HomeMy WebLinkAbout2020/09/21 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - Regular
AGENDA
SEPT. 21, 2020
All meetings of the St. Louis Park City Council will be conducted by telephone or other electronic
means starting March 30, 2020, and until further notice. This is in accordance with a local
emergency declaration issued by the city council, in response to the coronavirus (COVID-19)
pandemic and Governor Walz's “Stay Safe MN” executive order 20-056.
Economic development authority (EDA) at 6:20; Regular city council meeting at 6:30 p.m.
Some or all members of the St. Louis Park City Council will participate in the Monday, Sept. 21
EDA/city council meeting by electronic device or telephone rather than by being personally
present at the city council's regular meeting place at 5005 Minnetonka Blvd. Visit
bit.ly/slpccagendas to view the agenda and reports.
Members of the public can monitor the meeting at by video and audio at bit.ly/watchslpcouncil
and on local cable (Comcast SD channel 17 and HD channel 859, or CenturyLink SD channel 8117
and HD channel 8617) For audio only call +1.312.535.8110 and use access code 372 106 61.
Members of the public who want to address the city council during the regular meeting about
items on the agenda should call the number noted below next to the corresponding item. Call
when the meeting starts at 6:30 p.m. and follow instructions provided. Comments will be taken
during each item in the order they are received and must relate to an item on the current city
council agenda.
• 952.562.2886 – consent agenda items 4a-4l
• 952.562.2888 – item 6a – Savans dba Texas Tonka Liquor – off-sale intoxicating liquor license
• 952.562.288 6 – item 8a – Series 2020A general obligation bonds
• 952.562.288 7 – item 8b – 2021 preliminary property tax levy certification
• 952.562.288 8 – item 8c – 2021 preliminary HRA levy certification
6:20 p.m. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
1. Call to order
2. Roll call
3. Approval of EDA minutes
3a. Economic development authority minutes of Sept. 8, 2020
7. New business
7a. 2021 preliminary HRA Levy certification
Recommended action: Motion to adopt EDA Resolution authorizing the 2021
Preliminary HRA levy.
Meeting of Sept. 21, 20 20
City c ouncil agenda
6:30 p.m. CITY COUNCIL MEETING
1. Call to order
1a. Pledge of allegiance
1b. Roll call
2. Presentations
2a. Retirement recognition for Police Officer Todd Hinz
2b. Climate change in response to COVID-19: Energy Efficiency Day/Home Energy Squad
Challenge proclamation
2c. Recognition of donations
3. Approval of minutes
3a. City council meeting minutes of Aug. 17, 2020
3b. Study session meeting minutes of Aug. 24, 2020
4. Approval of agenda and items on consent calendar
Recommended action: **Motion to approve the agenda as presented and items listed on the
consent calendar; and to waive reading of all resolutions and ordinances. (Alternatively: Motion to add
or remove items from the agenda , or move items from consent calendar to regular agenda for discussion.)
4a. A pprove second reading and adopt Ordinance vacating portions of utility easements at
8200 Minnetonka Boulevard and approve the Summary Ordinance for publication.
4b . A uthorize a comment letter to be submitted to the Public Utilities Commission regarding
Xcel Energy’s 2020-2034 Upper Midwest Integrated Resource Plan.
4c . A dopt Resolution electing to participate in the Local Housing Incentives Account program
and adopting the housing goals for 2021-2030.
4d . A dopt Resolution accepting work and authorizing final payment in the amount of
$9,216.20 for project no. 4019-9007 modifications to the Wooddale Bridge at Highway
7, Contract No. 86-18.
4e . A dopt Resolution to execute memo of understanding between the Hopkins Chemical
Assessment Team and the City of St. Louis Park.
4f . A dopt Resolution approving acceptance of $310,000 from Maurice Hobbs to construct
an outdoor open-air shelter for youth programming at Westwood Hills Nature Center in
memory of his wife, Barbara Hobbs.
4g . Adopt Resolution to recognize Police Officer Todd Hinz for his 30 years of service.
4h . A dopt Resolution approving labor agreement between the city and the police officer’s
employee bargaining group, establishing terms and conditions of employment for one
year, from 1/1/2020 – 12/31/2020.
4i . A dopt Resolution approving deferral of special assessment – 4405 Cedar Lake Rd, St.
Louis Park, MN 55416.
4j . A dopt Resolution approving deferral of special assessment – 2150 Ridge Dr. # 28, St.
Louis Park, MN 55416.
4k. Adopt Resolution establishing the 2020 Interim Childcare/ Tutoring Reimbursement
Policy.
4l . Approve for filing planning commission meeting minutes of June 3, 2020.
Meeting of Sept. 21, 20 20
City c ouncil agenda
5. Boards and commissions
5a. Appointment of representative to boards and commissions
Recommended action: Motion to appoint Andrew Willette to the Environment and
Sustainability Commission for the term ending on May 31, 2021.
6. Public hearings
6a. Savans Inc. dba Texas Tonka Liquor – off-sale intoxicating liquor license
Recommended action: Mayor to open public hearing, take public testimony, and close
public hearing. Motion to approve application from Savans Inc. dba Texas Tonka Liquor for
an off-sale int oxicating liquor license located at 8242 Minnetonka Blvd.
7. Requests, petitions, and communications from the public – None
8. Resolutions, ordinances, motions and discussion items
8a. Series 2020A general obligation bonds
Recommended action: Motion to adopt Resolution providing for the sale of general
obligation bonds in the amount of approximately $15,540,000. (Requires 6 of 7
affirmative votes.)
8b . 2021 preliminary property tax levy certification
Recommended action: Motion to adopt Resolution approving 2021 preliminary
property tax levy and setting budget public hearing date for Dec. 7, 2020.
8c . 2021 preliminary HRA levy certification
Recommended action: Motion to adopt Resolution authorizing the 2021 Preliminary
HRA Levy.
9. Communications – None
**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 public, that item may be moved to an appropriate section of the
regular agenda for discussion.
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. During the COVID-19 pandemic, agendas will be posted on Fridays on
the entrance doors to city hall and on the text display on civic TV cable channel 17. The agenda and full packet are available after
noon on Friday on the city’s website.
If you need special accommodations or have questions about the meeting, please call 952-924-2525.
Meeting: Economic development authority
Meeting date: September 21, 2020
Minutes: 3a
Unofficial minutes
EDA meeting
St. Louis Park, Minnesota
Sept. 8, 2020
1. Call to order
President Harris called the meeting to order at 6:32 p.m.
2. Roll call
Commissioners present: President Harris, Tim Brausen, Larry Kraft, Anne Mavity, Nadia
Mohamed, Margaret Rog, and Jake Spano
Commissioners absent: None
Staff present: Executive Director (Mr. Harmening), City Attorney (Mr. Knutson), CFO (Ms.
Lammers), Community Development Director (Ms. Barton), Police Chief Harcey, Deputy City
Manager/Human Resources Director (Ms. Deno), Planning and Zoning Supervisor (Mr. Walther),
Senior Planner (Ms. Monson)
3. Approval of minutes
3a. EDA minutes of August 3, 2020
It was moved by Commissioner Rog, seconded by Commissioner Brausen, to approve the
August 3, 2020 meeting minutes as presented.
The motion passed 7-0.
4. Approval of EDA disbursement claims
4a. Approval of EDA disbursement claims
It was moved by Commissioner Brausen, seconded by Commissioner Spano, to approve
the EDA disbursement claims for the period of July 25 through August 28, 2020, as
presented.
The motion passed 7-0.
5. Reports - none
6. Old business - none
7. New business - none
Economic development authority meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 3a) Page 2
Title: EDA meeting minutes of September 8, 2020
8. Communications - none
9. Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 6:34 p.m.
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Melissa Kennedy, secretary Rachel Harris, president
Meeting: Economic development authority
Meeting date: September 21, 2020
Action agenda item: 7a
Executive summary
Title: 2021 preliminary HRA Levy certification
Recommended action: **Due to the COVID-19 emergency declaration, this item is considered
essential business and is categorized as a Required Action**
•Motion to adopt EDA Resolution authorizing the 2021 Preliminary HRA levy.
Policy consideration: Does the EDA desire to approve as a preliminary levy the full 0.0185% of
estimated market value allowable for HRA purposes of $1,523,590.
Summary: The HRA levy was originally implemented in St. Louis Park due to legislative changes
in 2001 which significantly reduced future tax increment revenues. The City Council elected at
that time to use the levy proceeds for future infrastructure improvements in redevelopment
areas. By law, these funds could also be used for other housing and redevelopment purposes.
Given the councils desire for housing related activities , staff recommends the HRA Levy
continue at the maximum allowed by law for the 2021 budget year.
The HRA Levy cannot exceed 0.0185% of the estimated market value of the City. Therefore,
staff has calculated the maximum HRA Levy for 2021 to be $1,523,590 based on valuation data
from Hennepin County which is an increase of $190,612 from 2020.
The EDA is allowed to authorize the HRA levy and then forward this recommendation to the city
council. Council action is required before certification. All special taxing districts levies must be
certified to the county auditor by Sept. 30.
Financial or budget considerations: The proposed levy is $1,523,590 for taxes payable 2021.
Strategic priority consideration:
All areas of the adopted strategic priorities are impacted by the city’s budget.
•St. Louis Park is committed to being a leader in racial equity and inclusion in order to
create a more just and inclusive community for all.
•St. Louis Park is committed to continue to lead in environmental stewardship.
•St. Louis Park is committed to providing a broad range of housing and neighborhood-
oriented development.
•St. Louis Park is committed to providing a variety of options for people to make their way
around the city comfortably, safely and reliably.
•St. Louis Park is committed to creating opportunities to build social capital through
community engagement.
Supporting documents: EDA resolution
Prepared by: Melanie Lammers, chief financial officer
Reviewed by: Nancy Deno, deputy city manager/HR director
Approve d by: Tom Harmening, city manager
Economic development authority meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 7a) Page 2
Title: 2021 preliminary HRA Levy certification
EDA Resolution No. 20-____
Authorizing the proposed levy of
a special benefit levy pursuant to Minnesota Statutes,
Section 469.033, subdivision 6
Whereas, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.090 to 469.108 (the “EDA Act”),
the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park created the St. Louis Park Economic Development
Authority (the "Authority"); and
Whereas, pursuant to the EDA Act, the city council granted to the Authority all of the
powers and duties of a housing and redevelopment authority under the provisions of the
Minnesota Statutes, sections 469.001 to 469.047 (the "HRA Act"); and
Whereas, Section 469.033, Subdivision 6, of the HRA Act permits the Authority to levy
and collect a special benefit levy of up to 0.0185 percent of estimated market value in the city
upon all taxable real property within the city; and
Whereas, the Authority desires to levy a special benefit levy in the amount of up to 0.0185
percent of estimated market value in the city for taxes payable in 2021; and
Whereas, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 275.065, the Authority is required to
adopt a proposed budget and a proposed tax levy and submit the same to the County Auditor by
Sept. 30; and
Now therefore be it resolved, be it resolved by the Board of Commissioners of the St.
Louis Park Economic Development Authority:
1.The proposed budget of $1,523,590 for the operations of the Authority in fiscal year
2021, as presented for consideration by the city council, is hereby in all respects
approved, subject to final approval by the Authority before certification of the tax
levy under Minnesota Statutes, Section 275.07.
2.Staff of the Authority are hereby authorized and directed to file the proposed budget
with the city in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.033, Subdivision 6.
3.The proposed special benefit levy pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.033,
Subdivision 6, is hereby approved in a maximum amount equal to 0.0185 percent of
estimated market value in City of St. Louis Park, currently estimated to be
$8,235,623,500, with respect to taxes payable in calendar year 2021, subject to final
approval by the Authority before certification of the special benefit levy pursuant to
Minnesota Statutes, Section 275.07.
4.Staff of the Authority are hereby authorized and directed to seek the approval by
resolution of the city council of the levy of special benefit taxes payable in 2021 and
to take such other actions as are necessary to bring before the Board the final
budget and levy to be sent to the county auditor on or before five working days
after Dec. 21, 2020.
Economic development authority meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 7a) Page 3
Title: 2021 preliminary HRA Levy certification
Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the Economic Development
Authority, September 21, 2020
Thomas K. Harmening, executive director Rachel Harris, president
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, secretary
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: September 21, 2020
Presentation: 2a
Executive summary
Title: Retirement recognition for Police Officer Todd Hinz
Recommended action: **Due to the COVID-19 emergency declaration, this item is considered
essential business and is categorized as Time-Sensitive**
•The mayor is asked to read the resolution and present a plaque virtually to Todd for his 30
years of service to the City of St. Louis Park.
Policy consideration: None at this time.
Summary: City policy states that employees who retire or resign in good standing with over 20
years of service will be presented with a resolution from the mayor, city manager and city council.
P olice Officer Todd Hinz will be in attendance virtually for the presentation at the beginning of
the meeting. The mayor is asked to read the resolution for Todd in recognition of his years of
service to the city.
Financial or budget considerations: Not applicable.
Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable.
Supporting documents: Resolution
Prepared by: Ali Timpone, HR manager
Reviewed by: Nancy Deno, deputy city manager/HR director
Approve d by: Tom Harmening, city manager
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 2a) Page 2
Title: Retirement recognition for Police Officer Todd Hinz
Resolution No. 20-____
Resolution of the
City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota
recognizing the contributions and expressing appreciation to
Police Officer Todd Hinz
Whereas, Todd Hinz began his employment with the City of St. Louis Park 30 years ago on
October 15, 1990; and
Whereas, Todd has worked all patrol shifts, including 12 straight years on the overnight
shift; and served as a crisis negotiator for two years, an investigator for three years and a drug
task force officer for 4.5 years; and
Whereas, Todd has served as a training officer, contributing to the field training of at least
28 of his fellow officers; and
Whereas, Todd has contributed to major case successes including the 2014 recovery of 20
pounds of illegal drugs, six illegal firearms, and $100,000 in cash; and was recognized by the FBI
for identifying a bank robber and accomplice from a prior arrest after seeing a news story; and
Whereas, Todd has been awarded more than 25 commendations and chief’s letters of
recognition during his time as an officer; and
Whereas, Todd will spend winters in Florida and return to Minnesota in the summertime
after retiring;
Now therefore be it resolved that the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota,
by this resolution and public record, would like to thank Todd Hinz for his great contributions
and 30 years of dedicated service to the City of St. Louis Park and wish him the best in his
retirement.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council September 21, 2020
Thomas K. Harmening, city manager Jake Spano, mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, city clerk
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: September 21, 2020
Presentation: 2b
Executive summary
Title: Climate change in response to COVID-19: Energy Efficiency Day/Home Energy Squad
Challenge p roclamation
Recommended action: **Due to the COVID-19 emergency declaration, this item is
considered essential business and is categorized as Time-Sensitive**
•Mayor is asked to read the proclamation de claring Wednesday, October 7, 2020 as Energy
Efficiency Day.
Policy consideration: Is the council supportive of a proclamation declaring October 7, 2020 as
Energy Efficiency Day in St. Louis Park?
Summary: Energy Efficiency Day is an annual nationwide event recognizing the many benefits
of energy efficiency—one of the cheapest, quickest and cleanest ways to meet our energy
needs, create jobs and lower utility bills. Since the inaugural Energy Efficiency Day in 2016, the
event has been supported by hundreds of organizations, companies, and government agencies.
Energy Efficiency Day falls on Oct ober 7, 2020. It is proposed that the city council approve a
proclamation supporting participation in this initiative to demonstrate St. Louis Park’s
commitment to reducing greenhouse gases, lowering the household energy burden and meeting
Climate Action Plan goals .
The City of St. Louis Park is currently participating in the 2020 Intercity Home Energy Squad
Challenge. The purpose of the Challenge is to increase the number of Home Energy Squad (HES)
visit s across the region. In an HES visit, residents learn how their home uses energy and about
potential energy-saving opportunities. At the end of 2020, the city with the highest number of
HES visits per capita wins the challen ge . St. Louis Park can use Energy Efficiency Day to further
promote the HES program to residents and call on neighboring cities to increase their
engagement in this friendly competition in the name of energy efficiency.
A proclamation declaring Oct. 7, 2020 as Energy Efficiency Day in St. Louis Park and highlighting
the Challenge was discussed at the Sept. 14 city council study session; that proclamation is
attached.
Financial or budget considerations: None
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to continue to lead in environmental
stewardship.
Supporting documents: Proclamation
Prepared by: Annie Pottorff, sustainability specialist
Emily Ziring, sustainability manager
Reviewed by: Brian Hoffman, director of building and energy
Approved by: Tom Harmening, city manager
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 2b ) Page 2
Title: Climate change in response to COVID-19: Energy Efficiency Day/Home Energy Squad Challenge proclamation
Proclamation
Energy Efficiency Day
October 7, 2020
Whereas, global climate change is one of the most urgent and challenging problems we
will face in the twenty -first century; and
Whereas, energy efficiency reduces the amount of electricity we need to power our lives,
which helps avoid power plant emissions that can harm our health, pollute our air and warm
our climate; and
Whereas, energy efficiency continues to be one of the cheapest, quickest and cleanest
ways to meet our energy needs, create jobs and reduce utility bills for residential, business and
industrial customers; and
Whereas, energy efficiency can also make our homes and workspaces healthier, safer and
more comfortable; and
Whereas, less energy-efficient housing and appliances and limited access to energy
efficiency programs contributes to high energy burdens, in which families devote a high
proportion of their income to utility bills and make difficult trade -offs between heating and
cooling and other necessities; and
Whereas, some Minnesotans spend 20-30% of their income on energy; and Black,
Indigenous, People of Color and renters historically experience higher energy burdens than
white property owners; and
Whereas, St. Louis Park is committed to being a leader in racial equity and inclusion in
order to create a more just and inclusive community for all; and
Whereas, St. Louis Park is committed to a bold Climate Action Plan to achieve carbon
neutrality by 2040, significantly reducing citywide greenhouse gas emissions; and
Whereas, Goal 4 of the St. Louis Park Climate Action Plan calls for reducing energy
consumption in residential buildings by 35% by 2030; and
Whereas, to help meet this goal St. Louis Park is competing in the metro area-wide
Intercity Home Energy Squad Challenge to promote Home Energy Squad visits and encourage
residents to take action to improve home energy efficiency; and
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 2b ) Page 3
Title: Climate change in response to COVID-19: Energy Efficiency Day/Home Energy Squad Challenge proclamation
Whereas, a nationwide network of energy efficiency groups and partners has designated
the first Wednesday in October as the fifth national annual Energy Efficiency Day; and
Whereas, St. Louis Park can help residents continue to contribute to our Climate Action
Plan efforts and reduce household energy burden by promoting accessible energy efficiency
programs such as Home Energy Squad;
Now therefore be it resolved that the Mayor and City Council of the City of St. Louis Park
do hereby proclaim Oct. 7, 2020 to be Energy Efficiency Day in St. Louis Park. We urge our
community members to improve the energy efficiency of their homes and businesses whenever
possible, and we challenge neighboring communities to set high participation goals in energy
assistance, weatherization and efficiency programs including the Intercity Home Energy Squad
Challenge.
Wherefore , I set my hand and cause the
Great Seal of the City of St. Louis Park to be
affixed this day of Sept. 21, 2020.
____________________________________
Jake Spano, mayor
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: September 21, 2020
Presentation: 2 c
Executive summary
Title: Recognition of donations
Recommended action: **Due to the COVID-19 emergency declaration, this item is considered
essential business and is categorized as Time Sensitive**
• Mayor to announce and express thanks and appreciation for the following donations being
accepted at the meeting and listed on the consent agenda:
From Donation For
Maurice Hobbs $310,000
Construction of an outdoor open-air shelter for youth
programming at Westwood Hills Nature Center in memory
of his wife Barbara Hobbs
Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable.
Supporting documents: None
Prepared by: Debbie Fischer, administrative services office assistant
Approve d by: Tom Harmening, city manager
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: September 21, 2020
Minutes: 3a
Unofficial minutes
City council meeting
St. Louis Park, Minnesota
August 17, 2020
1. Call to order
Mayor Spano called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m.
1a. Pledge of allegiance
1b. Roll call
Councilmembers present: Mayor Jake Spano, Tim Brausen, Larry Kraft, Anne Mavity, Nadia
Mohamed, and Margaret Rog
Councilmembers absent: Rachel Harris
Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), City Attorney (Mr. Mattick), CFO (Ms. Lammers),
CIO (Mr. Pires), Engineering Director (Ms. Heiser), Senior Planner (Ms. Monson), Planning and
Zoning Supervisor (Mr. Walther), Senior Engineering Project Manager (Mr. Sullivan), Housing
Supervisor/Deputy Community Development Director (Ms. Schnitker), Senior Management
Analyst (Ms. Solano), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Pappas)
Guests: Barb Person, MN League of Women Voters; Patrick Giordan, Architect; Mark Davis,
Developer
2. Presentations
2a. Proclamation – 19th Amendment and the 100-Year Journey of Women Voting
Councilmember Rog read the proclamation regarding the 19th Amendment and 100-year
journey of Women Voting. Aug. 26, 2020 is the day to honor the 19th Amendment.
Barb Person accepted on behalf of League of Women Voters. She expressed her thanks
to the city council and staff for their support over the years.
Councilmember Mavity thanked the St. Louis Park League of Women voters for their
work and assistance for voters, which she said makes a difference in the city. She stated
while the city celebrates this enormous step forward for white women, it is not
sufficient, as this anniversary leaves out women of color. She noted when she hears the
phrase “all men are created equal” she feels left out, adding if a person of privilege feels
left out, it shows how frustrated others are by not having basic voting rights. She added
she hopes this will honor those who fought for women voters, and also remind
everyone of the work ahead.
2b. Recognition of donations
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 3a) Page 2
Title: City council meeting minutes of August 17, 2020
• $2,200 donation from Scott and Beth Puchtel for the purchase of a memorial
bench at Westwood Hills Nature Center in honor of Alan and Ione Stiegler
• $2,200 donation from the Tangney Family for the purchase of a memorial
bench at Aquila Park in honor of Mark Tangney
• $2,200 donation from Jean Edin for the purchase of a memorial bench at
Louisiana Oaks Park in honor of Robert Edin
• $2,200 donation from John and Paula Koch for the purchase of a memorial
bench at Wolfe Park in honor of Brian Koch
• $2,200 donation from Minikahda Vista Neighborhood Association for the
purchase of a memorial bench at Minikahda Vista Park in honor of George
Floyd.
3. Approval of minutes
3a. Study session meeting minutes of June 22, 2020
Councilmember Kraft noted on page 8 under Communications it should read: “…in the
interview process for commissions adding that 4 people are now on commissions who
would not have been without the change.”
It was moved by Councilmember Rog, seconded by Councilmember Kraft, to approve the
study session meeting minutes of June 22, 2020 as amended.
The motion passed 6-0 (Councilmember Harris absent).
3b. City council meeting minutes of July 20, 2020
Councilmember Kraft noted in the 2nd paragraph last sentence it should read: “… and
whether would necessarily make violations a crime, which they would not have to…”
and in the 5th paragraph it should read, “…that would have the same clauses as the
proposed resolution but would replace the words strongly urged with require, he added,
violations should be a petty misdemeanor, it should require businesses….”
Councilmember Kraft also noted on page 7, in the 3rd paragraph, the motion he claimed
to have made was not made. He was only asking if he should make the motion. He
stated the paragraph should be stricken from record.
It was moved by Councilmember Rog, seconded by Councilmember Kraft, to approve the
city council meeting minutes of July 20, 2020 as amended.
The motion passed 6-0 (Councilmember Harris absent).
3c. Reconvened city council meeting minutes of July 21, 2020
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 3a) Page 3
Title: City council meeting minutes of August 17, 2020
It was moved by Councilmember Rog, seconded by Councilmember Brausen, to approve
the reconvened city council meeting minutes of July 21, 2020 as presented.
The motion passed 6-0 (Councilmember Harris absent).
4. Approval of agenda and items on consent calendar
4a. Designate GL Contracting, Inc. the lowest responsible bidder and authorize a
contract with the firm in the amount of $347,676.50 for the Southeast Bikeways –
project 4018-2000.
Adopt Resolution No. 20-109 to install all-way stop controls on Quentin Ave. at
Park Commons Dr.
4b. Approve second reading and adopt revised Ordinance No. 2590-20 repealing:
- Sections 8-331 and 8-332 of city code requiring a crime-free, drug-free lease
addendum, notices of violations and termination of tenancy for violation of the
ordinance in their entirety, and
- Section 8-333 allowing the city to change a rental license to provisional status
upon determination of ongoing public safety concerns, without regard to the
number of reported incidents and allowing landlords and involved tenants to
appeal this decision before the provisional license takes effect.
4c. Adopt Resolution No. 20-107 to authorize execution of the development
agreement between the city and the South Cedar Trails Homeowners Association
for housing improvements within the established South Cedar Trails Housing
Improvement Area (HIA).
Adopt Resolution No. 20-108 authorizing an internal loan for funds in connection
with housing improvements within the established South Cedar Trails
Homeowners Association (HIA).
4d. Approve a temporary on-sale intoxicating liquor license for Church of the Holy
Family at 5900 West Lake Street for their event to be held September 12, 2020.
4e. Approve second reading and adopt Ordinance No. 2591-20 amending Chapter
20-5 of the St. Louis Park Code of Ordinances relating to prohibited acts to allow
alcohol at the Westwood Hills Nature Center (“WHNC”) and to approve the
ordinance summary for publication.
4f. Adopt Resolution No. 20-110 to recognize Public Service Worker Dean Backaus
and Resolution No. 20-111 Property Maintenance and Licensing Manager Ann
Boettcher for their years of service.
4g. Authorize a comment letter to be submitted to the Public Utilities Commission
regarding CenterPoint Energy’s rate increase and Inclusive Financing.
4h. Authorize a comment letter to be submitted to the Public Utilities Commission
regarding Xcel Energy’s 2020-2034 Upper Midwest Integrated Resource Plan.
4i. Adopt Resolution No. 20-112 approving the CUP for excavation of more than 400
cubic yards of material.
4j. Adopt Resolution No. 20-113 accepting work and authorizing final payment in
the amount of $28,502.62 for project no. 5318-5004 Water Treatment Plant #4
rehabilitation w/ Municipal Builders, Inc., Contract No. 175-17.
4k. Accept the Strategic Roadmap for Advancing Arts and Culture in St. Louis Park.
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 3a) Page 4
Title: City council meeting minutes of August 17, 2020
4l. Authorize execution of a professional services contract with WSB Engineering
fora GIS study of underground utilities and above ground structures.
4m. Adopt Resolution No. 20-114 approving acceptance of a $2,200 donation from
Scott and Beth Puchtel for the purchase of a memorial bench at Westwood Hills
Nature Center in honor of Alan and Ione Stiegler, a $2,200 donation from the
Tangney Family for the purchase of a memorial bench at Aquila Park in honor of
Mark Tangney, a $2,200 donation from Jean Edin for the purchase of a memorial
bench at Louisiana Oaks Park in honor of Robert Edin, a $2,200 donation from
John and Paula Koch for the purchase of a memorial bench at Wolfe Park in
honor of Brian Koch and a $2,200 donation from Minikahda Vista Neighborhood
Association for the purchase of a memorial bench at Minikahda Vista Park in
honor of George Floyd.
4n. Adopt Resolution No. 20-115 authorizing the special assessment for the repair of
the sewer service line at 1440 Kilmer Avenue, St. Louis Park, MN. P.I.D. 01-117-
22-41-0112.
4o. Adopt Resolution No. 20-116 to authorize a loading zone on 36th Street adjacent
to The Elmwood.
4p. Adopt Resolution No. 20-117 rescinding Res. 19-087, removing permit parking
restrictions at 2600 Raleigh Ave.
Councilmember Kraft requested that consent calendar item 4k be removed and placed
on the regular agenda to 8c and also requested item 4h be removed and placed on the
regular agenda to 8d.
It was moved by Councilmember Rog, seconded by Councilmember Kraft, to approve the
agenda and items listed on the consent calendar as amended, and to move consent
calendar item 4k to the regular agenda as item 8c; and consent calendar item 4h to
regular agenda as item 8d, and to waive reading of all resolutions and ordinances.
The motion passed 6-0 (Councilmember Harris absent).
5. Boards and commissions - none
6. Public hearings
6a. Vacation for a portion of 14th Street east of Colorado Ave, west of the railroad
Ms. Monson presented the report.
Mayor Spano opened the public hearing. No speakers were present. Mayor Spano
closed the public hearing.
It was noted the council will vote on actions related to vacation of this right-of-way
during consideration of agenda item 8a.
7. Requests, petitions, and communications from the public – none
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 3a) Page 5
Title: City council meeting minutes of August 17, 2020
8. Resolutions, ordinances, motions and discussion items
8a. Medical office building - 6009 Wayzata Blvd. Resolution No. 20-118, Resolution
No. 20-119, Resolution No. 20-120
Councilmember Brausen stated he has studied this and will support it. He noted this
complex will add additional office space for medical procedures and surgeries and the
developer, while not required to do so, is incorporating a number of desirable
sustainable features into the building. He stated it is the type of redevelopment needed
in St. Louis Park and it has both his support and that of his colleagues.
Councilmember Kraft stated he will support this as well and asked how many jobs will
be created in St. Louis Park because of the project. Ms. Monson stated 140-150 jobs.
Councilmember Kraft asked how much will be added to the tax base. Ms. Monson
stated right now the property is valued at $4.5 million and the redevelopment adds $19-
22 million in value, so it will bring in approximately $16 million in value every year from
the tax base.
Councilmember Kraft asked the developer if they have considered a solar car port,
which provides the benefit of covered parking and is convenient for people seeking
medical attention. Mr. Davis stated the site was purchased 5 years ago, and they are
excited to move forward with it. He noted their goal is to include solar on the rooftop
and relocating the cell tower and putting a boiler into the building, that is all they can
plan for at this time in order to keep expenses at a minimum. He stated they have done
solar car ports in Arizona, but doing them here may put them over cost, adding they will
try to get solar on the roof for now.
Councilmember Kraft asked about parking with a variance and what is the ratio to
square foot. Ms. Monson stated it is 1 space for every 224 square feet. Councilmember
Kraft asked if this includes proof of parking. Ms. Monson answered yes.
Councilmember Kraft noted comparative places had significant surplus parking at peak
hours and asked if there is an opportunity to increase proof of parking and decrease the
size of the lot and the amount of pavement. Ms. Monson stated staff did take this into
consideration and noted places that had significant surplus of parking in peak hours. She
stated Colorado Avenue is still very narrow, so the number of parking spaces included in
report is comfortable for the parking needed. She stated staff would not be comfortable
recommending less parking on the site.
Councilmember Kraft stated city policy says to send out notices to folks within 500 feet
and added 500 feet does not go very far. He noted he has heard comments in the past
and stated this policy needs to be looked at. Ms. Monson stated the 500-foot distance is
dictated by city code. She noted staff also posts information on Next Door and does
emails and mailings in order to get the word out to residents.
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 3a) Page 6
Title: City council meeting minutes of August 17, 2020
Mr. Davis added they also mailed to all occupants, which included 350 people, all of
which were invited to the neighborhood meeting.
Councilmember Rog asked if small businesses are impacted by this change and if so,
which ones. Mr. David stated no occupants of any buildings at this point are impacted
except the Elliot Auto Shop. He stated when the developer originally purchased the site,
an agreement was worked out to relocate the auto shop and that process has just
begun. He stated all others on the property are all moved out now.
Councilmember Rog asked if the developer is working to keep the auto shop in St. Louis
Park. Mr. Davis stated yes.
Councilmember Rog asked about the timeline to plant new trees. Mr. Harmening stated
the city spends $70-80,000 per year for tree replacement, which comes from the
general budget. He noted if more is collected for tree replacement, then more trees are
planted, or the budget is offset.
Councilmember Rog asked about the 400 cubic yards of dirt moved and why a
conditional use permit is needed for this. Mr. Walther stated he would like to adjust this
at some point and noted for a time there were a number of excavation businesses in
town and other projects that might not get reviewed, but more significant ones are
reviewed if needed.
Councilmember Rog stated she is supportive of this and asked if flood storage will be
built on the site. Ms. Monson stated flood storage will be under the parking lot, with an
underground storm water vault, and will be built at the developer’s expense.
Councilmember Mohamed noted she is supportive of the project
It was moved by Councilmember Brausen, seconded by Councilmember Mavity, to
approve first reading of ordinance vacating portion of 14th Street east of Colorado
Avenue west of the railroad and set the Second Reading of the Ordinance for Sept. 8,
2020; adoption of Resolution No. 20-118 approving the preliminary and final plat for
Xchange Additional; adoption of Resolution No. 20-119 approving conditional use
permit (CUP) for excavation of more than 400 cubic yards of fill; and, adoption of
Resolution No. 20-120 approving variance for a reduction of 25 parking spaces.
The motion passed 6-0. (Harris absent)
8b. Bid tab for Dakota Avenue Bikeways and Dakota-Edgewood Trail Bridge –
project 4019-2000
Mr. Sullivan presented the staff report.
Councilmember Brausen made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Mavity to
designate Redstone Construction, LLC the lowest responsible bidder and authorize a
contract with the firm in the amount of $7,340,684.26 for Dakota-Edgewood Trail Bridge
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 3a) Page 7
Title: City council meeting minutes of August 17, 2020
– project 4019-2000 and to approve the construction administration services contract
with SRF Consulting Group, Inc. in the amount of $836,973.
Councilmember Rog asked what has been spent on the project to date. Mr. Sullivan
stated $1.3 million has been spent to date on easements and staff engineering time,
tree planting and utility relocations.
Councilmember Rog asked if the total cost to the city is $7.5 million. Mr. Sullivan stated
yes, it is just under $7.5 million. He added the overall project is $9.5 million, with $3
million in federal funding and $6.5 million is the rest including what has been spent to
date.
Councilmember Rog noted she confirmed with Ms. Lammers today that the property tax
impacts in 2022 and 10 years forward, for a home owner with a median value home is
about $64 per year or $5.30 per month for 10 years. Ms. Lammers pointed out this is
only an estimate at this point, adding staff cannot predict home values.
Councilmember Rog asked what is the consideration staff uses when they recommend
projects, and if levy impacts are considered or if the pandemic was considered. Mr.
Harmening stated staff takes direction from council on projects and assumed council
was interested in undertaking this project now or in future based on the federal monies
available. He stated council will need to move forward very soon as this project will not
get cheaper over time, and the federal funds could then be in jeopardy. He stated levy
impacts are noted by staff and that information is included in the staff report for council
to review.
Mr. Harmening added another reason staff recommends moving ahead on this project is
it is based on a study and work which has gone on for the last 10 years related to
Connect the Park. He stated this link is viewed as an important connection in the
community between north and south, while other plans have not been as high priority.
Councilmember Rog stated there is interest in the area east of here, near the Highway
100 Bridge, and asked why the Dakota area was chosen instead of the area near
Highway 100, which has more flexibility and fewer costs. She suggested pausing on this
project to look at Highway 100 as an alternative location for the bridge. Ms. Heiser
stated from a cost perspective a Highway 100 bridge would be in the $5-6 million range,
similar to this project; however, there has not been a feasibility study done there and
the Dakota area was seen as a higher priority and originally scheduled to be built two
years ago. She stated it was pushed back in order to use federal funding that the city
received.
Councilmember Rog stated the Highway 100 bridge is where folks are crossing, and
while she is not criticizing, it is a huge investment at a difficult time. She wants to do due
diligence, in this time of great uncertainty. She asked if the federal funding will still
come. Mr. Harmening stated the federal funding dollars have been allocated to the city
and MnDot has the funding in an account ready to be distributed.
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 3a) Page 8
Title: City council meeting minutes of August 17, 2020
Councilmember Rog asked if the funding is tied to the Dakota Avenue project. Ms.
Heiser stated yes, it is tied to this location.
Councilmember Rog stated there are certain factors which make the project more
expensive now, adding if there is a change in leadership after the elections, she feels like
the costs could go down. Mr. Harmening stated there is no way to know if costs could go
down. He stated if the council wants to wait and bid the project later this year or next
year, that can happen.
Mr. Harmening noted the other consideration is the bond market right now, which is an
attractive market in which to borrow money. Ms. Lammers noted the rates are under
2% for bonds currently.
Councilmember Rog noted earlier designs of the bridge had it shorter, with more
landings and steeper inclines, less concrete. Then plans moved on for a different bridge.
She asked if, in light of these higher costs and during these difficult times, there is a
want to revisit less expensive ways of creating this connection and what kind of
flexibility does the city have to do this. Mr. Sullivan stated staff looked at the bridge
designs that consider ADA compliance, noting the bridge length is the same cost, but it’s
what material the bridge is built of that costs more. He noted the ground has poor soils,
and much fill will be needed in this area so the bridge will not sink.
Councilmember Rog asked if the bid needs to be approved tonight. Mr. Harmening
stated there is a timeline for accepting or rejecting the bids.
Councilmember Mavity stated she is very much in favor of this project. She stated this
project has been part of Connect the Park’s vision for 7 – 13 years, and is a connection
needed in the community. She stated if delayed in order to get more information on
items not already known, she is not sure there would be any more information
forthcoming at this point. Councilmember Mavity stated she appreciates the
professional expertise presented for cost effectiveness and outcomes and trusts staff’s
judgement and the process and levels of community involvement.
Councilmember Mavity stated she would also rather the city pay less for this bridge but
added it will only get more expensive and there is an opportunity now with the
historically low bond rates, which will save residents money over time. She added the
council approves the pavement management plan each year and that plan repaves
roads at a cost that is five times the cost of this bridge. She pointed out this cost is also
borne by the levy and the council does not knit pick on pavement management costs.
She stated the costs paid for pavement management for cars do not get the same level
of scrutiny as bikes. She stated she respects this process, which has been vetted
thoroughly.
Councilmember Kraft asked if pavement management comes from the city levy. Mr.
Harmening stated it comes from franchise fees of Xcel and CenterPoint Energy and is
used exclusively for that, adding that residents and businesses owners pay for pavement
management in this way.
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 3a) Page 9
Title: City council meeting minutes of August 17, 2020
Councilmember Kraft asked what the cost of pavement management per year is. Ms.
Heiser answered $2.9-3.5 million per year.
Councilmember Kraft asked about the contingency amounts. Mr. Sullivan stated the
contingency is carried for uncertainty of how the project progresses, noting there are
always changes and risks.
Councilmember Kraft asked with the amount spent to date, and if council does not
approve the project, what would happen to the contingency money. Ms. Heiser stated
the GO bonds would need to be part of the bond sale.
Councilmember Kraft stated right now the city is spending more than the estimates
from two years ago, and while the idea of this connection is great, it seems at every
point in the process the cost goes up substantially. He asked at what point do we say it’s
just too much. He stated he was concerned a few months ago, and now the cost has
gone up again, adding we are in a recession which is likely to continue, and he fears the
price will continue to go up. He continued, stating at this point the project costs more
than The ROC, and is starting to get into Nature Center cost territory. He stated his
concern is that the project cost continues to increase, and it is a big red flag that
something is fundamentally wrong, adding he is concerned in moving forward without
more study.
Councilmember Mohamed stated she shares a lot of what Councilmembers Rog and
Kraft stated and has hesitation also. She is concerned about spending that much money
with a recession around the corner, and while it’s a great idea to build a connection, she
is concerned about at what cost this project moves forward.
Councilmember Brausen stated he appreciates staff efforts to keep costs as low as
possible. He stated he supports this bid which has been in discussion since 2013, adding
the need is still there and with almost $3 million in federal funding available to build it.
He stated the city will not be able to secure this type of federal funding in the future,
and the project is essential to the city. He stated his ward has wanted this completed
since 2011, adding there is no other north south connection. He pointed out in his seven
years on the council, he has not seen this project get any cheaper and the cost has been
built into the long-range capital plan for a while now. He stated he trusts the finance
staff to do their job and bonding over a longer period, if necessary, is fine by him
especially since interest rates are so low. He said the project needs to get going.
Councilmember Kraft stated he is supportive of the bikeway portion of the project and
noted the figures he quoted were for the bridge portion only.
Councilmember Kraft asked to delay the motion for the project for two weeks, noting
that Councilmember Harris was not there this evening. Mr. Mattick stated the council
needs to handle the motion on the table currently.
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 3a) Page 10
Title: City council meeting minutes of August 17, 2020
Mayor Spano stated he supports this project; but has concerns also about the costs. He
stated Councilmembers Kraft and Rog made excellent points; however, the need for this
project will not go away anytime soon and the north south crossing is very important.
He added he appreciated Councilmember Mavity’s points about costs and that delaying
this further will not make it any less expensive. He added this design seems the most
cost effective to achieve the city’s goals, noting prices will continue to increase. He
stated he will support the project as it is.
Councilmember Rog stated it would behoove the process to have Councilmember Harris
present; however, she also supports the bikeway project, regardless of the bridge. She
stated she is troubled by the bridge project and added this reveals the challenges in the
city’s processes. She stated she does not want to spend local funds when federal funds
are available, but what if a better spot is found for soil, or a different location might be
better or cheaper.
Councilmember Rog stated she is interested in an eastern project in a couple of years
when the timing is better, noting this is a terrible time to make this decision given all the
unknowns and needs in the community. She thinks it would be irresponsible to add 2%
to the levy for this project, and proposed the council pause on this, consider the project
for several more months, engage Councilmember Harris in the conversation, and also
talk to the community more. She requested to postpone the vote and rebid it in January
2021.
Mr. Mattick stated the bid document must be accepted within 33 days, so it must be
passed at the Aug. 24, 2020 council meeting, or there would need to be a special
meeting scheduled before Aug. 31, 2020.
Councilmember Mavity stated we are in extraordinary times, but the council instructed
staff to do the work and get the bids, adding if the council is not going to approve
projects, they need to tell staff earlier and not have them invest time in this process.
She added 10-20% increases are expected on costs of all projects and this project is not
unique. She stated delaying it will not bring down costs, adding she does not want the
council to be in some illusion that it will get cheaper, as it won’t. She stated she
appreciates that the council disagrees on this and will withdraw her original motion in
order to discuss next steps.
Councilmember Brausen withdrew his motion from the floor. Councilmember Mavity
withdrew her second to the motion.
Councilmember Brausen pointed out if the country is headed for a recession, this
project would create jobs in our community and be an opportunity for communities of
color to work. He added this project has been built into the levy and the long-range
capital plan, as well as basing it on the GO bond rate for this year.
Mayor Spano stated the council reserves the right to change their minds, and he
respects colleagues who have concerns about it.
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 3a) Page 11
Title: City council meeting minutes of August 17, 2020
Councilmember Mohamed stated she echoes what Mayor Spano said, the council can
change its mind over time on projects. She stated she is hesitant on the perception of it
as well when there are folks who cannot afford to have a house and yet, we want to
build this bridge. She stated everyone is on edge about this, especially when you see
your city spending money on this, and families are struggling. She asked how the council
can justify this project and costs to a mother who cannot afford their rent.
It was moved by Councilmember Brausen, seconded by Councilmember Rog, to table
consideration the bids for the Dakota Edgewood trail bridge - project 4019-2000 until a
special meeting is called to consider the bridge project bid later in August.
The motion passed 6-0 (Councilmember Harris absent).
It was moved by Councilmember Brausen, seconded by Councilmember Rog, to
designate S.M. Hentges & Sons, Inc. the lowest responsible bidder and authorize a
contract with the firm in the amount of $876,696.10 for Dakota Avenue bikeways –
project 4019-2000 with the value engineering savings.
The motion passed 6-0 (Councilmember Harris absent).
8c. Accept the strategic roadmap for advancing arts and culture in St. Louis Park
Councilmember Kraft stated he participated on the FOA committee work prior to joining
the council, adding he was impressed with Jamie Marshall’s work. He stated this work
connects people, ideas, and communities with significant race equity and inclusion
focus, alive in public spaces, and promoting health and well-being. He stated what
struck home was identifying the arts to help make the city’s values visible. He added he
wanted to discuss this with Jamie Marshall to see if the strategic framework is useful.
Councilmember Kraft stated it is already having an impact in guiding his work. He noted
the art fair, which was recently canceled, is an example of this. He also noted they are
working with Mx. Sojourner to develop the capacity to complete this through an equity
and inclusion lens.
Mayor Spano also complimented Jamie Marshall’s work, adding the owner of Mexico
City Café - Julio – also appreciates his work.
Ms. Solano added Mr. Marshall is great to work with and provides great collaboration.
She stated city business owners are excited to get this strategic roadmap.
Councilmember Rog thanked Ms. Solano for her work on this in support of the arts also.
It was moved by Councilmember Kraft, seconded by Councilmember Rog, to approve the
strategic roadmap for advancing arts and culture in St. Louis Park.
The motion passed 6-0 (Councilmember Harris absent).
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 3a) Page 12
Title: City council meeting minutes of August 17, 2020
8d. Authorize a comment letter to be submitted to the Public Utilities Commission
regarding Xcel Energy’s 2020-2034 upper Midwest integrated resource plan
Councilmember Kraft asked for various changes to this letter to be submitted to the
Public Utilities Commission.
Councilmember Mavity stated the ESC approved this letter and if staff is in agreement,
then these changes can be done. She stated, however, she is nervous about the council
mandating these changes without understanding staff’s feedback first.
Mr. Harmening stated staff is not in a position to answer that this evening and would
need to review the letter and proposed changes before finalizing the letter.
Councilmember Brausen agreed with Councilmember Mavity and stated the more
appropriate action is to ask staff to review the proposed changes and get feedback from
the ESC first.
It was moved by Councilmember Kraft, seconded by Councilmember Rog, to table
consideration of the comment letter to the Public Utilities Commission and ask staff to
work with ESC to make the changes suggested.
The motion passed 6-0 (Councilmember Harris absent).
9. Communications - none
10. Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 9:08 p.m.
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Jake Spano, mayor
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: September 21, 2020
Minutes: 3b
Unofficial minutes
City council study session
St. Louis Park, Minnesota
Aug. 24, 2020
The meeting convened at 6:30 p.m.
Councilmembers present: Mayor Jake Spano, Tim Brausen, Rachel Harris, Larry Kraft, Nadia
Mohamed, and Margaret Rog
Councilmembers absent: Anne Mavity
Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), CIO (Mr. Pires), Fire Chief Koering, Deputy Fire
Chief Wolff, Engineering Director (Ms. Heiser), Transportation Engineer (Mr. Manibog), Senior
Management Analyst (Ms. Solano), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Pappas)
Guests: None
1. Citywide speed limit evaluation
Mr. Manibog presented the report.
Councilmember Harris thanked staff for the thorough report and asked if there is a
correlation between pedestrians and bikers feeling safer on trail roads, when traffic is at
20 or 25 mph. Mr. Manibog stated he did not know but would look to see if there is data
that supports that.
Councilmember Brausen stated the report was very thorough, with great data. He
continued the city’s prioritization of walking and biking over cars is reflected here, and
the data also supports the Dakota Bridge as a safe north-south link in the community.
Councilmember Brausen stated his biggest concern in the report was Cedar Lake Road,
one of the major east west streets in St. Louis Park, which seems to work well at 35
mph. However, he added, there is a need for more data as it is a major road through the
4th Ward and very well used. He added the city’s system is well-designed but agreed
there is a need to lower speed limits more, pointing out that early on during Covid,
residents were driving slower through neighborhoods. He stated public outreach will
need to happen related to this, as well as public listening sessions before any changes
are made.
Councilmember Kraft thanked staff for the great report as well. He stated 21 serious
injuries in 3 years seems very good or okay, but he wants to see it relative to national
trends or to other cities similar in size to St. Louis Park. He noted there are more crashes
on higher traffic streets, with fatalities or injuries 3 times higher than when speed limits
are 20 mph, adding this surprised him. He stated if the city says pedestrians and bikes
should be prioritized, why does the report show that road type determines speed limits
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 3b) Page 2
Title: Study session minutes of August 24, 2020
vs. the number of pedestrians and bikes traveling on a road. Mr. Manibog explained the
reason is that citywide, there are speed and vehicle traffic data to refer to, but no data
for pedestrians and bikes and therefore, there is more vehicle data present in the
analysis.
Councilmember Kraft asked if the city should have more pedestrian and bike data. Ms.
Heiser stated staff has been looking at this but noted we have been a car-centered
society for over 100 years, so the data we have is about vehicles and traffic, not about
pedestrians and bikes as a trend. She added there is still a need for vehicles to move
goods and services, while buses must be considered as well for transit, noting also that
buses are on a timeframe. She stated there must be a balance, so when staff
recommends 20 mph on low traffic roads, it must also consider fire, police, garbage
trucks, as well as pedestrians and bikes.
Councilmember Kraft stated he would like staff to provide more data on pedestrians
and bikes over time, especially if the city claims the priority to be pedestrians, bikes, and
then cars.
Councilmember Kraft noted the NACTO recommendations of streets with high activity
and high density have 20 mph limits. He asked what this means relative to roads in St.
Louis Park, such as Minnetonka Boulevard and Cedar Lake Road. Mr. Manibog stated
Minnetonka Boulevard and Excelsior Boulevard are both county roads. Therefore, state
statute will not allow the city to make any changes. He then stated that Cedar lake Road
is a city road, so the city can make changes to it. He added NACTO looks at the same
criteria St. Louis Park looks at related to pedestrians and intersections, which can be due
to land use such as commercial or residential. He added by looking at this, the city then
takes it into consideration and tries to be contextual.
Ms. Heiser added the city does use NACTO guidance, and then applies it within the
context of St. Louis Park.
Councilmember Kraft asked how race equity is impacted by these decisions. Mr.
Manibog stated it is looked at a couple ways – by working with police to understand
how speed is enforced and looking at demographic data to ensure communities of color
benefit, so certain folks are not favored over others. He added staff also works on these
issues with Mx. Sojourner, adding staff can show more progress on this at a future
meeting.
Councilmember Kraft stated the speed study is all very much tied to Connect the Park,
and the recommendations make sense. He noted if bike lanes are added to more city
roads, then they need to be as safe as can be and adding a separated bike lane would be
needed to ensure safety.
Councilmember Rog asked how Connect the Park integrates with this study. She added
this is an opportunity to think about share-the-road options for bikes or separate bike
lanes, and related speeds accordingly.
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 3b) Page 3
Title: Study session minutes of August 24, 2020
Councilmember Rog also asked why the east frontage road in front of Benilde is 35 mph.
Mr. Manibog stated right now, the current limit there is 40 mph. Current guidance does
not recommend speed limits over 35 mph in urban contexts. Because of factors like the
level of traffic and pedestrian access, staff recommends a speed limit of 35 mph.
Councilmember Rog stated she wants more conversations on that area in terms of
Connect the Park and to be more intentional in that area. She asked why there is no
pedestrian access there and noted she would like to study the map better related to
questions she has in Ward 1. Ms. Heiser stated this is the first report on this to the
council and there will be more discussion in the future related to questions within
specific wards.
Councilmember Rog asked for an explanation on the 25 mph vs. 20 mph and that it’s a
half mile segment. Mr. Manibog explained the half mile length noted comes from
national standards. He stated speeds should not change every other block.
Councilmember Rog asked if council can also look at intersections in the city that are
dangerous, and speeds there, especially at spots where cars are failing to yield.
Ms. Heiser stated staff will bring this back to council for review in a few months and take
a city-wide look at different intersections, and the way they are set up, and safety
issues.
Councilmember Rog asked if these intersections are an opportunity for automated
enforcement and technology to change behavior, adding it also addresses racial equity
issues and there are ways to implement it to save money on policing. Mr. Manibog
stated this method of enforcement was deemed unconstitutional in MN.
Councilmember Rog stated she will discuss this with staff offline.
Councilmember Rog stated she is supportive of this, adding it’s what the community
wants, and there may also be some environmental assistance around emissions. She
stated it will be important how it is rolled out.
Councilmember Mohamed stated she is generally in support and agreed with the
recommendation by staff to do this street by street vs. a city-wide speed limit. She
stated she looks forward to the racial equity information and enforcement information
as well.
Mayor Spano asked staff the speeds of delivery vehicles in neighborhoods as they seem
to be very high lately, on residential streets, such as his. He noted this might be a topic
of future discussion. He added the assumption here is that staff feels there is no way to
improve safety on roads that does not involve lowering speeds. He asked if any other
options were looked at. Ms. Heiser stated staff is recommending lowering speed limits
as a safe systems approach. She stated as staff reviewed national studies, decreased
speeds on roads make a difference to safety. She added speed bumps, stop signs and
sidewalks for pedestrians on higher volume roads are all helpful as well, but are all more
expensive too.
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 3b) Page 4
Title: Study session minutes of August 24, 2020
Mr. Manibog noted the new statue statute also gave staff a new tool to use, so this is
staff’s reaction and recommendation.
Mayor Spano asked if lowering speeds as per staff recommendations allows for other
traffic calming measures. Ms. Heiser stated lowering speeds is the first step to making
other items in the toolbox more applicable. She noted staff can provide more
information to council on traffic management and use of speed bumps, turnabouts and
traffic circles, each which have a cause and effect.
Mayor Spano stated he is interested in how the budget will develop and wants to be
sure to ask the questions that need to be asked.
Councilmember Harris stated she has concerns about speeds at the transit stations. She
asked staff to look at this further and consider lowering speeds at light rail stations and
at access points to regional bike trails. She also asked about equalization to all
neighborhoods for speed limits, adding the proposal today is an improvement over what
has existed, and she appreciates this.
2. Fire department staffing structure
Fire Chief Koering and Deputy Fire Chief Wolff presented the report.
Councilmember Rog stated she appreciates the work of the Fire Chief and staff to build
community pride and serve the community. She asked who else in the area also uses the
career model with their fire service. Chief Koering answered Richfield, Minneapolis, St.
Paul, and Edina – which has a few part-time staff only. He noted 85% of cities in the
state were a combination of career and volunteer in the past, and now almost every
major city has moved away from this model.
Councilmember Rog asked if there are any potential negatives to have an all career
force in St. Louis Park. Chief Koering stated he could not think of any, adding they
looked at both pros and cons, and could not find any negative issues.
Councilmember Rog asked the demographics of the career force and of the part-time
group. Chief Koering stated the career force is 1 female of 27, and the new model would
provide 3 females. He added currently there are no people of color in the career group
but noted there is 1 Asian male and 1 Bangladesh male on the part-time staff, and 1
woman who recently resigned.
Councilmember Rog asked if the training costs that saved $15,000 came out of public
funds, or out of the budget each time someone is trained. Deputy Chief Wolff stated
part of those costs are reimbursed, but it varies by year.
Councilmember Rog asked when the last time someone was onboarded. Deputy Chief
Wolff stated 2018-2019, adding it is a year-long process.
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 3b) Page 5
Title: Study session minutes of August 24, 2020
Councilmember Rog stated she is concerned about diversity and opportunities for
people to serve the community. She questioned how many career firefighters are
residents of St. Louis Park. Chief Koering answered three people.
Councilmember Rog stated she has a concern about opportunities for community
members to serve and community pride and having firefighters who live in the
community. She added if cost effectiveness and savings are the only goals, the city could
move to all contract firefighters.
Councilmember Rog added removing part-time fire fighters is a big change to an
important component of the city’s services. She stated she has heard from several
people that are so proud to serve as part-time fire fighters. She asked if a public forum
could be set up to hear from these folks, let them talk about what they value, and their
suggestions for going forward. She added this would be respectful.
Councilmember Rog stated related to the city’s race equity and climate action goals,
having fire fighters who drive in from Hugo takes the city farther from these goals. She
added if we decide to go with the career program, she would like to look at doing the
Pathways program.
Mr. Harmening stated a change to the structure of the program will make it easier to
diversify the fire department. He added he has been incredibly forceful on the need to
diversify the fire department, adding there will be much more opportunity to do this vs.
having a paid on-call system.
Councilmember Rog asked about the opportunity to hear from part-time fire fighters.
Chief Koering stated there will be a follow up to this discussion with part-time staff on
September 1, and ways to honor their service. He stated he appreciates their
contributions over the years, and the fire staff will let them know how their
contributions made a difference.
Councilmember Brausen thanked Chief Koering for looking at the structure and how it
can work better. He stated he presumes the Chief and staff are not taking this step
lightly and he is impressed that they are studying and embracing change. He asked if this
proposed reorganization will have any impact on the CERT program. Chief Koering
stated no it will not, adding it may present opportunities to increase membership of the
CERT program.
Councilmember Brausen stated he is totally supportive of this, adding it seems to be a
superior delivery model, and will enhance staffing. He noted his colleagues have been
more concerned about COVID expenditures than he has at times, so this restructuring to
create a cost savings is helpful.
Councilmember Harris noted she did a ride along with the fire department and it was a
great experience. She suggested the other councilmembers do a ride along as well.
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 3b) Page 6
Title: Study session minutes of August 24, 2020
Councilmember Harris asked about COVID costs and what added costs or constraints are
on the department now. She also asked also if PPE or physical distancing has also driven
up department costs. Chief Koering stated COVID hasn’t been a driver of costs related to
staffing. While PPE has been a concern, the CAREs funding and reimbursement will take
care of that. He did, however, state that the city’s overall budget is affected by COVID,
so the fire department looked at this structure change to be an efficient and effective
cost savings model. He added the entire community could benefit from cost savings and
funds can be moved into other areas.
Councilmember Harris asked how the career force will improve diversity on the team.
Deputy Chief Wolff explained the plan will improve diversity, adding the written test
was removed for Bipoc communities to eliminate bias, and anyone that applied received
an interview. However, the success rate was not that good. He added since 2015, the
staff has hired 29 part-time fire fighters, including 3 women and 6 diverse people.
Councilmember Rog stated retention is as much an issue in diversity as is hiring. She
asked if the staff does exit interviews and if there is any data on why people left. Chief
Koering stated they do offer exit interviews, but not with part-time people. Mr.
Harmening added that HR administers and conduct the exit interviews.
Chief Koering stated if anyone leaves, he makes a point to connect with them and talk
through the process, noting in many cases the reasons for leaving were out of the
employee’s control.
Councilmember Harris asked if different languages are spoken by fire fighters, how
valuable it is to have people who speak different languages on staff, and how many
career and part-time fire staff speak other languages. Chief Koering stated there are a
couple part-time fire staff who speak other languages, adding he is not sure about
career staff. He stated this is not a requirement, but could become so around
community health, or using social work students who speak different languages, and
have them do internships on community health.
Councilmember Harris asked if the city moves to the career model, could there be a
requirement for fire fighters to live in our city. Mr. Harmening stated the city is not able
to require that under state law; however, the city has an incentive program on “live
where you work.”
Councilmember Brausen left the meeting at 9:15 p.m.
Councilmember Harris stated part-time staff want their questions answered, and she is
glad the fire department will host the Sept. 1 conversation. She stated she is generally
supportive but wants to think about it more.
Chief Koering noted the city works with fire chiefs in adjoining communities who could
use more part-timers in their current models, so there is an opportunity for St. Louis
Park part-time fire fighters. He stated the city’s fire department has tried to find a way
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 3b) Page 7
Title: Study session minutes of August 24, 2020
to help support part-timers’ desire to be a fire fighter, adding later these part-timers can
come back and serve on the career program in the future, if they desire.
Councilmember Kraft asked about retention percentages for full-time fire fighters.
Deputy Chief Wolff stated for full-time fire fighters, there was a 90% retention rate.
Councilmember Kraft asked how many part-time fire fighters get into full-time positions.
Deputy Chief Wolff stated of 104, approximately 30 moved to career.
Councilmember Kraft asked who can work overtime now. Deputy Chief Wolff stated
career staff perform overtime, and it cannot be offered to part time staff. He added
overtime is part of expectation, but it’s a burden for many. Chief Koering added when
staffing drops below 6 on a shift, there will need to be more hires as the department
cannot operate with less on a shift.
Councilmember Kraft asked how many fighters the department needs, and how does
the city know the service level the fire department is providing. Fire Chief Koering stated
to meet safety measures the target is 90%. He added by hiring additional staff, there is
extra unit availability to respond to the next call on the line, 24/7.
Councilmember Kraft asked what benefits the fire department expects. Chief Koering
stated part-time was an opportunity to allow community members to help, but they did
not have the opportunity to perform as a firefighter for which they were trained. They
were relegated to a role of clean up and putting trucks back in service, which is
unpredictable with no control over who is working. He added after the public safety
study was conducted, it showed we needed to integrate more part-time into the career
staff model to serve the community need.
Councilmember Kraft asked about cost saving, and if at some point will it cost more with
the approach being presented. Deputy Chief Wolff stated they did not build the cost of
adding 6-8 part time staff into the model to maintain levels, so it would have to be built
into the hiring process model and on average that’s about $50,000 additional, and to
include adding in a class each year.
Councilmember Kraft stated from the diversity perspective, he understands the effort,
and what he heard is that the fire department did not do well on diversity with the part-
time model because they were focusing on the full-time effort. He asked how we will
know the words are translating into progress sooner rather than later, adding he would
like to see metrics.
Councilmember Mohamed stated she is seeing a lot of what the fire department is going
to do vs. what they currently are doing related to racial equity. She stated retention is
culture and asked for an explanation of the culture in the fire department, how they are
actively promoting a racial equitable culture, and what the metrics are.
Chief Koering stated they have been actively involved developing culture and noted all
captains have served as race equity liaisons for the city and carried messages back to
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 3b) Page 8
Title: Study session minutes of August 24, 2020
the department to make sure all we do goes through the race equity lens first. He stated
there is always room to improve and they are open to change, adding they serve all
members of the community. Chief Koering explained they involve the racial equity lens
with interview panels and recruiting tools, and they run items by Mx. Sojourner as well.
He noted the challenge in fire service is the Bipoc community do not see firefighting as a
future for them, so there has been a lot of education to show there are openings
available to them, and that is why the Pathways program is also so important. Chief
Koering added culturally the fire department believes in looking like the community that
they serve.
Councilmember Mohamed stated the Bipoc community does not mean they come from
different countries, adding they can live here for a long time. She noted on the
PowerPoint presentation, the Chief referred to “diverse.” She noted this is very
bothering, and he should go back to Mx. Sojourner on that. She added Deputy Chief
Wolff’s comment “low man on the totem pole” is also problematic.
Councilmember Mohamed asked if it is the department’s responsibility to track data on
race equity initiatives. Mr. Harmening stated Mx. Sojourner tracks that data.
Councilmember Mohamed asked what has been tried with the Bipoc community that
was unsuccessful. Deputy Chief Wolff stated after removing the written test, there was
a huge benefit, and 3 women and 6 members of the Bipoc community were hired. He
stated they ran into behavior issues and law enforcement related issues after these folks
were on staff. He stated due to privacy, he could not share any further information, but
stated this was a challenge for the department. Deputy Chief Wolff stated the
department thought they had made progress, but then they had to start over, and later
stopped recruiting in 2019.
Councilmember Mohamed asked if the department has continued to build the
relationship with Bipoc communities, adding if they are only reaching out to them for
recruiting purposes -- that is a form of tokenism. Chief Koering stated they do outreach
in neighborhoods, answering questions, talking to folks, and providing an EMS bike
patrol in parks, along with the school supply program. He stated they work in the
underserved neighborhoods all the time, noting neighbors want to learn more and ride
on fire trucks and get a badge. He added, however, they are not effectively recruiting for
fire fighters, but are open and inclusive.
Councilmember Mohamed stated this doesn’t sound like we are building social capital in
those neighborhoods. Chief Koering stated they were working on the community health
initiative, but then COVID hit. He continued, explaining that today we are working with
Hennepin County public health to build social capital on the EMS community health
side.
Councilmember Mohamed asked where the savings are going related to the
restructuring. Mr. Harmening stated the savings lower the bottom line for operating
costs and impacts the property tax levy.
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 3b) Page 9
Title: Study session minutes of August 24, 2020
Councilmember Mohamed stated the numbers of diversity are not looking good, we are
not hearing much about culture, and as a Bipoc person, culture is so important. She
added we can recruit, but if we are not retaining these folks and building culture,
including them as part of the team, all the work goes out the door as well as the costs of
onboarding. She stated she would like to see data on racial equity and more focus on
culture as well. She added she agrees with the current proposal, but stressed the
department utilize Mx. Sojourner as much as possible.
Mayor Spano asked if full-time fire fighters will respond to call backs if current staff on
duty cannot handle the volume. Chief Koering stated yes.
Mayor Spano stated if they are not able to be there quickly, what impact would that
have on our mutual aid agreements. Chief Koering stated there is no impact because we
have a culture of calling early, so it is not an issue.
Mayor Spano noted there will be hiring of 4 career staff, 1 fire prevention staffer, and 1
technology person, and asked what are the other 3. Chief Koering stated 3 licensed fire
fighters to work the A, B, C shifts.
Mayor Spano asked how changes with fire service will impact community health and
health delivery aspects. Chief Koering stated it is not as much about fire now, as it is
about prevention and community health, along with risk reduction and EMS. He added
community health will focus more on social work and community health workers. He
stated this path will allow us to be more focused on prevention and the public safety
side.
Mayor Spano stated he wants a better understanding of this, related to fewer staff
working more shifts and less overtime costs. He added it seems the paid on-call program
is a perfect place to use the Pathways model.
Mayor Spano stated if we want to deliver fire prevention to the community in a cost-
effective way that diversifies our department, a paid on-call program takes a ton of time
to manage. He asked if this would be fair to say. Chief Koering answered yes.
Mayor Spano stated he wanted to echo Councilmember Mohamed’s comments and
focus on this. He stated it is difficult, but it also must happen.
Councilmember Rog stated she appreciated the opportunity to discuss this issue, and
like all of us, the fire department has room to grow. She added related to the policy
question, she does not feel she has enough information and is interested in a budget
breakdown on overtime and other items.
Councilmember Rog added caution related to the part time model, and to be very
careful about not generalizing that part-time fire fighters are a burden. She said she has
talked to many who are hurt about how they are being talked about. She added it is
important to lay the groundwork before speaking generally about how the part-time
model is not working and she looks forward to more dialogue on this.
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 3b) Page 10
Title: Study session minutes of August 24, 2020
3. Future study session agenda planning and prioritization
Mr. Harmening stated Councilmember Brausen would like to discuss climate change in times of
COVID at the Sept. 14, 2020 meeting and wants to elevate the conversation on home energy
audits.
Councilmember Rog stated she appreciates the report on menthol and wants to watch what
happens in Edina on this issue. She stated it will be important to be a leader on that, if possible.
The meeting adjourned at 10:00 p.m.
Written Reports provided and documented for recording purposes only:
4 Menthol, mint, and wintergreen flavored tobacco products
5. July 2020 monthly financial report
6. West End Office Park minor amendment to special permit
7. Notice of eviction
8. Request to vacate portions of unused utility easements at 8200 Minnetonka Blvd.
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Jake Spano, mayor
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: September 21, 2020
Consent agenda item: 4a
Executive summary
Title: Request to vacate portions of unused utility easements at 8200 Minnetonka Boulevard
Recommended action: **Due to the COVID-19 emergency declaration, this item is considered
essential business and is categorized as a Required Action**
• Motion to approve second reading and adopt Ordinance vacating portions of utility
easements at 8200 Minnetonka Boulevard and approve the Summary Ordinance for
publication.
Policy consideration: Are the utility easements needed for public purposes?
Summary: The city received a petition from Texa Tonka Bowling Alley, LLC to vacate portions of
utility easements at 8200 Minnetonka Boulevard, also known as the Texa-Tonka Lanes. The ten-
foot-wide utility easement runs north to south through the site and underneath the building.
The easement was originally recorded in 1951 and has never been used. Additionally, in 1958,
the Hennepin County District Court decided that this easement did not apply to the lot, though
the easement is still showing up in the property’s title documentation.
The applicant requests to vacate the utility easement in order to clean up the titles to the
property.
The portions of easements to be vacated are not needed by the city, county or public utility
companies for any public purpose.
The city council held a public hearing on September 8, 2020 and voted 7 to 0 to approve the
first reading of the Ordinance.
Financial or budget considerations: Not applicable
Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable.
Supporting documents: Ordinance
Summary ordinance for publication
Prepared by: Jennifer Monson, senior planner
Reviewed by: Sean Walther, planning and zoning supervisor
Karen Barton, community development director
Approve d by: Tom Harmening, city manager
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 4a) Page 2
Title: Request to vacate portions of unused utility easements at 8200 Minnetonka Boulevard
Ordinance No. ____-20
An ordinance vacating portions of utility easements
8200 Minnetonka Boulevard
The City of St. Louis Park does ordain:
Whereas, certain easements contained in the plat of Texa-Tonka Addition have been
adjudicated to not affect certain property within Block 2, Texa-Tonka Addition as evidenced in
Findings of Fact and Order dated September 30, 1954, filed September 30, 1954, as Document
No. 436715 (Block 2), and in Findings and Order dated July 9, 1958, filed July 11, 1958, as
Document No. 562866 (Block 4).
Section 1. The petition to vacate the utility easements was initiated by Texa Tonka
Bowling Alley LLC. The notice of said petition has been published in the St. Louis Park Sailor on
August 17, 2020, and the City Council has conducted a public hearing upon said petition and has
determined that the easements are not needed for public purposes and that it is for the best
interest of the public that said easements be vacated.
Section 2. The following described easements as now dedicated and laid out within the
corporate limits of the City of St. Louis Park and shown in Attachment A, are vacated:
That particular utility easement as shown on the plat of Texa-Tonka
Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota located upon the west 10.00 feet
of Lots 24, 25, 26, 27 and 28, Block 4, said Texa -Tonka Addition.
Section 3. The City Clerk is instructed to record certified copies of this ordinance in the
Office of the Hennepin County Register of Deeds or Registrar of Titles as the case may be.
Section 4. This ordinance shall take effect fifteen days after its publication
Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council September 21,
2020
Thomas K. Harmening, city manager Jake Spano, mayor
Attest: Approved as to form and execution:
Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Soren Mattick, city attorney
First reading September 8, 2020
Second reading September 21, 2020
Date of publication October 1, 2020
Date ordinance takes effect October 16, 2020
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 4a) Page 3
Title: Request to vacate portions of unused utility easements at 8200 Minnetonka Boulevard
Attachment A
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 4a) Page 4
Title: Request to vacate portions of unused utility easements at 8200 Minnetonka Boulevard
Summary for publication
Ordinance No. ____-20
An ordinance vacating portions of utility easements
This ordinance states that portions of utility easements at 8200 Minnetonka Boulevard will be
vacated.
This ordinance shall take effect 15 days after publication.
Adopted by the City Council September 21, 2020
Jake Spano /s/
Mayor
A copy of the full text of this ordinance is available for inspection with the City Clerk.
Published in St. Louis Park Sailor: October 1, 2020
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: September 21, 2020
Consent agenda item: 4b
Executive summary
Title: Revised letter to Public Utilities Commission on Xcel Energy’s Integrated Resource Plan
Recommended action: **Due to the COVID-19 emergency declaration, this item is considered
essential business and is categorized as Time-Sensitive**
•Motion to authorize a comment letter to be submitted to the Public Utilities Commission
regarding Xcel Energy’s 2020-2034 Upper Midwest Integrated Resource Plan.
Policy consideration: Is the city council supportive of the revised comments to the Public
Utilities Commission regarding Xcel Energy’s Integrated Resource Plan?
Summary: In Minnesota, investor-owned utilities are required by the state to share their
electricity generation plans with the public through Integrated Resource Plans (IRPs). An IRP is a
document that requires utilities to give advance notice of how they plan to generate electricity
over the coming 15 years (in this case, 2020-2034). Because generation decisions can affect
many things—electric rates, the communities where power plants are located, infrastructure,
and the environment—people and organizations are encouraged to review these plans and
offer feedback to the Public Utilities Commission (PUC).
Xcel Energy’s IRP would lead to a more than 80% reduction in carbon emissions in the region by
2030 compared to 2005, a step toward the company achieving its vision to provide customers
100% carbon -free electricity by 2050. The utility will achieve these carbon reductions by retiring
its last two coal plants by 2030; adding 1,850 megawatts of wind and 3,000 megawatts of solar;
gaining regulatory approval to operate the Monticello nuclear plant until at least 2040; and
increasing the use of natural gas-fired power plants. The city’s letter to the PUC indicates that
the city is generally supportive of Xcel’s IRP, but encourages the utility to invest in research and
technology to more quickly transition toward 100% renewable energy. Written comments are
due to the PUC by October 30.
At the August 17, 2020 city council meeting, council voted to return the original letter to staff to
work with the Environment and Sustainability Commission (ESC) on two changes: fixing the
sentence in the second paragraph to read “2030” (not 2034), and strengthening the language
asking Xcel to avoid adding natural gas capacity. The ESC has discussed and revised the letter;
the revised version is attached.
Financial or budget considerations: None
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to continue to lead in environmental
stewardship.
Supporting documents: Revised letter to PUC on Xcel Energy’s Integrated Resource Plan
Prepared by: Emily Ziring, sustainability manager
Reviewed by: Brian Hoffman, director of building and energy
Approve d by: Tom Harmening, city manager
St. Louis Park City Hall • 5005 Minnetonka Blvd., St. Louis Park, MN 55416
www.stlouispark.org • Phone: 952.924.2500 • TTY: 952.924.2518
September 24, 2020
Mr. Will Seuffert
Executive Secretary
Minnesota Public Utilities Commission
121 7th Place East, Suite 350
St. Paul, Minnesota 55101-2147
Re: Docket No. E002/RP-19-368
Dear Mr. Seuffert:
The City of St. Louis Park appreciates the opportunity to comment on Xcel Energy’s proposed Integrated
Resource Plan (IRP) for 2020-2034.
We support Xcel Energy’s goal to reach 80% carbon reductions by 2030 and their leadership in the utility
sector in taking this step toward reducing carbon. We would support an even faster timeline given our
city’s ambitious Climate Action Plan. Our Climate Action Plan aims to achieve a net zero carbon footprint
by 2040, and an interim goal includes achieving 100% renewable electricity by 2030.
Xcel Energy’s proposed IRP will be a start in helping us reduce emissions from the electricity sector. We
would, however, encourage Xcel Energy to explore how to more quickly transition away from natural
gas to 100% renewable energy. Natural gas may be a cleaner burning fuel than coal, however, the
methane leaks that occur during the extraction and transportation of natural gas have a Global Warming
Potential many times greater than that of carbon dioxide. Given this fact , the city urges Xcel Energy to
re-examine their current plan to increase natural gas usage. We encourage invest ment in research and
development of new technologies (such as energy storage and other innovat ions ) in the near term that
can assist in speeding this transition.
Nuclear energy may play a role in reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the short term. However, the
risks inherent in this source of energy are such that, ultimately, transitioning away from nuclear energy
is desirable. We therefore also encourage Xcel energy to plan for a future without nuclear energy.
Given St. Louis Park’s aggressive goals, we ask Xcel Energy to continue to phase out carbon-based
energy sources in a way that would be fair and equitable to all communities. We would also appreciate
flexibility in programs for businesses and residents to purchase and/or build renewable resources, suc h
as solar and wind. We support Xcel Energy’s leadership to transition away from carbon-based energy
sources and look forward to partnering with the utility in the future to help us meet our Climate Action
Plan goals, ensuring a healthy, vibrant, equitable community for all.
Sincerely,
Jake Spano
Mayor
City of St. Louis Park
CC: City of St. Louis Park Environment and Sustainability Commission members
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Revised letter to Public Utilities Commission on Xcel Energy’s Integrated Resource Plan Page 2
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: September 21, 2020
Consent agenda item: 4c
Executive summary
Title: Livable Communities Act enrollment and housing goals for 2021-2030
Recommended action: **Due to the COVID-19 emergency declaration, this item is considered
essential business and is Categorized as Time -Sensitive**
•Motion to adopt Resolution electing to participate in the Local Housing Incentives Account
program and adopting the housing goals for 2021-2030.
Policy consideration: Does the council support participating in the Local Housing Incentive
Account Program and adopting the affordable and life-cycle housing goals for 2021-2030?
Summary: The Metropolitan Livable Communities Act (LCA) established a Livable Communities
Fund which is intended to address housing and other development issues facing the
metropolitan area. Cities are not eligible to receive grants or loans under the Livable
Communities Fund. Cities are not eligible to receive certain polluted sites cleanup funding from
the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development unless the municipality
is participating in the Local Housing Incentives Account Program.
Communities that wish to enroll or re -enroll in LCA for the 2021-2030 decade need to adopt, by
resolution, affordable and lifecycle housing goals by November 15, 2020.
The Metropolitan Council determines housing goals using a methodology consistent across
communities. Met Council staff began conducting outreach in 2019 on the best way to
determine 2021-2030 goals. St. Louis Park staff participated in outreach activities and were
involved in establishing the affordable housing and life-cycle goals. The goals set forth by the
Met Council to be consistent with staff expectations. Affordable and life-cycle housing goals are
updated every decade and the current goals expire at the end of 2020. The affordable and life-
cycle housing goals for calendar years 2021 through 2030 are:
Affordable Housing Goals Range
(up to 80% AMI)
Life -Cycle Housing Goal
(housing built at a density of 8 units an acre or more)
326-593 housing units 1620 housing units
No later than January 15, 2021 the Metropolitan Council will hold a public hearing and adopt
participating communities’ goals to f ormalize enrollm ent.
Financial or budget considerations: The city w ill not b e eligible for LCA grants if the council
does not adopt the housing goals. Since 2016 the city has received over $4,575,000 in funding
through the LCA grant program. In 2020 the city has applie d for nearly $4 million in LCA grants.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a broad range of
housing and neighborhood oriented development.
Supporting documents: Resolution
Prepared by: Marney Olson, assistant housing supervisor
Reviewed by: Karen Barton, community development director
Approve d by: Tom Harmening, city manager
Page 2 City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 4c)
Title: Livable Communities A ct e nr ollment and housing goals for 2021-2030
Resolution No. 20-____
Resolution electing to participate in the Local Housing Incentives Account
Program under the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act
Calendar years 2021 through 2030
Whereas, the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act (Minnesota Statutes sections
473.25 to 473.255) establishes a Metropolitan Livable Communities Fund which is intended to
address housing and other development issues facing the metropolitan area defined by
Minnesota Statutes section 473.121; and
Whereas, the Metropolitan Livable Communities Fund, comprising the Tax Base
Revitalization Account, the Livable Communities Demonstration Account, the Local Housing
Incentive Account and the Inclusionary Housing Account, is intended to provide certain funding
and other assistance to metropolitan-area municipalities; and
Whereas, a metropolitan-area municipality is not eligible to receive grants or loans under
the Metropolitan Livable Communities Fund or eligible to receive certain polluted sites cleanup
funding from the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development unless
the municipality is participating in the Local Housing Incentives Account Program under
Minnesota Statutes section 473.254; and
Whereas, the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act requires that each municipality
establish aff ordable and life-cycle housing goals for that municipality that are consistent with
and promote the policies of the Metropolitan Council as provided in the adopted Metropolitan
Development Guide; and
Whereas, a metropolitan-area municipality can participat e in the Local Housing
Incentives Account Program under Minnesota Statutes section 473.254 if: (a) the municipality
elects to participate in the Local Housing Incentives Program; (b) the Metropolitan Council and
the municipality successfully negotiate new affordable and life-cycle housing goals for the
municipality; (c) the Metropolitan Council adopts by resolution the new negotiated affordable
and life -cycle housing goals for the municipality; and (d) the municipality establishes it has
spent or will spend or distribute to the Local Housing Incentives Account the required
Affordable and Life-Cycle Housing Opportunities Amount (ALHOA) for each year the
municipality participates in the Local Housing Incentives Account Program.
Now therefore be it resolved that the City of St. Louis Park:
1.Elects to participate in the Local Housing Incentives Program under the Metropolitan
Livable Communities Act for calendar years 2021 through 2030.
2.Agrees to the following affordable and life -cycle housing goals for calendar years 2021
through 2030:
Affordable Housing Goals Range Life -Cycle Housing Goal
326-593 housing units 1620 housing units
Page 3 City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 4c)
Title: Livable Communities A ct e nr ollment and housing goals for 2021-2030
3.Will prepare and submit to the Metropolitan Council a plan identifying the actions it plans
to take to meet its established housing goals.
Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council September 21, 2020
Thomas K. Harmening, city manager Jake Spano, mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, city clerk
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: September 21, 2020
Consent agenda item: 4d
Executive summary
Title: Final payment resolution – modifications to the Wooddale Bridge at Highway 7– Project
No. 4019-9007
Recommended action: **Due to the COVID-19 emergency declaration, this item is considered
essential business and is categorized as a Required Action**
•Motion to adopt Resolution accepting work and authorizing final payment in the amount
of $9,216.20 for project no. 4019-9007 modifications to the Wooddale Bridge at Highway
7, Contract No. 86-18.
Policy consideration: Not applicable
Summary: On June 18, 2018, the city council awarded a contract in the amount of $2,100,071.16
to Kraemer North America for the modifications to the Wooddale Bridge at Highway 7, project
4019-9007. The project included bridge widening to enhance the sidewalks, bike lanes and
improve sightlines at the Highway 7 ramps. This work also included some infrastructure
preparation for the f uture SWLRT construction that is occurring adjacent to the project.
The final contract amount for this project is $2,377,508.31. The contract increase is attributed
to various site constraints and field modifications necessary to provide a quality project for the
community. Details on the contract changes and quantity overruns are included in the
discussion section of this report.
Financial or budget considerations: This project was included in the city’s capital improvement
plan (CIP) for 2018. The final cost of the work performed by the contractor under Contract No.
86-18 is in cluded in the discussion section of this report.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a variety of options for
people to make their way around the city comfortably, safely and reliably.
Supporting documents: Discussion
Resolution
Prepared by: Jack Sullivan, senior engineering project manager
Reviewed by: Debra Heiser, engineering director
Approve d by: Tom Harmening, city manager
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 4d ) Page 2
Title: Final payment resolution – modifications to the Wooddale Bridge at Highway 7– Project No. 4019-9007
Discussion
Background: Wooddale Bridge was modified to enhance pedestrian and bicycle movement
across the bridge as this is a critical crossing of Highway 7 to access the Wooddale SWLRT
station, schools, businesses and housing in the area. The bridge deck was widened by 7 feet on
each side of the bridge. This provided the room necessary to widen the sidewalks to 12 feet on
both sides of the bridge and provide dedicated bike lanes on the bridge.
In addition, the concrete parapet walls were pulled back to provide better sightlines for drivers
as they approach Wooddale Avenue from Highway 7.
This work was intended to be completed just before the construction activities occurred with
the SWLRT at the Wooddale Station. A delay in the SWLRT project allowed the bridge widening
to be completed approximately 18 months in advance of the construction necessary for the
SWLRT.
The SWLRT project office is now anticipating their work on Wooddale Avenue to be completed
late this fall or early spring of 2021. As part of their project, they are installing traffic signals at
the Highway 7 ramps and will be removing the all-way stop signs that are currently in place and
slightly modifying the lane configuration on the approach to the bridge.
The bridge was completed in early 2019 but required a two-year warranty of the vegetation
and landscaping that was installed as part of the project. The contractor has satisfied the
warranty and we are now able to close out the project.
Cost increases: During construction, several unexpected items came up that added to the cost
of the project. The additional work that was completed increased the cost of the contract by
$277,437.15, resulting in a final contract amount for this project is $2,377,508.31. These include
$299,204.54 in changes orders/extra work and a reduction of $21,767.39 in quantity underruns.
The additional work was necessary to ensure that the bridge widening matched into the
existing structure and provided a quality project for the community. A description of the
additional work:
•The bridge is directly adjacent to the SWLRT Wooddale Station area. The two projects
required considerable coordination to ensure a seamless project at the end of
construction. An example of the additional coordination is the installation of the traffic
signal foundations at the Highway 7 ramps. The concrete bases for these signals had to
be installed with the bridge project; otherwise , the SWLRT would have had to remove
considerable amounts of concrete and asphalt to install the bases. In the interim all-way
stop signs were installed. This coordination resulted in a $5,500 change order.
•During construction, the Cedar Lake Regional Trail needed to be detoured in order to
build the trail crossing of Wooddale Avenue. The original design had rubber mats to
provide the temporary surface. It was determined once construction started that this
detour would remain in place for a considerably longer time than anticipated. Three
Rivers Park District and the city agreed that a temporary asphalt paved surface would be
a better alternative. This paving totaled $11,500.
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 4d ) Page 3
Title: Final payment resolution – modifications to the Wooddale Bridge at Highway 7– Project No. 4019-9007
•During the demolition of the bridge , the contractor discovered that the bridge deck was
constructed thicker than designed, this required additional concrete to be placed to
match the structural design and elevations of the old and new segments. In addition,
various other items needed to be modified to tie into the existing bridge. This resulted
in $121,800 in additional concrete and labor.
•During the driving of the sheet piles to begin work on the wider bridge foundations, the
contractor drove sheet piles through an unknown city-owned storm sewer pipe. Due to
the location of the storm sewer pipe , the best way to fix the damage was to line the
pipe from the inside. The cost to line the pipe was $35,000.
•During construction, various roads needed to be closed to accommodate the work.
Most notably, Highway 7 had to be closed on various occasions to compete the
demolition activities and placement of the new beams. These closures required changes
to the detour routes, state troopers to close the highway and other various traffic
control switches that were not expected during plan development. The changes cost
$21,600.
•Construction began in July of 2018 but carried over into spring of 2019 due to the
amount of work and the timing of certain construction activities. The pouring of a portion
of the concrete bridge deck in October required additional expense to heat the concrete
to ensure a quality product. In addition, MnDOT required that the new concrete deck
surface be protected from salt during the winter months. In order to protect the bridge
deck , a concrete barrie r was installed to keep traffic and salt spray off the new surface.
This extension of the contract schedule resulted in $104,000 change order.
Financial or budget considerations: The final cost of the work performed by the contractor
under Contract No. 86-18 has been calculated as follows:
Original contract (based on estimated quantities) $ 2,100,071.16
Change Orders/ extra work +$ 299,204.54
Quantity underruns -$ 21,767.39
Final contract cost $ 2,377,508.31
Previous payments -$ 2,368,292.11
Balance due $ 9,216.20
This project was included in the Capital Improvement Program (CIP). Funding was provided by
the following sources: Elmwood TIF District and general obligation bonds (fiber optic).
Funding Sources
Elmwood TIF District $ 2,363,653.31
GO Bonds (fiber optic) $ 13,855.00
Total $ 2,377,508.31
Due to the nature of our construction projects, it is not unusual to have additional work added
to our projects. To address this, when the bid is awarded, we assumed a 10% contingency for all
aspects of the project. The costs detailed above represent a 13% increase to this project. This is
slightly over the planned contingency; however, there are adequate funds in the Elmwood TIF
District to cover these costs.
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 4d ) Page 4
Title: Final payment resolution – modifications to the Wooddale Bridge at Highway 7– Project No. 4019-9007
Resolution No. 20-____
Resolution authorizing final paymentand accepting work for
modifications to the Wooddale Bridge at Highway 7
City Project No. 4019-9007
Contract No. 86-18
Be it resolved by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, as follows:
1.Pursuant to a written contract with the City dated June 18, 2018, Kraemer North
America, LLC has satisfactorily completed the modifications to the Wooddale Bridge , as
per Contract No. 86-18.
2.The Engineering Director has filed her recommendations for final acceptance of the work.
3.The work completed under this contract is accepted and approved. The final contract
cost is $2,377,508.31.
4.The City Manager is directed to make final payment in the amount of $9,216.20 on this
contract, taking the contractor's receipt in full.
Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council Sept ember 21, 2020
Thomas K. Harmening, city manager Jake Spano, mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, city clerk
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: September 21, 2020
Consent agenda item: 4e
Executive summary
Title: Memo of understanding with Hopkins Chemical Assessment Team
Recommended action: **Due to the COVID-19 emergency declaration, this item is considered
essential business and is categorized as Time-Sensitive**
• Motion to adopt Resolution to execute memo of understanding between the Hopkins
Chemical Assessment Team and the City of St. Louis Park .
Policy consideration: Should the St. Louis Park Fire Department partner with the Hopkins
Chemical Assessment Team?
Summary: In support of regional response to hazardous materials events, the St. Louis Park Fire
Department allows one of our staff to train and respond as part of the State Chemical
Assessment Team located at the Hopkins Fire Department. This collaboration provides ongoing
training and exposure to current standards and technology that benefits the St. Louis Park Fire
Department’s response and training.
Financial or budget considerations: By executing the agreement, the City will have access to the
grant funding that supports the team. These funds can be used to cover personnel costs
associated with training and deployment. It also provides for workers compensation and liability
coverage should the members be activated under MN Stat. Sec. 12.351 during an emergency.
Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable.
Supporting documents: Resolution
Memo of understanding
Prepared by: Steve Koering, fire chief
Approve d by: Tom Harmening, city manager
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 4e ) Page 2
Title: Memo of understanding with Hopkins Chemical Assessment Team
Resolution No. 20-____
Resolution to execute m emo of understanding between
the Hopkins Chemical Assessment Team and the City of St. Louis Park
Whereas, the Fire Department currently has members on the roster of the Hopkins
Chemical Assessment Team; and
Whereas, the city seeks to take advantage of the provisions provided to the sponsoring
agency by the memo of understand for the Hopkins Chemical Assessment Team.
Now therefore be it resolved by the city council of St. Louis Park that the city will
execute the memo of understanding with the Hopkins Chemical Assessment Team.
Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council September 21, 2020
Thomas K. Harmening, city manager Jake Spano, mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, city clerk
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 4e ) Page 3
Title: Memo of understanding with Hopkins Chemical Assessment Team
Memorandum of understanding between the
C ities of Hopkins, Minnetonka, and St. Louis Park
regarding mutual aid participation on the Hopkins Chemical Assessment Team
This Memorandum of Understanding (this “MOU”) is made this 21st day of September,
2020, by and between the cities of Hopkins (“Hopkins”), Minnetonka (“Minnetonka”), and St.
Louis Park (“St. Louis Park”), all Minnesota municipal corporations and through each of their
respective fire departments. The three cities may be referred to collectively herein as the
“Parties.”
Recitals
A. Hopkins, through its fire department, currently provides and operates a Hazardous
Materials Emergency Chemical Assessment Team (the “Hopkins CAT Team”) for the
State of Minnesota (the “State”) pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 299A.48-.52
(the “Act”) and a separate Professional and Technical Services Contract that it entered
into with the State (the “CAT Contract”).
B. In accordance with the Act and the CAT Contract, the Hopkins CAT Team responds to a
five -county area for the purpose of supporting other local fire departments in hazardous
materials incidents.
C. Hopkins cannot fully staff the Hopkins CAT Team with its own fire personnel and so
when deployment and response under the CAT Contract is necessary, Hopkins seeks
assistance from certain trained members of both the Minnetonka Fire Department and
the St. Louis Park Fire Department, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 12.331.
D. The Parties desire to continue the aforementioned mutual aid arrangement, although
the State has indicated that in order for non-Hopkins personnel to (1) be deemed state
employees for purposes of liability and workers’ compensation coverage pursuant to
the Act and unde r the terms of the CAT Contract; and (2) be entitled to the same hourly
compensation as Hopkins personnel under the terms of the CAT Contract, a
memorandum of understanding between the Parties which memorializes the
relationship between the Parties is necessary.
Memorandum of understanding
In consideration of the mutual covenants hereinafter provided, it is hereby understood
by the parties as follows:
1. As authorized pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 12.331, the Parties intend to
continue to support one another and operate in a manner that provides the Hopkins
CAT Team with an ability to seek assistance from trained members of both the
Minnetonka Fire Department and the St. Louis Park Fire Department on an as-needed
basis in order to fulfill certain responsibilities under the CAT Contract.
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 4e ) Page 4
Title: Memo of understanding with Hopkins Chemical Assessment Team
2. All provisions contained in Minnesota Statutes, section 12.331, subd. 2 shall continue to
apply to mutual aid activities related to the Parties’ respective participation on the
Hopkins CAT Team, except it is the Parties’ understanding and intent that all personnel
employed by Minnetonka and St. Louis Park, when participating on the Hopkins CAT
Team in any capacity, including, but not limited to, training, emergency deployment, or
otherwise, shall be entitled to hourly compensation pursuant to the terms of the CAT
Contract as if they were members of the Hopkins Fire Department, and furthermore the
provisions regarding liability and workers’ compensation contained in Minnesota
Statutes, section 299A.51 shall apply to said personnel during such participation as if
they were members of the Hopkins Fire Department.
3. Except as expressly outlined herein, this MOU shall not in any way be interpreted to
affect or otherwise alter the rights, obligations, and responsibilities of the Parties or any
other persons or entities under any laws, regulations, or agreements that are in effect or
existence as of the date of this MOU.
In witness whereof, the Parties have executed this Memorandum of Understanding as
of the day and year first written above.
The City of Hopkins
By: ____________________________
Its: Mayor
By: ____________________________
Its: City Manager
The City of St. Louis Park
By: ____________________________
Its: Mayor
By: ____________________________
Its: City Manager
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: September 21, 2020
Consent agenda item: 4f
Executive summary
Title: Accept monetary donation of $310,000 from Maurice Hobbs to Westwood Hills Nature
Center
Recommended action: **Due to the COVID-19 emergency declaration, this item is considered
essential business and is categorized as Time-Sensitive**
• Motion to adopt Resolution approving acceptance of $310,000 from Maurice Hobbs to
construct an outdoor open-air shelter for youth programming at Westwood Hills Nature
Center in memory of his wife , Barbara Hobbs.
Policy consideration: Does the city council wish to accept these gifts with restrictions on their use?
Summary: State statute requires city council’s acceptance of donations. This requirement is
necessary in order to make sure the city council has knowledge of any restrictions placed on the
use of each donation prior to it being expended.
Maurice Hobbs graciously d onated $310,000 to Westwood Hills Nature Center in memory of his
wife Barbara Hobbs with the restriction that it be used to construct an outdoor open-air shelter
for youth programming at Westwood Hills Nature Center.
Maurice moved to St. Louis Park in 1970. His three children all attended Susan Lindgren
Elementary and graduated from St. Louis Park High Schoo l. Later in life, h e bought a
townhouse in the Greensboro Association where he found the nature center and enjoyed
running its trails. Barbara and her family moved to St. Louis Park where she graduated from St.
Louis Park High School. Maurice and Barbara were married in 1994 and began walking daily in
the nature center. They enjoyed the animal life at Westwood Hills Nature Center. Maurice says,
“It always felt like a welcoming place, peaceful, quiet, full of growth and life. We would remark
what a blessing it was to have the nature center practically at our doorstep.” Maurice also
stated, “Barbara thought it was a delightful place for children to run, play , and enjoy the plants
and animals. In her last months, Barbara said she wanted to make an outdoor pavilion for
children so they could enjoy the center and learn to love nature as much as she did.”
Mr. Hobbs respectfully declined being recognized in person during the virtual council meeting.
Financial or budget considerations: This donation will be used to construct an outdoor open-air
shelter for youth programming at Westwood Hills Nature Center.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to creating opportunities to build
social capital through community engagement.
Supporting documents: Resolution
Prepared by: Carrie Mandler, secretary program aide
Reviewed by: Mark Oestreich, Westwood Hills Nature Center manager
Cynthia S. Walsh, director of operations and recreation
Approve d by: Tom Harmening, city manager
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 4f) Page 2
Title: Accept monetary donation of $310,000 from Maurice Hobbs to Westwood Hills Nature Center
Resolution No. 20-____
Resolution approving acceptance of a donation in the amount of $310,000 in
memory of Barbara Hobbs to be used for an outdoor open-air shelter for youth
programming at Westwood Hills Nature Center
Whereas, the City of St. Louis Park is required by state statute to authorize acceptance
of any donations; and
Whereas, the city council must also ratify any restrictions placed on the donation by the
donor; and
Whereas, Maurice Hobbs donated $310,000.
Now therefore be it resolved by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park that this gift
is hereby accepted with thanks to Maurice Hobbs with the understanding that it must be used
to construct an outdoor open-air shelter for youth programming at Westwood Hills Nature
Center in memory of Barbara Hobbs.
Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council Sept. 21, 2020
Thomas K. Harmening, city manager Jake Spano, mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, city clerk
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: September 21, 2020
Consent agenda item: 4g
Executive summary
Title: Retirement recognition for Police Officer Todd Hinz
Recommended action: **Due to the COVID-19 emergency declaration, this item is considered
essential business and is categorized as a Required Action**
•Motion to adopt Resolution to recognize Police Officer Todd Hinz for his 30 years of service .
Policy consideration: None at this time .
Summary: City policy states that employees who retire or resign in good standing with over 20
years of service will be presented with a resolution from the mayor, city manager and city
council. Todd will be in attendance virtually for a presentation of his resolution .
This consent item will officially adopt the resolution that honors Todd for his years of service.
Financial or budget considerations: Not applicable .
Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable.
Supporting documents: Resolution
Prepared by: Ali Timpone, HR manager
Reviewed by: Nancy Deno, deputy city manager/HR director
Approve d by: Tom Harmening, city manager
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 4g) Page 2
Title: Retirement recognition for Police Officer Todd Hinz
Resolution No. 20-____
Resolution of the
City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota
recognizing the contributions and expressing appreciation to
Police Officer Todd Hinz
Whereas, Todd Hinz began his employment with the City of St. Louis Park 30 years ago on
October 15, 1990; and
Whereas, Todd has worked all patrol shifts, including 12 straight years on the overnight
shift; and served as a crisis negotiator for two years, an investigator for three years and a drug
task force officer for 4.5 years; and
Whereas, Todd has served as a training officer, contributing to the field training of at least
28 of his fellow officers; and
Whereas, Todd has contributed to major case successes including the 2014 recovery of 20
pounds of illegal drugs, six illegal firearms, and $100,000 in cash; and was recognized by the FBI
for identifying a bank robber and accomplice from a prior arrest after seeing a news story; and
Whereas, Todd has been awarded more than 25 commendations and chief’s letters of
recognition during his time as an officer; and
Whereas, Todd will spend winters in Florida and return to Minnesota in the summertime
after retiring;
Now therefore be it resolved that the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota,
by this resolution and public record, would like to thank Todd Hinz for his great contributions and
30 years of dedicated service to the City of St. Louis Park and wish him the best in his retirement.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council September 21, 2020
Thomas K. Harmening, city manager Jake Spano, mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, city clerk
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: September 21, 2020
Consent agenda item: 4h
Executive summary
Title: 2020 Law Enforcement Labor Services (LELS) Local #206 Police Officers Labor Agreement
Recommended action: **Due to the COVID-19 emergency declaration, this item is considered
essential business and is categorized as a Required Action**
• Motion to adopt Resolution approving labor agreement between the city and the police
officer’s employee bargaining group, establishing terms and conditions of employment for
one year, from 1/1/2020 – 12/31/2020.
Policy consideration: The proposed 2020 contract is in alignment with other approved labor
agreements for the city.
Summary: Staff is pleased to bring to council the details of a contract agreement between the
city and our police officer group for 2020. This is the last union group to settle for 2020.
Financial or budget considerations: The amount recommended has been included in the 2020
budget.
Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable.
Supporting documents: Discussion
Resolution
Prepared by: Ali Timpone, HR manager
Reviewed by: Nancy Deno, deputy city manager/HR director
Approve d by: Tom Harmening, city manager
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 4h ) Page 2
Title: 2020 Law Enforcement Labor Services (LELS) Local #206 Police Officers Labor Agreement
Discussion
Background: The city and the police officer union group have negotiated and come to
agreement on the following changes to the contract:
•Duration of one year (1/1/2020 – 12/31/2020).
•Wage increase of 3% for 2020 plus a market adjustment of $44.80 bi-w eekly.
−Comment: The 2020 wage increase is consistent with nonunion employees and our
other settled groups for 2020. We conducted a review of our market and the bi-w eekly
market adjustment was added to ensure that our group remains at our target pay of
the 85th percentile.
•Increase assignment pay from $109 per biweekly period to 5% of top patrol pay ($189.92
biweekly) and eliminate performance steps.
−Comment: Based on market review, this change to a percentage of top patrol pay is
consistent with how assignments are paid in comparable cities and positions us at the
85th percentile which is the target pay in our compensation plan.
•Employer contribution for benefits same as other groups for 2020.
•The parties have also agreed to a memorandum of understanding which will provide a
minimum number of off duty hours for overnight shift workers who are required to report
back to work for court. The union requested some language in this area as a wellness
initiative to address rest habits of overnight shift workers. The memorandum of
understanding will allow this new program to be tested on a trial period for the remainder
of 2020 and the full year 2021.
Next steps: Staff recommends approval. The proposed contract is on file with the city clerk.
More detail is available upon request.
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 4h ) Page 3
Title: 2020 Law Enforcement Labor Services (LELS) Local #206 Police Officers Labor Agreement
Resolution No. 20-____
Resolution approving labor agreement between
the City of St. Louis Park and
Law Enforcement Labor Services (LELS ) Local #206
January 1, 2020 – December 31, 2020
Whereas, the city and the union have reached a negotiated settlement covering the
terms and conditions of a labor agreement as permitted by the State of Minnesota Public
Employees Labor Relations Act, and
Whereas, the city council may enter into such agreements as authorized by its charter;
Now therefore be it resolved by the city council of the City of St. Louis Park that the
mayor and city m anager are authorized to execute a collective bargaining agreement, city
contract #______ between the City of St. Louis Park and LELS Local #206 Police Officers
effective January 1, 2020 – December 31, 2020.
Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council September 21, 2020
Thomas K. Harmening, city manager Jake Spano, mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, city clerk
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: September 21, 2020
Consent agenda item: 4i
Executive summary
Title: Deferral of special assessment – 4405 Cedar Lake Rd.
Recommended action: **Due to the COVID-19 emergency declaration, this item is considered
essential business and is categorized as Time-Sensitive**
•Motion to adopt Resolution approving deferral of special assessment – 4405 Cedar Lake
Rd, St. Louis Park, MN 55416.
Policy consideration: Minnesota Statutes 435.193 through 435.195 provide for deferment of
special assessments and specify the conditions under which municipalities are authorized, on a
voluntary basis, to defer such assessments. The city council adopted Resolution Number 09-
134 on Oct. 19, 2009, establishing the eligibility requirements for a deferral. The recommended
action is consistent with policy previously established by the city council.
Summary: The property owner of the condominium at 4405 Cedar Lake Rd , St. Louis Park, MN
55416, has requested that the special assessment be deferred. This special assessment relates
to a Housing Improvement Area (HIA) assessment assessed against all property owners in the
South Cedar Trails Condominium. The St. Louis Park City Council established this HIA to
facilitate certain improvements to the property.
Homesteaded property owned by persons meeting specified age or disability and income
guidelines are eligible. An application was submitted by the property owner and reviewed by
city staff. All eligibility requirements were determined to be met.
Financial or budget considerations: The city has adequate funds to finance the cost of deferring
this special assessment.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a broad range of
housing and neighborhood oriented development.
Supporting documents: Resolution
Prepared by: Emily Carr, assessment technician
Reviewed by: Melanie Lammers, chief f inancial officer
Marney Olson, assistant housing supervisor
Nancy Deno, deputy city manager/HR director
Approve d by: Tom Harmening, city manager
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 4i) Page 2
Title: Deferral of special assessment – 4405 Cedar Lake Rd.
Resolution No. 20-____
Approving deferral of special assessment 4405 Cedar Lake Rd
Whereas, certain application and authorization for deferral of a special assessment has
been received by the City of St. Louis Park from a property owner seeking to have the special
assessment for their property deferred, as allowed by provisions of Minnesota Statutes Section
435.193 to 435.195.
Now therefore be it resolved the following ap plication satisf ies the criteria for deferral of
a special assessment and is hereby granted:
Deferred
Principal Interest
PID Address Levy No. Amount Rate
30-029-24-43-0032 4405 Cedar Lake Rd 99999 $19,776.78 2.91%
Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council September 21, 2020
Thomas K. Harmening, city manager Jake Spano, mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, city clerk
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: September 21, 2020
Consent agenda item: 4j
Executive summary
Title: Deferral of special assessment - 2150 Ridge Dr. #28
Recommended action: **Due to the COVID-19 emergency declaration, this item is considered
essential business and is categorized as Time-Sensitive**
•Motion to adopt Resolution approving deferral of special assessment – 2150 Ridge Dr. #
28, St. Louis Park, MN 55416.
Policy consideration: Minnesota Statutes 435.193 through 435.195 provide for deferment of
special assessments and specify the conditions under which municipalities are authorized, on a
voluntary basis, to defer such assessments. The city council adopted Resolution Number 09-134
on Oct. 19, 2009, establishing the eligibility requirements for a deferral. The recommended
action is consistent with policy previously established by the city council.
Summary: The property owner of the condominium at 2150 Ridge Dr #28, St. Louis Park, MN
55416, has requested that the remaining balance of the existing special assessment be
deferred. This special assessment relates to a Housing Improvement Area (HIA) assessment
assessed against all property owners in the Sunset Ridge Condominium. The St. Louis Park City
Council established this HIA to facilitate certain improvements to the property.
Property owners who did not initially qualify or elect to defer their assessment may at some
point face financial hardship and become eligible. Homesteaded property owned by persons
meeting specified age or disability and income guidelines are eligible. An application was
submitted by the property owner and reviewed by city staff. All eligibility requirements were
determined to be met.
Financial or budget considerations: The city has adequate funds to finance the cost of deferring
this special assessment.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a broad range of
housing and neighborhood oriented development.
Supporting documents: Resolution
Prepared by: Emily Carr, assessment technician
Reviewed by: Melanie Lammers, chief financial officer
Marney Olson, assistant housing supervisor
Nancy Deno, deputy city manager/HR director
Approve d by: Tom Harmening, city manager
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 4j) Page 2
Title: Deferral of special assessment - 2150 Ridge Dr. #28
Resolution No. 20-____
Approving deferral of special assessment 2150 Ridge Dr. #28
Whereas, certain application and authorization for deferral of a special assessment has
been received by the City of St. Louis Park from a property owner seeking to have the special
assessment for their property deferred, as allowed by provisions of Minnesota Statutes Section
435.193 to 435.195.
Now therefore be it resolved the following application satisf ies the criteria for deferral of
a special assessment and is hereby granted:
Deferred
Principal
PID Address Levy No. Amount___
09-117-21-21-0377 2150 Ridge Dr #28 99999 $8,150.83
Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council September 21, 2020
Thomas K. Harmening, city manager Jake Spano, mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, city clerk
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: September 21, 2020
Consent agenda item: 4k
Executive summary
Title: 2020 Interim Childcare/Tutoring Reimbursement Policy
Recommended action: **Due to the COVID-19 emergency declaration, this item is
considered essential business and is categorized as Time-Sensitive**
•Motion to adopt Resolution establishing the 2020 Interim Childcare/ Tutoring
Reimbursement Policy.
Policy consideration: Does council approve the recommended interim policy as a public
purpose expenditure in 2020?
Summary: This report details a new staff recommended interim benefit to assist employees
who are dealing with school or daycare closures due to COVID-19.
City staff were recently sent a survey asking about back to school scheduling issues caused
by COVID-19 and the resulting distance learning models. An overwhelming majority of staff
who responded reported anxiety and concern about their ability to do their jobs while also
monitoring distance learning or childcare. Although leave benefits and flexible work
arrangements (including telework) are already in place, this policy provides another
resource for parents or caregivers to meet care/educational needs of children while also
allowing employees the ability to continue to work as needed.
The interim policy is recommended to be implemented upon council approval and will be
monitored by human resources with an intent to end the program when no longer deemed
necessary by the worldwide COVID-19 pandemic.
Financial or budget considerations: The cost for this program will be budget neutral. The
program can be funded by unspent dollars in the employee administration fund (tuition
reimbursement line item). Additionally, city staff will seek CARES Act funding for
reimbursement of eligible funds.
Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable.
Supporting documents: Discussion
Resolution
Prepared by: Ali Timpone, HR manager
Approved by: Tom Harmening, city manager
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 4k) Page 2
Title: 2020 Interim Childcare/Tutoring Reimbursement Policy
Discussion
Background: Since March 2020 when COVID-19 was first detected in Minnesota, city leadership
has provided leave benefits, telework and remote working assignments, and a multitude of
other flexible work arrangements to allow staff to balance personal needs and work
responsibilities.
Employee survey: In August, city staff were sent a survey to determine how many employees
would be impacted by distance learning in the fall. 51 people who have school-aged children
completed the survey. 90% of respondents reported they will have a child or children in full-
time distance learning or hybrid learning model in September 2020. Additionally, 74% of
respondents stated that their work schedule will be impacted due to their child’s learning
schedule.
Staff have identified a new benefit/resource to further provide support and assistance to
parents or caregivers who need to be at home to manage distance learning plans for school this
fall. Staff have worked with the city attorney on the program details to make sure it aligns with
regulations. After review of all the information, staff is recommending approval of the benefit
as a public purpose expenditure in order to increase productivity of staff who are also parents
or caregivers.
Interim childcare/tutoring reimbursement policy: The recommended program would provide
reimbursement of up to $1,000 per employee for eligible childcare or tutoring expenses that
are incurred after September 1, 2020. The benefit is taxable per IRS regulations. Staff who
wish to utilize this benefit must provide documentation supporting their reimbursement
request. Staff eligible are benefit earning non-exempt employees (full and part time) who have
been employed for a minimum of 30 calendar days, which is similar to the city’s eligibility policy
for COVID-19 paid leave programs. Exempt employees are not eligible due to a typically higher
annual salary and flexibility in hours available to complete job duties.
Funding: Each year, human resources budgets a lump sum for tuition reimbursement. Over the
past couple of years, some funds remain. For 2020, $45,000 was budgeted and it’s estimated
around $30,000 will be spent , and recommend the remaining budgeted funds be used for this
program. Additionally, since expenses are related to COVID-19 and the resulting school
closures, staff will explore CARES Act funding for this benefit. Pre -approval for the benefit will
be required and requests will only be approved as long as funding is available.
Recommendation: Human resources is please d to recommend another benefit that can
support and assist city staff in balancing work and life in a global pandemic. We know that
providing support to staff also helps their ability to better focus on work. It’s recommended
that the interim policy attached in the resolution be approved upon adoption. Staff will
implement and work with employees on any questions.
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 4k) Page 3
Title: 2020 Interim Childcare/Tutoring Reimbursement Policy
Resolution No. 20-____
Resolution establishing
2020 Interim Child care/Tutoring Reimbursement P olicy
Whereas, the city council has e stablished policies and benefits in accordance with local,
state and federal guidelines; and
Whereas, the city council wishes to establish benefits for staff who may have difficulty
completing work duties due to parenting or caregiver responsibilities due to school or daycare
closures as a result of the global pandemic COVID-19; and
Whereas, the city council has determined that the benefit described below is a public
purpose expenditure;
Now therefore be it resolved by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park that the
following interim benefit be approved effective S ept emb er 22, 2020. The parameters of the
program may be modified or ended by the city manager at any time.
2020 Interim Childcare/Tutoring Reimbursement Policy
The city supports employees who nee d to balance their work duties with parenting or
caregiving responsibilities during COVID-19 related distance learning or daycare closures. Staff
who choose to hire childcare providers or tutors to assist with distance learning or other
COVID-19 related issue s may receive support through this childcare/tutoring reimbursement
policy . Regular full and part-time employees who are non-exempt and have been employed for
at least 30 calendar days with the city may be eligible for reimbursement of childcare/tutoring
expenses.
Employees may be eligible for reimbursement of 100% up to $1,000 maximum in for the cost of
COVID-19 relat ed t utoring or child care expenses. If the employee is receiving another source of
funding, such as a grant/scholarship or u tilizing tax-deferred dependent care flexible spending
accounts, they shall not be eligible for reimbursement on the amount funded by other sources.
The city manager makes all final decisions regarding the reimbursement program and approval
or denial of requests. Requests for f unding will be pre-approved only if budget dollars are
available as part of the tuition reimbursement program.
This program will begin upon approval by city council and will continue unless otherwise
determined due to financial or other considerations and may be modifi ed o r ended at any time
at the discretion of the city manager.
In order f or childcare/tutoring expenses to qualify for reimbursement, the following conditions
must be met:
•The expenses must be incurred due to a school or daycare closure due to COVID-19.
Employees who have the option of sending children to in-person school or daycare
but choose to do distance learning or keep children home are not eligible for
reimbursement in this program.
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 4k) Page 4
Title: 2020 Interim Childcare/Tutoring Reimbursement Policy
• The expenses cannot be incurred for childcare or tutoring provided by an immediate
family member (e.g. grandparent or older sibling).
• Expense reimbursement is capped at $10 per hour and $1,000 maximum per
calendar year. Annual maximum calculated based on date reimbursement request is
received in human resources.
• The expenses incurred must make the employee more available or able to complete
work duties and assignments.
• The expenses must be pre -approved by human resources.
Employees must provide documentation of the expenditure and proof of school or daycare
closure . All requests for reimbursement must be submitted within 30 calendar days of incurred
date to be eligible for reimbursement. Forms are available in Human Resources.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council September 21, 2020
Thomas K. Harme ning, city manager Jake Spano, mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, city clerk
Meeting: City coun cil
Meeting date: September 21, 2020
Consent agenda item: 4 l
OFFICIAL MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
JUNE 3, 2020 – 6:00 p.m.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MEMBERS PRESENT: Jim Beneke, Imran Dagane, Lynette Dumalag, Matt Eckholm,
Courtney Erwin, Jessica Kraft, Tom Weber
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: Jacquelyn Kramer, Sean Walther
Chair Kraft welcomed the two new commissioners to the meeting – Imran Dagane and Tom
Weber – and thanked outgoing commissioners Johnston-Madison and Robertson for their
service.
1. Call to Order – Roll Call
2. Approval of Minutes of May 20, 2020
Commissioner Eckholm made a motion to approve the minutes. Commissioner Dumalag
seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 7-0.
3. Public Hearings
A. Union Park Flats (Union Congregational Church project)
Applicant: Project for Pride in Living
Case Nos: 20-03-CP, 20-04-S, 20-05-PUD
Ms. Kramer, assistant zoning administrator, presented the staff report.
Ms. Kramer stated Union Congregational Church currently owns the project site, which
is guided for civic uses. If council approves the applications, the land will be sold to PPL,
who will develop the sit e and operate the proposed 3 story, 60-unit apartment building.
There will be underground parking and units along the ground floor level will have
private e ntrances. The building will have a mix of studio, one, two, and three bedrooms
with 30% of the AMI or $30,000 for a household of 4 to 80% AMI or $80,000 for a
household of 4. This is a 100% affordable housing development.
Ms. Kramer noted the developer is asking for a comprehensive plan amendment to
change the future land use designation of the site from civic to a high -density
residential; a preliminary and final plat ; and a rezoning from R-3 two family residence
zoning district to a plan ned unit development (PUD).
City council meeting of September 21, 20 20 (Item No. 4l) Page 2 Title: Planning commission meeting minutes June 3, 2020
Commissioner Eckholm asked if the context slide showing the proposed building
elevations with surrounding buildings and if the lower image of the street elevation
study is a single -family home . Ms. Kramer stated yes.
Commission Beneke asked if there is additional parking in the area, aside from the on-
street parking. Mr. Walther stated there are 5 spots on Alabama and 6 spots on
Brunswick adjacent to the site which are inclu ded in staff’s parking counts. There is
additional on -street parking that is permitted in the neighborhood; however, they are
not counted toward parking spots for the development.
Commissioner Dumalag asked if the on -street parking on east and west of the site is
intended for the residents or property use, or if it’s open to anyone . Ms. Kramer stated
they are public parking spaces, and open to anyone, and they are allowed to be counted
to reduce the off-street parking required for the development.
Commissioner Weber asked if the design of 37th Street will req uire any traf fic calming
measures. Mr. Walther stated staff did not find there was a need for any mitigation to
the street due to the proposed project.
Chair Kraft asked about the height limit for a building for the R-3 zoning district . Ms.
Kramer stated it is 3 stories or 35 feet.
Commissioner Dumalag asked where visitors can enter the building, on the north or
south side . Ms. Kramer stated there is a public entrance on the south side in the interior
courtyard, in addition to the main building entrance on the north side along 37th Street.
Commissioner Erwin asked the height difference between this building and the
townhomes to the east. Ms. Kramer stated she does not know the exact height. Mr.
Walther estimated the mid-point of the roof was 25-28 feet .
The applican t, Mr. Wilson, from Project for Pride in Living presented. He explained the
PPL mission and stated they have existed since 1972. He also shared PPL’s goals for this
development.
Chair Kraft opened the public hearing.
JW Starrett, 5825 Goo drich Ave., noted he is the neighborhood captain, adding they
have appreciated working with PPL these last few months and do support affordable
housing. We all care about St. Louis Park . He stated Elmwood is the most historic part of
the city with some of the oldest homes, predating 1900. He added this is a diverse area
of the city as well, with apartments and townhomes in the area as well. He stated this is
the last developable area in Elmwood, and the areas residents are very engaged. He
stated the majority are supportive of the affordable home project, but some are against.
He stated right now the neighborhood wants the best project for the area, but the
proposed project is not in compliance with the comp plan approved in 2019. He noted
they want to create something new, but also keep the flavor of Elmwood, but noted it
City council meeting of September 21, 20 20 (Item No. 4l) Page 3 Title: Planning commission meeting minutes June 3, 2020
just is not there yet. He stated it is too dense, doesn’t comply with parking and the
overall the architecture of the project does not feel appropriate .
John Gleason, 5801 Goodrich Ave ., stated he has been an active volunteer with PPL and
resident of Elmwood for many years. He noted efficiency in land use is part of the
ecosystem, and this information must be studied as it relates to this project. We all
agree on affordability, and 50% of all Elmwood is affordable along with over 12
multifamily projects . He noted how the project fails on many points of livable
community, land use, housing and historic prese rvation goals within the comprehensive
plan, while stating th e biggest failure is with in the future land use designation. Studies
for the site show it is almost two times the maximum density of units at more than 50
units per acre.
Heather Simmonet, 6232 Oxford St ., stated they have frustrations with the architectural
design of the project. She stated it has industrial components and the scale is 3 stories
which overshadows the homes on Brunswick Ave . Additionally , she stated the structure
should be 2 stories only, especially when facing the historical homes on Brunswick Ave.
She state d this project is isolated and was not looked at holistically within the context of
the surrounding area. She added the roofline does not match the home in the area and
the structure should feel like a home and not an institution. She stated it overpowers a
hist orical neighborhood. She asked the commission to think about their decision and its
impacts on one of the greatest neighborhoods in St. Louis Park. She asked the
commission to re -evaluate the design and stated we can do better.
The neighborhood representatives asked for one of the following three actions:
1. to not recommend the project,
2. to not recommend an action and direct staff and the developer to keep working on
the project in order to match the comprehensive plan , or
3. to recommend denial of the project until t hey bring the project into code and with
the comp plan, lower it to 2 stories , get all parking underground and ensure
architecture and design are of superior quality.
Denise Engb ue , 3850 Alabama Ave., noted the presenters are community
repre sentatives, but not community leaders and do not represent her side. She
encouraged the commission and neighbors to welcome new people into the community
in light of the housing crises and increasing economic inequity. She stated this project
will help St. Louis Park lead, and this project will help advance ideals for folks trying to
gain a foothold.
Barb Patterson, 4326 Wooddale Ave ., and member of the city housing team, although
she is not representing the team this evening, stated she is in favor of th e plan. It
supports the 2040 plan and she is pleased about the AMI and the units for families,
proxim ity to parks and light rail and shopping. She is also happy with PPL and their
response in revising the plan as needed. She stated she is impressed with the
association with climate justice, the green plan and light rail, and reduction in parking.
She stated she would be proud of this project in her city and thanked the commission,
PPL and the church.
City council meeting of September 21, 20 20 (Item No. 4l) Page 4 Title: Planning commission meeting minutes June 3, 2020
Mitchell Aldrich, 6016 Oxford St., stated he lives adjacent to the site . He stated the plan
complies with some of the comp plan, but there are some major concerns . He is in favor
of the development, and of it being affordable and of it having an impact on the housing
crisis . However, he stated being immediately next door to the project, he has concern
about the size, scope and architectural mismatch of the project. He stated the
challenges are not eliminated by reducing the footprint, but it’s a start. He
recommended the commissioners come to the site and stand east-west at Brunswick,
and view the area in relation to the design. He would like to be in t he conversations
about the alleyway since he does live right next to the development.
Chuck Burrill, 5900 Oxford, stated at the March 10 public meeting with UCC and PPL,
there was a need for 80 units. Now the development is 60 units vs. 80 units and the
scope seems to have changed, and he asked what other changes could be made by the
June 15th meeting.
Dan Albright, 8607 Westmoreland Ln., stated he is in support of the proje ct as
presented. He added he is a member of the city’s affordable housing team and is
frustrated by the lack of affordable housing in St. Louis Park. He stated this is often due
to intense neighborhood opposition. He added PPL has helped the neighborhood to
understand the project and he encourages the commission to support it.
Ronald Hobson, 4156 Alabama Ave., stated he likes the walkability and reduction in
parking, but he does agree with some of the issues noted by neighbors including the
mass of the building within the single -family and duplex homes in the area. He added he
would appreciate a way to step back the 3rd floor of the Brunswick side so it reduces the
façade and blends in with the neighborhood to the west.
Andrew Sackrison, 6215 Oxford St., asked if amending the comp plan is a normal
occurrence when a project comes f orward , and added he is in agreement with the
project as presented by PPL. He also asked if there is a formal process for changing the
comp plan and noted the land use study is e xpensive to perform.
Tristen Ritter, 6319 Oxford St ., thanked the Elmwood neighborhood for all their work on
affordable housing. She stated her concern is to preserve the safety of the
neighborhood. She stated the height of the building and the fact the re is no slope and
the density are concerns of hers. She added the walkability and traffic are concern s and
streets will need to be plowed in the winter.
Claudia Oxley , 2931 Vernon Ave . S., stated she is in support of the project. She is
in terested in the AMI range and family orientation and the location by light rail st ation
are important, and she feels the density is important in that area. She asks the
commission and PPL team to look at reducing the units on the Brunswick side to reduce
height . She stated PPL brings strength to this project and the commission ne eds to
acknowledge them from a long-term management of the project and stability and the
kind of residents that will be part of the city. The need is urgent and we need to do this
now, with a gre at partner.
City council meeting of September 21, 20 20 (Item No. 4l) Page 5 Title: Planning commission meeting minutes June 3, 2020
Cindy Larson, 4321 Coolidge Ave ., stated she is a 20 + year resident, and has acted as
the environmental commissioner in the city and has been a board member for TC
Habitat for Humanity . She stated this is a special opportunity for the city that is very rare
and does not come along with support services typically . She supports a 68-unit complex
and believes the architecture fits in well.
John Heider, 7609 Lake St., stated he is a construction worker and stated the size of the
project is too large. He agrees with affordable housing but does not know why it cannot
be spread all over St. Louis Park vs. all in one area.
Xavier Varecka, 5900 Oxford St ., stated he was at the March meeting and asked when
the crime rate issues will be addressed in the area, especially with light rail coming in .
How asked will t his development upset the crime rate in the area.
Del Lewchuk, 5900 Oxford, stated he is in favor of the project. He bought in the
community because of the culture and historical aspect of the neighborhood. He states
the project is in violation of the comp plan, and he recommends the commission not
rush this and look at the project in depth, so it meets the city’s long-term objectives.
Aaron Fis her, 6313 Oxford St ., stated he is supportive of affordable housing and is
needed in the city and area. He state d the traffic restrictions in Elmwood are a
consideration with traffic flow and parking and designation for bikeways in the city plan .
Also, the parking restrictions near the roundabout are a consideration, as well as the
narrow streets in the area which are also a safety issue and unique to the neighb orhood.
Shannon Sackrison , 6215 Oxford St ., echoed what has been said this evening and they
need to scale back the size on the Brunswick side.
Sue Budd, 3204 Hillsboro, stated she is in favor of this project and it will bring positive
changes, especially with the ligh t rail station . She is impressed and does not think it has
been rushed. She is hopeful the commission will support the plan as it.
Alex Fracassi, 6220 Oxford St ., is concerned with the scale of the elevation. He stated it
does not show the project will be on a hill, and there is a hill there, which makes the
building too tall. He asked for a two-story design instead of three -story.
Lisa Hasting, 3828 Joppa Ave nue South, stated it’s easy to approve something not in
your neighborhood. She added we do need more affordable housing, but asked how
they can ensure will be only families living there and not just individuals . She hopes the
building can be two-story, and keep the charm of St. Louis Park, within the design.
PPL addressed the concerns of the public. Mr. Wilson presented information on the
crime rates with affordable housing, showing that affordable housing owned by a non-
profit agency does not increase crime in the area of the housing.
He added the height meets the zoning require ments of the city and the images shown
are accurate, as that was called into question. He stated the height will not overshadow
City council meeting of September 21, 20 20 (Item No. 4l) Page 6 Title: Planning commission meeting minutes June 3, 2020
the surrounding buildings, and no one other than Jonny Pops will be shadowed. Also,
the closest house is 132 feet away from the projected buildin g. He added the density is
actually one of the best ecological features of the building. Building 20 less units means
20 more f amilies have to travel a much greater distance to get to light rail and walkable
and bikeable trails, adding the density is a good thing. He noted a traffic study was
completed and there are only 30 more trips per day projected.
Peggy Johnson, 2846 Zarthan Ave ., asked if the hill will be removed and 30 feet will
begin at street level at Brunswick.
Abbie Loosen with PPL stated the 33 feet is from the curb cut and up from there .
Mike Ritter, 6319 Oxford St ., asked if it is possible to see the sources on all 33 studies .
Mr. Wilson stated yes, he will forward that information to the city.
Xavier Varecka, 5900 Oxford S t., stated he has concerns about the crime rate . He hopes
the commission will consider placing this information into the re cord, adding there is no
proof or evidence of the information Mr. Wilson provided.
Chuck Burrill, 5900 Oxford , noted he was told at March meeting that PPL needed to
build a minimum of 80-unit building for this project to be financially helpful for the
church. He aske d what has changed since then and will it go back up to 80 units.
Mitchell Aldrich, 6016 Oxford St ., aske d about the elevation and the hill. He asked for
further explanation on this and the street level at Brunswick.
Sue Basill, 6028 Oxford St., stated density seems to be a common theme and she
suggested if the church could lower their asking price for the land, all could arrive at
design all could be helpful with. She added PPL has been very flexible on all of this,
whereas the church has not.
Mr. Wilson answered the follow up questions. He noted the church is being paid the
appraised value of the site, and PPL typically does not bargain back and forth with
churches, so a third party was involved. The church has been consistent on this and this
all se e med fair to both sides. He added the feasibility of 80 units was sent to the
neighborhood, and that information is available for anyone who wants to review. He
stated the costs were too high for each of the 80 units, so it would have been difficult to
gather the financing. He added when going over costs, the state will not approve
because it makes the project unaffordable.
Mr. Walther note d there is no physical change for the parking lot at the site and existing
conditions will be allowed to continue on. He added with regard to amendments to the
comp plan, there are 1-15 amendments each year, and it is relatively common.
City council meeting of September 21, 20 20 (Item No. 4l) Page 7 Title: Planning commission meeting minutes June 3, 2020
Lisa Hasting, 3828 Joppa Ave nue South, asked for an explanation of affordable housing.
She asked how we will know it will be families that live the city or are singles coming in
from other cities.
Andrew Sackrison, 6215 Oxford St., wanted to confirm there are 6-7 comp plan changes
each year. He asked PPL about including the park across the street within the design
elements.
Chair Kraft closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Dumalag asked if this property will be self -managed by PPL and if they
are going after 9% tax credits with the properties.
Mr. Wilson stated they are going after 9% tax credits, which will be the primary funding
source and they will be doing the property management for the project.
Commissioner Beneke asked if there are any important deadlines coming up related to
the project.
Mr. Walther stated there are two coming up. He stated the city has up to 120 days to
respond to an applicatio n. The only way to extend the deadline beyond that is if the
applicant requests more time. PPL requested an extension and the deadline for the city
to act on the applicatio n is now July 7, 2020. He stated the planning commission must
make a recommendation tonight to advance this to city council for the ir June 15
meeting, and a second meeting of the council on July 6. The second is the annual
application deadline for low income housing tax credits that PPL is trying to meet which
is in mid -July .
Commissioner Bene ke stated he wants to support this project in light of the affordable
housing crisis . His only hesitation is in the last revision presented seems the most
appropriate for this site and he wondered if there is any other public process
appropriate for the project.
Commissioner Eckholm stated hearing the compromise on the table as it stands has
already put the project at risk and lowering the units to 60 has now lowered the number
of folks that can live here . He stated PPL and UCC have made concessions to come to
agreement, and he thinks the project needs to move forward as it stands today.
Commissioner Dumalag stated she is also in full support of the project, adding she
reviewed all of the statements from neighbors. This p roject now happens or it doesn’t,
and there are economies of scale that need to be take n into consideration. She stated
this project aligns with the city’s strategic priorities and the comp plan. Related to the
tax credits, there are many guidelines and compliance that developers need to go
through, and the family’s incomes must be revie wed each year. She is in full support of
the project.
City council meeting of September 21, 20 20 (Item No. 4l) Page 8 Title: Planning commission meeting minutes June 3, 2020
Commissioner Erwin is also in full support of this project as well. She stated she lives in a
very diverse area and she agrees St. Louis Park needs more of this . She thanked
residents for their civic e ngagement as well.
Chair Kraft added she supports the project as well and she visited the site today. She
stated there are taller buildings on three sides and then viewed the homes on Brunswick
as well. She stated the project seems in scale and is appropriate and she appreciates the
compromises that were made on the height also. She sees further change and
development in this area as light rail moves along also.
Commissio ner Eckholm added with light rail coming and changing building codes
allowing for talle r buildings nearer to the light rail station, locking in with this three -
story project here is important now.
Commissioner Dagane stated there is a need for affordable housing for employees in
the area and also fully supports the project, and he thanked PPL for this great
development.
Commissioner Eckholm made a motion, Commissioner Beneke seconded, and
recommending amendment of the comp plan, approval of the prelimin ary and final plat
and the PUD subject to recommendations by staff.
The motion passed on a vote of 7-0.
The proposal will be recommended to the city council.
4. Other Business - none
5. Communications
Mr. Walther stated the June 17 meeting will be cancelled and the next re gularly
scheduled meeting is July 1, 2020. He also recognized the new commissioners.
6. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 8:51 p.m.
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: September 21, 2020
Action agenda item: 5a
Executive summary
Title: Appointment of representative to boards and commissions
Recommended action: *Due to the COVID-19 emergency declaration, this item is considered
essential business and is categorized as a Required Action**
• Motion to appoint Andrew Willette to the Environment and Sustainability Commission for
the term ending on May 31, 2021.
Policy consideration: Does the city council wish to appoint Andrew Willette to serve on the
Environment and Sustainability Commission ?
Summary: Board members are appointed to three -year terms on the Environment and
Sustainability Commission , beginning May 31 of each year. Vacancies may occur upon the
resignation of a board member. If appointed, Andrew Willette will fill a vacant position on the
Environment and Sustainability Commission with a term ending on May 31, 2021.
Financial or budget considerations: Not applicable.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to creating opportunities to build
social capital through community engagement.
Supporting documents: None
Prepared by: Maria Solano, senior management analyst
Approved by: Tom Harmening, city manager
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: September 21, 2020
Public hearing: 6a
Executive summary
Title: Savans Inc. dba Texas Tonka Liquor – off-sale intoxicating liquor license
Recommended action: **Due to the COVID-19 emergency declaration, this item is considered
essential business and is categorized as a Required Action**
• Mayor to open public hearing, take public testimony, and close public hearing. Motion to
approve application from Savans Inc. dba Texas Tonka Liquor for an off-sale intoxicating
liquor license located at 8242 Minnetonka Blvd.
Policy consideration: Does the applicant meet the requirements for the issuance of an off-sale
intoxicating liquor license?
Summary: The city has received an application from Savans Inc. dba Texas Tonka Liquor for an
off-sale intoxicating liquor license located at 8242 Minnetonka Blvd. Texas Tonka Liquor is an
existing business that is be ing sold and will have new ownership under Savans Inc. The existing
space will remain unchanged and business operations will stay as is.
The police department is currently conducting a background investigation for the applicant and
issuance of the license will depend on their findings. The application and police report will be
held on file in the city clerk’s office. The required notice of public hearing was published on
September 3, 2020. If the license is approved, nothing will be issued until all requirements have
been met with the city, Hennepin County, and the State Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement
Division.
Financial or budget considerations: Fees include $500 for the background investigation and
$380 for an off -sale intoxicating liquor license . This fee will be pro -rated for the remainder of
the license term pursuant to city provisions.
Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable .
Supporting documents: None
Prepared by: Chase Peterson-Etem, office assistant
Reviewed by: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk
Approve d by: Tom Harmening, city manager
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: September 21, 2020
Action agenda item: 8a
Executive summary
Title: Series 2020A general obligation bonds
Recommended action: **Due to the COVID-19 emergency declaration, this item is considered
essential business and is categorized as a Required Action**
•Motion to adopt Resolution providing for the sale of general obligation bonds in the
amount of approximately $15,540,000. (Requires 6 of 7 affirmative votes.)
Policy consideration:
•Does the City Council desire to issue general obligation (G.O.) charter bonds in the
amount of $9,940,000 for sidewalk and trails projects, SWLRT, and the Dakota Bridge
and Bikeway project?
•Does the City Council desire to issue general o bligation utility revenue bonds in the
amount of $5,600,000 for utility projects in 2020 and 2021?
Summary: The G.O. bonds of $9,940,000 are proposed to be issued under the authority
provided by the city’s charter. These bonds will fund the current year sidewalk and trail projects
(pavement management), SWLRT Regional Transit Trail Bridge, SE Bikeway, and the Dakota
Bridge and Bikeway pro jects. Since these are proposed to be issued as charter authorized bonds,
the recommended action will require approval by at least 6 of the 7 city council members.
The G.O. Utility Revenue bonds of $5,600,000 will finance several projects over the next two
years including local and commercial street rehab projects, recoat elevated water tower #2, and
installing a booster station at water treatment plant 8.
Financial or budget considerations: The proposed bond issues will be consolidated into one for
potential investors to bid. As discussed at a recent council meeting, the G.O. Bonds will have a
term of 10 years, with the exception of the Dakota bridge, which is 20 years. These bonds will
be repaid with tax levy and/or utility revenues at an estimated True Interest Cost (TIC) ranging
from 1.27%-1.92%.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a variety of options for
people to make their way around the city comfortably, safely and reliably.
Next Steps: Oct. 19, 2020 award sale of the bonds.
Supporting documents: Resolution
Presale report
Prepared by: Melanie Lammers, chief financial officer
Reviewed by: Nancy Deno, deputy city manager/HR director
Approve d by: Tom Harmening, city manager
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 8a) Page 2
Title: Series 2020A general obligation bonds
Resolution No. 20-____
Resolution providing for the issuance and sale of
$15,540,000 general obligation bonds, series 2020A
Be it resolved by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park , Hennepin County,
Minnesota (the “City”) as follows:
A.Whereas, the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota has heretofore
determined that it is necessary and expedient to issue the City 's $15,540,000 General
Obligation Bonds, Series 2020A (the "Bonds"), to finance various bridge, bikeways,
pavement management, and the 2020 and 2021 utility projects in the City ; and
B.Whereas, the City has retained Ehlers & Associates, Inc., in Roseville, Minnesota
("Ehlers"), as its independent municipal advisor for the Bonds in accordance with
Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.60, Subdivision 2(9);
Now, therefore, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park,
Minnesota, as follows:
1.Authorization; Findings. The City Council hereby authorizes Ehlers to assist the City for
the sale of the Bonds.
2.Meeting; Proposal Opening. The City Council shall meet at 6:30 p.m. on October 19,
2020, for the purpose of considering proposals for and awarding the sale of the Bonds.
3.Official Statement. In connection with said sale, the officers or employees of the City are
hereby authorized to cooperate with Ehlers and participate in the preparation of an
official statement for the Bonds and to execute and deliver it on behalf of the City upon
its completio n.
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by City Council
Member ______________, and, after full discussion thereof and upon a vote being taken
thereon, the following City Council Members voted in favor thereof:
And the following City Council Members voted in opposition:
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council September 21, 2020
Thomas K. Harmening, city manager Jake Spano, mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, city clerk
September 21, 2020
Pre-Sale Report for
City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota
$15,540,000 General Obligation Bonds,
Series 2020A
Prepared by:
Ehlers
3060 Centre Pointe Drive
Roseville, MN 55113
Advisors:
Stacie Kvilvang, Senior Municipal Advisor
Jason Aarsvold, Senior Municipal Advisor
Keith Dahl, Financial Specialist
BUILDING COMMUNITIES. IT’S WHAT WE DO.
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 8a)
Title: Series 2020A general obligation bonds Page 3
Presale Report
City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota
September 21, 2020
Page 1
Proposed Issue:
$15,540,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2020A
Purposes:
The proposed issue includes financing for the following purposes:
1. Bridges, Bikeways, Pavement Management - $9,940,000:
The following projects will be funded, and debt service will be paid from ad valorem
property taxes:
Dakota Bridge - $6,865,000
Dakota Bikeway - $1,060,000
Pavement Management - $955,000
SWLRT Regional Transit Trail Bridge - $575,000
SE Bikeway - $485,000
2. Utilities - $5,600,000:
The City will fund the 2020 and 2021 utility projects in the City. Debt service will be
paid from utility revenues.
Authority:
The Bonds are being issued pursuant to City Charter (#1 above) and Minnesota Statutes,
Chapters:
444 – Utility (#2 above)
475 – General Bonding Authority (#1, and #2 above)
Chapter 444 allows cities to issue debt without limitation as long as debt service is expected
to be paid from water and sewer revenues.
The portion of the Bonds listed under #1 above count against the Net Debt Limit of 3% of the
estimated market value of taxable property in the City, which is currently $233.057 million.
The City currently has $32.825 million in outstanding debt that counts against this limit. If we
add the portion of bonds under this issue, it increases the outstanding amount to $42.765
million. This leaves approximately $190 million in unused debt limit for the City.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF PROPOSED DEBT
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 8a)
Title: Series 2020A general obligation bonds Page 4
Presale Report
City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota
September 21, 2020
Page 2
The Bonds will be general obligations of the City for which its full faith, credit and taxing
powers are pledged.
Term/Call Feature:
The Bonds are being issued for a term of 22 years. The longer term of the bonds applies to
the Dakota Bridge portion of the project only. The other projects will be financed over a 12-
year term. Principal on the Bonds will be due on February 1 in the years 2022 through 2042.
Interest is payable every six months beginning August 1, 2021.
The Bonds will be subject to prepayment at the discretion of the City on February 1, 2029 or
any date thereafter.
Bank Qualification:
Because the City is issuing more than $10,000,000 in tax-exempt obligations during the
calendar year, the City will be not able to designate the Bonds as “bank qualified” obligations.
Rating:
The City’s most recent bond issues were rated by S&P Global Ratings. The current ratings on
those bonds are “AAA”. The City will request a new rating for the Bonds.
Basis for Recommendation:
Based on our knowledge of your situation, your objectives communicated to us, our advisory
relationship as well as characteristics of various municipal financing options, we are
recommending the issuance of general obligation bonds as a suitable financing option for the
following reasons:
- This is a viable option available to finance these types of projects under State law and
City Charter
- This is the most overall cost-effective option that still maintains future flexibility for the
repayment of debt
Method of Sale/Placement:
We will solicit competitive bids for the purchase of the Bonds from underwriters and banks.
We will include an allowance for discount bidding in the terms of the issue. The discount is
treated as an interest item and provides the underwriter with all or a portion of their
compensation in the transaction.
If the Bonds are purchased at a price greater than the minimum bid amount (maximum
discount), the unused allowance may be used to reduce your borrowing amount.
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 8a)
Title: Series 2020A general obligation bonds Page 5
Presale Report
City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota
September 21, 2020
Page 3
Premium Pricing:
In some cases, investors in municipal bonds prefer “premium” pricing structures. A premium
is achieved when the coupon for any maturity (the interest rate paid by the issuer) exceeds
the yield to the investor, resulting in a price paid that is greater than the face value of the
bonds. The sum of the amounts paid in excess of face value is considered “reoffering
premium.” The underwriter of the bonds will retain a portion of this reoffering premium as their
compensation (or “discount”) but will pay the remainder of the premium to the City. The
amount of the premium varies, but it is not uncommon to see premiums for new issues in the
range of 2.00% to 10.00% of the face amount of the issue. This means that an issuer with a
$2,000,000 offering may receive bids that result in proceeds of $2,040,000 to $2,200,000.
For this issue of Bonds we have been directed to use the net premium to increase the net
proceeds for the projects. The resulting adjustments may slightly change the true interest cost
of the issue, either up or down.
The amount of premium can be restricted in the bid specifications. Restrictions on premium
may result in fewer bids, but may also eliminate large adjustments on the day of sale and
unintended impacts with respect to debt service payment. Ehlers will identify appropriate
premium restrictions for the Bonds intended to achieve the City’s objectives for this financing.
Review of Existing Debt:
We have reviewed all outstanding indebtedness for the City and find that there is an
opportunity to refund the City’s General Obligation Bonds, Series 2010C (Louisiana Court
Apartments). Ehlers will work with staff on the timing and structuring of this refinancing.
We will continue to monitor the market and the call dates for the City’s outstanding debt and
will alert you to any future refunding opportunities.
Continuing Disclosure:
Because the City has more than $10,000,000 in outstanding debt (including this issue) and
this issue is over $1,000,000, the City will be agreeing to provide certain updated Annual
Financial Information and its Audited Financial Statement annually, as well as providing notices
of the occurrence of certain reportable events to the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board
(the “MSRB”), as required by rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The City
is already obligated to provide such reports for its existing bonds, and has contracted with
Ehlers to prepare and file the reports.
Arbitrage Monitoring:
Because the Bonds tax-exempt obligations, the City must ensure compliance with certain
Internal Revenue Service (IRS) rules throughout the life of the issue. These rules apply to all
gross proceeds of the issue, including initial bond proceeds and investment earnings in
construction, escrow, debt service, and any reserve funds. How issuers spend bond proceeds
and how they track interest earnings on funds (arbitrage/yield restriction compliance) are
common subjects of IRS inquiries. Your specific responsibilities will be defined in the Tax
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 8a)
Title: Series 2020A general obligation bonds Page 6
Presale Report
City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota
September 21, 2020
Page 4
Certificate prepared by your Bond Attorney and provided at closing. You have retained Ehlers
to assist you in complying with these rules.
Investment of Bond Proceeds:
To maximize interest earnings we recommend using an SEC registered investment advisor to
assist with the investment of bond proceeds until they are needed to pay project costs. Ehlers
is a registered investment advisor, and can assist the City in developing an appropriate
investment strategy if needed.
Other Service Providers:
This debt issuance will require the engagement of other public finance service providers. This
section identifies those other service providers, so Ehlers can coordinate their engagement on
your behalf. Where you have previously used a particular firm to provide a service, we have
assumed that you will continue that relationship. For services you have not previously required,
we have identified a service provider. Fees charged by these service providers will be paid
from proceeds of the obligation, unless you notify us that you wish to pay them from other
sources. Our pre-sale bond sizing includes a good faith estimate of these fees, but the final
fees may vary. If you have any questions pertaining to the identified service providers or their
role, or if you would like to use a different service provider for any of the listed services please
contact us.
Bond Counsel: Kennedy & Graven, Chartered
Paying Agent: Bond Trust Services Corporation
Rating Agency: S&P Global Ratings (S&P)
Summary:
The decisions to be made by the City Council are as follows:
Accept or modify the finance assumptions described in this report
Adopt the resolution attached to this report.
This presale report summarizes our understanding of the City’s objectives for the structure
and terms of this financing as of this date. As additional facts become known or capital
markets conditions change, we may need to modify the structure and/or terms of this
financing to achieve results consistent with the City’s objectives.
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 8a)
Title: Series 2020A general obligation bonds Page 7
Presale Report
City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota
September 21, 2020
Page 5
Pre-Sale Review by City Council: September 21, 2020
Due Diligence Call to review Official Statement: Week of October 12,
2020
Distribute Official Statement: Week of October 5,
2020
Conference with Rating Agency: Week of October 12,
2020
City Council Meeting to Award Sale of the Bonds: October 19, 2020
Estimated Closing Date: November 10, 2020
Redemption Date for Bonds Being Refunded: February 1, 2021
Attachments
Estimated Sources and Uses of Funds
Estimated Proposed Debt Service Schedule
Resolution Authorizing Ehlers to Proceed with Bonds Sale
EHLE CONTACTS
Stacie Kvilvang, Senior Municipal Advisor (651) 697-8506
Jason Aarsvold, Senior Municipal Advisor (651) 697-8512
Keith Dahl, Financial Specialist (651) 697-8595
Silvia Johnson, Public Finance Analyst (651) 697-8580
Alicia Gage, Senior Financial Analyst (651) 697-8551
The Preliminary Official Statement for this financing will be sent to the City Council at
their home or email address for review prior to the sale date.
PROPOSED DEBT ISSUANCE SCHEDULE
EHLERS’ CONTACTS
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 8a)
Title: Series 2020A general obligation bonds Page 8
St Louis Park, Minnesota
$15,540,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2020
Issue Summary
Assumes Current Market Non-BQ AAA Rates plus 20bps
Total Issue Sources And Uses
Dated 11/10/2020 | Delivered 11/10/2020
Dakota Bridge
Dakota
Bikeway SE Bikeway
Pavement
Management
SWLRT
Regional
Transit Trail
Bridge Utilities
Issue
Summary
Sources Of Funds
Par Amount of Bonds $6,865,000.00 $1,060,000.00 $485,000.00 $955,000.00 $575,000.00 $5,600,000.00 $15,540,000.00
Federal Aid 2,918,400.00 -----2,918,400.00
Utility Fund Revenue 318,500.00 -----318,500.00
Total Sources $10,101,900.00 $1,060,000.00 $485,000.00 $955,000.00 $575,000.00 $5,600,000.00 $18,776,900.00
Uses Of Funds
Total Underwriter's Discount (1.000%)68,650.00 10,600.00 4,850.00 9,550.00 5,750.00 56,000.00 155,400.00
Costs of Issuance 56,545.69 8,731.01 3,994.86 7,866.15 4,736.16 46,126.13 128,000.00
Deposit to Capitalized Interest (CIF) Fund 130,450.25 12,638.94 5,809.56 11,377.19 6,890.63 -167,166.57
Deposit to Project Construction Fund 9,842,836.00 1,027,373.00 469,797.83 927,369.00 558,682.00 5,500,000.00 18,326,057.83
Rounding Amount 3,418.06 657.05 547.75 (1,162.34)(1,058.79)(2,126.13)275.60
Total Uses $10,101,900.00 $1,060,000.00 $485,000.00 $955,000.00 $575,000.00 $5,600,000.00 $18,776,900.00
Series 2020A GO Bonds - N | Issue Summary | 9/15/2020 | 2:26 PM
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 8a)
Title: Series 2020A general obligation bonds Page 9
St Louis Park, Minnesota
$15,540,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2020
Issue Summary
Assumes Current Market Non-BQ AAA Rates plus 20bps
Debt Service Schedule
Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I Fiscal Total
11/10/2020 -----
08/01/2021 --146,359.38 146,359.38 -
02/01/2022 335,000.00 0.500%100,937.50 435,937.50 582,296.88
08/01/2022 --100,100.00 100,100.00 -
02/01/2023 950,000.00 0.500%100,100.00 1,050,100.00 1,150,200.00
08/01/2023 --97,725.00 97,725.00 -
02/01/2024 965,000.00 0.550%97,725.00 1,062,725.00 1,160,450.00
08/01/2024 --95,071.25 95,071.25 -
02/01/2025 970,000.00 0.600%95,071.25 1,065,071.25 1,160,142.50
08/01/2025 --92,161.25 92,161.25 -
02/01/2026 975,000.00 0.750%92,161.25 1,067,161.25 1,159,322.50
08/01/2026 --88,505.00 88,505.00 -
02/01/2027 980,000.00 0.900%88,505.00 1,068,505.00 1,157,010.00
08/01/2027 --84,095.00 84,095.00 -
02/01/2028 995,000.00 1.000%84,095.00 1,079,095.00 1,163,190.00
08/01/2028 --79,120.00 79,120.00 -
02/01/2029 1,000,000.00 1.150%79,120.00 1,079,120.00 1,158,240.00
08/01/2029 --73,370.00 73,370.00 -
02/01/2030 1,015,000.00 1.300%73,370.00 1,088,370.00 1,161,740.00
08/01/2030 --66,772.50 66,772.50 -
02/01/2031 1,030,000.00 1.400%66,772.50 1,096,772.50 1,163,545.00
08/01/2031 --59,562.50 59,562.50 -
02/01/2032 1,040,000.00 1.500%59,562.50 1,099,562.50 1,159,125.00
08/01/2032 --51,762.50 51,762.50 -
02/01/2033 730,000.00 1.600%51,762.50 781,762.50 833,525.00
08/01/2033 --45,922.50 45,922.50 -
02/01/2034 740,000.00 1.700%45,922.50 785,922.50 831,845.00
08/01/2034 --39,632.50 39,632.50 -
02/01/2035 755,000.00 1.800%39,632.50 794,632.50 834,265.00
08/01/2035 --32,837.50 32,837.50 -
02/01/2036 765,000.00 1.900%32,837.50 797,837.50 830,675.00
08/01/2036 --25,570.00 25,570.00 -
02/01/2037 360,000.00 2.100%25,570.00 385,570.00 411,140.00
08/01/2037 --21,790.00 21,790.00 -
02/01/2038 370,000.00 2.150%21,790.00 391,790.00 413,580.00
08/01/2038 --17,812.50 17,812.50 -
02/01/2039 380,000.00 2.200%17,812.50 397,812.50 415,625.00
08/01/2039 --13,632.50 13,632.50 -
02/01/2040 385,000.00 2.250%13,632.50 398,632.50 412,265.00
08/01/2040 --9,301.25 9,301.25 -
02/01/2041 395,000.00 2.300%9,301.25 404,301.25 413,602.50
08/01/2041 --4,758.75 4,758.75 -
02/01/2042 405,000.00 2.350%4,758.75 409,758.75 414,517.50
Total $15,540,000.00 -$2,446,301.88 $17,986,301.88 -
Yield Statistics
Bond Year Dollars $152,136.50
Average Life 9.790 Years
Average Coupon 1.6079651%
Net Interest Cost (NIC)1.7101102%
True Interest Cost (TIC)1.6999195%
Bond Yield for Arbitrage Purposes 1.5874800%
All Inclusive Cost (AIC)1.7937277%
IRS Form 8038
Net Interest Cost 1.6079651%
Weighted Average Maturity 9.790 Years
Series 2020A GO Bonds - N | Issue Summary | 9/15/2020 | 2:26 PM
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 8a)
Title: Series 2020A general obligation bonds Page 10
St Louis Park, Minnesota
$15,540,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2020
Issue Summary
Assumes Current Market Non-BQ AAA Rates plus 20bps
Detail Costs Of Issuance
Dated 11/10/2020 | Delivered 11/10/2020
COSTS OF ISSUANCE DETAIL
Municipal Advisor $88,000.00
Bond Counsel $19,000.00
Rating Agency Fee $20,000.00
Miscellaneous $1,000.00
TOTAL $128,000.00
Series 2020A GO Bonds - N | Issue Summary | 9/15/2020 | 2:26 PM
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 8a)
Title: Series 2020A general obligation bonds Page 11
St Louis Park, Minnesota
$15,540,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2020
Issue Summary
Assumes Current Market Non-BQ AAA Rates plus 20bps
Debt Service Schedule
Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I CIF Net New D/S 105% of Total Utility Revenue Levy/(Surplus)
02/01/2021 ---------
02/01/2022 335,000.00 0.500%247,296.88 582,296.88 (167,166.57)415,130.31 435,886.83 435,886.83 -
02/01/2023 950,000.00 0.500%200,200.00 1,150,200.00 -1,150,200.00 1,207,710.00 439,674.38 768,035.63
02/01/2024 965,000.00 0.550%195,450.00 1,160,450.00 -1,160,450.00 1,218,472.50 437,810.63 780,661.88
02/01/2025 970,000.00 0.600%190,142.50 1,160,142.50 -1,160,142.50 1,218,149.63 441,010.50 777,139.13
02/01/2026 975,000.00 0.750%184,322.50 1,159,322.50 -1,159,322.50 1,217,288.63 438,742.50 778,546.13
02/01/2027 980,000.00 0.900%177,010.00 1,157,010.00 -1,157,010.00 1,214,860.50 435,907.50 778,953.00
02/01/2028 995,000.00 1.000%168,190.00 1,163,190.00 -1,163,190.00 1,221,349.50 437,755.50 783,594.00
02/01/2029 1,000,000.00 1.150%158,240.00 1,158,240.00 -1,158,240.00 1,216,152.00 439,173.00 776,979.00
02/01/2030 1,015,000.00 1.300%146,740.00 1,161,740.00 -1,161,740.00 1,219,827.00 439,955.25 779,871.75
02/01/2031 1,030,000.00 1.400%133,545.00 1,163,545.00 -1,163,545.00 1,221,722.25 440,086.50 781,635.75
02/01/2032 1,040,000.00 1.500%119,125.00 1,159,125.00 -1,159,125.00 1,217,081.25 439,750.50 777,330.75
02/01/2033 730,000.00 1.600%103,525.00 833,525.00 -833,525.00 875,201.25 438,936.75 436,264.50
02/01/2034 740,000.00 1.700%91,845.00 831,845.00 -831,845.00 873,437.25 437,634.75 435,802.50
02/01/2035 755,000.00 1.800%79,265.00 834,265.00 -834,265.00 875,978.25 441,084.00 434,894.25
02/01/2036 765,000.00 1.900%65,675.00 830,675.00 -830,675.00 872,208.75 438,679.50 433,529.25
02/01/2037 360,000.00 2.100%51,140.00 411,140.00 -411,140.00 431,697.00 -431,697.00
02/01/2038 370,000.00 2.150%43,580.00 413,580.00 -413,580.00 434,259.00 -434,259.00
02/01/2039 380,000.00 2.200%35,625.00 415,625.00 -415,625.00 436,406.25 -436,406.25
02/01/2040 385,000.00 2.250%27,265.00 412,265.00 -412,265.00 432,878.25 -432,878.25
02/01/2041 395,000.00 2.300%18,602.50 413,602.50 -413,602.50 434,282.63 -434,282.63
02/01/2042 405,000.00 2.350%9,517.50 414,517.50 -414,517.50 435,243.38 -435,243.38
Total $15,540,000.00 -$2,446,301.88 $17,986,301.88 (167,166.57)$17,819,135.31 $18,710,092.08 $6,582,088.08 $12,128,004.00
Significant Dates
Dated 11/10/2020
First Coupon Date 8/01/2021
Yield Statistics
Bond Year Dollars $152,136.50
Average Life 9.790 Years
Average Coupon 1.6079651%
Net Interest Cost (NIC)1.7101102%
True Interest Cost (TIC)1.6999195%
Bond Yield for Arbitrage Purposes 1.5874800%
All Inclusive Cost (AIC)1.7937277%
Series 2020A GO Bonds - N | Issue Summary | 9/15/2020 | 2:26 PM
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 8a)
Title: Series 2020A general obligation bonds Page 12
St Louis Park, Minnesota
$6,865,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2020
Dakota Bridge
Assumes Current Market Non-BQ AAA Rates plus 20bps
Debt Service Schedule
Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I Fiscal Total
11/10/2020 -----
08/01/2021 --77,205.25 77,205.25 -
02/01/2022 --53,245.00 53,245.00 130,450.25
08/01/2022 --53,245.00 53,245.00 -
02/01/2023 305,000.00 0.500%53,245.00 358,245.00 411,490.00
08/01/2023 --52,482.50 52,482.50 -
02/01/2024 310,000.00 0.550%52,482.50 362,482.50 414,965.00
08/01/2024 --51,630.00 51,630.00 -
02/01/2025 310,000.00 0.600%51,630.00 361,630.00 413,260.00
08/01/2025 --50,700.00 50,700.00 -
02/01/2026 310,000.00 0.750%50,700.00 360,700.00 411,400.00
08/01/2026 --49,537.50 49,537.50 -
02/01/2027 315,000.00 0.900%49,537.50 364,537.50 414,075.00
08/01/2027 --48,120.00 48,120.00 -
02/01/2028 320,000.00 1.000%48,120.00 368,120.00 416,240.00
08/01/2028 --46,520.00 46,520.00 -
02/01/2029 320,000.00 1.150%46,520.00 366,520.00 413,040.00
08/01/2029 --44,680.00 44,680.00 -
02/01/2030 325,000.00 1.300%44,680.00 369,680.00 414,360.00
08/01/2030 --42,567.50 42,567.50 -
02/01/2031 330,000.00 1.400%42,567.50 372,567.50 415,135.00
08/01/2031 --40,257.50 40,257.50 -
02/01/2032 335,000.00 1.500%40,257.50 375,257.50 415,515.00
08/01/2032 --37,745.00 37,745.00 -
02/01/2033 340,000.00 1.600%37,745.00 377,745.00 415,490.00
08/01/2033 --35,025.00 35,025.00 -
02/01/2034 345,000.00 1.700%35,025.00 380,025.00 415,050.00
08/01/2034 --32,092.50 32,092.50 -
02/01/2035 350,000.00 1.800%32,092.50 382,092.50 414,185.00
08/01/2035 --28,942.50 28,942.50 -
02/01/2036 355,000.00 1.900%28,942.50 383,942.50 412,885.00
08/01/2036 --25,570.00 25,570.00 -
02/01/2037 360,000.00 2.100%25,570.00 385,570.00 411,140.00
08/01/2037 --21,790.00 21,790.00 -
02/01/2038 370,000.00 2.150%21,790.00 391,790.00 413,580.00
08/01/2038 --17,812.50 17,812.50 -
02/01/2039 380,000.00 2.200%17,812.50 397,812.50 415,625.00
08/01/2039 --13,632.50 13,632.50 -
02/01/2040 385,000.00 2.250%13,632.50 398,632.50 412,265.00
08/01/2040 --9,301.25 9,301.25 -
02/01/2041 395,000.00 2.300%9,301.25 404,301.25 413,602.50
08/01/2041 --4,758.75 4,758.75 -
02/01/2042 405,000.00 2.350%4,758.75 409,758.75 414,517.50
Total $6,865,000.00 -$1,543,270.25 $8,408,270.25 -
Yield Statistics
Bond Year Dollars $83,874.63
Average Life 12.218 Years
Average Coupon 1.8399728%
Net Interest Cost (NIC)1.9218211%
True Interest Cost (TIC)1.9115389%
Bond Yield for Arbitrage Purposes 1.5874800%
All Inclusive Cost (AIC)1.9893294%
IRS Form 8038
Net Interest Cost 1.8399728%
Weighted Average Maturity 12.218 Years
Series 2020A GO Bonds - N | Dakota Bridge | 9/15/2020 | 2:26 PM
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 8a)
Title: Series 2020A general obligation bonds Page 13
St Louis Park, Minnesota
$6,865,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2020
Dakota Bridge
Assumes Current Market Non-BQ AAA Rates plus 20bps
Debt Service Schedule
Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I CIF Net New D/S
105% of
Total
02/01/2021 -------
02/01/2022 --130,450.25 130,450.25 (130,450.25)--
02/01/2023 305,000.00 0.500%106,490.00 411,490.00 -411,490.00 432,064.50
02/01/2024 310,000.00 0.550%104,965.00 414,965.00 -414,965.00 435,713.25
02/01/2025 310,000.00 0.600%103,260.00 413,260.00 -413,260.00 433,923.00
02/01/2026 310,000.00 0.750%101,400.00 411,400.00 -411,400.00 431,970.00
02/01/2027 315,000.00 0.900%99,075.00 414,075.00 -414,075.00 434,778.75
02/01/2028 320,000.00 1.000%96,240.00 416,240.00 -416,240.00 437,052.00
02/01/2029 320,000.00 1.150%93,040.00 413,040.00 -413,040.00 433,692.00
02/01/2030 325,000.00 1.300%89,360.00 414,360.00 -414,360.00 435,078.00
02/01/2031 330,000.00 1.400%85,135.00 415,135.00 -415,135.00 435,891.75
02/01/2032 335,000.00 1.500%80,515.00 415,515.00 -415,515.00 436,290.75
02/01/2033 340,000.00 1.600%75,490.00 415,490.00 -415,490.00 436,264.50
02/01/2034 345,000.00 1.700%70,050.00 415,050.00 -415,050.00 435,802.50
02/01/2035 350,000.00 1.800%64,185.00 414,185.00 -414,185.00 434,894.25
02/01/2036 355,000.00 1.900%57,885.00 412,885.00 -412,885.00 433,529.25
02/01/2037 360,000.00 2.100%51,140.00 411,140.00 -411,140.00 431,697.00
02/01/2038 370,000.00 2.150%43,580.00 413,580.00 -413,580.00 434,259.00
02/01/2039 380,000.00 2.200%35,625.00 415,625.00 -415,625.00 436,406.25
02/01/2040 385,000.00 2.250%27,265.00 412,265.00 -412,265.00 432,878.25
02/01/2041 395,000.00 2.300%18,602.50 413,602.50 -413,602.50 434,282.63
02/01/2042 405,000.00 2.350%9,517.50 414,517.50 -414,517.50 435,243.38
Total $6,865,000.00 -$1,543,270.25 $8,408,270.25 (130,450.25)$8,277,820.00 $8,691,711.00
Significant Dates
Dated 11/10/2020
First Coupon Date 8/01/2021
Yield Statistics
Bond Year Dollars $83,874.63
Average Life 12.218 Years
Average Coupon 1.8399728%
Net Interest Cost (NIC)1.9218211%
True Interest Cost (TIC)1.9115389%
Bond Yield for Arbitrage Purposes 1.5874800%
All Inclusive Cost (AIC)1.9893294%
Series 2020A GO Bonds - N | Dakota Bridge | 9/15/2020 | 2:26 PM
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 8a)
Title: Series 2020A general obligation bonds Page 14
St Louis Park, Minnesota
$1,060,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2020
Dakota Bikeway
Assumes Current Market Non-BQ AAA Rates plus 20bps
Debt Service Schedule
Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I Fiscal Total
11/10/2020 -----
08/01/2021 --7,480.19 7,480.19 -
02/01/2022 --5,158.75 5,158.75 12,638.94
08/01/2022 --5,158.75 5,158.75 -
02/01/2023 100,000.00 0.500%5,158.75 105,158.75 110,317.50
08/01/2023 --4,908.75 4,908.75 -
02/01/2024 105,000.00 0.550%4,908.75 109,908.75 114,817.50
08/01/2024 --4,620.00 4,620.00 -
02/01/2025 105,000.00 0.600%4,620.00 109,620.00 114,240.00
08/01/2025 --4,305.00 4,305.00 -
02/01/2026 105,000.00 0.750%4,305.00 109,305.00 113,610.00
08/01/2026 --3,911.25 3,911.25 -
02/01/2027 105,000.00 0.900%3,911.25 108,911.25 112,822.50
08/01/2027 --3,438.75 3,438.75 -
02/01/2028 105,000.00 1.000%3,438.75 108,438.75 111,877.50
08/01/2028 --2,913.75 2,913.75 -
02/01/2029 105,000.00 1.150%2,913.75 107,913.75 110,827.50
08/01/2029 --2,310.00 2,310.00 -
02/01/2030 110,000.00 1.300%2,310.00 112,310.00 114,620.00
08/01/2030 --1,595.00 1,595.00 -
02/01/2031 110,000.00 1.400%1,595.00 111,595.00 113,190.00
08/01/2031 --825.00 825.00 -
02/01/2032 110,000.00 1.500%825.00 110,825.00 111,650.00
Total $1,060,000.00 -$80,611.44 $1,140,611.44 -
Yield Statistics
Bond Year Dollars $7,203.50
Average Life 6.796 Years
Average Coupon 1.1190593%
Net Interest Cost (NIC)1.2662100%
True Interest Cost (TIC)1.2689601%
Bond Yield for Arbitrage Purposes 1.5874800%
All Inclusive Cost (AIC)1.3977706%
IRS Form 8038
Net Interest Cost 1.1190593%
Weighted Average Maturity 6.796 Years
Series 2020A GO Bonds - N | Dakota Bikeway | 9/15/2020 | 2:26 PM
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 8a)
Title: Series 2020A general obligation bonds Page 15
St Louis Park, Minnesota
$1,060,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2020
Dakota Bikeway
Assumes Current Market Non-BQ AAA Rates plus 20bps
Debt Service Schedule
Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I CIF Net New D/S
105% of
Total
02/01/2021 -------
02/01/2022 --12,638.94 12,638.94 (12,638.94)--
02/01/2023 100,000.00 0.500%10,317.50 110,317.50 -110,317.50 115,833.38
02/01/2024 105,000.00 0.550%9,817.50 114,817.50 -114,817.50 120,558.38
02/01/2025 105,000.00 0.600%9,240.00 114,240.00 -114,240.00 119,952.00
02/01/2026 105,000.00 0.750%8,610.00 113,610.00 -113,610.00 119,290.50
02/01/2027 105,000.00 0.900%7,822.50 112,822.50 -112,822.50 118,463.63
02/01/2028 105,000.00 1.000%6,877.50 111,877.50 -111,877.50 117,471.38
02/01/2029 105,000.00 1.150%5,827.50 110,827.50 -110,827.50 116,368.88
02/01/2030 110,000.00 1.300%4,620.00 114,620.00 -114,620.00 120,351.00
02/01/2031 110,000.00 1.400%3,190.00 113,190.00 -113,190.00 118,849.50
02/01/2032 110,000.00 1.500%1,650.00 111,650.00 -111,650.00 117,232.50
Total $1,060,000.00 -$80,611.44 $1,140,611.44 (12,638.94)$1,127,972.50 $1,184,371.13
Significant Dates
Dated 11/10/2020
First Coupon Date 8/01/2021
Yield Statistics
Bond Year Dollars $7,203.50
Average Life 6.796 Years
Average Coupon 1.1190593%
Net Interest Cost (NIC)1.2662100%
True Interest Cost (TIC)1.2689601%
Bond Yield for Arbitrage Purposes 1.5874800%
All Inclusive Cost (AIC)1.3977706%
Series 2020A GO Bonds - N | Dakota Bikeway | 9/15/2020 | 2:26 PM
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 8a)
Title: Series 2020A general obligation bonds Page 16
St Louis Park, Minnesota
$485,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2020
SE Bikeway
Assumes Current Market Non-BQ AAA Rates plus 20bps
Debt Service Schedule
Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I Fiscal Total
11/10/2020 -----
08/01/2021 --3,438.31 3,438.31 -
02/01/2022 --2,371.25 2,371.25 5,809.56
08/01/2022 --2,371.25 2,371.25 -
02/01/2023 45,000.00 0.500%2,371.25 47,371.25 49,742.50
08/01/2023 --2,258.75 2,258.75 -
02/01/2024 45,000.00 0.550%2,258.75 47,258.75 49,517.50
08/01/2024 --2,135.00 2,135.00 -
02/01/2025 45,000.00 0.600%2,135.00 47,135.00 49,270.00
08/01/2025 --2,000.00 2,000.00 -
02/01/2026 50,000.00 0.750%2,000.00 52,000.00 54,000.00
08/01/2026 --1,812.50 1,812.50 -
02/01/2027 50,000.00 0.900%1,812.50 51,812.50 53,625.00
08/01/2027 --1,587.50 1,587.50 -
02/01/2028 50,000.00 1.000%1,587.50 51,587.50 53,175.00
08/01/2028 --1,337.50 1,337.50 -
02/01/2029 50,000.00 1.150%1,337.50 51,337.50 52,675.00
08/01/2029 --1,050.00 1,050.00 -
02/01/2030 50,000.00 1.300%1,050.00 51,050.00 52,100.00
08/01/2030 --725.00 725.00 -
02/01/2031 50,000.00 1.400%725.00 50,725.00 51,450.00
08/01/2031 --375.00 375.00 -
02/01/2032 50,000.00 1.500%375.00 50,375.00 50,750.00
Total $485,000.00 -$37,114.56 $522,114.56 -
Yield Statistics
Bond Year Dollars $3,314.13
Average Life 6.833 Years
Average Coupon 1.1198902%
Net Interest Cost (NIC)1.2662335%
True Interest Cost (TIC)1.2690680%
Bond Yield for Arbitrage Purposes 1.5874800%
All Inclusive Cost (AIC)1.3971846%
IRS Form 8038
Net Interest Cost 1.1198902%
Weighted Average Maturity 6.833 Years
Series 2020A GO Bonds - N | SE Bikeway | 9/15/2020 | 2:26 PM
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 8a)
Title: Series 2020A general obligation bonds Page 17
St Louis Park, Minnesota
$485,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2020
SE Bikeway
Assumes Current Market Non-BQ AAA Rates plus 20bps
Debt Service Schedule
Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I CIF
Net New
D/S
105% of
Total
02/01/2021 -------
02/01/2022 --5,809.56 5,809.56 (5,809.56)--
02/01/2023 45,000.00 0.500%4,742.50 49,742.50 -49,742.50 52,229.63
02/01/2024 45,000.00 0.550%4,517.50 49,517.50 -49,517.50 51,993.38
02/01/2025 45,000.00 0.600%4,270.00 49,270.00 -49,270.00 51,733.50
02/01/2026 50,000.00 0.750%4,000.00 54,000.00 -54,000.00 56,700.00
02/01/2027 50,000.00 0.900%3,625.00 53,625.00 -53,625.00 56,306.25
02/01/2028 50,000.00 1.000%3,175.00 53,175.00 -53,175.00 55,833.75
02/01/2029 50,000.00 1.150%2,675.00 52,675.00 -52,675.00 55,308.75
02/01/2030 50,000.00 1.300%2,100.00 52,100.00 -52,100.00 54,705.00
02/01/2031 50,000.00 1.400%1,450.00 51,450.00 -51,450.00 54,022.50
02/01/2032 50,000.00 1.500%750.00 50,750.00 -50,750.00 53,287.50
Total $485,000.00 -$37,114.56 $522,114.56 (5,809.56)$516,305.00 $542,120.25
Significant Dates
Dated 11/10/2020
First Coupon Date 8/01/2021
Yield Statistics
Bond Year Dollars $3,314.13
Average Life 6.833 Years
Average Coupon 1.1198902%
Net Interest Cost (NIC)1.2662335%
True Interest Cost (TIC)1.2690680%
Bond Yield for Arbitrage Purposes 1.5874800%
All Inclusive Cost (AIC)1.3971846%
Series 2020A GO Bonds - N | SE Bikeway | 9/15/2020 | 2:26 PM
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 8a)
Title: Series 2020A general obligation bonds Page 18
St Louis Park, Minnesota
$955,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2020
Pavement Management
Assumes Current Market Non-BQ AAA Rates plus 20bps
Debt Service Schedule
Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I Fiscal Total
11/10/2020 -----
08/01/2021 --6,733.44 6,733.44 -
02/01/2022 --4,643.75 4,643.75 11,377.19
08/01/2022 --4,643.75 4,643.75 -
02/01/2023 90,000.00 0.500%4,643.75 94,643.75 99,287.50
08/01/2023 --4,418.75 4,418.75 -
02/01/2024 95,000.00 0.550%4,418.75 99,418.75 103,837.50
08/01/2024 --4,157.50 4,157.50 -
02/01/2025 95,000.00 0.600%4,157.50 99,157.50 103,315.00
08/01/2025 --3,872.50 3,872.50 -
02/01/2026 95,000.00 0.750%3,872.50 98,872.50 102,745.00
08/01/2026 --3,516.25 3,516.25 -
02/01/2027 95,000.00 0.900%3,516.25 98,516.25 102,032.50
08/01/2027 --3,088.75 3,088.75 -
02/01/2028 95,000.00 1.000%3,088.75 98,088.75 101,177.50
08/01/2028 --2,613.75 2,613.75 -
02/01/2029 95,000.00 1.150%2,613.75 97,613.75 100,227.50
08/01/2029 --2,067.50 2,067.50 -
02/01/2030 95,000.00 1.300%2,067.50 97,067.50 99,135.00
08/01/2030 --1,450.00 1,450.00 -
02/01/2031 100,000.00 1.400%1,450.00 101,450.00 102,900.00
08/01/2031 --750.00 750.00 -
02/01/2032 100,000.00 1.500%750.00 100,750.00 101,500.00
Total $955,000.00 -$72,534.69 $1,027,534.69 -
Yield Statistics
Bond Year Dollars $6,484.88
Average Life 6.790 Years
Average Coupon 1.1185210%
Net Interest Cost (NIC)1.2657868%
True Interest Cost (TIC)1.2685173%
Bond Yield for Arbitrage Purposes 1.5874800%
All Inclusive Cost (AIC)1.3974226%
IRS Form 8038
Net Interest Cost 1.1185210%
Weighted Average Maturity 6.790 Years
Series 2020A GO Bonds - N | Pavement Management | 9/15/2020 | 2:26 PM
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 8a)
Title: Series 2020A general obligation bonds Page 19
St Louis Park, Minnesota
$955,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2020
Pavement Management
Assumes Current Market Non-BQ AAA Rates plus 20bps
Debt Service Schedule
Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I CIF Net New D/S
105% of
Total
02/01/2021 -------
02/01/2022 --11,377.19 11,377.19 (11,377.19)--
02/01/2023 90,000.00 0.500%9,287.50 99,287.50 -99,287.50 104,251.88
02/01/2024 95,000.00 0.550%8,837.50 103,837.50 -103,837.50 109,029.38
02/01/2025 95,000.00 0.600%8,315.00 103,315.00 -103,315.00 108,480.75
02/01/2026 95,000.00 0.750%7,745.00 102,745.00 -102,745.00 107,882.25
02/01/2027 95,000.00 0.900%7,032.50 102,032.50 -102,032.50 107,134.13
02/01/2028 95,000.00 1.000%6,177.50 101,177.50 -101,177.50 106,236.38
02/01/2029 95,000.00 1.150%5,227.50 100,227.50 -100,227.50 105,238.88
02/01/2030 95,000.00 1.300%4,135.00 99,135.00 -99,135.00 104,091.75
02/01/2031 100,000.00 1.400%2,900.00 102,900.00 -102,900.00 108,045.00
02/01/2032 100,000.00 1.500%1,500.00 101,500.00 -101,500.00 106,575.00
Total $955,000.00 -$72,534.69 $1,027,534.69 (11,377.19)$1,016,157.50 $1,066,965.38
Significant Dates
Dated 11/10/2020
First Coupon Date 8/01/2021
Yield Statistics
Bond Year Dollars $6,484.88
Average Life 6.790 Years
Average Coupon 1.1185210%
Net Interest Cost (NIC)1.2657868%
True Interest Cost (TIC)1.2685173%
Bond Yield for Arbitrage Purposes 1.5874800%
All Inclusive Cost (AIC)1.3974226%
Series 2020A GO Bonds - N | Pavement Management | 9/15/2020 | 2:26 PM
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 8a)
Title: Series 2020A general obligation bonds Page 20
St Louis Park, Minnesota
$575,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2020
SWLRT Regional Transit Trail Bridge
Assumes Current Market Non-BQ AAA Rates plus 20bps
Debt Service Schedule
Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I Fiscal Total
11/10/2020 -----
08/01/2021 --4,078.13 4,078.13 -
02/01/2022 --2,812.50 2,812.50 6,890.63
08/01/2022 --2,812.50 2,812.50 -
02/01/2023 55,000.00 0.500%2,812.50 57,812.50 60,625.00
08/01/2023 --2,675.00 2,675.00 -
02/01/2024 55,000.00 0.550%2,675.00 57,675.00 60,350.00
08/01/2024 --2,523.75 2,523.75 -
02/01/2025 55,000.00 0.600%2,523.75 57,523.75 60,047.50
08/01/2025 --2,358.75 2,358.75 -
02/01/2026 55,000.00 0.750%2,358.75 57,358.75 59,717.50
08/01/2026 --2,152.50 2,152.50 -
02/01/2027 55,000.00 0.900%2,152.50 57,152.50 59,305.00
08/01/2027 --1,905.00 1,905.00 -
02/01/2028 60,000.00 1.000%1,905.00 61,905.00 63,810.00
08/01/2028 --1,605.00 1,605.00 -
02/01/2029 60,000.00 1.150%1,605.00 61,605.00 63,210.00
08/01/2029 --1,260.00 1,260.00 -
02/01/2030 60,000.00 1.300%1,260.00 61,260.00 62,520.00
08/01/2030 --870.00 870.00 -
02/01/2031 60,000.00 1.400%870.00 60,870.00 61,740.00
08/01/2031 --450.00 450.00 -
02/01/2032 60,000.00 1.500%450.00 60,450.00 60,900.00
Total $575,000.00 -$44,115.63 $619,115.63 -
Yield Statistics
Bond Year Dollars $3,929.38
Average Life 6.834 Years
Average Coupon 1.1227137%
Net Interest Cost (NIC)1.2690474%
True Interest Cost (TIC)1.2718690%
Bond Yield for Arbitrage Purposes 1.5874800%
All Inclusive Cost (AIC)1.4000083%
IRS Form 8038
Net Interest Cost 1.1227137%
Weighted Average Maturity 6.834 Years
Series 2020A GO Bonds - N | SWLRT Regional Transit Tr | 9/15/2020 | 2:26 PM
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 8a)
Title: Series 2020A general obligation bonds Page 21
St Louis Park, Minnesota
$575,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2020
SWLRT Regional Transit Trail Bridge
Assumes Current Market Non-BQ AAA Rates plus 20bps
Debt Service Schedule
Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I CIF
Net New
D/S
105% of
Total
02/01/2021 -------
02/01/2022 --6,890.63 6,890.63 (6,890.63)--
02/01/2023 55,000.00 0.500%5,625.00 60,625.00 -60,625.00 63,656.25
02/01/2024 55,000.00 0.550%5,350.00 60,350.00 -60,350.00 63,367.50
02/01/2025 55,000.00 0.600%5,047.50 60,047.50 -60,047.50 63,049.88
02/01/2026 55,000.00 0.750%4,717.50 59,717.50 -59,717.50 62,703.38
02/01/2027 55,000.00 0.900%4,305.00 59,305.00 -59,305.00 62,270.25
02/01/2028 60,000.00 1.000%3,810.00 63,810.00 -63,810.00 67,000.50
02/01/2029 60,000.00 1.150%3,210.00 63,210.00 -63,210.00 66,370.50
02/01/2030 60,000.00 1.300%2,520.00 62,520.00 -62,520.00 65,646.00
02/01/2031 60,000.00 1.400%1,740.00 61,740.00 -61,740.00 64,827.00
02/01/2032 60,000.00 1.500%900.00 60,900.00 -60,900.00 63,945.00
Total $575,000.00 -$44,115.63 $619,115.63 (6,890.63)$612,225.00 $642,836.25
Significant Dates
Dated 11/10/2020
First Coupon Date 8/01/2021
Yield Statistics
Bond Year Dollars $3,929.38
Average Life 6.834 Years
Average Coupon 1.1227137%
Net Interest Cost (NIC)1.2690474%
True Interest Cost (TIC)1.2718690%
Bond Yield for Arbitrage Purposes 1.5874800%
All Inclusive Cost (AIC)1.4000083%
Series 2020A GO Bonds - N | SWLRT Regional Transit Tr | 9/15/2020 | 2:26 PM
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 8a)
Title: Series 2020A general obligation bonds Page 22
St Louis Park, Minnesota
$5,600,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2020
Utilities
Assumes Current Market Non-BQ AAA Rates plus 20bps
Debt Service Schedule
Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I Fiscal Total
11/10/2020 -----
08/01/2021 --47,424.06 47,424.06 -
02/01/2022 335,000.00 0.500%32,706.25 367,706.25 415,130.31
08/01/2022 --31,868.75 31,868.75 -
02/01/2023 355,000.00 0.500%31,868.75 386,868.75 418,737.50
08/01/2023 --30,981.25 30,981.25 -
02/01/2024 355,000.00 0.550%30,981.25 385,981.25 416,962.50
08/01/2024 --30,005.00 30,005.00 -
02/01/2025 360,000.00 0.600%30,005.00 390,005.00 420,010.00
08/01/2025 --28,925.00 28,925.00 -
02/01/2026 360,000.00 0.750%28,925.00 388,925.00 417,850.00
08/01/2026 --27,575.00 27,575.00 -
02/01/2027 360,000.00 0.900%27,575.00 387,575.00 415,150.00
08/01/2027 --25,955.00 25,955.00 -
02/01/2028 365,000.00 1.000%25,955.00 390,955.00 416,910.00
08/01/2028 --24,130.00 24,130.00 -
02/01/2029 370,000.00 1.150%24,130.00 394,130.00 418,260.00
08/01/2029 --22,002.50 22,002.50 -
02/01/2030 375,000.00 1.300%22,002.50 397,002.50 419,005.00
08/01/2030 --19,565.00 19,565.00 -
02/01/2031 380,000.00 1.400%19,565.00 399,565.00 419,130.00
08/01/2031 --16,905.00 16,905.00 -
02/01/2032 385,000.00 1.500%16,905.00 401,905.00 418,810.00
08/01/2032 --14,017.50 14,017.50 -
02/01/2033 390,000.00 1.600%14,017.50 404,017.50 418,035.00
08/01/2033 --10,897.50 10,897.50 -
02/01/2034 395,000.00 1.700%10,897.50 405,897.50 416,795.00
08/01/2034 --7,540.00 7,540.00 -
02/01/2035 405,000.00 1.800%7,540.00 412,540.00 420,080.00
08/01/2035 --3,895.00 3,895.00 -
02/01/2036 410,000.00 1.900%3,895.00 413,895.00 417,790.00
Total $5,600,000.00 -$668,655.31 $6,268,655.31 -
Yield Statistics
Bond Year Dollars $47,330.00
Average Life 8.452 Years
Average Coupon 1.4127516%
Net Interest Cost (NIC)1.5310697%
True Interest Cost (TIC)1.5300355%
Bond Yield for Arbitrage Purposes 1.5874800%
All Inclusive Cost (AIC)1.6365385%
IRS Form 8038
Net Interest Cost 1.4127516%
Weighted Average Maturity 8.452 Years
Series 2020A GO Bonds - N | Utilities | 9/15/2020 | 2:26 PM
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 8a)
Title: Series 2020A general obligation bonds Page 23
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: September 21, 2020
Action agenda item: 8b
Executive summary
Title: 2021 preliminary property tax levy certification
Recommended action: *Due to the COVID-19 emergency declaration, this item is considered
essential business and is categorized as a Required Action**
•Motion to adopt Resolution approving 2021 preliminary property tax levy and setting
budget public hearing date for Dec. 7, 2020.
Policy consideration:
•Does the city council desire to set the 2021 preliminary property tax levy at $36,895,000,
which is a 6.11% increase over the 2020 final property tax levy?
•Does the city council desire to hold the public hearing at which the budget and levy will be
discussed on Monday, Dec. 7, 2020 and then take action on the 2021 budgets, final
property tax levy, f inal HRA levy, and 2021-2030 capital improvement plan at the regular
city council meeting on Dec. 21, 2020?
Summary: Included is information pertaining to the 2021 preliminary property tax levy. Council
has had several budget discussions throughout 2020 including most recently on Sept. 14. Also
shown is the calendar of upcoming budget and tax levy discussions.
Once the preliminary levy is set, it can be decreased but not increased. As we move ahead
with our 2021 budget process and planning, we will continue to have discussions and provide
more information prior to the Dec. 7 public hearing and final adoption on Dec. 21. The city
manager will continue to work with directors to finalize recommendations and provide
additional information to council.
Financial or budget considerations: The proposed tax levy will help support necessary city
services to be provided during 2021.
Strategic priority consideration:
All areas of the adopted strategic priorities are impacted by the city’s budget.
•St. Louis Park is committed to being a leader in racial equity and inclusion in order to
create a more just and inclusive community for all.
•St. Louis Park is committed to continue to lead in environmental stewardship.
•St. Louis Park is committed to providing a broad range of housing and neighborhood-
oriented development.
•St. Louis Park is committed to providing a variety of options for people to make their way
around the city comfortably, safely and reliably.
•St. Louis Park is committed to creating opportunities to build social capital through
community engagement.
Supporting documents: Discussion
Resolution
Prepared by: Melanie Lammers, chief financial officer
Reviewed by: Nancy Deno, deputy city manager/HR director
Approve d by: Tom Harmening, city manager
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 8b ) Page 2
Title: 2021 preliminary property tax levy certification
Discussion
Background: On May 26, 2020, staff met with the city council to discuss the 2021 budget
process, tax levy and the “systems thinking” approach. Staff has prepared the recommendations
based on continued quality and timely delivery of core services in addition to continuing to
support and align with the five strategic priorities and the key organizational cultural behaviors
of collaboration, quality and responsiveness when preparing the 2021 budget.
A t the June 22, August 10, and September 14, 2020 city council study sessions, the city council
reviewed information regarding the 2021 budget. At the September 14 study session staff was
directed to prepare for council approval a 2021 preliminary p roperty tax levy that represented a
6.11% increase when compared to the 2020 f inal property tax levy. It was made by clear by the
council that the goal was to adopt a final levy in December that was lower than the preliminary
levy. The premise behind adopting the preliminary levy at the amount proposed was to give the
council flexibility over the coming weeks to further discuss the 2021 budget, capital needs and
other financial issues prior to adopting the final budget, capital plan and levy in December.
2021 preliminary property tax l evy
There are some important key items to keep in mind for the 2021 preliminary tax levy:
•There are no levy limits in place for 2021.
•Local Government Aid (LGA) for 2021 - St. Louis Park will receive $0 which is $267,271 less
than the LGA certified in 2020.
•The strategic priorities are factored into the proposed 2021 budget.
•The Long-Term Financial Planning process is being undertaken as part of the 2021
budgeting process.
•The 2021 preliminary property tax levy once adopted on September 21, 2020, can be
decreased but not increased after that date.
2020 city final levy and 2021 city preliminary levy
A synopsis of prior year levy information and the 2021 proposed preliminary levy is shown below:
1.The 2020 preliminary levy was $34,985,521 which was 5.61% more than 2019.
2.The 2020 final le vy was $34,770,521, which was 4.96% more than 2019.
3.Considering the budgets which have been submitted, strategic priorities , debt service
needs and the financial planning process, the 2021 preliminary property tax levy is
proposed at 6.11%.
2020 2021 $ Change % Change
Actual Preliminary 2020 to 2021 2020 to 2021
TAX CPACITY BASED TAX LEVY
General Fund 28,393,728 29,906,485 1,512,757 5.33%
Park improvement Fund 860,000 860,000 - 0.00%
Capital Replacement Fund 1,567,700 1,567,700 - 0.00%
Debt Service-current 3,799,093 4,410,815 611,722 16.10%
Employee Benefits Fund 150,000 150,000 - 0.00%
TOTAL TAX CAPACITY BASED TAX LEVIES 34,770,521 36,895,000 2,124,479 6.11%
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 8b ) Page 3
Title: 2021 preliminary property tax levy certification
HRA property tax levy: Council will consider the HRA levy which is recommended to be set at
the maximum allowed .0185% of estimated market value, which is consistent with previous
years. The amount for 2021 is estimated at $1,523,590. Per previous council direction, its
assumed that with the exception of housing staff salaries, the bulk of the levy proceeds will be
placed in the city’s housing trust fund. A final budget amount/allocation will be approved in
December.
U tility Rates: Council will be asked to move forward on adopting 2021 utility rates at the
meeting on October 5th. The proposed increases are in line with our utility rate study and
needed to maintain each fund’s needs. Further evaluation of the funds will progress with the
Long-term financial plan, and staff will work with Ehlers to “refresh” the rate study in 2021 to
see if our base charges are now able to pay for basic needs of each utility fund.
Additional tax levy information: By law, the city council is required to approve a 2021
preliminary property tax levy which must be certified to Hennepin County by September 30,
2020. Hennepin County will mail out parcel specific notices in mid to late November.
Setting dates for public hearing and 2020 budget adoption: The city is required to hold a
regularly scheduled meeting at which the budget and levy will be discussed, and public input is
allowed, prior to final budget and levy determination. This public input meeting must occur
after November 24, 2020. Past practice has been to hold the public input meeting and then
schedule a subsequent meeting to adopt the final budget. If the city council chooses to
continue this practice, then the dates would be the regular meeting on December 7, 2020 for
the public input meeting and December 21, 2020 for adoption of the 2021 budget, tax levy,
HRA levy, and 2021-2030 capital improvement plan.
Next steps: Once the preliminary levy is set, city manager will continue to work with staff and
council to set the final levy. In the past years, council typically reduces this preliminary levy as
they work towards finalizing all the information for 2021. Again, pre liminary levy can be
reduced, not increased when set in December for the upcoming year. The following preliminary
timeline has been developed for council:
September 16 Council establishes 2021 preliminary property tax levy and HRA levy.
(Levies can be reduced, but not increased for final property tax levies.)
October 5 Utility Rate discussion , public hearing-1st reading of fees.
October 12 Review and discussion of 2021 budget, CIP, utility rates, LRFMP. Directors
or their designees in attendance as needed.
October 19 2nd Reading of Fees, and adoption of 2021 Utility Rates
December 7 Truth in Taxation Public Hearing and budget presentation
December 21 Council adopts 2020 Revised Budget, 2021 Budgets, final tax levies (City
and HRA), and 2021 - 2030 CIP.
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 8b ) Page 4
Title: 2021 preliminary property tax levy certification
Resolution No. 20-____
Resolution approving 2021 preliminary property tax levy,
and setting public hearing date for
the 2021 budget and final property tax levy
Whereas, The City of St. Louis Park is required by Charter and State law to approve a
resolution setting forth an annual tax levy to the Hennepin County Auditor; and
Whereas, Minnesota Statutes require approval of a preliminary prop erty tax levy on or
before September 30th of each year; and
Whereas, the city council has received the proposed budget information;
Be it further resolved that the truth in taxation public hearing will be held on December
7, 2020; and
Be it further resolved that the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Hennepin
County, Minnesota, that the following sums of money be levied for collection in 2021 upon the
taxable property in said City of St. Louis Park for the following purposes:
And
Be it further resolved that the chief f inancial officer is hereby authorized and directed
to transmit this information to the County Auditor of Hennepin County, Minnesota and the
Minnesota Department of Revenue, if applicable, in the format requested as required by law.
Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council September 21, 2020
Thomas K. Harmening, city manager Jake Spano, mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, city clerk
TAX CAPACITY BASED TAX LEVY
General Fund 29,906,485
Debt Service 4,410,815
Capital Replacement Fund 1,567,700
Park improvement Fund 860,000
Employee Benefits Fund 150,000
TOTAL TAX CAPACITY BASED TAX LEVIES 36,895,000
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: September 21, 2020
Action agenda item : 8 c
Executive summary
Title: 2021 preliminary HRA levy certification
Recommended action: **Due to the COVID-19 emergency declaration, this item is considered
essential business and is categorized as a Required Action**
• Motion to adopt Resolution authorizing the 2021 Preliminary HRA Levy.
Policy consideration: Does the city council desire to approve as a preliminary levy the full
0.0185% of estimated market value allowable for HRA purposes of $1,523,590?
Summary: The HRA levy was originally implemented in St. Louis Park due to legislative changes
in 2001 which significantly reduced future tax increment revenues. The city council elected at
that time to use the levy proceeds for future infrastructure improvements in redevelopment
areas. By law, these funds could also be used for other housing and redevelopment purposes.
Given the council’s desire for housing activities , staff recommends the HRA Levy continue at the
maximum allowed by law for the 2021 budget year. Both the EDA and City Council must
approve the HRA preliminary levy.
The HRA Levy cannot exceed 0.0185% of the estimated market value of the city. Therefore,
staff has calculated the maximum HRA Levy for 2021 to be $1,523,590 based on valuation data
from Hennepin County which is an increase of $190,612 from 2020.
Financial or budget considerations: The proposed preliminary HRA levy is $1,523,590 for 2021.
Strategic priority consideration:
All areas of the adopted strategic priorities are impacted by the city’s budget.
• St. Louis Park is committed to being a leader in racial equity and inclusion in order to
create a more just and inclusive community for all.
• St. Louis Park is committed to continue to lead in environmental stewardship.
• St. Louis Park is committed to providing a broad range of housing and neighborhood-
oriented development.
• St. Louis Park is co mmitted to providing a variety of options for people to make their way
around the city comfortably, safely and reliably.
• St. Louis Park is committed to creating opportunities to build social capital through
community engagement.
Supporting documents: Resolution
Prepared by: Melanie Lammers, chief financial officer
Reviewed by: Nancy Deno, deputy city manager/HR director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, city manager
City council meeting of September 21, 2020 (Item No. 8c ) Page 2
Title: 2021 preliminary HRA levy certification
Resolution No. 20-____
Authorizing the preliminary HRA levy for 2021
Whereas, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.090 to 469.108 (the “EDA Act”),
the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park created the St. Louis Park Economic Development
Authority (the "Authority"); and
Whereas, pursuant to the EDA Act, the city council granted to the Authority all of the
powers and duties of a housing and redevelopment authority under the provisions of the
Minnesota Statutes, sections 469.001 to 469.047 (the "HRA Act"); and
Whereas, Section 469.033, subdivision 6 of the Act authorizes the Authority to levy a tax
upon all taxable property within the city to be expended for the purposes authorized by the
HRA Act; and
Whereas, such levy may be in an amount not to exceed 0.0185 percent of estimated
market value of the city; and
Whereas, the Authority has filed its budget for the special benefit levy in accordance
wit h the budget procedures of the city in the amount of $1,523,590; and
Whereas, based upon such budgets the Authority will levy all or such portion of the
authorized levy as it deems necessary and proper;
Now therefore be it resolved by the St. Louis Park City Council:
1. That approval is hereby given for the Authority to levy, for taxes payable in 2021,
such tax upon the taxable property of the city as the Authority may dete rmine, subject to the
limitations contained in the HRA Act.
Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council September 21, 2020
Thomas K. Harmening, city manager Jake Spano, mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, city clerk