscaping
will be in greater compliance with the Zoning Ordinance by the addition of trees and shrubs
and maintaining the large significant trees off 26th Street. Mr. Fulton pointed out the
student loading zones on the east side that would be added to enhance safety and where
handicapped spaces would be moved from one location to another part of the parking lot. It
was explained that the 26th Street drop off and loading zone, which will impact on-street
parking on 26th Street, will be addressed as a separate issue.
Mr. Fulton noted that Beth El is required to have 214 off-street parking spaces based on
current sanctuary seating. At present, there are 312 available off-street parking spaces on the
site. Under this proposal, 9 spaces would be removed leaving a total available parking to 303
spaces, which exceeds the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance by 89 spaces. He
explained that Beth El has a shared parking arrangement with Benilde-St. Margaret’s School
(BSM), located immediately to the north. BMS uses 150 to 200 spaces at Beth El on a
regular weekday and in return, Beth El uses the BSM parking lots during the Jewish high
holidays and major events. This occurs three to four times per year.
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 3b) Page 4
Subject: Council Meeting Minutes May 17, 2010
Mr. Fulton presented a map identifying areas of additional stormwater management and
explained that drainage from the Beth El site will be diverted to the north so it does not
enter the 26th Street stormwater system, which is currently operating close to capacity during
major rainfall events. He advised that staff and the Planning Commission recommend
approval of the CUP subject to the conditions detailed in the resolution.
Gary Krupp, Beth El president, thanked the staff, Council, and Planning Commission for
their consideration and working with their design team. He stated that as a resident of St.
Louis Park, he applauded the City for its work the past few years to promote progressive
urban development. Mr. Krupp explained that Beth El serves just over 1,200 members and
over 3,000 individuals, one in three being a resident. He stated Beth El has been known to
many as the synagogue with a “ski jump,” becoming an architectural icon, and they intend
to enhance that landmark with this project. Mr. Krupp reviewed the variety of well-attended
events hosted at Beth El that were believed to also be of benefit to the City. He stated that
Beth El has a close relationship with BSM for parking and takes pride in being part of the
broader St. Louis Park community by contributing generously to the food bank and
outreach through their youth programs. Mr. Krupp introduced the Beth El design team.
Councilmember Finkelstein disclosed that he and his wife have been active members of Beth
El Synagogue for the past 20 years and, in honor of that, will abstain from the vote on this
matter.
Councilmember Sanger indicated she understands the need for a significant remodel after
touring Beth El and seeing the dysfunctional basement rooms. She thanked Beth El for the
tour and improvement being made to stormwater management. Councilmember Sanger
asked why the project is not required to comply with landscaping requirements.
Mr. Fulton explained this is a large parking lot that is in good condition and the work is only
to the very western side. However, when the parking lot is reconstructed in the future, it
would be required to install curb and to bring it into full compliance with the landscaping
requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. At that time, the stormwater requirements would
also be readdressed. Mr. Fulton stated this issue is similar to that of the steeple, which is out
of compliance for height with the Zoning Ordinance but grandfathered because it is existing.
The parking lot is also grandfathered.
Councilmember Sanger commended Beth El and BSM for working together on parking.
She stated she struggled with the removal of nine parking spaces; however, since the overflow
parking into neighborhoods during high holidays is so widespread, the loss of the nine spaces
is probably not significant. In addition, this only occurs several times a year.
Councilmember Sanger asked that the “No Parking” signs to be placed on 26th Street for the
preschool indicate parking is banned only when the preschool is in operation.
It was moved by Councilmember Sanger, seconded by Councilmember Santa, to adopt
Resolution No. 10-055 granting Conditional Use Permit under Section 36-163(d)(7) of
the St. Louis Park ordinance code relating to zoning to permit renovations and addition for
property zoned R-1 single family residential district located at 5224 West 26th Street.
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 3b) Page 5
Subject: Council Meeting Minutes May 17, 2010
The motion passed 6-0-1 (Councilmember Finkelstein abstained from the vote).
9. Communications
Mayor Jacobs reminded everyone of the upcoming Memorial Day event at Wolf Park,
starting 11 a.m. He extended the City’s appreciation to Sebastian Ice Cream for donating
ice cream, cones, and volunteers during the recent Ice Cream Social. Mayor Jacobs also
thanked City Staff for its fantastic job to organize this event.
Councilmember Finkelstein reported that STEP moved this weekend to a new location on
Lake Street across from the high school football field. He noted STEP serves 700 families in
need each month.
Councilmember Finkelstein presented the 2010 Parktacular Block Party button. He advised
of locations where it can be purchased and savings offered to button holders by local
businesses.
10. Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 8:09 p.m.
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Nancy Stroth, City Clerk Jeff Jacobs, Mayor
Meeting Date: June 7, 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:
Temporary On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor License – Church of the Holy Family.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Approve Temporary On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor License – Church of the Holy Family at 5900 &
5925 West Lake Street for August 20 and August 21, 2010.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Does Council agree with staff’s recommendation to approve a temporary on-sale intoxicating liquor
license for Church of the Holy Family during their annual Festival to be held August 20-21, 2010?
BACKGROUND:
The Holy Family Catholic Church has made application for a temporary on-sale liquor license for
an annual Family Festival event scheduled for August 20 and August 21, 2010. The event will take
place on the church and school grounds located at 5900 and 5925 W. Lake Street. The activities at
the Festival include a chicken dinner, beer garden under a tent with pop and popcorn for kids, and a
dance with the sounds of Papa D and the Knights of Rock.
Staff has administratively approved all required permits for the event, with the exception of the
Liquor License which must be approved by Council. Temporary Liquor Licenses approved by the
City Council are not valid until approved by the Commissioner of Public Safety.
POLICE INVESTIGATION:
The principals were investigated and the Police Department found nothing in the course of their
investigation that would warrant denial of the license.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
Not applicable.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
Not Applicable.
Attachments: None
Prepared by: Nancy Clerk, City Clerk
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Meeting Date: June 7, 2010
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:
Receipt of Donation for Arboriculture Conference.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Motion to Adopt Resolution Accepting Donation to the City to support the Environmental
Coordinator’s Attendance at the 2010 International Society of Arboriculture Conference.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Minnesota Statutes Section 465.03 requires that donations of real or personal property be accepted
by a resolution of the City Council adopted by a two-thirds majority of its members.
Does the City Council wish to accept a donation to the City of St. Louis Park to support
participation at an out-of-state conference by the Environmental Coordinator?
BACKGROUND:
The City of St. Louis Park’s Environmental Coordinator, Jim Vaughan, will represent the
Minnesota Society of Arboriculture (MSA) as their International Society of Arboriculture (ISA)
Council Representative at the 2010 Arboriculture Conference in Chicago, Illinois July 23 –July 28,
2010. This conference is an annual international conference for arborists covering many aspects in
the science, management and practice of urban tree care. City staff has attended this conference in
the past, but due to costs and budget constraints is not able to under current City budget. As a result
of Mr. Vaughan’s appointment, the Minnesota Society of Arboriculture has offered to pay all related
conference expenses.
The City Attorney has reviewed this matter. His opinion is that state law permits the payment of
such expenses by this organization, regardless of whether the funds come from primary or secondary
sources. It is treated as a gift to the city and needs to be a resolution adopted by the City Council
determining that attendance at this event serves a public purpose and accepting the gift. The
resolution needs to be adopted before attendance at the conference. The City of St. Louis Park will
pay for travel, the conference and hotel accommodations up front and submit receipts to MSA for
reimbursement.
It is also important to note that, in general, 2010 travel for training and conferences has been
restricted by the City Manager to Minnesota, unless exceptions are granted by the City Manager.
This is due to the on-going budget challenges.
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 4b) Page 2
Subject: Receipt of Donation for Arboriculture Conference
ABOUT MSA: The Minnesota Society of Arboriculture (MSA) is a non-profit organization that
fosters and promotes the planting and preservation of shade and ornamental trees. MSA promotes
the science, technology and practice of arboriculture and urban forestry, encouraging participation in
continuing education programs (i.e. Certified Arborist program) and an exchange of information
and experience. Jim Vaughan is and has been an active member of MSA for over 20 years.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
All costs related to this conference are covered by the Minnesota Society of Arboriculture with no
out-of-pocket costs to the City of St. Louis Park.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
Not applicable.
Attachments: Resolution
Prepared by: Stacy Voelker, Administrative Secretary
Jim Vaughan, Environmental Coordinator
Reviewed by: Cindy Walsh, Director of Parks and Recreation
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 4b) Page 3
Subject: Receipt of Donation for Arboriculture Conference
RESOLUTION NO. 10-______
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING DONATION TO THE CITY TO SUPPORT
ENVIRONMENTAL COORDINATORS ATTENDANCE AT THE
2010 INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY OF ARBORICULTURE CONFERENCE
WHEREAS, the Minnesota Society of Arboriculture has offered to donate all travel,
lodging, and attendance related costs of the City’s Environmental Coordinator at the International
Society of Arboriculture Conference, July 23 - 28, 2010 in Chicago, Illinois to the City of St. Louis
Park for arborists covering many aspects in the science, management and practice of urban tree care;
and
WHEREAS, such donation will benefit the citizens of the City of St. Louis Park; and
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes Section 465.03 requires that donations of real or personal
property be accepted by a resolution of the City Council adopted by a two-thirds majority of its
members.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park that the donation of all travel, lodging, and attendance related costs of the City’s
Environmental Coordinator at the International Society of Arboriculture Conference, July 23 - 28,
2010 in Chicago, Illinois by the Minnesota Society of Arboriculture is hereby accepted.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council June 7, 2010
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Meeting Date: June 7, 2010
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:
Special Assessment - Water Service Line Repair at 2311 Sumter Avenue South.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Motion to Adopt Resolution authorizing the special assessment for the repair of the water service
line at 2311 Sumter Avenue South, St. Louis Park, MN - P.I.D. 08-117-21-23-0093.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
None - The proposed action is consistent with policy previously established by the City Council.
BACKGROUND:
Esther Tanick, owner of the single family residence at 2311 Sumter Avenue South has requested the City
to authorize the repair of the water service line for 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 water 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 water service line repair and special
assess the cost of the repair. The total eligible cost of the repair has been determined to be $2,200.00.
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 June 7, 2010 (Item No. 4c) Page 2
Subject: Special Assessment – Water Service Line Repair at 2311 Sumter Ave
RESOLUTION NO. 10-____
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT
FOR THE REPAIR OF THE WATER SERVICE LINE AT
2311 SUMTER AVENUE SOUTH, ST. LOUIS PARK, MN
PID 08-117-21-23-0093
WHEREAS, the Property Owner at 2311 Sumter Avenue South has petitioned the City of
St. Louis Park to authorize a special assessment for the repair of the water service line for the single
family residence located at 2311 Sumter 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 water 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
water service line repair is hereby accepted.
2. The water 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 water service line is accepted at $2,200.00.
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 water service line and the special assessment of all costs associated
therewith.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council June 7, 2010
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Meeting Date: June 7, 2010
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:
Special Assessment - Water Service Line Repair at 3049 Edgewood Avenue South.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Motion to Adopt Resolution authorizing the special assessment for the repair of the water service
line at 3049 Edgewood Avenue South, St. Louis Park, MN - P.I.D. #17-117-21-11-0012.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
None - The proposed action is consistent with policy previously established by the City Council.
BACKGROUND:
Matthew Sonntag, owner of the single family residence at 3049 Edgewood Avenue South, has requested
the City to authorize the repair of the water service line for his 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 water 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 water service line repair and special
assess the cost of the repair. The total eligible cost of the repair has been determined to be $5,274.21.
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 June 7, 2010 (Item No. 4d) Page 2
Subject: Special Assessment – Water Service Line Repair at 3049 Edgewood Ave
RESOLUTION NO. 10-____
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT
FOR THE REPAIR OF THE WATER SERVICE LINE AT
3049 EDGEWOOD AVENUE SOUTH, ST. LOUIS PARK, MN
P.I.D. #17-117-21-11-0012
WHEREAS, the Property Owner at 3049 Edgewood Avenue South has petitioned the City
of St. Louis Park to authorize a special assessment for the repair of the water service line for the
single family residence located at 3049 Edgewood 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 water 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
water service line repair is hereby accepted.
2. The water 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 water service line is accepted at $5,274.21.
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 water service line and the special assessment of all costs associated
therewith.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council June 7, 2010
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Meeting Date: June 7, 2010
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:
Sam’s Club Fuel Station - Conditional Use Permit for Excavation.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Motion to Adopt Resolution Granting Conditional Use Permit under Section 36-79 Relating To
Zoning To Permit Excavation Of Over 400 Cubic Yards Of Material For Property Zoned C-2 –
General Commercial Located At 3745 Louisiana Avenue South.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Does the proposed plan for excavation at the Sam’s Club Fuel Station satisfy the requirements for
approval of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP)?
BACKGROUND:
Requested is a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for excavation at the fueling station at Sam’s Club.
The fueling station was constructed in 2007, but modifications are required because of differential
settling between the parking lot and the fueling station. The soils underlying the fueling station are
settling at a varying rate, and frost heave has become a concern. These soils will be removed and
replaced by clean fill during the project. When complete, the site and building design at the fueling
station will mirror its initial construction in 2007.
The Planning Commission held a public hearing to review the CUP proposal on May 19th, 2010.
There was no one present to comment on the proposal. The Planning Commission recommended
approval of the CUP.
Development Background:
The Sam’s Club store and fueling station were constructed under a Conditional Use Permit (CUP)
approved in 2005. Following the store opening in 2006, the fueling station was completed in 2007.
The fueling station is located at the south end of Monitor Street, and is open to members only. At
the time of construction, there were no concerns about the soils beneath the fueling station and they
were simply left in place.
The excavation will allow for the removal of the materials underlying the fueling station that have
resulted in the heaving and differential settling. The total amount of material removed will vary
across the site; based on the environmental analysis, there is a need to excavate to a depth between
one foot to seven feet over most of the fueling station site. The existing canopy, building and
underground storage tanks will remain in place during construction; the foundations for those
structures extend below the materials of concern and are completely stable. The fuel dispensers and
pumps will be removed during construction.
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 4e) Page 2
Subject: Sam’s Club Fuel Station - Conditional Use Permit for Excavation
The excavation plan is attached for review. It is expected that approximately 2,000 cubic yards of
material will be removed from the site, although that number may vary based on the conditions
discovered during excavation. Should there be 2,000 cubic yards of excavation, approximately 200
regular-sized dump truck loads would result. Hauling is expected to occur over a three week period.
Per Ordinance, hauling may only occur between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. Monday
through Friday, and the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. on the weekend and holidays.
Contractors are required to comply with state requirements and local ordinance requirements. City
Staff will monitor the site to ensure that dust and erosion control measures are in place throughout
the excavation process. The site is located away from any residential areas, so further limiting the
hours of operation was not deemed a necessary addition to the conditions of approval.
The site is located in close proximity to the intersection of State Highway 7 and Louisiana Avenue
South. The haul route will proceed along Monitor Street and Lake Street to Louisiana Avenue
South and then to State Highway 7. Trucks may then proceed either to the east or west, reaching
State Highway 100 or US Highway 169. Hauling is prohibited on other local streets.
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) Involvement
The initial redevelopment of the Sam’s Club site included significant MPCA involvement to ensure
that all contaminated materials on the site were handled appropriately and in compliance with state
statute and regulations. Similarly, the MPCA must approve a plan for excavation at the fueling
station. The plan, known as a “Remedial Action Plan,” or RAP, details how the materials should be
handled during excavation and where they can be properly placed in a landfill.
The material of concern is calcium hydroxide. Calcium hydroxide is created when calcium oxide,
also known as lime, is mixed with water. The calcium hydroxide on the fueling station site is not
naturally occurring and is most likely a byproduct of industrial processes that took place on this site
or an adjacent site sometime in the past. The applicant will have an environmental consultant on-
site throughout the excavation process to test the material being removed. Depending on the results
of the testing, material will either be directly hauled off the site or covered and stored temporarily.
When the project is complete, the soils under the fueling station will be fully stable.
A copy of the RAP has been provided to the City. Before construction, the RAP must be approved
by the MPCA. Braun Intertec and Carlson Consulting Engineers, Wal-Mart’s consulting engineers
on this project, have indicated that MPCA approval is expected by mid-June. Should the MPCA
require additional or unexpected information, it is possible that construction may be delayed;
however, the applicant is optimistic that construction on the site will begin by mid to late July.
Process
A public hearing was held at the Planning Commission meeting, as required for all CUPs. All
property owners within 350 feet of the fueling station were notified by mail. Because the adjacent
properties are primary industrial or commercial in nature, no neighborhood meeting was conducted.
There was no one present to comment on the CUP at the public hearing. The hauling activity will
be consistent with the character of the neighborhood in which it is taking place. There is no concern
about interference between the hauling and residential activity within the City.
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 4e) Page 3
Subject: Sam’s Club Fuel Station - Conditional Use Permit for Excavation
As noted, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the proposed CUP.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
None.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
The removal and proper disposal of contaminated materials from the Sam’s Club site meets the
Vision goals for environmental stewardship.
Attachments: Resolution – Conditional Use Permit
Draft Planning Commission Minutes – May 19, 2010
Location Map
Haul Route Map
Site Plan and related documents
Prepared by: Adam Fulton, Planner
Reviewed by: Meg McMonigal, Planning and Zoning Supervisor
Kevin Locke, Community Development Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 4e) Page 4
Subject: Sam’s Club Fuel Station - Conditional Use Permit for Excavation
RESOLUTION NO. 10-_____
RESOLUTION GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
UNDER SECTION 36-79 OF THE ST. LOUIS PARK ORDINANCE
CODE RELATING TO ZONING TO PERMIT EXCAVATION
OF OVER 400 CUBIC YARDS OF MATERIAL FOR PROPERTY
ZONED C-2 – GENERAL COMMERCIAL LOCATED
AT 3745 LOUISIANA AVENUE SOUTH
BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park:
Findings
1. The City of St. Louis Park has made application to the City Council for a Conditional Use
Permit under Section 36-79 of the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code for the purpose of excavation of
over 400 cubic yards of material within a C-2 General Commercial District located at 3745
Louisiana Avenue South for the legal description as follows, to-wit:
Lot 1, Block 1, Sam’s Club Addition
2. The City Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning
Commission (Case No. 10-15-CUP) and the effect of the proposed excavation on the health, safety
and welfare of the occupants of the surrounding lands, existing and anticipated traffic conditions,
the effect on values of properties in the surrounding area, the effect of the use on the
Comprehensive Plan, and compliance with the intent of the Zoning Ordinance.
3. The Council has determined that the excavation will not be detrimental to the health, safety,
or general welfare of the community nor will it cause serious traffic congestion or hazards, nor will
it seriously depreciate surrounding property values, and the proposed excavation is in harmony
with the general purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan.
4. The contents of Planning Case File 10-17-CUP are hereby entered into and made part of the
public hearing record and the record of decision for this case.
Conclusion
The Conditional Use Permit to permit the excavation of over 400 cubic yards of material at the
location described is granted based on the findings set forth above and subject to the following
conditions:
1. The site shall be developed, used and maintained in accordance with Exhibits incorporated
by reference herein.
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 4e) Page 5
Subject: Sam’s Club Fuel Station - Conditional Use Permit for Excavation
2. Prior to the start of construction activity, including excavation, the following conditions
must be met:
a. A letter of credit or cash escrow in the amount of $10,000.00 shall be provided by
the applicant to the City to guarantee the replacement of damaged landscaping and
the cleaning of local streets during excavation and hauling activity. The full amount
shall be released upon completion of the project.
3. The haul route shall follow Louisiana Avenue, State Highway 7, State Highway 100, and US
Highway 169. No hauling shall be permitted on residential streets.
4. Hauling may occur between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. Monday through Friday,
and the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. on the weekend and holidays.
5. All contractors are required to comply with state and local dust and noise ordinances.
In addition to any other remedies, the developer or owner shall pay an administrative fee of
$750 per violation of any condition of this approval.
Under the Zoning Ordinance Code, this permit shall be revoked and cancelled if the
building or structure for which the conditional use permit is granted is removed.
Assent form and official exhibits must be signed by applicant (or applicant and owner if
applicant is different from owner) prior to issuance of a building permit.
Approval of a Building Permit is required, which may impose additional requirements.
The City Clerk is instructed to record certified copies of this resolution in the Office of the
Hennepin County Register of Deeds or Registrar of Titles as the case may be.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council June 7, 2010
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 4e) Page 6
Subject: Sam’s Club Fuel Station - Conditional Use Permit for Excavation
Excerpts – Unofficial Minutes
Planning Commission Minutes
May 19, 2010
B. Conditional Use Permit for Excavation – Sam’s Club Gas Station
Location: 3745 Louisiana Avenue South
Applicant: Sam’s Club/Wal-Mart
Case No.: 10-17-CUP
Adam Fulton, Planner, presented the staff report. He explained that there has been some
differential settling of soil at the fueling station subsequent to construction. He explained
that the soils to be excavated are probably not natural soils to the area. They are probably
soils that developed over time through some of the industrial processes that occurred in this
area. The 2,000 cubic yards referenced in the staff report may be exceeded a bit and the
number will be modified in the Council report to reflect that.
Mr. Fulton discussed the haul route and stated there is no concern about interference
between the hauling and residential activity within the City.
Mr. Fulton spoke about the Remedial Action Plan for the site which must be provided to the
City as a condition of the Conditional Use Permit.
Commissioner Kramer asked why it is believed that the canopy and small building won’t
have settling problems.
Mr. Fulton said he expected the engineering analysis determined that those footings are
sufficiently stable. He added that a number of permits will be required from the Fire
Marshall and Building Official to make sure construction specifications are met.
Commissioner Kramer asked why the contaminated fill isn’t stable.
Mr. Fulton said the material of concern is calcium hydroxide. He explained that it’s not an
unstable material, it is just not a very desirable material for foundation. He said that the
surrounding soils expand and contract at different rates resulting in some cracking,
differential settling, and frost heave.
Commissioner Morris said his understanding is that there will not be any physical changes to
the site. Everything will look the same.
Mr. Fulton replied that is correct and upon completion of this project the site will be
restored to fully meet the exhibits from the 2005 Conditional Use Permit approval.
Chair Person asked how many truckloads of material would be removed.
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 4e) Page 7
Subject: Sam’s Club Fuel Station - Conditional Use Permit for Excavation
Mr. Fulton said the general number on the high end is for 2,000 cubic yards of material. He
said generally one short dump truck would take approximately 10 cubic yards or
approximately 200 truck trips. He added that it is not known exactly how much soil will be
excavated at the final count.
Jarmon Peregoy, PE, Carlson Consulting Engineers, spoke about the foundation of the kiosk
building and the frost depth in St. Louis Park. The foundations are already expected to go
down to frost depth, about six feet. That penetrated the zone of contaminated soils. He
explained in areas where the contaminated zone was slightly deeper, correction was made in
the field during construction. Those footings are founded on good material. There aren’t
concerns with settlement of that structure. Mr. Peregoy said the reason calcium hydroxide
soil, also referred to as lime, is considered contaminated is because of the PH level which is
somewhere around 12 – 12.5. 12.5 and over is hazardous material. They propose to test the
soil as it comes out, as described in the Remedial Action Plan. If the PH is less than 12.5 it
can be direct hauled to a facility. If it is over 12.5 it will be treated on site and hauled off.
Commissioner Kramer asked if the PH is at a naturally occurring high level or if it happened
as a result of industrial activity.
Mr. Peregoy said it is due to the nature of the material and is the result of industrial process.
He said it is not a naturally occurring soil.
Commissioner Kramer asked where the material will be hauled.
Mr. Peregoy said it will be hauled to a special waste facility.
Commissioner Kramer asked about qualities if the waste is airborne.
Mr. Peregoy responded that lime is used routinely. The lime is a thick layer which absorbs
much moisture and pavement is rising up 5-6 inches which is why it is being corrected. In
this case it is the PH level which is a concern. He said trucks carrying the material will be
covered.
Chair Person opened the public hearing. As no one was present wishing to speak, the Chair
closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Morris moved approval of the Conditional Use Permit subject to conditions
recommended by staff. Commissioner Kramer seconded the motion and the motion passed
on a vote of 6-0.
Proposed Route for Excavation Materials3745 Louisiana Ave. S. - Sam's Club Fuel Station
Hwy100
Hwy 7
Loui
s
iana
Ave
.
S
.
Hwy 7Louis
iana
Ave.
S.
Meeting Date: June 7, 2010
Agenda Item #: 4f
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:
City/School Cable TV Operations Agreement.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Motion to approve a joint operations agreement for operation and maintenance of Educational
Access Channel 14 and the Community TV Studio.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Does the City Council support an agreement to enhance the partnership with the School District
related to Cable TV services?
BACKGROUND:
During the course of staff’s 2010 budget work, staff from the city and St. Louis Park Public Schools
met to discuss several of its current partnerships, including our partnership regarding Cable TV.
Currently, the city has a franchise agreement with Comcast Cable until 2021. Proceeds from this
agreement (generated by franchise fees billed to the customer) are utilized to fund Cable TV
operations at the city and a portion of the city’s General Fund. Additionally, the
Telecommunications Advisory Commission and the City Council have been awarding two annual
grants to St. Louis Park Public Schools each year for operations of the district’s channel (Channel
14), equipment in the district’s television studio and equipment for use by students and district staff
(approximately $50,000 annually). The city also maintains an agreement with the district for use of
its studio for Community TV and other ParkTV productions, while paying an hourly rate for its
use.
In 2009, the City Council directed staff to pursue an agreement with the school district that would
allow for continued use of the production studio and continued operation of the district’s channel,
but with the elimination of the annual school district grants. It is expected that doing so would, at a
minimum, save the Cable TV fund the $35,000 operations grant annually. Equipment for school
productions would be provided directly by the city instead of the grant.
Proposed Agreement: In considering an agreement, staff examined the following areas:
Broadcast Coverage
• The School District currently broadcasts School Board meetings live approximately four
times monthly (regular meetings and work sessions) during the school year. Under the
agreement, city staff assumes responsibilities for this coverage. City staff has been covering the
meetings during the 2009-2010 school year in anticipation of this agreement. This coverage
would be provided by existing City staff.
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 4f) Page 2
Subject: City/School Cable TV Operations
• The School District currently broadcasts an unknown amount of other programming
(concerts, plays, etc.). The city’s On Location could take on a few of these productions each year
(major concerts, etc.) but it is likely that the district will lose some of this programming.
• Under the agreement, city staff would be available to train students/district staff to cover
single-camera shoots of other school-related events. This is how these events were broadcast in
the past, but the district will no longer have a staff person dedicated to this task.
• Under the agreement, the city will also provide video on demand and Web streaming
services for the district.
Studio Use
• In the past, the city was limited in its hours of use, plus the city paid $25/hour for school
district staff assistance. The agreement eliminates fees and greatly expands hours of use for
city staff. Since January 2010, the city and district have been operating on these new terms in
anticipation of the agreement.
• Studio training – Staff began and continues receiving advanced training in the TV studio
and is prepared to assume control at any time.
TV Grant
• The TAC and City Council approved $53,000 in operations/equipment grants for
2009/2010. Following council direction, payment was remitted to the district for the
operation portion of the grant ($35,000) and a partial equipment grant (approximately
$10,000) with the understanding that it would be the last grants awarded to the district.
Programming
• The agreement calls for the city to take over programming of Channel 14 on July 1, 2010.
Note: Additional background was provided to the City Council in a written report for its May 24th,
2010, study session.
TAC Recommendation
The City’s Telecommunications Advisory Commission has been actively involved in the details
surrounding this agreement and made a recommendation at its May 13th, 2010 meeting to the
Council to approve the agreement.
School District Action
The School District has approved the agreement by consent of its board chair and superintendent.
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 4f) Page 3
Subject: City/School Cable TV Operations
Summary
In summation, pursuing an operations agreement based on the above would yield, at a minimum,
the following benefits:
• The city’s Cable TV fund would become more stable (to the tune of $35,000-plus annually)
without compromising its current programming
• The city (and thereby community members) would have increased access to and control of a
fully capable TV Studio and equipment at no cost
• The School Board meetings would receive the attention of the city’s professional production
staff
• The district would no longer need to provide staff support for its cable channel
• Students would be able to receive training from our in-house professionals which the city
and district hope would eventually create more programming for the community while also
engaging students in an exciting and creative learning experience
• The city would be able to utilize students to enhance and increase its own productions
• The city and school district would have more flexibility in the amount and type of
programming produced and available to the public, thereby creating more opportunities for
sharing city and school news with residents
• School district productions would be available through Video on Demand in addition to live
web streaming
• Continued strong city – school partnership and efficiencies for community-wide benefit
Next Steps
If the agreement is approved by Council, it will take full effect on July 1, 2010. However, little
change will actually be noticed as city staff has already assumed most of the roles outlined in the
agreement. This practice was necessary to test and keep smooth the transition of responsibility.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
Finalizing the agreement would help the Cable TV fund remain sustainable until 2021, the end of
the current franchise. This includes sustainability for both operations and equipment supported by
the fund. As stated previously, the agreement would save the city’s cable TV Fund a minimum of
$35,000 annually. Any additional duties for city staff will be absorbed into currently allocated hours.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
St. Louis Park is committed to remaining a connected and engaged community.
Attachments: Agreement
Prepared by: Jamie Zwilling, Communications Coordinator
Reviewed by: Clint Pires, Chief Information Officer
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 4f) Page 4
Subject: City/School Cable TV Operations
AGREEMENT FOR OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF
EDUCATIONAL ACCESS CHANNEL 14 AND THE COMMUNITY TV STUDIO
THIS AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) is entered into this Seventh day of June, Two
Thousand and Ten, by and between the City of St. Louis Park (“City”) and St. Louis Park
Independent School District No. 283 (“District”).
RECITALS
A. The mission of the City of St. Louis Park Information Resources Department, which
includes the Communications Division, is to provide the St. Louis Park community
with effective communications, responsive technology and support services and vital
information to embrace change, empower people and enhance customer service.
B. The purpose of this agreement is to establish the terms and conditions under which
the City will assume management of Educational Access Cable Channel 14 (“the
Channel”) and operating procedures for the School District TV studio.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises, covenants and
undertakings herein contained, the parties agree as follows:
1. Recitals. The Recitals are incorporated into the Agreement.
2. Studio Use. The television studio facility at the St. Louis Park Senior High
school will be made available for community use under the following conditions:
1. Any use of the studio by teachers or students will take priority over community
use during school hours. As requested and available, the studio will be available
for city use, including Community TV productions.
2. Community use of the television studio between the hours of 4pm and 9pm
weekdays, or on weekend days will need to be scheduled through the district
facilities permitting system.
3. The studio facility will not be made available for community use on designated
days when the senior high building is closed.
4. City employees will be present while the television studio facility is to be used by
community members.
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 4f) Page 5
Subject: City/School Cable TV Operations
5. Access to the facility for City employees will be determined by The District in a
manner that satisfies the District’s security policies. Any City staff and
community members entering the facility during schools hours will follow all
prescribed check-in and check-out procedures.
6. Internet access will be provided in the studio facility in accordance with the
school district’s Acceptable Use Policy
3. Programming. The City will assume responsibility for all programming
management of the Channel effective no later than July 1, 2010. The District shall provide a section
on its website, which directs users to www.parktv.org for any and all cable television inquiries. Any
District request for video production of a presentation or performance by student(s) must have
properly executed copyright clearances and student privacy permissions.
4. Cablecast coverage. The City will schedule and coordinate all cablecast coverage
for the channel, and it will provide the following: live and replayed coverage of all regularly
scheduled and special board of education meetings; live and replayed High School Commencement;
and live or taped events as selected by City staff upon execution of this agreement. The City will also
provide Video on Demand services on its website of these productions. The District will be
responsible for producing any additional content (i.e. concerts, plays, etc.). Additionally, the City
will provide live Web streaming and Video on Demand services for the District.
5. Training. District staff will train City staff on use of the studio and equipment
supplied by the District. City staff will train any students/staff interested in producing content for
the Channel or assisting City staff on its other programming.
6. Costs. Costs associated with the agreement will be allocated as follows:
6.1 Equipment Grant. The District will no longer receive an annual equipment
grant from the City. The City will assume responsibility for maintenance and repair of all
equipment related to the studio and its use, except for equipment used for School Board or
student production. All new studio equipment purchased after July 1, 2010 will be the
property of the City and ongoing maintenance will be provided by the City. Equipment
purchased with grant funds prior to July 1, 2010 will remain property of ISD #283. The
District will supply a current equipment inventory for the studio, control room, editing
suites and other areas in use for production. In turn, the City will supply an annual
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 4f) Page 6
Subject: City/School Cable TV Operations
inventory of all city-owned equipment that will be housed at the district television studio
facility.
6.2 Operations Grant. The District will no longer receive an operations grant
from the City.
6.3 Facilities. The District will ensure adequate safety features, including a gate
at the High School football field and a “pass-through” are available inside the gymnasium, to
facilitate coverage of events at those locations. The District will provide adequate signal
wiring from the main gymnasium and auditorium at St. Louis Park Senior High School
from agreed upon origination points to the studio control room for live cable-casting and
other live and delayed uses. The City will not make any physical changes to the district TV
studio facilities equipment or aesthetics unless prior consent is granted by the ISD #283
Director of Information Services
7. Liability Limitation. Each party is liable to the other only to the extent the
negligent actions or inactions of one proximately cause direct out-of-pocket cost to the other. No
party is responsible for lost services, lost revenues, lost profits, indirect, consequential or special
damages or attorneys’ fees incurred by another.
8. Indemnity and Duty to Defend. The City and the District agree to indemnify
and hold each other harmless from any and all liability on account of injury to third parties or
damage to third party property occasioned by the negligent actions or inactions of another. The
party seeking to be indemnified and defended shall provide timely notice to the others when the
claim is brought. The party undertaking the defense shall retain all rights and defenses available to
the party indemnified and no immunities are hereby waived that are otherwise available to the City
or the District. Said provision notwithstanding, each party to this agreement shall indemnify and
hold harmless all other parties to this agreement only to the extent allowed by law.
9. Insurance. Each party represents that it carries the insurance coverages necessary
for school District, municipal or joint powers organizations under Minnesota law. No party waives
its immunities under Chapter 466.
10. Termination. The agreement, including the use of the current TV studio or
equipment, will remain in effect until the expiration of City’s franchise agreement with Comcast in
2021. This Agreement may be terminated only under the following circumstances:
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 4f) Page 7
Subject: City/School Cable TV Operations
10.1 By mutual agreement of the parties expressed in writing.
10.2 By material breach of a party that has not been cured after written notice and
a reasonable opportunity to cure.
11. Dispute Resolution. If the City and the District cannot agree on any matter
arising out of this Agreement, after a reasonable period of good faith negotiations, they agree to
engage a qualified third party to mediate the disagreement, and share the costs of the mediator on an
equal basis. The parties will work in good faith with the mediator to find an acceptable solution and
must reduce any settlement agreement to writing. Any such agreement must be incorporated into
and made a part of this Agreement. If a mediated agreement cannot be reached, each party has
available to it all rights in law or equity.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the duly authorized officers of the undersigned have executed
this Agreement on behalf of the parties hereto.
City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota
By____________________________
Its ________________________
By____________________________
Its ________________________
St. Louis Park Independent School District No. 283
By____________________________
Its ________________________
By____________________________
Its ________________________
Meeting Date: June 7, 2010
Agenda Item #: 4g
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:
Policy Statement Minority-Owned, Women’s Business Enterprises and Small Business.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Approve Policy Statement in support of Resolution regarding minority-owned, women’s business
enterprises and small business in contracting, professional services and purchasing.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Does Council wish to approve the policy statement?
BACKGROUND:
On April 12, 2010 the Council had a conversation about contracting as it relates to minority-owned,
women’s enterprises and small business. It was the consensus of the Council to develop a policy
statement supporting minority-owned, women’s business enterprises and small business in our
contracting, professional services and purchasing. Council agreed that the policy statement is to
encourage, support and make use of minority-owned, women’s business enterprises and small
business when possible. Data will not be required for certification or tracking. Council agreed that
the policy will be to encourage business opportunities and provide information.
On May 24, 2010, Council received a report that included a draft resolution with a policy statement
relating to minority-owned, women’s enterprises and small business. The next step is for Council to
formally adopt the attached resolution. Once approved, it will be incorporated into the purchasing
guide for use by staff. Staff will also be proactive in informing agencies and organizations related to
this policy and provide information on our web site about contracting, professional services and
purchasing.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
Not applicable.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
“St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged community”
Attachments: Resolution with policy statement supporting of minority-owned, women’s
business enterprises and small business.
Prepared by: Nancy Gohman, Deputy City Manager
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 4g) Page 2
Subject: Policy Statement Minority-Owned, Women’s Business Enterprises and Small Business
RESOLUTION NO. 10-_____
RESOLUTION SUPPORTING
MINORITY-OWNED BUSINESS,
WOMEN’S BUSINESS ENTERPRISES AND
SMALL BUSINESS
WHEREAS, the City Council met and discussed the importance of small and minority-owned
businesses and women’s enterprises in contracting, professional services and purchasing.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ST. LOUIS PARK AS FOLLOWS:
The City of St. Louis Park is committed to encourage and support minority-owned business and
women’s business enterprises and small business, as defined by SBA regulations, when prudent as it
relates to contracting, professional services and purchasing. Such efforts shall:
A. Including such firms upon their request, when qualified, on solicitation electronic mailing
lists;
B. Dividing total requirements, when economically prudent, into smaller tasks or quantities to
permit participation by such firms;
C. Establishing delivery schedules, where the requirement permits, which encourage
participation by such firms;
D. Using the services and assistance of organizations such as the SBA (Small Business
Association), MWBE (Minority and Women Business Enterprises) and MN-NAWBO
(National Association of Women Business Owners);
E. Encourage prime contractors, when subcontracting is anticipated, to take the positive steps
listed above.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council June 7, 2010
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Meeting Date: June 7, 2010
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:
First Reading of an Ordinance Setting Fees for Multiple Re-inspection Fee and Massage Therapist
License.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Motion to adopt first reading of ordinance setting fees for Multiple Re-inspection Fee for Licensed
Businesses and Massage Therapist License and set second reading for June 14, 2010.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
None
BACKGROUND:
On April 5, 2010 the City Council approved an ordinance amending several sections in Chapter 8
relating to Business and Contractor Licensing, including proposed fees for the Massage Therapist
License and the Multiple Re-inspection fee for licensed business. However, the fees were mistakenly
omitted from the actual ordinance.
The attached ordinance corrects this situation and establishes fees of $130 for the Multiple Re-
inspection Fee, $95 for the annual Massage Therapist License, and a Therapist License fee of only
$25 if the therapist is also the Massage Therapy Establishment license holder.
DISCUSSION:
If approved, the second reading of the ordinance will take place on June 14th at a special City
Council meeting and be in effect fifteen days after publication. This will allow the new fees to be in
place consistent with the effective date of July 1 for the new massage therapy codes.
Attachments: Ordinance
Prepared by: Ann Boettcher, Inspection Services Manager
Reviewed by: Brian Hoffman, Director of Inspections
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 4h) Page 2
Subject: First Reading of Ordinance Setting Fees Multiple Re-inspection Fee and Massage Therapist License
ORDINANCE NO. _____-10
ORDINANCE RELATING TO FEES, ESTABLISHING THE
AMOUNT OF CERTAIN NEW FEES FOR THE YEAR 2010
THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DOES ORDAIN:
Section 1. The following new fees shall be effective for the year 2010:
City Code Sec. 8-193 - Re-Inspection fee - $130.00
City Code Sec. 8-300 - 8-305 - Massage Therapist license - $95.00;
with a fee of $25.00 for therapists holding a Massage Therapy
Establishment license.
Section 2. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen days after its publication.
First Reading June 7, 2010
Second Reading June 14, 2010
Date of Publication July 17, 2010
Date Ordinance takes effect July 2, 2010
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council
City Manager Mayor
Attest: Approved as to form and execution:
City Clerk City Attorney
Meeting Date: June 7, 2010
Agenda Item #: 4i
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:
Approval of the EDA’s issuance of a $4.3 million Tax Exempt TIF Revenue Note (Series 2010A)--
Hoigaard Village Project.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Motion to adopt a resolution approving the EDA’s awarding the sale of, and providing the form,
terms, covenants, and directions for the issuance of a $4,300,000 tax exempt tax increment revenue
refunding Note (Hoigaard Village Project), Series 2010A.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Does the City Council approve of the EDA’s issuance of the proposed tax exempt TIF Note related
to the Hoigaard Village project?
BACKGROUND:
The City’s enabling resolution creating the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority
requires the City Council to approve the sale of all EDA bonds before they are issued. The attached
City Council resolution is the companion to the EDA resolution for the Hoigaard Village tax
exempt TIF Note being considered earlier Monday evening.
On April 26th, the EDA extended the maturity date for the taxable TIF Note Series 2006A related to
the Hoigaard Village project. The extension was approved in anticipation of the EDA issuing a new
$4.3 million tax exempt TIF revenue refunding Note. On May 10th, the Redeveloper updated the
EDA on the status of the Hoigaard Village project and discussed in detail the need for the issuance
of a new tax exempt TIF revenue refunding Note. The attached Resolution approves the EDA’s
issuance of the new tax exempt TIF Note related to the project which facilitates the refinancing of
the previously issued taxable TIF Notes. The conditions for issuance of the tax exempt Note have
been met by the Redeveloper. Staff and the EDA’s Bond Counsel recommend adoption of the
attached resolution approving the EDA’s issuance of a tax exempt TIF revenue Note for Hoigaard
Village.
Past Action and Description of TIF Note
On March 6, 2006, the EDA entered into a Redevelopment Contract with Union Land II LLC
(Redeveloper) in which the Redeveloper committed to acquire 6 parcels (generally at the northwest
corner of 36th Street and Highway 100), consisting of a combined 9.6 acres, remove the existing
structures, remediate the contaminated soils, and prepare the area for redevelopment. In their place,
the Redeveloper agreed to construct a two-phase, four-stage, mixed use redevelopment called
“Hoigaard Village”. To facilitate the project the EDA agreed to provide the Redeveloper with Tax
Increment Financing once certain “Public Redevelopment Costs” had been incurred in connection with
the redevelopment of the site.
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 4i) Page 2
Subject: Issuance of a $4.3 million Tax Exempt TIF Revenue Note (Series 2010A) – Hoigaard Village project
The Contract was subsequently amended by a First Amendment dated as of July 10, 2006, a Second
Amendment dated as of March 5, 2007, a Third Amendment dated as of April 28, 2008, and a Fourth
Amendment dated as of August 17, 2009 pursuant to which, among other things, the EDA agreed to
issue Taxable Tax Increment Revenue Notes to reimburse the Redeveloper for certain eligible costs
related to the redevelopment property.
Pursuant to the Contract, the EDA issued and sold a $1,663,000 Taxable TIF Note, Series 2006A
for the Phase I portion of the project (Harmony Vista) and a $2,540,000 Taxable TIF Note, Series
2007A for the Phase II portion of the project (Camerata Apartments). The revenue notes were
issued with a taxable interest rate of 7.25%, had maturity dates of February 1, 2010 and February 1,
2011 respectively and were secured by the pledge of 95% of the tax increment generated from all
parcels located within the project area (whether developed upon or not). As allowed in the Contract
the Redeveloper may request that the EDA refinance the outstanding principal amount of any of its
initial taxable tax increment revenue notes, by issuing tax-exempt tax increment revenue notes, provided
that the Redeveloper meets certain conditions and secures a purchaser for any such notes.
Recently the Redeveloper secured a purchaser for the two taxable TIF notes. In order to successfully
complete negotiations with such purchaser, the EDA approved extensions related to the maturity
date of the Series 2006A Taxable TIF Note, so as to aid the Redeveloper’s efforts to refinance the
project. Pursuant to Section 7.4 of the Redevelopment Contract, the Redeveloper has approached
the EDA to complete the tax exempt refinancing of the two taxable TIF notes.
The current structure of the taxable TIF revenue notes have maturity dates of July 1, 2010 and
February 1, 2011 respectively and therefore need to be paid in full via a refinancing. It was
anticipated when these revenue notes were issued in 2006 and 2007 that the EDA would do tax
exempt “take out” financing as outlined in the Redevelopment Contract. The reason for the EDA
agreeing to tax exempt financing is that it reduces the interest cost associated with the financing
(7.25% vs. the proposed 5% rate). Also, under the taxable financing, the Redeveloper has personal
guarantees for payments on the notes, which will go away when they are refinanced as tax exempt.
Dougherty Funding LLC, the registered owner of the Notes, has consented to their proposed
refinancing.
The proposed tax exempt Series 2010A Note will be issued in the maximum aggregate principal
amount of $4,300,000 and will be secured by available tax increment generated from the Stage 1 and 4
properties (the stages that have already been constructed). Tax increment from Stages 2 and 3 would
be pledged to any additional Initial Notes. The Series 2010A Note will bear interest at a rate of 5%,
and will have a term of 13 years. Consistent with the City’s TIF Policy, Fiscal Disparities would be
taken from inside the district. A 5% administrative fee would also be charged to the district which is
the EDA’s typical rate.
Tax exempt take out financing reduces interest costs to the project which means a greater likelihood
that there will be sufficient TIF to repay the debt and payoff the obligation sooner. If the obligation
is paid off sooner, the EDA can have the choice to use any future increment generated from the
project to complete other redevelopment projects in the city (within pooling restrictions) or chose to
decertify the district early. However, it should be noted that the tax exempt financing contemplated
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 4i) Page 3
Subject: Issuance of a $4.3 million Tax Exempt TIF Revenue Note (Series 2010A) – Hoigaard Village project
here will require 95 percent of the increment generated to pay off the obligation and that the entire
term of the original district will be required (payment through February 1, 2023). The extended
term of the district (7 years) that was approved through special legislation in 2009 is not pledged or
available to pay debt service on this revenue note.
The Redeveloper understands that the EDA makes no warranties regarding the amount of available
Tax Increment, or that revenues pledged to the Note will be sufficient to pay the principal and
interest on the Note. The Redeveloper further understands that estimates of Tax Increment prepared
by the EDA or its financial advisors in connection with the applicable portions of the Elmwood
Village TIF District are not intended as representations on which the Redeveloper may rely.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
In accordance with the Redevelopment Contract, the EDA agreed to reimburse Union Land II for
certain Redeveloper Public Improvements and Other Public Redevelopment Costs it incurred related to
the Hoigaard Village project through issuance of one or more pay-as-you-go TIF notes and those Notes
may be refinanced with one or more tax exempt Notes. The Redeveloper is required to meet certain
parameters under the Contract for the EDA and City Council to consider issuing take out financing.
Given that the Redeveloper has met the required conditions the City Council’s approval of the
EDA’s authorization cannot be unreasonably withheld provided the terms of the refinancing are
reasonable due to market conditions.
The City Council is being asked to approve the EDA’s issuance of a tax exempt TIF Note in the
maximum aggregate principal amount of $4,300,000 secured by available tax increment generated from
the Stage 1 and 4 properties within the Hoigaard Village redevelopment. The issuance of the tax
exempt TIF revenue note will not require any cash payments from the EDA or City. All costs
associated with the Note issuance (Kennedy & Graven, Ehlers and Dougherty) are paid from gross
proceeds of the tax increment.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
The Hoigaard Village project is consistent with the City’s Vision; especially the Strategic Directions
concerning gathering places, public art, trails, sidewalks and transportation.
Attachments: Resolution of Approval
Prepared by: Greg Hunt, Economic Development Coordinator
Reviewed by: Kevin Locke, Community Development Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, EDA Executive Director and City Manager
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 4i) Page 4
Subject: Issuance of a $4.3 million Tax Exempt TIF Revenue Note (Series 2010A) – Hoigaard Village project
ST. LOUIS PARK CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO. 10-______
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE ISSUANCE OF A TAX-
EXEMPT TAX INCREMENT REVENUE REFUNDING
NOTE (HOIGAARD VILLAGE PROJECT), SERIES 2010A,
IN THE ORIGINAL PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF
$______________
BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council (“Council”) of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota
(the “City”) as follows:
Section 1. Recitals.
1.01. The City and the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority (the
“Authority”) have heretofore approved the establishment of the Elmwood Village Tax Increment
Financing District (the “TIF District”) within Redevelopment Project No. 1 (the “Project”), and
have adopted a tax increment financing plan for the purpose of financing certain improvements
within the Project.
1.02. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.178, the Authority is authorized to
issue and sell its bonds for the purpose of financing a portion of the public Redevelopment costs of
the Project. Such bonds are payable from all or any portion of revenues derived from the TIF
District and pledged to the payment of the bonds. The Authority previously issued and sold its
Taxable Tax Increment Revenue Note (Hoigaard Village Project), Series 2006A in the aggregate
principal amount of $1,663,000 (the “Series 2006A Note”) and its Taxable Tax Increment Revenue
Note (Hoigaard Village Project), Series 2007A in the aggregate principal amount of $2,540,000 (the
“Series 2007A Note”) for the purpose of financing certain public redevelopment costs of the Project.
The Series 2006A Note and the Series 2007A Note are payable solely from Available Tax Increments
as defined in such notes and in the Contract for Private Redevelopment by and between the
Authority and Union Land II, LLC and its assigns, dated March 6, 2006, as amended.
1.03. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.67, subdivision 3, the Authority is
authorized to issue and sell its bonds to refund obligations and the interest thereon before the due date of
the obligations, if consistent with covenants made with the holders thereof, when determined by the
Authority, in the case of obligations payable solely from a special fund, to be necessary and desirable for
the more advantageous sale of additional obligations paid from the same fund. The Authority has
determined that it is necessary and desirable to issue and sell its Tax Increment Revenue Refunding Note
(Hoigaard Village Project), Series 2010A, in the principal amount of $___________ to refund the
outstanding principal of the Series 2006A Note and the Series 2007A Note.
1.04. Pursuant to the Enabling Resolution Establishing an Economic Development Authority
for the City of Saint Louis Park, dated November 3, 1988 (the “Enabling Resolution”), the sale of all
bonds or obligations issued by the Authority must be approved by the Council before issuance.
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 4i) Page 5
Subject: Issuance of a $4.3 million Tax Exempt TIF Revenue Note (Series 2010A) – Hoigaard Village project
Section 2. Note Approved.
2.01. The Council hereby approves issuance of the Note in accordance with the terms set
forth in the Authority’s Resolution Awarding the Sale of, and Providing the Form, Terms,
Covenants and Directions for, the Issuance of a Tax-Exempt Tax Increment Revenue Refunding
Note (Hoigaard Village Project), Series 2010A in the Principal Amount of $______________.
Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council June 7, 2010
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
Clerk
Meeting Date: June 7, 2010
Agenda Item #: 4j
OFFICIAL MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
April 21, 2010--6:00 p.m.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MEMBERS PRESENT: Lynne Carper, Andrew Ford (youth member), Claudia Johnston-
Madison, Robert Kramer, Richard Person, and Carl Robertson
MEMBERS ABSENT: Dennis Morris and Larry Shapiro
STAFF PRESENT: Adam Fulton, Nancy Sells and Sean Walther
1. Call to Order – Roll Call
2. Approval of Minutes of April 7, 2010: regular meeting and study session
Commissioner Robertson made a motion to recommend approval of the minutes of April 7,
2010.
Commissioner Carper seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 5-0.
3. Hearings
A. Conditional Use Permit for Renovations and Addition
Location: 5224 West 26th Street
Applicant: Beth El Synagogue
Case No.: 10-12-CUP
Adam Fulton, Planner, presented the staff report.
Commissioner Carper stated when looking at the stormwater plan he didn’t see any
engineering on the parking lot in terms of reconstruction. He asked what will happen to move
the water to the northeast and into the 25 ½ Street collector.
Mr. Fulton replied that staff reviewed the drainage of the parking lot, but it was not proposed
for reconstruction at this time. There will still be sheet flow happening on the parking lot.
With the new addition and the modifications happening around the building, there is an
opportunity to move that water into the pipe they are installing and bring the water to the
north.
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 4j) Page 2
Subject: Planning Commission Minutes April 21, 2010
Gary Kraup, Beth El president, thanked staff and commissioners for working with the design
team. He described the Beth El community. He said Beth El was proposing to enhance the
landmark status of the synagogue, which had hosted many national and international
speakers. Mr. Kraup said Beth El has good relationships with others in the community
including Benilde St. Margaret’s. He introduced Paul May of Miller, Dunwoodie
Architecture who introduced other members of their team. Mr. May discussed the
renovations and noted most were internal and for accessibility and safety.
Chair Person opened the public hearing.
Robert DeMay, 2505 Quentin Ct, agreed that Beth El is a good neighbor and means a lot to
the community. He said the shared parking arrangement between Beth El and Benilde St.
Margaret’s helps to relieve parking issues in the neighborhood. He said in interpreting the
parking requirements, staff said they were only looking at the sanctuary rather than the
totality of the capacity. Given the circumstances of Beth El, he thought that was appropriate.
He stated he believes there is a looming parking issue related to the stadium Benilde was
building, but it was a community issue. In the Benilde special use permit, the City Council
reserved the right to say if parking became an issue greater than what they had anticipated,
they could place additional conditions if necessary. Mr. DeMay suggested the same kind of
condition would be appropriate here because they don’t know the kind of uses and the
totality of the circumstances. Normally there is only an issue on high holy days and some
public events where they draw national figures. Mr. DeMay requested that the Commission
consider the possibility of adding a condition that would allow flexibility if it became an
issue.
Bob Tift, President, Benilde St. Margaret’s, said he supported Beth El’s application. He
spoke about Benilde’s wonderful relationship with the Beth El community.
Chair Person closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Carper stated he felt it was a good project and he had no objections.
Commissioner Johnston-Madison asked about the resident’s request to add the condition
about the parking.
Commissioner Robertson stated the Commission always has the ability to deal with parking
issues. He said he was comfortable dealing with it later, if necessary.
Commissioner Johnston-Madison asked staff for further discussion on that.
Mr. Fulton noted a substantial number of conditions were added to the Benilde St. Margaret
approval for their special permit. Under either a special permit or a conditional use permit,
the city has the ability to come back for review if issues come up. He said the Planning
Commission could add a condition requesting if at some future time the parking problem
becomes increasingly exacerbated, there would be an opportunity for further review or
additional parking required.
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 4j) Page 3
Subject: Planning Commission Minutes April 21, 2010
Commissioner Johnston-Madison asked who would request such a review.
Mr. Fulton replied a resident could make a complaint, however if the Planning Commission
were to hear from residents, they could make a request. It could also be staff initiated.
Traffic issues are generally monitored by the Public Works Department, but the Planning
division works closely with them on parking issues. The shared parking agreement had
addressed many of the parking issues.
Commissioner Johnston-Madison said she understood the review process. She thanked Beth
El, the staff and project team for coming to a study session a few weeks ago. She said it was a
good project.
Commissioner Robertson made a motion to recommend approval of the conditional use
permit, subject to conditions recommended by staff.
Commissioner Kramer seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 5-0.
4. Other Business - None
5. Communications - None
6. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned 6:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Amy Stegora-Peterson
Recording Secretary
Meeting Date: June 7, 2010
Agenda Item #: 4k
OFFICIAL MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
May 5, 2010 – 6:00 p.m.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MEMBERS PRESENT: Lynne Carper, Andrew Ford (youth member), Claudia Johnston-
Madison, Robert Kramer, Dennis Morris, Richard Person, Larry
Shapiro
MEMBERS ABSENT: Carl Robertson
STAFF PRESENT: Adam Fulton, Meg McMonigal, Rick Beane
1. Call to Order – Roll Call
2. Approval of Minutes: None
3. Hearings
A. Conditional Use Permit for Excavation – Birchwood Park
Location: 2701 Zarthan Avenue South
Applicant: City of St. Louis Park
Case No.: 10-15-CUP
Adam Fulton, Planner, presented the staff report.
Commissioner Morris asked about the haul route which goes through two residential blocks.
He noted it was the most direct route, but unusual for a haul route to go through residential
blocks.
Mr. Fulton said the site is located in the midst of a residential neighborhood. He said if
there was an alternative route it would be Dakota Ave., which does carry a higher volume of
traffic, but is still residential. He went on to say that to reach Dakota would require traveling
west through residential. He said the proposed haul route is similar to the route used for
heavy equipment during a recent Public Works project at Dakota Park.
Commissioner Morris asked about the feasibility of adding some safety signs in the area to
alert residents. He asked about the possibility of shortening the evening haul time to 8:00
p.m. or 9:00 p.m.
Mr. Fulton said Rick Beane, Park Superintendent, might be able to address the hours. Mr.
Fulton added that the hours could probably be reduced. The proposed hours reflect what is
allowed in the ordinance. He said he didn’t expect construction would start at 7 a.m. or end
as late as 10 p.m.
Commissioner Morris asked if contaminated soils are being removed.
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 4k) Page 2
Subject: Planning Commission Minutes May 5, 2010
Mr. Fulton responded that his understanding is that the soils are not contaminated but are
unsuitable for the construction of a new building. He said there might be an excess
concentration of peat and less than ideal soils to support a building foundation.
Commissioner Morris asked if residents might be able to harvest some of the excavated soil.
Mr. Beane said regarding the haul route, safety signs can be installed. He said the hours
should not be an issue and can be adjusted back.
Mr. Beane stated there are no contaminated soils on site. The soil is peaty, probably in
excess of 20 ft. deep. The peat will be harvested and used for topsoil. Some of the other soils
will be used on site, such as in the parking lot and trail sections.
Commissioner Kramer asked how many truck trips would be required.
Mr. Fulton responded that approximately 94 dump truck trips would be required.
Commissioner Carper asked about the loss of a volleyball court in the park.
Mr. Beane said that the neighborhood asked for a bigger basketball court and indicated that
the volleyball court did not get used. The neighborhood also requested a small sand play
area next to the playground.
Commissioner Carper inquired about lighting on the basketball court.
Mr. Beane said typically there aren’t any lighted courts because of resident impact with late
night use. He said there will be one security parking lot light in use from dusk to dawn.
Commissioner Carper asked about the expected cost of the entire project.
Mr. Beane stated that he did not have the capital plan with him. He said the building will
cost about $400,000. The trail, parking lot, and basketball court will cost approximately
$100,000 - $150,000.
Commissioner Carper asked how a project like this is budgeted in these difficult economic
times. He asked about the source of funds.
Mr. Beane explained the source of funds is the Park Improvement Fund. It’s been in the
capital plan for at least 3-4 years. He went on to say with the potential loss of Northside
Park a rink will be lost. Birchwood Park will be able to become more of a winter facility.
The Birchwood building will be fully staffed during ice rink operating hours, functioning
identical to the Browndale and Nelson park buildings.
Commissioner Carper asked if the work is contracted out or if city labor is used.
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 4k) Page 3
Subject: Planning Commission Minutes May 5, 2010
Mr. Beane said the work is contracted out. Some city labor will be used for finish work.
Commissioner Carper asked if the city has requirements that contractors use union labor.
Mr. Beane responded that the city does not have that requirement.
Chair Person opened the public hearing.
As no one was present wishing to speak, the Chair closed the public hearing.
Meg McMonigal, Planning and Zoning Supervisor, said the Commission could make a
recommendation to change the hours of hauling.
Commissioner Morris made a motion recommending approval of the Conditional Use
Permit (CUP) subject to changing hours of hauling to end by 7 p.m.
Commissioner Kramer seconded the motion and the motion passed on a vote of 6-0.
4. Other Business
Ms. McMonigal spoke about the Proclamation passed by the City Council honoring board
and commission volunteers. She distributed copies and read the proclamation.
Commissioners Morris and Kramer asked for updates at the next meeting for the West End
development, West End public art, and Ellipse public art.
5. Communications: None
6. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 6:20 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Nancy Sells
Administrative Secretary
Meeting Date: June 7, 2010
Agenda Item #: 4l
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 May 15, 2010 through May 31, 2010.
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
6/2/2010CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 6:28:28R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
1Page -Council Check Summary
5/31/2010 -5/15/2010
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
333.45PARK MAINTENANCE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES+SECURETECHS, INC
333.45
41.63TREE MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIESA-1 OUTDOOR POWER INC
41.67WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
41.67SEWER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
41.67STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
166.64
393.37STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICEAAA LAMBERTS LANDSCAPE PRODUCT
393.37
66.56PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIESACE SUPPLY CO
66.56
355.81PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYACTION FLEET INC
355.81
150.00POLICE G & A TRAININGADMIN IPA
150.00
13.00MUNICIPAL BLDG BUILDINGS & STRUCTURESAECOM INC
13.00
35.34INSPECTIONS G & A ELECTRICALAIR MECHANICAL
35.34
15.61-PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH DUE TO OTHER GOVTSALLIED PRODUCTS CORP
242.71BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
227.10
8.17SCHOOL GROUPS CONCESSION SUPPLIESALMSTEAD'S SUPERVALU
8.17
525.57PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYAMERICAN TIRE DISTRIBUTORS
525.57
87.90GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE OPERATIONAL SUPPLIESAMERIPRIDE LINEN & APPAREL SER
137.53PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
88.72PARK MAINTENANCE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
53.44ENTERPRISE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
99.14VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 4l)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 2
6/2/2010CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 6:28:28R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
2Page -Council Check Summary
5/31/2010 -5/15/2010
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
32.39WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
32.39SEWER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
531.51
1,076,868.84CONSTRUCTION PAYMENTS IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDIAMES CONSTRUCTION
1,076,868.84
125.00COMM & MARKETING G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESANDERSAND CORP
125.00
1,339.09FABRICATIONOTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESANDERSEN INC, EARL
1,339.09
342.87GENERAL CUSTODIAL DUTIES CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SUPPLYARAMARK UNIFORM CORP ACCTS
342.87
1,000.002008A UTIL REV BOND PROJECT RENTAL BUILDINGSARCA MINNESOTA INC
1,000.00
1,300.00SUPPORT SERVICES TRAININGATOM
1,300.00
24.54-PARK IMPROVE BALANCE SHEET DUE TO OTHER GOVTSBACHMAN'S PLYMOUTH
381.54TREE REPLACEMENT TREE REPLACEMENT
357.00
14,896.43TREE REPLACEMENT TREE REPLACEMENTBAILEY NURSERIES INC
14,896.43
730.13EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A TUITIONBALVIN, AARON
730.13
16.50HUMAN RESOURCES GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICESBARNA, GUZY & STEFFEN LTD
16.50
1,348.43EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A TUITIONBARRETT, TIM
1,348.43
85.45WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIESBATTERIES PLUS
85.45
3,763.36GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEBOYER FORD TRUCKS
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 4l)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 3
6/2/2010CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 6:28:28R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
3Page -Council Check Summary
5/31/2010 -5/15/2010
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
3,763.36
62.37PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYBOYER TRUCK PARTS
62.37
125.74STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICEBROCK WHITE CO LLC
125.74
60.07AQUATIC PARK MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIESCARPETS PLUS/COLOR TILE
60.07
159.24IT G & A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICECARTRIDGE CARE
159.24
31.70TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENTCDW GOVERNMENT INC
31.70
6,570.66DISCOUNT LOAN PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESCENTER ENERGY & ENVIRONMENT
2,900.00LIVE WHERE YOU WORK PRGM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
9,470.66
14.78SEWER UTILITY G&A HEATING GASCENTERPOINT ENERGY
14.78
1,122.94FACILITY OPERATIONS HEATING GASCENTERPOINT ENERGY SERVICES IN
4,931.73ENTERPRISE G & A HEATING GAS
6,054.67
31.52GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIESCINTAS FIRST AID & SAFETY
31.52
68.28-GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET DUE TO OTHER GOVTSCITIZENS INDEPENDENT BANK
20.65ADMINISTRATION G & A MEETING EXPENSE
4.28HUMAN RESOURCES OFFICE SUPPLIES
28.81HUMAN RESOURCES GENERAL SUPPLIES
801.95HUMAN RESOURCES RECOGNITION
5.00HUMAN RESOURCES CITE
8.58HUMAN RESOURCES MEETING EXPENSE
9.18CITEGENERAL SUPPLIES
75.00COMM & MARKETING G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
17.58DESKTOP SUPPORT/SERVICES GENERAL SUPPLIES
15.00FINANCE G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 4l)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 4
6/2/2010CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 6:28:28R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
4Page -Council Check Summary
5/31/2010 -5/15/2010
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
60.00COMM DEV PLANNING G & A TRAINING
1.82POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
85.81POLICE G & A POLICE EQUIPMENT
2,711.00POLICE G & A TRAINING
57.79POLICE G & A TRAVEL/MEETINGS
90.29DARE PROGRAM OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
366.95NEIGHBORHOOD OUTREACH OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
20.00NEIGHBORHOOD OUTREACH TRAINING
93.71OPERATIONSGENERAL SUPPLIES
703.02OPERATIONSFIRE PREVENTION SUPPLIES
21.43OPERATIONSOPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
884.09OPERATIONSTRAINING
495.00OPERATIONSSEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
79.90INSPECTIONS G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
45.00PUBLIC WORKS G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
325.38PUBLIC WORKS G & A MEETING EXPENSE
215.00ENGINEERING G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
162.69ENGINEERING G & A MEETING EXPENSE
10.11-PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH DUE TO OTHER GOVTS
49.40ORGANIZED REC G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
43.52SOFTBALLGENERAL SUPPLIES
13.25TENNISGENERAL SUPPLIES
77.48SPECIAL PROGRAMS GENERAL SUPPLIES
207.54WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
327.82WESTWOOD G & A OFFICE EQUIPMENT
201.73WESTWOOD G & A TRAINING
305.00ENTERPRISE G & A LICENSES
47.10BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
88.04INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS GENERAL SUPPLIES
875.31LIFEGUARDINGOPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
986.07CONCESSIONSCONCESSION SUPPLIES
23.11CABLE TV G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
350.79CABLE TV G & A OFFICE EQUIPMENT
4.17CABLE TV G & A BANK CHARGES/CREDIT CD FEES
45.00FRANCHISE ADMINISTRATION SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
325.00TV PRODUCTION GENERAL SUPPLIES
155.00EQUIPMENT MANAGEMENT REPAIRS
375.50MOVE-UP PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
50.00WATER UTILITY G&A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
11,877.35
129.20INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESCOLBORN, CHRISTINE
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 4l)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 5
6/2/2010CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 6:28:28R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
5Page -Council Check Summary
5/31/2010 -5/15/2010
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
129.20
503.11PATROLOPERATIONAL SUPPLIESCOMPAR INC
503.11
.72-GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET DUE TO OTHER GOVTSCOOKE JP CO
11.15INSPECTIONS G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
10.43
8,158.89POLICE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESCORNERSTONE ADVOCACY SERVICE
8,158.89
109.01OPERATIONSGENERAL SUPPLIESCOUNTRY FLAGS
109.01
33.97-GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET DUE TO OTHER GOVTSCREATIVE PRODUCT SOURCING INC
528.10DARE PROGRAM OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
494.13
270.34SUPPORT SERVICES G&A OFFICE SUPPLIESCROWN MARKING INC
270.34
3,260.90BASKETBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESCRYSTAL, CITY OF
3,260.90
310.00SUPPORT SERVICES OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESCSD
310.00
32.80PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYCUMMINS NPOWER LLC
32.80
425.00SOFTBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESCURRAN-MOORE, KIM
425.00
956.31WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICECUSTOM VALVE NUT REPLACEMENT
956.31
1,836.00EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A TUITIONCZAPAR, KIMBERLY
1,836.00
5,940.20WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESDAKOTA SUPPLY GROUP
5,940.20
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 4l)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 6
6/2/2010CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 6:28:28R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
6Page -Council Check Summary
5/31/2010 -5/15/2010
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
503.60PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESDJ ELECTRIC SERVICES INC
503.60
2,822.84SUPPORT SERVICES G&A POSTAGEDO-GOOD.BIZ INC
2,822.84
285.89WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIESDON'S RODENTS
285.89
200.00SOFTBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESDOOLEY, JOHN
200.00
544.75SYSTEM REPAIR OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESEGAN COMPANIES INC
544.75
150.91SEWER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEELECTRIC PUMP INC
150.91
63.30SEWER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIESELVIN SAFETY SUPPLY
63.30
1,366.20OPERATIONSEMERGENCY PREPAREDNESSEMBEDDED SYSTEMS INC
1,366.20
1,000.00HUMAN RESOURCES ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENTEMPLOYERS ASSOCIATION INC
1,000.00
353.54PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYFACTORY MOTOR PARTS CO
353.54
120.70GENERAL REPAIR GENERAL SUPPLIESFASTENAL COMPANY
42.77WATER UTILITY G&A IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
163.47
82.48STORM WATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT PARTSFRONTIER PRECISION INC
82.48
1,250.00FINANCE G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICESGALLAGHER RISK MGMT SERVICES I
1,250.00PARK AND REC G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
1,250.00VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
1,250.00CABLE TV G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 4l)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 7
6/2/2010CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 6:28:28R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
7Page -Council Check Summary
5/31/2010 -5/15/2010
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
1,250.00HOUSING REHAB G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
1,250.00WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
1,250.00SEWER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
1,250.00SOLID WASTE G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
1,250.00STORM WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
11,250.00
1,274.97EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A TUITIONGARLAND, MIKAEL
1,274.97
150.00EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICESGENESIS EMPLOYEE BENEFITS INC
150.00
1,237.35WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICEGOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC
1,237.35
338.26PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A GENERAL SUPPLIESGRAINGER INC, WW
338.26PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
543.87VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
1,220.39
2,580.52MUNICIPAL BLDG BUILDINGS & STRUCTURESGRAYBAR ELECTRIC CO
2,580.52
25.00OPERATIONSSUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPSHALE, JOHN
448.72OPERATIONSTRAINING
473.72
300.00SOFTBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESHAMILTON, MIKE
300.00
60.52INSPECTIONS G & A ELECTRICALHANDYMAN CONNECTION
60.52
42.32WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIESHEGNA, JESSICA
42.32
300.00SOFTBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESHENDERSON, TRACY
300.00
462.47IT G & A COMPUTER SERVICESHENNEPIN COUNTY INFO TECH
2,240.00POLICE G & A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 4l)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 8
6/2/2010CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 6:28:28R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
8Page -Council Check Summary
5/31/2010 -5/15/2010
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
800.00OPERATIONSRADIO COMMUNICATIONS
256.00OPERATIONSEMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS
3,758.47
2,461.32POLICE G & A SUBSISTENCE SERVICEHENNEPIN COUNTY SHERIFFS ACCTG
2,461.32
3,078.00POLICE G & A SUBSISTENCE SERVICEHENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER
3,078.00
30,369.36TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENTHEWLETT-PACKARD CO
30,369.36
4,813.15IT G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICESHEYER SOLUTIONS
4,813.15
7,474.21WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICEHIGHVIEW PLUMBING INC
7,474.21
175.00PERFORMING ARTS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESHINDING, CHRIS
175.00
8.92ROUTINE MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIESHOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES
20.52BEAUTIFICATION/LANDSCAPE GENERAL SUPPLIES
294.41BEAUTIFICATION/LANDSCAPE LANDSCAPING MATERIALS
31.58BEAUTIFICATION / FLOWERS OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
355.43
330.65PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIESHOTSY EQUIPMENT OF MN
330.65
325.00SOFTBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESHOWES, JEFFREY
325.00
275.00SOFTBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESHOWES, KRISTINE
275.00
85.48PATCHING-PERMANENT EQUIPMENT PARTSHSBC BUSINESS SOLUTIONS
67.31ENVIRONMENTAL G & A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
9.80STORM WATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT PARTS
162.59
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 4l)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 9
6/2/2010CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 6:28:28R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
9Page -Council Check Summary
5/31/2010 -5/15/2010
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
1,576.35EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S UNION DUESI.U.O.E. LOCAL NO 49
1,576.35
1,854.95CABLE TV G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESIMPLEX.NET INC
1,854.95
361.92WATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT PARTSINDELCO
361.92
849.66BEAUTIFICATION/LANDSCAPE LANDSCAPING MATERIALSINDEPENDENT BLACK DIRT CO
849.66
310.79BUILDING MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIESINDUSTRIAL CONTROLS DISTRIBUTO
310.79
381.78PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYINVER GROVE FORD
381.78
85.59ADMINISTRATION G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICESIRON MOUNTAIN
85.29POLICE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
170.88
802.84EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A TUITIONJASMER, JERRY
802.84
161.72WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIESJRK SEED & SURG SUPPLY
161.72
891.00ESCROWSDuke Realty - West EndKENNEDY & GRAVEN
704.00ESCROWS
1,216.45PPL LOUISIANA COURT LEGAL SERVICES
1,482.75SUNSET RIDGE LEGAL SERVICES
4,294.20
4.99ADMINISTRATION G & A MEETING EXPENSEKLESK, JANE
4.99
25.00GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESKONG, JIM
25.00
133.98BLDG/GROUNDS OPS & MAINT BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIESKRUGE-AIR INC
119.00BLDG/GROUNDS OPS & MAINT BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 4l)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 10
6/2/2010CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 6:28:28R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
10Page -Council Check Summary
5/31/2010 -5/15/2010
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
252.98
4,372.53CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDILARSON, JH CO
101.41MUNICIPAL BLDG BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES
4,473.94
45.00TENNISOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESLARSON, JOSHUA
45.00
293.00TREE REPLACEMENT TREE REPLACEMENTLAUREL TREE FARMS
293.00
2,352.00EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S UNION DUESLAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR SERVICES
2,352.00
9.73PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYLDV INC
.63-PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH DUE TO OTHER GOVTS
9.10
102,547.25EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A League of MN Cities dept'l expLEAGUE OF MN CITIES INSURANCE
1,094.53UNINSURED LOSS G&A UNINSURED LOSS
103,641.78
64.00INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESLENTNER, LAURA
64.00
580.00BUILDING MAINTENANCE BUILDING MTCE SERVICELINDESSER, TIM
580.00
210.00INSPECTIONS G & A CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCELITTLE, BRIAN
210.00
44,768.37IT G & A COMPUTER SERVICESLOGIS
2,836.40SUPPORT SERVICES G&A COMPUTER SERVICES
9,689.20TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT COMPUTER SERVICES
57,293.97
2,661.75PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESLSV METALS INC
2,661.75
825.00GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEMAACO AUTO PAINTING
825.00
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 4l)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 11
6/2/2010CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 6:28:28R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
11Page -Council Check Summary
5/31/2010 -5/15/2010
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
66.63PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYMACQUEEN EQUIP CO
66.63
660,374.82CONSTRUCTION PAYMENTS IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDIMAGNEY CONSTRUCTION INC
660,374.82
69.44PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A OFFICE SUPPLIESMARS CO, W P & R S
69.44PARK MAINTENANCE G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
69.44VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A OFFICE SUPPLIES
208.32
70.00ADMINISTRATION G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPSMCFOA
70.00
23.26PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIESMENARDS
25.14IRRIGATION MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
37.60PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES
54.47TREE MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
37.49WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
110.95PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
6.99TREE REPLACEMENT TREE REPLACEMENT
295.90
162.67PUBLIC WORKS G & A MEETING EXPENSEMERKLEY, SCOTT
162.67
303,683.28OPERATIONSCLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICEMETROPOLITAN COUNCIL
303,683.28
60.50INSPECTIONS G & A MECHANICALMIDLAND HEATING & AIR CONDITIO
60.50
4,634.86CRACK SEALING PROJECTS OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESMIDSTATES EQUIPMENT & SUPPLY
4,634.86
2,415.00WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESMIDWEST TESTING LLC
2,415.00
689.00PAWN FEES OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESMINNEAPOLIS FINANCE DEPT
689.00
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 4l)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 12
6/2/2010CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 6:28:28R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
12Page -Council Check Summary
5/31/2010 -5/15/2010
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
1,574.42EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S WAGE GARNISHMENTSMINNESOTA CHILD SUPPORT PYT CT
1,574.42
593.65PRINTING/REPRO SERVICES OFFICE SUPPLIESMINUTEMAN PRESS
593.65
298.88H.V.A.C. EQUIP. MTCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIESMINVALCO INC
298.88
445.50ASSESSING G & A LICENSESMN STATE BOARD OF ASSESSORS
445.50
280.50-PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH DUE TO OTHER GOVTSMOST DEPENDABLE FOUNTAINS
4,360.50PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES
4,080.00
609.19VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIESMSC INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY CO.
609.19
894.41PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYMTI DISTRIBUTING CO
894.41
703.00REILLY BUDGET OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESMVTL LABORATORIES
703.00
33.00PRE-SCHOOL PROGRAMS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESNANCY'S CRAFT CAPERS
33.00
395.91PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYNAPA (GENUINE PARTS CO)
89.35VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
21.86SEWER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
507.12
940.00ASSESSING G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTATNCRAAO
940.00
111.64INSPECTIONS G & A GENERAL SUPPLIESNORTHERN AIRE SWIMMING POOLS
111.64
16.00WATER UTILITY G&A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CARO'CONNOR, CHARLES
16.00
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 4l)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 13
6/2/2010CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 6:28:28R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
13Page -Council Check Summary
5/31/2010 -5/15/2010
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
194.80IT G & A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEOCE
194.80
110.00WESTWOOD G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAROESTREICH, MARK
110.00
18.10ASSESSING G & A OFFICE SUPPLIESOFFICE DEPOT
72.11FINANCE G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
4.38GENERAL INFORMATION OFFICE SUPPLIES
431.76POLICE G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
21.97PATROLOFFICE SUPPLIES
15.18PATROLOPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
207.71OPERATIONSOFFICE SUPPLIES
97.52OPERATIONSTRAINING
189.57INSPECTIONS G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
118.98ORGANIZED REC G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
69.87SEWER UTILITY G&A OFFICE SUPPLIES
1,247.15
1,441.58ADMINISTRATION G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICESOFFICE TEAM
834.40INSPECTIONS G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
2,275.98
24.62SNOW PLOWING EQUIPMENT PARTSOLSEN CHAIN & CABLE CO INC
24.62
407.14BEAUTIFICATION / FLOWERS OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESOLSON, TOM
407.14
1,711.39PORTABLE TOILETS/FIELD MAINT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESON SITE SANITATION
85.50OFF-LEASH DOG PARK OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
106.88WESTWOOD G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,903.77
480.94REFORESTATIONCLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICEOSTVIG TREE INC
480.94
132.00INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESPAPP, MELISSA
132.00
5,989.55COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIPS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESPARKTACULAR
5,989.55
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 4l)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 14
6/2/2010CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 6:28:28R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
14Page -Council Check Summary
5/31/2010 -5/15/2010
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
20.87ADMINISTRATION G & A TRAININGPETTY CASH
10.00ADMINISTRATION G & A TRAVEL/MEETINGS
10.00ADMINISTRATION G & A MEETING EXPENSE
22.95HUMAN RESOURCES GENERAL SUPPLIES
11.36HUMAN RESOURCES ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT
11.96HUMAN RESOURCES CITE
71.83ASSESSING G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
14.97FINANCE G & A TRAVEL/MEETINGS
8.50FINANCE G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR
27.66INSPECTIONS G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
4.95INSPECTIONS G & A TRAINING
5.00INSPECTIONS G & A TRAVEL/MEETINGS
29.56INSPECTIONS G & A MEETING EXPENSE
2,500.00PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH PETTY
20.08WATER UTILITY G&A OFFICE SUPPLIES
103.00WATER UTILITY G&A LICENSES
2.78STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
2,875.47
5.35WESTWOOD G & A OFFICE SUPPLIESPETTY CASH - WWNC
52.60WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
9.99WESTWOOD G & A CONCESSION SUPPLIES
8.80WESTWOOD G & A POSTAGE
34.40FAMILY PROGRAMS GENERAL SUPPLIES
7.00YOUTH PROGRAMS GENERAL SUPPLIES
118.14
1,062.87PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESPHILIP'S TREE CARE INC
1,062.87
488.25INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESPOLK, MARLA
488.25
331.09PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYPOMP'S TIRE SERVICE INC
331.09
537.38WATER UTILITY G&A POSTAGEPOSTMASTER - PERMIT #603
537.38SEWER UTILITY G&A POSTAGE
537.38SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS POSTAGE
537.37STORM WATER UTILITY G&A POSTAGE
2,149.51
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 4l)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 15
6/2/2010CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 6:28:28R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
15Page -Council Check Summary
5/31/2010 -5/15/2010
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
1,200.00PERFORMING ARTS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESPOWER SHOUT LLC
1,200.00
225.00STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICEPRAIRIE RESTORATIONS INC
225.00
906.31TREE DISEASE PUBLIC CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICEPRECISION LANDSCAPE & TREE
906.31
15.00ICE RESURFACER EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEPRINTERS SERVICE INC
15.00
5,338.73WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICESPROGRESSIVE CONSULTING ENGINEE
5,338.73
12.92SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESQUEST ENGINEERING INC
12.92
25.54VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A POSTAGEQUICKSILVER EXPRESS COURIER
25.54
175.79IT G & A TELEPHONEQWEST
1,529.43COMMUNICATIONS/GV REIMBURSEABL TELEPHONE
524.00COMMUNICATIONS/GV REIMBURSEABL DATACOMMUNICATIONS
2,229.22
48.75ICE RESURFACER EQUIPMENT PARTSR & R SPECIALTIES
48.75
152.50WATER UTILITY G&A POSTAGERAPID GRAPHICS & MAILING
152.50SEWER UTILITY G&A POSTAGE
152.50SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS POSTAGE
152.50STORM WATER UTILITY G&A POSTAGE
610.00
35.00GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESRAPP, GARY & JAN
35.00
162.67PUBLIC WORKS G & A MEETING EXPENSERARDIN, MICHAEL
162.67
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 4l)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 16
6/2/2010CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 6:28:28R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
16Page -Council Check Summary
5/31/2010 -5/15/2010
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
1,256.98OPERATIONSEMERGENCY PREPAREDNESSREADY WATT ELECTRIC
1,256.98
225.00MOVE-UP PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESREHKAMP LARSON ARCHITECTS INC
225.00
750.00HUMAN RESOURCES ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENTRICE LEADERSHIP CONSULTING, ML
750.00
96.38PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYRIGID HITCH INC
96.38
50.00OPERATIONSTRAININGSAFE KIDS WORLDWIDE
50.00
225.00MOVE-UP PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESSALA ARCHITECTS INC
225.00
69.60COMMUNICATIONS/GV REIMBURSEABL GENERAL SUPPLIESSAM'S CLUB
75.92FAMILY PROGRAMS CONCESSION SUPPLIES
42.63YOUTH PROGRAMS GENERAL SUPPLIES
188.15
210.00INSPECTIONS G & A BUILDINGSANDERS, TROY
210.00
2,058.15EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A TUITIONSAUTTER, SAMANTHA
2,058.15
3,034.27MUNICIPAL BLDG BUILDINGS & STRUCTURESSCHERER BROS. LUMBER CO.
3,034.27
64.00INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESSCHMIDT, KELLIE
64.00
962.26EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A TUITIONSCHNEIDER, JENNIFER
962.26
125.50ASSESSING G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CARSCHOMER, KELLEY
125.50
400.00OPERATIONSTRAININGSCHOOL BUS TRAINING CO
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 4l)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 17
6/2/2010CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 6:28:28R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
17Page -Council Check Summary
5/31/2010 -5/15/2010
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
400.00
225.00POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIESSCOTT COUNTY TREASURER
225.00
573.53PE INVEST/REVIEW/PER IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDISEH
21,532.98PE DESIGN IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
1,751.75SEWER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
308.00STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
24,166.26
1,008.39MUNICIPAL BLDG BUILDINGS & STRUCTURESSERIGRAPHICS SIGN SYSTEMS INC
1,008.39
236.35INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESSIMMONS, DENISE
236.35
713.00MUNICIPAL BLDG BUILDINGS & STRUCTURESSIMPLEXGRINNELL LP
713.00
1,505.44EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S UNION DUESSLP ASSOC OF FIREFIGHTERS #993
1,505.44
4,748.10PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESSODA RESTORATION
4,748.10
74.91TREE MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIESSPS COMPANIES INC
7.17MUNICIPAL BLDG BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES
82.08
17,477.40PE PLANS/SPECS IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDISRF CONSULTING GROUP INC
2,912.42CE DESIGN IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
20,389.82
30.74PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYST JOSEPH'S EQUIPMENT INC
30.74
700.00NEIGHBORHOOD PUBLIC ART OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESST LOUIS PARK SENIOR PROGRAM
700.00
103.00COMM DEV PLANNING G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPSST LOUIS PARK SUNRISE ROTARY
103.00
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 4l)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 18
6/2/2010CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 6:28:28R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
18Page -Council Check Summary
5/31/2010 -5/15/2010
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
958.20PATCHING TEMPORARY OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESST PAUL, CITY OF
958.20
.75INSPECTIONS G & A DUE TO OTHER GOVTSSTAHL, ERIK
68.75INSPECTIONS G & A ELECTRICAL
69.50
179.77PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIESSTORAGE EQUIPMENT INC
179.77
88.17WATER UTILITY G&A IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDISTRAND MFG CO
88.17
538.99POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIESSTREICHER'S
538.99
157.30ADMINISTRATION G & A LEGAL NOTICESSUN NEWSPAPERS
157.30
676,250.66SUNSET RIDGE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESSUNSET RIDGE CONDOMINIUM ASSN
676,250.66
550.00POLICE G & A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICETASER INTERNATIONAL
550.00
43.86ADMINISTRATION G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESTELELANGUAGE INC
43.86
4,150.00REILLY BUDGET OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESTESTAMERICA LABORATORIES INC
4,150.00
253.88ERUOPERATIONAL SUPPLIESTEXSTYLES INTERNATIONAL INC
253.88
128.00INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESTHOMPSON, HOLLY
128.00
80.00INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESTHOMPSON, MEGAN
80.00
105.00INSPECTIONS G & A TRAININGTILTON, JOHN
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 4l)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 19
6/2/2010CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 6:28:28R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
19Page -Council Check Summary
5/31/2010 -5/15/2010
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
105.00
126.25ADMINISTRATION G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESTIMESAVER OFF SITE SECRETARIAL
126.25
1,010.08ENGINEERING G & A ENGINEERING SERVICESTKDA
1,296.61SEWER UTILITY G&A IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
2,306.69
225.00COUNTS AND STUDIES OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESTRAFFIC DATA INC
225.00
250.00SOFTBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESTRAUTMANN, JOHN
250.00
77.07PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYTRI STATE BOBCAT
77.07
123.37GROUNDS MTCE LANDSCAPING MATERIALSTRUGREEN - MTKA 5640
123.37
168.42PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYTURFWERKS LLC
168.42
96.46PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIESTWIN CITY HARDWARE
96.46
1,630.91PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESTWIN CITY SEED CO
1,630.91
141.60SUPPORT SERVICES OPERATIONAL SUPPLIESUNIFORMS UNLIMITED (PD)
1,740.08SUPERVISORYOPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
1,932.47PATROLOPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
474.53RESERVESOPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
111.15COMMUNITY SERVICE OFFICER OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
4,399.83
211.00EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S UNITED WAYUNITED WAY OF MINNEAPOLIS AREA
211.00
80.00HOUSING REHAB G & A TRAININGURBAN LAND INSTITUTE
80.00
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 4l)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 20
6/2/2010CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 6:28:28R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
20Page -Council Check Summary
5/31/2010 -5/15/2010
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
132.92POLICE G & A TELEPHONEUSA MOBILITY WIRELESS INC
132.92
104.92OPERATIONSOPERATIONAL SUPPLIESVALLEY NATIONAL GASES WV LLC
26.35SEWER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
131.27
20.00HUMAN RESOURCES RECRUITMENTVERIFIED CREDENTIALS
20.00
47.18WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESVESSCO INC
47.18
858.74ENGINEERING G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIESVIKING INDUSTRIAL CTR
858.74
57,010.59SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICEWASTE MANAGEMENT
23,745.15SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS YARD WASTE SERVICE
30,462.92SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE
13,174.22SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL YARD WASTE SERVICE
124,392.88
240.12STORM WATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT PARTSWEATHERAMA WEATHER INSTRUMENTS
240.12
200.00SOFTBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESWEGSCHEID, ROB
200.00
13.20OPERATIONSELECTRIC SERVICEXCEL ENERGY
17,600.08PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A ELECTRIC SERVICE
1,512.45PARK MAINTENANCE G & A ELECTRIC SERVICE
12.75BRICK HOUSE (1324)ELECTRIC SERVICE
30.29WW RENTAL HOUSE (1322)ELECTRIC SERVICE
238.65WESTWOOD G & A ELECTRIC SERVICE
19,015.64WATER UTILITY G&A ELECTRIC SERVICE
8.11OPERATIONSELECTRIC SERVICE
1,201.56REILLY BUDGET ELECTRIC SERVICE
2,580.13SEWER UTILITY G&A ELECTRIC SERVICE
633.46STORM WATER UTILITY G&A ELECTRIC SERVICE
42,846.32
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 4l)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 21
6/2/2010CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 6:28:28R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
21Page -Council Check Summary
5/31/2010 -5/15/2010
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
49.50SUPPORT SERVICES OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESYAHOO
49.50
500.00PERFORMING ARTS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESYANNIE, MARK
500.00
17,954.63PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYYOCUM OIL CO INC
17,954.63
73.96VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIESZEP MFG
73.96
Report Totals 3,377,124.52
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 4l)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 22
Meeting Date: June 7, 2010
Agenda Item #: 4m
OFFICIAL MINUTES
ST. LOUIS PARK TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
MEETING OF FEBRUARY 11, 2010
ST. LOUIS PARK COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MEMBERS PRESENT: Bruce Browning, Rick Dworsky, Dale Hartman, Mike Mulligan and
Rolf Peterson
MEMBERS ABSENT: David Dyer, Toby Keeler
STAFF PRESENT: Reg Dunlap, Civic TV Coordinator; John McHugh, Community
TV Coordinator; Clint Pires, Chief Information Officer; Jamie
Zwilling, Communications Coordinator
OTHERS PRESENT: Arlen Mattern, Comcast Cable Public Affairs Administrator
1. Call to Order
Chair Browning called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM.
2. Roll Call
Present at roll call were Commissioners Browning, Dworsky, Hartman, and Peterson.
Commissioner Mulligan arrived at 7:05.
3. Approval of Minutes for December 10, 2009
It was moved by Commissioner Dworsky, seconded by Commissioner Hartman, to approve
the minutes of December 10, 2009, without changes.
The motion passed 5-0.
4. Adoption of Agenda
Chair Browning requested 6C, Google Broadband Initiative, be added.
It was moved by Commissioner Peterson, seconded by Commissioner Dworsky, to approve
the agenda as amended.
The motion passed 5-0.
5. Public Comment – None
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 4m) Page 2
Subject: Telecommunications Commission Minutes February 11, 2010
6. New Business
A. Federal Law updates including the CAP Act
Mr. Dunlap updated the Commission on a bill introduced last fall and supported by
MACTA and NATOA. Keith Ellison was a co-sponsor of the bill, but there had been no
recent action. The bill was to clean up problems for local programming entities that have
happened in other parts of the country.
B. Review School District programming reports
Mr. Dunlap indicated there was no report, but they were transitioning to have the
programming run by the City, expected to be completed by July 1st.
C. Google Broadband Initiative
Chair Browning referred to an article in the paper that Google is considering building out a
gigabyte Broadband network in select communities throughout the country. Broadband
bandwidth is falling behind in the United States, and Google is trying to shake the industry
up and get people connected to faster networks at reasonable prices.
Mr. Pires reported that the community was encouraging the City to look at this initiative
and he was researching it. Google allows people to nominate their community. The
application will require many hours of staff work to complete and it needs to go before the
City Manager and City Council. Applications need to be submitted by March 26, 2010.
Google’s project would be an experiment to see if there are quicker ways to deploy
broadband. Google is interested in communities that allow aerial construction of fiber. St.
Louis Park has 27 miles of existing fiber infrastructure that is underground because the City
has been encouraging underground utilities for years, so it would complement what Google
would want to build. It would be helpful to get comments from the Commission to pass on
to the City Council.
Commissioner Dworsky believed the opportunity was timely and that the City is well
positioned. There was no down side to proceeding. Chair Browning agreed.
Mr. Pires noted that a community member had nominated St. Louis Park, and referenced
the past efforts of the City trying to deploy alternative broadband technologies. He said
many people believed they should do this.
Commissioner Peterson would like it studied further.
Chair Browning suggested Commissioners look at the article and Email comments to Mr.
Pires. The Commission could help work on the Community Benefit section.
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 4m) Page 3
Subject: Telecommunications Commission Minutes February 11, 2010
Commissioner Mulligan asked which would be a better opportunity? Mr. Pires replied the
other opportunity was BTOP (Broadband Technologies Opportunities Program), part of
ARRA (American Recovery and Reconstruction), which was looking to expand the fiber
infrastructure. He said the chances were probably better with Google for several reasons. It
would take a lot of effort for the Google application, but BTOP had Federal requirements
that were even more intense. There are no matching fund requirements with Google, while
BTOP had a minimum of 20% matching requirements. The application for BTOP was due
before the Google application. He was still learning about the Google possibility.
7. Unfinished Business
A. LocaLoop update
Mr. Pires noted that the multi-page agreement is unique in a couple of ways. This is one of
the first situations where a community went this far in leasing a portion of its fiber to private
entities. The City has successfully leased space for years on water towers for wireless carriers.
The LocaLoop agreement is similar because there is limited capacity and strands of fiber. It
would be “first come, first served.” Unlike water tower agreements, LocaLoop was proposing
to build just under a mile of fiber to connect to the water tower and turn over ownership of
that fiber to the City, a $60,000 value. It would extend the City fiber network to nearly 28
miles and give non-exclusive access to the water towers. LocaLoop wants to build the fiber
extensions so they can get to the water towers, connect to their radios and to transmit their
wireless signal for fast internet bandwidth. The City will provide credits toward LocaLoop
leases based on value of the fiber that was being built and ownership being conveyed to the
City. There is agreement at the City staff level, including the City Attorney, that the City’s
interests were protected. Mr. Pires felt there was enough capacity for the School use, City
use and future use. City staff also wanted to maintain a level playing field for other
providers. LocaLoop has a parallel process going on for leasing the water tower space and
they need to do more on that. The target date was March 1st for approval of both the fiber
lease and the water tower agreements at City Council, and deployment in the spring. Clear
Wire was on the same path for approval of water tower leases for Wi Max, but they have not
expressed interest in fiber. There is space for both companies on the water tower.
Vice Chair Browning noted the many antennas the City had for Wi-Fi, and the poles and
solar panels that some people had a problem with, disappear for a Wi Max system, which is
not a blight on city streets.
B. Long term fiber infrastructure planning update
Mr. Pires stated staff was working on the above issues, and expects that there will be progress
by the Commission’s May meeting.
C Proposed Park TV & School District #283 agreement
Mr. Zwilling stated staff at the City and School District have reached an agreement in
principal including:
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 4m) Page 4
Subject: Telecommunications Commission Minutes February 11, 2010
• Have City staff access to studio and develop a process during the school day
• Hope to see more use of the studio, with the District getting first choice and the City
getting more time than before
• One issue is that they had hoped school classes would work with them, which didn’t
work out. But City staff is open to training students and school staff to use
equipment.
• Several physical challenges need to be worked out, like a cable pass through a gym
door and a gate by the football field.
• Working to finalize and go through School Board action, have Telecommunication
Commission make a recommendation on agreement, then bring to City Council.
• Working in studio every week
• Covering School Board meetings and providing Video On Demand for Board
meetings.
Commissioner Peterson noted there were many positive comments about the Video On
Demand for Board meetings. The productions done by Leslie Ferrell were absolutely great
and this was a fantastic and dependable asset. It’s great to have the staff using the studio and
covering Board meetings and there is synergy there.
Mr. Zwilling said VOD is the way things are going, and the City has 3,000 fans on
Facebook.
Chair Browning asked how the van was coming along? Mr. Zwilling said the van was close
to completion. The production equipment was installed and there would be training in the
next few weeks.
Chair Browning said it would be a great idea to have a way for the community to see the new
van. Mr. McHugh said that he was planning an open house event to do that and would
explain further later in communications.
D. Comcast audit update, including proper notice for future audits to cover
7/1/08 and onward
Mr. Dunlap received a reply about a week ago from Comcast about the report. Scott Lewis
& Associates had issued a detailed report and found a difference of $6,181. There were two
areas of dispute, $549 over tower fees and $3,200 in launch fees and marketing revenue.
Regarding tower fees, Mr. Lewis has no way of knowing where the towers are in this area,
and Robbin Pepper of Comcast says their engineers report that there are no towers in St.
Louis Park. The gist of the launch fees and marketing discrepancy is that the way Comcast
uses generally accepted accounting principals, they don’t report this as revenue. Many
auditors nation-wide look for areas that cities can push for to add revenue for the city, and
this is one of those areas. Mr. Dunlap reported the way the last 2 audits concluded, and that
the Commission has the option to continue the audit or bring it to a conclusion. Ms.
Pepper’s letter said they would pay $1,279 and $441 interest at the end of February.
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 4m) Page 5
Subject: Telecommunications Commission Minutes February 11, 2010
Mr. Peterson ask if, based on the letter, we’re $4,500 apart? Mr. Dunlap replied that it was
$3,263, that interest would be recalculated, because the tower rental fees don’t apply.
Chair Browning asked if their launch fee policy was uniform across the nation, and Mr.
Dunlap replied yes, that Comcast had in fact gone to court with Sacramento, California over
this issue and settled out of court. The North Suburbs have been pushing to collect launch
fees for the last several years because they had strong franchise language pertaining to audits,
but they have recently settled the matter along with other issues.
Commissioner Mulligan said that given the amount of time that would need to be spent on
the issue, and the relatively low dollar amount, that our resources would be better used
somewhere else. Chair Browning agreed.
It was moved by Commissioner Mulligan, seconded by Commissioner Hartman, to accept
the audit conclusion as proposed by Comcast ($1,620).
Mr. Pires suggested the Commissioners consider directing staff to work with the City
Attorney to see if there was a way to protect rights in the future, if the same issue comes up
again.
Mr. Dunlap suggested they could reserve the right to collect launch fee revenue in future
years.
After discussion, Commissioner Mulligan added a friendly amendment to include pending
legal verbiage, that gives the City the right to dispute these fees in the future, and
Commissioner Hartman seconded.
The motion passed as amended 5-0.
8. Reports
A. Complaints
Vice Chair Browning asked about the problem the DVR and no record of the customer
contacting them? Mr. Mattern responded either the problem was resolved or there was
nothing to go by. Chair Browning said he’d assisted two different customers and each time
the box had to be replaced and he asked how reliable they are. Mr. Mattern said it was rare
to have a problem with the cable boxes, in his experience. Occasionally there is a problem,
but the DVR’s are pretty reliable.
9. Communication from the Chair - None
10. Communications from City Staff
Mr. McHugh distributed a draft version of publicity material for Community TV-Park TV
networking night to recognize Community TV producers for 2009. The event will happen
on April 1st and this will be the first opportunity to allow tours of the new production van.
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 4m) Page 6
Subject: Telecommunications Commission Minutes February 11, 2010
Vice Chair Browning asked if LocaLoop would do a pilot project? Mr. Pires responded yes,
and that they would look for residents and community volunteers to do that as quickly as
possible. Mr. Pires also mentioned the possibility of a Wi-Fi hotspot at Lenox, that the
equipment is ready to go, but staff was waiting to hear the future of Lenox, since the School
Board is about announce their decision on facilities. City staff is using social media like
Facebook and Twitter, and it’s reaching the point where they would like Commissioner input
after a staff presentation. Mr. Pires said the City is considering purchasing a reverse 911
system, much like the School District has had for several years now. Reverse 911 allows
targeting neighborhoods for announcements, or notifying residents city-wide if there are major
emergencies. Mr. Pires also said guitarist Sharon Isbin from St. Louis Park has recently won
her second Grammy award.
11. Adjournment
Commissioner Dworsky made a motion, Commission Peterson seconded to adjourn at 8:10.
The motion passed.
Respectfully submitted by:
Amy L. Stegora-Peterson
Recording Secretary
Meeting Date: June 7, 2010
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 and First Reading of housekeeping amendments to Home Rule Charter/City Code
regarding staff positions and municipal elections.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
1. Mayor to close public hearing.
2. Motion to approve First Reading of an ordinance amending the St. Louis Park Home Rule
Charter Sections 4.03, 4.06, 6.09, and 6.10 concerning municipal elections and city position
titles and to set Second Reading on June 28, 2010.
3. Motion to approve First Reading of an ordinance amending the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code
Sections 2-350, 2-351, 18-203, 32-34, and 32-99 concerning city position titles and to set
Second Reading on June 28, 2010.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
• Does the City Council wish to amend Home Rule Charter Sections 4.03, 4.06, 6.09, 6.10 as
recommended by the Charter Commission?
• Does the City Council wish to amend Ordinance Code Sections 2-350, 2-351, 18-203, 32-34,
32-99 regarding staff position housekeeping changes?
BACKGROUND:
With the recent adoption of 2010 state legislative election laws and changes to city staff positions,
housekeeping amendments to the St. Louis Park City Charter and City Code of Ordinances are
necessary for consistency. The City Charter and City Code housekeeping amendments are as
follows:
City Charter Housekeeping Amendments
Minnesota Statute § 410.12, Subd. 7 provides that upon recommendation of the Charter Commission
the City Council may enact a charter amendment by ordinance. Within one month of the public
hearing and first reading, the city council must vote on the proposed charter amendment ordinance.
The ordinance must receive a unanimous vote of the entire city council at the second reading to become
enacted. Second reading is scheduled for a Special City Council Meeting on June 28, 2010 as it appears
all council members will be in attendance. The ordinance would take effect 90 days after publication
which is September 29, 2010.
At the Charter Commission meetings on March 10 and April 14, 2010, Commissioners
unanimously voted to recommend that the City Council pass an ordinance amending Charter
Sections 4.03, 4.06, 6.09, and 6.10 for the following reasons:
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 6a) Page 2
Subject: 1st Reading Charter/Code Housekeeping Amendments Elections and Staff Positions
Section 4.03 and 4.06 provides reference to municipal elections and candidate filing
requirements. The Minnesota Legislature amended state statutes to provide that state and
municipal primary elections be held on the second Tuesday in August and candidate filing
period dates be changed to allow for additional time for overseas absentee voting. Amending
these sections in the City Charter will maintain consistency with state election laws.
Charter Sections 6.09 and 6.10 provide reference to the “director of finance” as the lead finance
position with specific duties. With the Finance Director resignation, it was determined through
reorganization by the City Manager that the position would be titled Controller and would serve
as the City Treasurer. Assistant Finance Director Brian Swanson accepted the Controller
position and was appointed City Treasurer on February 1, 2010 by Resolution No. 10-011. All
references to “director of finance” were amended to be consistently replaced with “City
Treasurer”.
City Code of Ordinances Housekeeping Amendments related to Staff Positions
In addition to Charter amendments regarding staff positions, housekeeping amendments will also be
necessary for City Code Sections 2-350, 2-351, 18-203, 32-34, and 32-99. All references to
“director of finance” will require amending to be consistently replaced with “City Treasurer”.
Second Reading of the ordinance amending the City Code of Ordinances is scheduled for June 28,
2010 and would take effect July 23, 2010.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
None.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
None.
Attachments: Ordinance amending City Charter municipal elections/staff positions
Ordinance amending City Code staff positions
Prepared by: Nancy Stroth, City Clerk
Reviewed by: Nancy Gohman, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 6a) Page 3
Subject: 1st Reading Charter/Code Housekeeping Amendments Elections and Staff Positions
ORDINANCE NO. ____-10
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ST. LOUIS PARK
HOME RULE CHARTER SECTIONS 4.03, 4.06, 6.09, 6.10
CONCERNING MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS
AND CITY POSITION TITLES
PREAMBLE
WHEREAS, pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 410.12, Subd. 7 the Charter Commission has
recommended to the City Council that the Charter be amended as provided herein; and
WHEREAS, Minn. Stat. § 410.12, Subd. 7 provides that upon recommendation of the
Charter Commission the City Council may enact a Charter Amendment by ordinance.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA DOES ORDAIN:
SECTION 1. The St. Louis Park Home Rule Charter Sections 4.03, 4.06, 6.09, and 6.10
are hereby amended by deleting stricken language and adding underscored language:
Section 4.03. Primary Elections.
The Council shall, whenever three (3) or more candidates have filed for any elective City office,
provide through ordinance or resolution for a primary election to be held for each such office. The
primary election shall be held on the first second Tuesday after the second Monday in September
August. At least two (2) weeks' notice shall be given by the Clerk of the time and places of holding
such election, and of the officers to be elected, by posting a notice thereof in at least one (1) public
place in each voting precinct where a primary election will be held and by publishing a notice thereof
at least once in the official newspaper of the City. Failure to give such notice shall not invalidate such
election.
Section 4.06. Nomination by Petition.
The nomination of elective officers provided for by this Charter shall be by petition. The name of
any nominee shall be printed upon the ballot whenever a petition meeting the requirements specified
in this Charter has been filed on the nominee's behalf with the City Clerk. Such petition shall be
signed by at least fifteen (15) currently registered electors qualified to vote for the office specified in
the petition. No elector shall sign petitions for more candidates than the number of places to be
filled at the election, and should the elector do so that signature shall be void as to the petition or
petitions last filed. All nomination petitions shall be filed with the City Clerk not no more than ten
(10) eighty four (84) days nor fewer less than eight (8) weeks seventy (70) days and fifty-six (56)
days before the first second Tuesday after the second Monday in September August before the
general city election. The Clerk shall prepare the ballots with names of the candidates for an office
in a manner provided by ordinance. Each petition, when presented, must be accompanied by a
twenty dollar ($20.00) filing fee.
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 6a) Page 4
Subject: 1st Reading Charter/Code Housekeeping Amendments Elections and Staff Positions
Section 6.09. Levy and Collection of Taxes.
Each year the Council shall levy the taxes necessary to meet the requirements of the budget for the
ensuing fiscal year in the manner prescribed by State law. The Director of Finance City Treasurer
shall transmit a statement of the taxes levied to the County Auditor annually. Such taxes shall be
collected and their payment shall be enforced at the time and in the same manner as State and
County taxes. No tax shall be invalid because of any informality in the manner of levying the same,
nor because the amount levied exceeds the amount required to be raised for the purpose for which it
was levied. Any surplus shall go into a suspense fund, and shall be used to reduce the levy for the
ensuing year.
Section 6.10. Tax Settlement with County.
The Director of Finance City Treasurer shall ensure that all monies in the County Treasury
belonging to the City are promptly turned over to the City according to law.
SECTION 2. This Ordinance shall take effect ninety days after its publication.
Date of Publication of Public Hearing May 20, 2010
Public Hearing and First Reading June 7, 2010
Second Reading June 28, 2010
Date of Publication of adopted Ordinance July 8, 2010
Date Ordinance takes effect October 5, 2010
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council
City Manager Mayor
Attest: Approved as to form and execution:
City Clerk City Attorney
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 6a) Page 5
Subject: 1st Reading Charter/Code Housekeeping Amendments Elections and Staff Positions
ORDINANCE NO. ____-10
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ST. LOUIS PARK
ORDINANCE CODE SECTIONS 2-350, 2-351, 18-203, 32-34, and 32-99
CONCERNING CITY POSITION TITLES
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DOES ORDAIN:
SECTION 1. The St. Louis Park Ordinance Code Sections 2-350, 2-351, 18-203, 32-34, and 32-
99 are hereby amended by deleting stricken language and adding underscored language:
Sec. 2-350. Manner of Presentation of Claims
All bills, invoices, statements and claims for payment of money in discharge of any obligation of the
City shall be filed with the Director of Finance City Treasurer who shall examine the same and enter
each upon the record. Each claim shall be accompanied by either an itemized bill or payroll, or time
sheet, each of which shall be approved and signed by the responsible City officer who vouches for its
correctness and reasonableness and, except in the case of salaries and wages of employees and laborers
of the City, shall be accompanied by the claimant’s verified statement of claim as required by law.
Sec 2-351. Payment of Claims
The Director of Finance City Treasurer is authorized to pay all claims determined to be proper
obligations of the City and consistent with the budget approved by the City Council. The Director
of Finance City Treasurer shall prepare a list of newly paid claims for Council review at each regular
meeting of the City Council.
Sec. 18-203. Disposition of Funds.
Together with found money that has been held for 60 days, the chief of police must deliver all
money that was received from the sale of abandoned property to the finance director City Treasurer
for deposit into the city’s general fund. If no claim has been made by the former owner with
satisfactory proof of ownership, found money may be returned to the finder; otherwise the money
will revert to the city's general fund.
Sec. 32-34. Delinquent water accounts.
All charges for water shall be due and payable within three weeks of the billing date specified by the
director of finance City Treasurer. Accounts shall be considered delinquent and subject to a penalty
of ten percent if not paid within three weeks of the billing date. It shall be the duty of the director of
finance City Treasurer to endeavor to promptly collect delinquent accounts, and in all cases where
satisfactory arrangements for payments have not then been made, the director of public works shall
be instructed to discontinue water service at the stop box. All delinquent accounts shall be certified
by the city clerk to the city assessor who shall prepare an assessment roll each year providing for
assessment of the delinquent amounts against the respective properties served, for collection as other
taxes.
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 6a) Page 6
Subject: 1st Reading Charter/Code Housekeeping Amendments Elections and Staff Positions
Sec. 32-99. Sewer bills.
It is hereby made the duty of the director of finance City Treasurer to render to the owners, lessees
or occupants of all classes of property on a monthly or quarterly basis, as is appropriate, bills for the
amount of sewer rental charge as provided in section 32-97. Such bills may be a surcharge upon the
water bills rendered to such persons. All such charges when collected shall be placed in a separate
fund. These funds shall be used only for the purpose authorized by M.S.A. § 444.075, and such
charges, if unpaid, may be collected on direction of the city council as authorized by M.S.A. §
444.075, as set forth in sections 32-97, 32-98 and this section.
SECTION 2. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen days after its publication.
First Reading June 7, 2010
Second Reading June 28, 2010
Date of Publication July 8, 2010
Date Ordinance takes effect July 23, 2010
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council
City Manager Mayor
Attest: Approved as to form and execution:
City Clerk City Attorney
Meeting Date: June 7, 2010
Agenda Item #: 6b
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 Wine & 3.2 Liquor License – Sauce West End.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to approve application from Sauce West End. LLC, dba
Sauce Pizza and Wine for an on-sale wine and 3.2 malt liquor license to be located at 1601 West
End Boulevard with the license term through March 1, 2011.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Does the Council wish to approve the liquor license for Sauce West End, LLC?
BACKGROUND:
The City received an application from Sauce West End, LLC, dba Sauce Pizza & Wine for an on-
sale wine and 3.2 malt liquor license. The premises will consist of approximately 3,220 square feet
with seating for approximately 92 persons. The restaurant plans to open on June 21, 2010
Sauce Pizza & Wine will be a casual neighborhood restaurant featuring Italian dishes, gourmet pizza,
salads, and wine. Several other locations include Phoenix, Scottsdale, Mesa, and Tucson, Arizona;
and Greenwood Village, Colorado.
The sole manager of Sauce is McMerritt Management, LLC which was organized on September 1,
2009. Adam Kahler Lehr is the designated Store Manager.
The Police Department has conducted a full investigation and 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 May 27, 2010.
Should Council approve the liquor license no actual license will be issued until all required
compliance is met with the City Inspections Department and the State Alcohol and Gambling
Enforcement Division.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
The investigation fee for a new applicant is $500. The yearly license fee is $2,750 (pro-rated).
VISION CONSIDERATION:
Not applicable.
Attachments: None
Prepared by: Nancy Stroth, City Clerk
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Meeting Date: June 7, 2010
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 and Preliminary Resolution Authorizing the Pre-Sale of Educational Facility
Revenue Notes for the Groves Academy Project - Series 2010.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Mayor to open and close the public hearing.
Motion to adopt a “Resolution Giving Preliminary Approval to the Proposed Issuance of Revenue
Bonds Under Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.152 Through 469.165” for the Groves Academy
Project - Series 2010.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Does the City Council wish to undertake the action as proposed? If so, the proposed process is
consistent with the City’s approved policy for issuing private activity revenue bonds.
BACKGROUND:
On May 10, 2010, a report included in a Study Session packet stated Groves Academy is requesting
that the City of St. Louis Park issue private activity revenue bonds for the purposes of refunding
existing debt and financing the second and final phase of an expansion of their facilities. The
aggregate principal amount of the Series 2010 bonds will not exceed an amount of approximately
$4,590,000.
Groves Academy has completed the necessary planning and zoning processes to allow them to
expand their campus. They will also be financing internal improvements to their facilities to
enhance their educational operations.
The synopsis of the final steps in the process for issuing these bonds will include a public hearing
which is proposed for the regular City Council meeting of June 7, 2010. After the public hearing
has been opened, any comments heard and the hearing closed, the City Council will be asked to
consider a preliminary resolution authorizing issuance of the bonds through Wells Fargo Securities,
LLC, who is operating as the placement agent for this transaction. If the City Council approves the
preliminary resolution, the project will be submitted to the Minnesota Department of Employment
and Economic Security (DEED) for approval. Upon acceptance by DEED, the City Council would
be requested to consider a final resolution at the regular meeting of June 21, 2010 allowing the
bonds to be issued on a date agreed upon by the parties. The complete description of the entire
process as prepared by Kennedy & Graven is available in the City Clerk’s department for review.
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 6c) Page 2
Subject: Preliminary Resolution – Groves Academy Private Activity Revenue Bond Pre-Sale
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
Groves Academy has provided the City with a new application, which is on file in the City Clerk’s
office, along with the required fee of $2,500 in accordance with our policy. These bonds are not
obligations of the city in any respect, but rather are payable solely from revenues of the Groves
Academy. They will also pay a fee of 1/8th of one percent in two semi-annual payments to the City
on based on the amount of bonds outstanding each year. These monies will be deposited in the
City’s Housing Rehabilitation fund.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
Not Applicable
Attachments: Resolution
Prepared by: Brian A. Swanson, Controller
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 6c) Page 3
Subject: Preliminary Resolution – Groves Academy Private Activity Revenue Bond Pre-Sale
RESOLUTION NO. 10-________
RESOLUTION GIVING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL
TO THE PROPOSED ISSUANCE OF REVENUE
BONDS UNDER MINNESOTA STATUTES,
SECTIONS 469.152 THROUGH 469.165
WHEREAS, the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota (the “City”) is a home rule city, duly
organized and existing under its Charter, the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota.
WHEREAS, under the Minnesota Municipal Industrial Development Act, Minnesota
Statutes, Sections 469.152-469.165, as amended (the “Act”), each home rule charter or statutory
city of the State of Minnesota, including the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota (the “City”), is
authorized to issue revenue bonds to finance, in whole or in part, the costs of the acquisition,
construction, improvement, or extension of a revenue producing enterprise, whether or not operated
for profit; and
WHEREAS, under the terms of the Act, each home rule charter or statutory city, including
the City, may issue revenue bonds to refund, in whole or in part, bonds previously issued by the
home rule charter or statutory city under the Act and interest on them; and
WHEREAS, on July 15, 2009, the City issued its Educational Facility Revenue Notes
(Groves Academy Project), Series 2009 (the “Series 2009 Notes”), in the original aggregate principal
amount of $3,500,000, and loaned the proceeds derived from the sale of the Series 2009 Notes to
Groves Academy, a Minnesota nonprofit corporation (the “Borrower”), under the terms of a Loan
Agreement, dated as of July 1, 2009 (the “Prior Loan Agreement”); and
WHEREAS, the proceeds of the loan made pursuant to the Prior Loan Agreement were
applied by the Borrower to the financing of: (i) the renovation, expansion, and improvement of
Groves Academy, an independent co-educational day school facility owned by the Borrower and
located at 3200 Highway 100 South in the City (the “Project”); and (ii) the costs of issuing the
Series 2009 Notes; and
WHEREAS, the Borrower has requested that the City issue an additional series of revenue
bonds (the “Bonds”) and loan the proceeds derived from the sale of the Bonds to the Borrower,
pursuant to the terms of a Loan Agreement, to be dated on or after June 1, 2010 (the “Loan
Agreement”); and
WHEREAS, the proceeds of the loan made pursuant to the Loan Agreement are proposed
to be applied by the Borrower to the financing of: (i) the completion of the renovation, expansion,
and improvement of the Project; and (ii) the redemption and prepayment of the Series 2009 Notes;
and (iii) at the option of the Borrower, payment of a portion of the costs of issuing the Bonds; and
WHEREAS, Section 147(f) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the
“Code”), and regulations promulgated thereunder, requires that prior to the issuance of the Bonds,
this Council approve the Bonds after conducting a public hearing thereon, preceded by publication
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 6c) Page 4
Subject: Preliminary Resolution – Groves Academy Private Activity Revenue Bond Pre-Sale
of a notice of public hearing (in the form required by Section 147(f) of the Code and applicable
regulations) in a newspaper of general circulation at least fourteen (14) days prior to the public
hearing date; and
WHEREAS, under Section 469.154 of the Act, this Council is required to conduct a public
hearing on the proposal to undertake and finance a portion of the Project and such public hearing
must be preceded by a notice of the time and place of the hearing, to be published not less than
fourteen (14) days and not more than thirty (30) days prior to the date fixed for the hearing, in the
official newspaper and a newspaper of general circulation of the City;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT:
Public Hearing.
Pursuant to the Act and the Code, a notice of public hearing in the form required by the Act
and Section 147(f) of the Code was published in the Sun Sailor, the official newspaper of the City
and a newspaper of general circulation of the City, on Thursday, May 20, 2010.
At the meeting of June 7, 2010, the Council conducted a public hearing on the issuance of
the Bonds as requested by the Borrower, at which a reasonable opportunity was provided for
interested individuals to express their views, both orally and in writing, on the proposed issuance of
the Bonds, and the location and nature of the Project.
Preliminary Approval.
1. The City hereby grants preliminary approval for the issuance of the Bonds for the
purposes referenced in this resolution and in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed $4,590,000,
subject to the approval of the portion of the Project to be financed with the proceeds of the Bonds by
the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development (“DEED”), as required by the
Act, and subject to the mutual agreement of the City, the Borrower, and the initial purchaser of the
Bonds as to the details of the Bonds and provisions for their payment. In all events, it is understood,
however, that the Bonds shall not constitute a pecuniary liability or charge, lien or encumbrance, legal
or equitable, upon any funds, assets, taxing power, or any other property of the City except the City's
interest in the Loan Agreement; and the Bonds, when, as, and if issued, shall recite in substance that the
Bonds, including interest thereon, are payable solely from the revenues received from the Loan
Agreement and other property pledged to the payment thereof, and shall not constitute general or moral
obligations of the City.
2. In accordance with Section 469.154 of the Act, the City may cooperate with the
Borrower in submitting the proposal for the financing of the Project to DEED, including the execution
of necessary documentation by City officials.
3. As requested by the Borrower, the law firm of Kennedy & Graven, Chartered shall serve
as Bond Counsel and assist in the preparation and review of necessary documents relating to the Project
and the Bonds to be issued in connection therewith.
City Council Meeting of June 7, 2010 (Item No. 6c) Page 5
Subject: Preliminary Resolution – Groves Academy Private Activity Revenue Bond Pre-Sale
4. The Borrower shall pay to the City any and all costs incurred by the City in connection
with the Bonds or the financing of the Project, whether or not the financing of the Project is approved
by DEED, whether or not the financing is carried to completion, and whether or not the Bonds or
operative instruments are executed and delivered. The Borrower shall also comply with the City’s
deposit and fee policies respecting such revenue bond issues.
5. All commitments of the City expressed herein are subject to the condition that by
June 7, 2011, the City and the Borrower will have agreed to mutually acceptable terms and conditions
of the Loan Agreement, the Bonds, and of the other instruments and proceedings relating to the Bonds
and their issuance and sale. If the events set forth herein do not take place within the time set forth
above, or any extension thereof, and the Bonds are not sold within such time, this resolution will expire
and be of no further effect.
6. The adoption of this resolution does not constitute a guaranty or firm commitment that
the City will issue the Bonds as requested by the Borrower. The City retains the right in its sole
discretion to withdraw from participation and accordingly not to issue the Bonds, or issue the Bonds in
an amount less than the amount referred to herein, should the City at any time prior to issuance thereof
determine not to issue the Bonds, or to issue the Bonds in an amount less than the amount referred to
in paragraph 1 hereof, or should the parties to the transaction be unable to reach agreement as to the
terms and conditions of any of the documents required for the transaction.
7. With respect to eligible costs of the Project which may be paid by the Borrower prior
to the issuance of the Bonds and reimbursed to the Borrower from the proceeds of the Bonds, this
resolution is intended to be a reimbursement resolution and declaration of intent to issue
reimbursement bonds under Treasury Regulations, Section 1.150-2, as amended.
Effective Date. This Resolution shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota on this 7th day of June, 2010.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council June 7, 2010
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
SA140-104 (JU)
369161v.1