HomeMy WebLinkAbout2020/10/26 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - Study SessionAGENDA
OCT. 26, 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 the 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.
The St. Louis Park City Council will meet on Oct. 26, 2020, by videoconference for a special city
council meeting. Participants will meet by electronic device or telephone rather than by being
personally present at the city council's regular meeting place at 5005 Minnetonka Blvd.
Members of the public can monitor the meeting by video and audio at https://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.
Cisco Webex will be used to conduct videoconference meetings of the city council, with council
members and staff participating from multiple locations.
Members of the public who want to address the city council during the special city council
meeting about items on the agenda should call the number noted below next to the
corresponding item. Call when the meeting starts at 5:15 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 – item 2a - Environmental response fund grant - Dakota -Edgewood Trail Bridge
• 952.562.2887 – item 3a – General Obligation Bonds, Series 2020A
At 5:30 p.m., the city council will interview applicants for the Ward 2 city council vacancy. Members
of the public can monitor the interviews by video and audio at https://bit.ly/watchslpcouncil or by
calling 1.312.535.8110 and using access code 372 106 61 for audio only.
Items for the Oct. 26 study session are written reports only.
5:15 p.m. SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
1. Call to order
1a. Roll call
2. Consent items
2a. Resolution supporting environmental response fund grant - Dakota-Edgewood Trail
Bridge (4019-2000)
Recommended Action: Motion to adopt Resolution to support the application for an
Environmental Response Fund (ERF) Grant from Hennepin County for the Dakota-
Edgewood Trail Bridge (4019-2000)
3. Resolutions, ordinances, motions and discussion items
3a. General Obligation Bonds, Series 2020A
Recommended Action: Motion to adopt Resolution awarding the sale of General
Obligation (G.O.) Bonds, Series 2020A. (4 affirmative votes required)
4. Adjournment
Meeting of Oct. 26, 2020
City c ouncil agenda
5:30 p.m. – WARD 2 CANDIDATE INTERVIEWS
STUDY SESSION (written reports only)
Written reports
1. September 2020 monthly financial report
2. Third quarter investment report (July – Sept. 2020)
3. Update to the council on housing zoning regulations
4. Community health services and connections
5. St. Louis Park 4d Affordable Housing Incentive Program update
6. Sustainability Division update for Q4 2020
7. Update on US Internet in St. Louis Park
The agenda is posted on Fridays on the official city bulletin board in the lobby of city hall and on the text display
on civic TV cable channel 17. The agenda and full packet are available by noon on Friday on the city’s website.
If you need special accommodations or have questions about the meeting, please call 952-924-2525.
Meeting: Special city council
Meeting date: October 26, 2020
Consent agenda item: 2a
Executive summary
Title: Resolution supporting environmental response fund grant - Dakota-Edgewood Trail Bridge
(4019-2000)
Recommended action: Motion to adopt Resolution to support the application for an
Environmental Response Fund (ERF) Grant from Hennepin County for the Dakota-Edgewood
Trail Bridge (4019-2000)
Policy consideration: none
Summary: During preliminary design , a phase II environmental study was conducted that found
contaminated material within the construction limits of the project. The contaminated material
will need to be removed in order to construct this project. The low bid for the project approved
by council on Sept. 8, 2020 includes an estimated $527,543 in con taminated soil removal and
disposal. Staff recommends applying for an ERF grant to help offset the cost that the project
will incur due to the contamination.
The ERF program provides funds for the assessment and cleanup of contaminated sites. ERF
grants provide funding for a variety of activities at contaminated sites where the added
environmental costs hinder site improvements or redevelopment. Staff is requesting that
council approve the attached resolution of support to apply for the ERF Grant.
The application is being completed by our consultant as part of the construction administration
services contract approved on Sept. 8, 2020. The deadline for the application is Nov. 2, 2020,
and the city would be notified of the results in late January 2021.
Financial or budget considerations: The project is proposed to be paid for using a combination
of federal funds, general obligation bonds, watermain, and storm sewer funds. Adopting this
resolution will enable the city to apply for ERF grand funds for contaminated material removal.
If received, these dollars will be used to offset the general obligation bond funding for the
project.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to continue to lead in
environmental stewardship.
Supporting documents: Resolution
Prepared by: Jack Sullivan, senior engineering project manager
Reviewed by: Debra Heiser, engineering director
Approve d by: Tom Harmening, city manager
Special city council meeting of October 26, 2020 (Item No. 2a) Page 2
Title: Resolution supporting environmental response fund grant - Dakota-Edgewood Trail Bridge (4019 -2000)
Resolution No. 20-____
Resolution to approve application submittal and
to receive ERF funding from Hennepin County
for the cleanup of contaminated soils
and management of contaminated groundwater for
the Dakota-Edgewood Trail Bridge project
Be it resolved that the City of Saint Louis Park approves the application for
funding for the Dakota-Edgewood Trail Bridge Project (4019-2000), for which an
Environmental Response Fund (ERF) grant application is being submitted to the
Hennepin County Department of Environment and Energy Department on November 2,
2020, by the City of Saint Louis Park.
Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council Oct. 26, 2020
Thomas K. Harmening, city manager Jake Spano, mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, city clerk
Meeting: Special city council
Meeting date: October 26, 2020
Action agenda item: 3a
Executive summary
Title: General Obligation Bonds, Series 2020A
Recommended action: Motion to adopt Resolution awarding the sale of General Obligation
(G.O.) Bonds, Series 2020A. (4 affirmative votes required)
Policy consideration: Does the city council wish to accept the lowest bid for the sale of the G.O.
Bonds, Series 2020A?
Summary: At the September 21, 2020 council meeting , staff reviewed the 2020 bond issue in
detail. In addition, on September 21, 2020 council authorized the sale of the G.O. bonds.
The charter G.O. bonds of $9,945,000 will fund the current year sidewalk and trails projects
(pavement management), SWLRT Regional Transit Trail Bridge, SE Bikeway, Dakota Bridge and
Bikeway. 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.
On October 14, 2020 city staff conducted a credit review with Standard and Poor’s (S&P) and at
the time of writing the staff report S&P has not released its report. It is anticipated that the city
will retain its AAA rating.
The competitive bids for the bonds will be received and tabulated by the city’s municipal
advisor, Ehlers and Associates, Inc. on Monday October 26th at 11:00am. Ehlers will present
the competitive bids received and recommendation to the city council at the October 26, 2020
special city council meeting. The bond resolution will be filled out with the final bond sale
information received on Monday.
Financial or budget considerations: The two portions of the bonds have been consolidated into
one bond issue (2020A) for bidding by potential investors. The G.O. Bonds, which are 10-20
years in length and repaid with tax levy and/or utility revenues, are estimated at a True Interest
Cost (TIC) ranging from 1.26%-1.91%.
Strategic priority consideration:
•St. Louis Park is committed to continue to lead in environmental stewardship.
•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: Tentatively on November 10, 2020, close on bonds, no council action required.
Supporting documents: Resolution
Prepared by: Melanie Lammers, chief financial officer
Reviewed by: Nancy Deno, deputy city manager/HR director; Elizabeth Diaz, consultant Ehlers
Approve d by: Tom Harmening, city manager
Special city council meeting of October 26, 2020 (Item No. 3a) Page 2
Title: General Obligation Bonds, Series 2020A
Resolution No. 20-____
A resolution awarding the sale of G eneral Obligation Bonds,
Series 2020A, in the original aggregate principal amount of
$______________; fixing their form and specifications; directing
their execution and delivery; and providing for their payment
Be it resolved by the City Council (the “City Council”) of the City of St. Louis Park,
Hennepin County, Minnesota (the “City”) as follows:
Se ction 1. Sale of Bonds.
1.01. Charter Bonds.
(a)Pursuant to Section 6.15 of the City Charter (the “Charter”) and
Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 475, as amended (the “Municipal Debt Act”), the City is
authorized to issue general obligation bonds for any purpose permitted by state law
upon a vote of at least six (6) members of the City Council.
(b)The City has determined to finance the construction of projects related to
bridges, bikeways, and pavement management in the City (the “Capital Projects”).
(c)It is necessary and expedient to the sound financial management of the
affairs of the City to issue its general obligations in the principal amount of
$________________ (the “Charter Bonds”), pursuant to the City Charter and the
Municipal Debt Act, to provide financing for the Capital Projects.
(d)On September 21, 2020, the City Council adopted a resolution authorizing
the issuance of the Bonds (hereinafter defined). The Authorizing Resolution was
approved by a vote of at least six (6) members of the City Council.
1.02. Utility Revenue Bonds.
(a)The City engineer has recommended the construction of various
improvements to the City’s water and storm sewer systems (the “Utility
Improvements”), pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapters 444 and 475, as amended
(collectively, the “Utility Revenue Act”).
(b)It is necessary and expedient to the sound financial management of the
affairs of the City to issue general obligations in the principal amount of $____________
(the “Utility Revenue Bonds”), pursuant to the Utility Revenue Act, to provide financing
for the Utility Improvements.
1.03. Sale of Bonds.
Special city council meeting of October 26, 2020 (Item No. 3a) Page 3
Title: General Obligation Bonds, Series 2020A
(a) The City Council finds it necessary and expedient to the sound financial
management of the affairs of the City that the City issue its General Obligation Bonds,
Series 2020A (the “Bonds”), in the original aggregate principal amount of
$_____________, pursuant to the Municipal Debt Act and the Utility Revenue Act
(together, the “Act”) and the City Charter, in order to provide financing for the Capital
Projects and the Utility Improvements.
(b) The City is authorized by Section 475.60, subdivision 2(9) of the Act to
negotiate the sale of the Bonds, it being determined that the City has retained an
independent municipal advisor in connection with such sale. The actions of the City
staff and municipal advisor in negotiating the sale of the Bonds are ratified and
confirmed in all aspects.
1.04. Award to the Purchaser and Interest Rates. A tabulation of proposals received is
attached hereto as Exhibit A. The proposal of __________________ (the “Purchaser”) to purchase
the Bonds is hereby found and determined to be a reasonable offer and is hereby accepted, the
proposal being to purchase the Bonds at a price of $_____________ (par amount of $________,
[plus original issue premium of $__________,] [less original issue discount of $__________,] less
underwriter’s discount of $__________), plus accrued interest, if any, to date of delivery for Bonds
bearing interest as follows:
Year Interest Rate Year Interest Rate
2022 % 2033 %
2023 2034
2024 2035
2025 2036
2026 2037
2027 2038
2028 2039
2029 2040
2030 2041
2031 2042
2032
True interest cost: ___________%
1.05. Purchase Contract. The amount proposed by the Purchaser in excess of the
minimum bid shall be credited to the accounts in the Debt Service Fund hereinafter created or
deposited in the accounts in the Construction Fund hereinafter created, as determined by the
Chief Financial Officer of the City in consultation with the City’s municipal advisor. The Chief
Financial Officer is directed to retain the good faith check of the Purchaser, pending completion of
the sale of the Bonds, and to return the good faith checks of the unsuccessful proposers. The
Mayor and City Manager are directed to execute a contract with the Purchaser on behalf of the
City.
Special city council meeting of October 26, 2020 (Item No. 3a) Page 4
Title: General Obligation Bonds, Series 2020A
1.06. Terms and Principal Amounts of the Bonds. The City will forthwith issue and sell
the Bonds pursuant to the Charter and the Act, in the total principal amount of $________,
originally dated November 10, 2020, in the denomination of $5,000 each or any integral multiple
thereof, numbered No. R-1, upward, bearing interest as above set forth, and maturing serially on
February 1 in the years and amounts as follows:
Year Amount Year Amount
2022 $ 2033 $
2023 2034
2024 2035
2025 2036
2026 2037
2027 2038
2028 2039
2029 2040
2030 2041
2031 2042
2032
(a) $_______________ of the Bonds (the “Charter Bonds”), maturing on
February 1 in the years and in the amounts set forth below, will be used to finance the
Capital Projects:
Year Amount Year Amount
2023 $ 2033 $
2024 2034
2025 2035
2026 2036
2027 2037
2028 2038
2029 2039
2030 2040
2031 2041
2032 2042
(b) The remainder of the Bonds in the amount of $____________ (the “Utility
Revenue Bonds”), maturing on February 1 in the years and in the amounts set forth below,
will be used to finance the Utility Improvements:
Year Amount Year Amount
2022 $ 2030 $
2023 2031
2024 2032
Special city council meeting of October 26, 2020 (Item No. 3a) Page 5
Title: General Obligation Bonds, Series 2020A
2025 2033
2026 2034
2027 2035
2028 2036
2029
1.07. Optional Redemption. The City may elect on February 1, 2029, and on any day
thereafter to prepay Bonds due on or after February 1, 2030. Redemption may be in whole or in
part and if in part, at the option of the City and in such manner as the City will determine. If less
than all Bonds of a maturity are called for redemption, the City will notify DTC (as defined in
Section 7 hereof) of the particular amount of such maturity to be prepaid. DTC will determine by
lot the amount of each participant’s intere st in such maturity to be redeemed and each participant
will then select by lot the beneficial ownership interests in such maturity to be redeemed.
Prepayments will be at a price of par plus accrued interest.
[TO BE COMPLETED IF TERM BONDS ARE REQUESTED 1.08. Mandatory Redemption;
Term Bonds. The Bonds maturing on February 1, 20____ and February 1, 20____ shall hereinafter
be referred to collectively as the “Term Bonds.” The principal amount of the Term Bonds subject
to mandatory sinking fund redemption on any date may be reduced through earlier optional
redemptions, with any partial redemptions of the Term Bonds credited against future mandatory
sinking fund redemptions of such Term Bond in such order as the City shall determine. The Term
Bonds are subject to mandatory sinking fund redemption and shall be redeemed in part at par plus
accrued interest on February 1 of the following years and in the principal amounts as follows:]
Sinking Fund Installment Date
February 1, 20___ Term Bond Principal Amount
____________________
* Maturity
February 1, 20___ Term Bond Principal Amount
____________________
* Maturity
Section 2. Registration and Payment.
2.01. Registered Form. The Bonds will be issued only in fully registered form. The
interest thereon and, upon surrender of each Bond, the principal amount thereof, is payable by
check or draft issued by the Registrar described herein.
2.02. Dates; Interest Payment Dates. Each Bond will be dated as of the last interest
payment date preceding the date of authentication to which interest on the Bond has been paid or
made available for payment, unless (i) the date of authentication is an interest payment date to
Special city council meeting of October 26, 2020 (Item No. 3a) Page 6
Title: General Obligation Bonds, Series 2020A
which interest has been paid or made available for payment, in which case the Bond will be dated
as of the date of authentication, or (ii) the date of authentication is prior to the first interest
payment date, in which case the Bond will be dated as of the date of original issue. The interest on
the Bonds is payable on February 1 and August 1 of each year, commencing August 1, 2021, to the
registered owners of record thereof as of the close of business on the fifteenth day of the
immediately preceding month, whether or not such day is a business day.
2.03. Registration. The City will appoint a bond registrar, transfer agent, authenticating
agent and paying agent (the “Registrar”). The effect of registration and the rights and duties of the
City and the Registrar with respect thereto are as follows:
(a) Register. The Registrar must keep at its principal corporate trust office a
bond register in which the Registrar provides for the registration of ownership of Bonds
and the registration of transfers and exchanges of Bonds entitled to be registered,
transferred or exchanged.
(b) Transfer of Bonds. Upon surrender for transfer of a Bond duly endorsed by
the registered owner thereof or accompanied by a written instrument of transfer, in form
satisfactory to the Registrar, duly executed by the registered owner thereof or by an
attorney duly authorized by the registered owner in writing, the Registrar will authenticate
and deliver, in the name of the designated transferee or transferees, one or more new
Bonds of a like aggregate principal amount and maturity, as requested by the transferor.
The Registrar may, however, close the books for registration of any transfer after the
fifteenth day of the month preceding each interest payment date and until that interest
payment date.
(c) Exchange of Bonds. When Bonds are surrendered by the registered owner
for exchange the Registrar will authenticate and deliver one or more new Bonds of a like
aggregate principal amount and maturity as requested by the registered owner or the
owner’s attorney in writing.
(d) Cancellation. Bonds surrendered upon transfer or exchange will be
promptly cancelled by the Registrar and thereafter disposed of as directed by the City.
(e) Improper or Unauthorized Transfer. When a Bond is presented to the
Registrar for transfer, the Registrar may refuse to transfer the Bond until the Registrar is
satisfied that the endorsement on the Bond or separate instrument of transfer is valid and
genuine and that the requested transfer is legally authorized. The Registrar will incur no
liability for the refusal, in good faith, to make transfers which it, in its judgment, deems
improper or unauthorized.
(f) Persons Deemed Owners. The City and the Registrar may treat the person
in whose name a Bond is registered in the bond register as the absolute owner of the
Bond, whether the Bond is overdue or not, for the purpose of receiving payment of, or on
account of, the principal of and interest on the Bond and for all other purposes, and
payments so made to a registered owner or upon the owner’s order will be valid and
Special city council meeting of October 26, 2020 (Item No. 3a) Page 7
Title: General Obligation Bonds, Series 2020A
effectual to satisfy and discharge the liability upon the Bond to the extent of the sum or
sums so paid.
(g) Taxes, Fees and Charges. The Registrar may impose a charge upon the
owner thereof for a transfer or exchange of Bonds sufficient to reimburse the Registrar for
any tax, fee or other governmental charge required to be paid with respect to the transfer
or exchange.
(h) Mutilated, Lost, Stolen or Destroyed Bonds. If a Bond becomes mutilated
or is destroyed, stolen or lost, the Registrar will deliver a new Bond of like amount,
number, maturity date and tenor in exchange and substitution for and upon cancellation of
the mutilated Bond or in lieu of and in substitution for any Bond destroyed, stolen or lost,
upon the payment of the reasonable expenses and charges of the Registrar in connection
therewith; and, in the case of a Bond destroyed, stolen or lost, upon filing with the
Registrar of evidence satisfactory to it that the Bond was destroyed, stolen or lost, and of
the ownership thereof, and upon furnishing to the Registrar an appropriate bond or
indemnity in form, substance and amount satisfactory to it and as provided by law, in
which both the City and the Registrar must be named as obligees. Bonds so surrendered to
the Registrar will be cancelled by the Registrar and evidence of such cancellation must be
given to the City. If the mutilated, destroyed, stolen or lost Bond has already matured or
been called for redemption in accordance with its terms it is not necessary to issue a new
Bond prior to payment.
(i) Redemption. In the event any of the Bonds are called for redemption,
notice thereof identifying the Bonds to be redeemed will be given by the Registrar by
mailing a copy of the redemption notice by first class mail (postage prepaid) to the
registered owner of each Bond to be redeemed at the address shown on the registration
books kept by the Registrar and by publishing the notice if required by law. Failure to give
notice by publication or by mail to any registered owner, or any defect therein, will not
affect the validity of the proceedings for the redemption of Bonds. Bonds so called for
redemption will cease to bear interest after the specified redemption date, provided that
the funds for the redemption are on deposit with the place of payment at that time.
2.04. Appointment of Initial Registrar. The City appoints Bond Trust Services
Corporation, Roseville, Minnesota, as the initial Registrar. The Mayor and the City Manager are
authorized to execute and deliver, on behalf of the City, a contract with the Registrar. Upon
merger or consolidation of the Registrar with another corporation, if the resulting corporation is a
bank or trust company authorized by law to conduct such business, the resulting corporation is
authorized to act as successor Registrar. The City agrees to pay the reasonable and customary
charges of the Registrar for the services performed. The City reserves the right to remove the
Registrar upon thirty (30) days’ notice and upon the appointment of a successor Registrar, in which
event the predecessor Registrar must deliver all cash and Bonds in its possession to the successor
Registrar and must deliver the bond register to the successor Registrar. On or before each
principal or interest due date, without further order of the City Council, the Chief Financial Officer
must transmit to the Registrar moneys sufficient for the payment of all principal and interest then
due.
Special city council meeting of October 26, 2020 (Item No. 3a) Page 8
Title: General Obligation Bonds, Series 2020A
2.05. Execution, Authentication and Delivery. The Bonds will be prepared under the
direction of the City Manager and executed on behalf of the City by the signatures of the Mayor
and the City Manager, provided that those signatures may be printed, engraved or lithographed
facsimiles of the originals. If an officer whose signature or a facsimile of whose signature appears
on the Bonds ceases to be such officer before the delivery of a Bond, that signature or facsimile
will nevertheless be valid and sufficient for all purposes, the same as if the officer had remained in
office until delivery. Notwithstanding such execution, a Bond will not be valid or obligatory for any
purpose or entitled to any security or benefit under this resolution unless and until a certificate of
authentication on the Bond has been duly executed by the manual signature of an authorized
representative of the Registrar. Certificates of authentication on different Bonds need not be
signed by the same representative. The executed certificate of authentication on a Bond is
conclusive evidence that it has been authenticated and delivered under this resolution. When the
Bonds have been so prepared, executed and authenticated, the City Manager will deliver the same
to the Purchaser upon payment of the purchase price in accordance with the contract of sale
heretofore made and executed, and the Purchaser is not obligated to see to the application of the
purchase price.
Section 3. Form of Bond.
3.01. Execution of the Bonds. The Bonds will be printed or typewritten in substantially
the form set forth in Exhibit B.
3.02. Approving Legal Opinion. The City Manager is authorized and directed to obtain
a copy of the proposed approving legal opinion of Kennedy & Graven, Chartered, Minneapolis,
Minnesota, and cause the opinion to be printed on or accompany each Bond.
Section 4. Payment; Security; Pledges and Covenants.
4.01. Debt Service Fund. The Bonds will be payable from the General Obligation Bonds,
Series 2020A Debt Service Fund (the “Debt Service Fund”) hereby created. The Debt Service Fund
shall be administered and maintained by the Chief Financial Officer as a bookkeeping account
separate and apart from all other funds maintained in the official financial records of the City. The
City will maintain the following accounts in the Debt Service Fund: the “Capital Projects Account”
and “Utility Improvements Account.” Amounts in the Capital Projects Account are irrevocably
pledged to the Charter Bonds, and amounts in the Utility Improvements Account are
irrevocably pledged to the Utility Revenue Bonds.
(a) Capital Projects Account. The Chief Financial Officer shall timely deposit in
the Capital Projects Account of the Debt Service Fund the ad valorem taxes hereinafter
levied (the “Taxes”) and allocated to the payment of debt service on the Charter Bonds,
which Taxes are pledged to the Capital Projects Account. There is also appropriated to the
Capital Projects Account a pro rata portion of (i) capitalized interest financed with proceeds
of the Bonds, if any; and (ii) amounts over the minimum purchase price paid by the
Purchaser, to the extent designated for deposit in the Debt Service Fund in accordance
with Section 1.05 hereof.
Special city council meeting of October 26, 2020 (Item No. 3a) Page 9
Title: General Obligation Bonds, Series 2020A
(b) Utility Improvements Account. The City will continue to maintain and
operate its Water Fund and Storm Sewer Fund, to which will be credited all gross revenues
of the water system and storm sewer system, respectively, and out of which will be paid all
normal and reasonable expenses of current operations of such systems. Any balances
therein are deemed net revenues (the “Net Revenues”) and will be transferred, from time
to time, to the Utility Improvements Account of the Debt Service Fund, which Utility
Improvements Account will be used only to pay principal of and interest on the Utility
Revenue Bonds and any other bonds similarly authorized. There will always be retained
in the Utility Improvements Account a sufficient amount to pay principal of and interest
on all the Utility Revenue Bonds, and the Chief Financial Officer must report any current
or anticipated deficiency in the Utility Improvements Account to the City Council. There
is also appropriated to the Utility Improvements Account a pro rata portion of (i)
capitalized interest financed with proceeds of the Bonds, if any; and (ii) amounts over the
minimum purchase price paid by the Purchaser, to the extent designated for deposit in the
Debt Service Fund in accordance with Section 1.05 hereof.
4.02. Construction Fund. The City hereby cre ates the General Obligation Bonds,
Series 2020A Construction Fund (the “Construction Fund”). The City will maintain the following
accounts in the Construction Fund: the “Capital Projects Account” and “Utility Improvements
Account.” Amounts in the Capital Projects Account are irrevocably pledged to the Charter
Bonds, and amounts in the Utility Improvements Account are irrevocably pledged to the Utility
Revenue Bonds.
(a) Capital Projects Account. Proceeds of the Charter Bonds, less the
appropriations made in Section 4.01(a), together with Taxes and any other funds
appropriated for the Capital Projects collected during the construction of the Capital
Projects, will be deposited in the Capital Projects Account of the Construction Fund to be
used solely to defray expenses of the Capital Projects and the payment of principal and
interest on the Charter Bonds prior to the completion and payment of all costs of the
Capital Projects. When the Capital Projects are completed and the cost thereof paid, the
Capital Projects Account of the Construction Fund is to be closed and any funds remaining
may be deposited in the Capital Projects Account of the Debt Service Fund.
(b) Utility Improvements Account. Proceeds of the Utility Revenue Bonds, less
the appropriations made in Section 4.01(b) hereof, will be deposited in the Utility
Improvements Account of the Construction Fund to be used solely to defray expenses of
the Utility Improvements. When the Utility Improvements are completed and the cost
thereof paid, the Utility Improvements Account of the Construction Fund is to be closed
and any funds remaining may be deposited in the Utility Improvements Account of the
Debt Service Fund.
4.03. City Covenants with Respect to the Utility Revenue Bonds. The City Council
covenants and agrees with the holders of the Bonds that so long as any of the Bonds remain
outstanding and unpaid, it will keep and enforce the following covenants and agreements:
(a) The City will continue to maintain and efficiently operate the water
system and storm sewer system as public utilities and conveniences free from
Special city council meeting of October 26, 2020 (Item No. 3a) Page 10
Title: General Obligation Bonds, Series 2020A
competition of other like municipal utilities and will cause all revenues therefrom to be
deposited in bank accounts and credited to the Water Fund and Storm Sewer Fund,
respectively, as hereinabove provided, and will make no expenditures from those
accounts except for a duly authorized purpose and in accordance with this resolution.
(b) The City will also maintain the Utility Improvements Account of the Debt
Service Fund as a separate account and will cause money to be credited thereto from
time to time, out of Net Revenues from the water system and storm sewer system in
sums sufficient to pay principal of and interest on the Utility Revenue Bonds when due.
(c) The City will keep and maintain proper and adequate books of records
and accounts separate from all other records of the City in which will be complete and
correct entries as to all transactions relating to the water system and storm sewer
system and which will be open to inspection and copying by any Bondholder, or the
Bondholder’s agent or attorney, at any reasonable time, and it will furnish certified
transcripts therefrom upon request and upon payment of a reasonable fee therefor, and
said account will be audited at least annually by a qualified public accountant and
statements of such audit and report will be furnished to all Bondholders upon request.
(d) The City Council will cause persons handling revenues of the water
system and storm sewer system to be bonded in reasonable amounts for the protection
of the City and the Bondholders and will cause the funds collected on account of the
operations of such systems to be deposited in a bank whose deposits are guaranteed
under the Federal Deposit Insurance Law.
(e) The City Council will keep the water system and storm sewer system
insured at all times against loss by fire, tornado and other risks customarily insured
against with an insurer or insurers in good standing, in such amounts as are customary
for like plants, to protect the holders, from time to time, of the Bonds and the City from
any loss due to any such casualty and will apply the proceeds of such insurance to make
good any such loss.
(f) The City and each and all of its officers will punctually perform all duties
with reference to the water system and storm sewer system as required by law.
(g) The City will impose and collect charges of the nature authorized by
Section 444.075 of the Utility Revenue Act, at the times and in the amounts required to
produce Net Revenues adequate to pay all principal and interest when due on the Utility
Revenue Bonds and to create and maintain such reserves securing said payments as
may be provided herein.
(h) The City Council will levy general ad valorem taxes on all taxable property
in the City when required to meet any deficiency in Net Revenues.
4.04. General Obligation Pledge. For the prompt and full payment of the principal of and
interest on the Bonds, as the same respectively become due, the full faith, credit and taxing
powers of the City will be and are hereby irrevocably pledged. If the balance in the Debt Service
Special city council meeting of October 26, 2020 (Item No. 3a) Page 11
Title: General Obligation Bonds, Series 2020A
Fund is ever insufficient to pay all principal and interest then due on the Bonds and any other
bonds payable therefrom, the deficiency will be promptly paid out of monies in the general fund of
the City which are available for such purpose, and such general fund may be reimbursed with or
without interest from the Debt Service Fund when a sufficient balance is available therein.
4.05. Pledge of Taxes. For the purpose of paying the principal of and interest on the
Charter Bonds, there is levied a direct annual irrepealable ad valorem tax upon all of the taxable
property in the City, which will be spread upon the tax rolls and collected with and as part of
other general taxes of the City. The Taxes will be credited to the Capital Projects Account of the
Debt Service Fund above provided and will be in the years and amounts as attached hereto as
Exhibit C.
4.06. Certification to Taxpayer Services Division Manager as to Debt Service Fund
Amount. It is hereby determined that the estimated collection of the foregoing Taxes and Net
Revenues will produce at least five percent (5%) in excess of the amount needed to meet when
due the principal and interest payments on the Bonds. The tax levy herein provided is
irrepealable until all of the Bonds are paid, provided that at the time the City makes its annual
tax levies the Chief Financial Officer may certify to the Taxpay er Services Division Manager of
Hennepin County, Minnesota (the “Taxpayer Services Division Manager”) the amount available
in the Debt Service Fund to pay principal and interest due during the ensuing year, and the
Taxpayer Services Division Manager will thereupon reduce the levy collectible during such year
by the amount so certified.
4.07. Registration of Resolution. The City Manager is authorized and directed to file a
certified copy of this resolution with the Taxpayer Services Division Manager and to obtain the
certificate required by Section 475.63 of the Act.
Section 5. Authentication of Transcript.
5.01. City Proceedings and Records. The officers of the City are authorized and directed
to prepare and furnish to the Purchaser and to the attorneys approving the Bonds certified copies
of proceedings and records of the City relating to the Bonds and to the financial condition and
affairs of the City, and such other certificates, affidavits and transcripts as may be required to show
the facts within their knowledge or as shown by the books and records in their custody and under
their control, relating to the validity and marketability of the Bonds, and such instruments,
including any heretofore furnished, will be deemed representations of the City as to the facts
stated therein.
5.02. Certification as to Official Statement. The Mayor, the City Manager, and the Chief
Financial Officer are authorized and directed to certify that they have examined the Official
Statement prepared and circulated in connection with the issuance and sale of the Bonds and that
to the best of their knowledge and belief the Official Statement is a complete and accurate
representation of the facts and representations made therein as of the date of the Official
Statement.
5.03. Other Certificates. The Mayor, the City Manager, and the Chief Financial Officer
are hereby authorized and directed to furnish to the Purchaser at the closing such certificates
Special city council meeting of October 26, 2020 (Item No. 3a) Page 12
Title: General Obligation Bonds, Series 2020A
as are required as a condition of sale. Unless litigation shall have bee n commenced and be
pending questioning the Bonds or the organization of the City or incumbency of its officers, at
the closing the Mayor, the City Manager, and the Chief Financial Officer shall also execute and
deliver to the Purchaser a suitable certificate as to absence of material litigation, and the Chief
Financial Officer shall also execute and deliver a certificate as to payment for and delivery of
the Bonds.
5.04. Electronic Signatures. The electronic signature of the Mayor, the City Manager,
the Chief Financial Officer, and/or the City Clerk to this resolution and any certificate authorized
to be executed hereunder shall be as valid as an original signature of such party and shall be
effective to bind the City thereto. For purposes hereof, (i) “electronic signature” means a
manually signed original signature that is then transmitted by electronic means; and
(ii) “transmitted by electronic means” means sent in the form of a facsimile or sent via the
internet as a portable document format (“pdf”) or other replicating image attached to an
electronic mail or internet message.
5.05. Payment of Costs of Issuance. The City authorizes the Purchaser to forward the
amount of Bond proceeds allocable to the payment of issuance expenses to Old National Bank,
Chaska, Minnesota on the closing date for further distribution as directed by the City’s
municipal advisor, Ehlers and Associates, Inc.
Section 6. Tax Covenant.
6.01. Tax -Exempt Bonds. The City covenants and agrees with the holders from time to
time of the Bonds that it will not take or permit to be taken by any of its officers, employees or
agents any action which would cause the interest on the Bonds to become subject to taxation
under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), and the Treasury Regulations
promulgated thereunder, in effect at the time of such actions, and that it will take or cause its
officers, employees or agents to take, all affirmative action within its power that may be necessary
to ensure that such interest will not become subject to taxation under the Code and applicable
Treasury Regulations, as presently existing or as hereafter amended and made applicable to the
Bonds.
6.02. Rebate. The City will comply with requirements necessary under the Code to
establish and maintain the exclusion from gross income of the interest on the Bonds under
Section 103 of the Code, including without limitation requirements relating to temporary periods
for investments, limitations on amounts invested at a yield greater than the yield on the Bonds,
and the rebate of excess investment earnings to the United States.
6.03. Not Private Activity Bonds. The City further covenants not to use the proceeds of
the Bonds or to cause or permit them or any of them to be used, in such a manner as to cause the
Bonds to be “private activity bonds” within the meaning of Sections 103 and 141 through 150 of
the Code.
6.04. Not Qualified Tax -Exempt Obligations. The Bonds are not designated as “qualified
tax -exempt obligations” for purposes of Section 265(b)(3) of the Code.
Special city council meeting of October 26, 2020 (Item No. 3a) Page 13
Title: General Obligation Bonds, Series 2020A
6.05. Procedural Requirements. The City will use its best efforts to comply with any
federal procedural requirements which may apply in order to effectuate the designations made by
this section.
Section 7. Book-Entry System; Limited Obligation of City.
7.01. DTC. The Bonds will be initially issued in the form of a separate single typewritten
or printed fully registered Bond for each of the maturities set forth in Section 1.06 hereof. Upon
initial issuance, the ownership of each Bond will be registered in the registration books kept by the
Registrar in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee for The Depository Trust Company, New York,
New York, and its successors and assigns (“DTC”). Except as provided in this section, all of the
outstanding Bonds will be registered in the registration books kept by the Registrar in the name of
Cede & Co., as nominee of DTC.
7.02. Participants. With respect to Bonds registered in the registration books kept by the
Registrar in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee of DTC, the City, the Registrar and the Paying
Agent will have no responsibility or obligation to any broker dealers, banks and other financial
institutions from time to time for which DTC holds Bonds as securities depository (the
“Participants”) or to any other person on behalf of which a Participant holds an interest in the
Bonds, including but not limited to any responsibility or obligation with respect to (i) the accuracy
of the records of DTC, Cede & Co. or any Participant with respect to any ownership interest in the
Bonds, (ii) the delivery to any Participant or any other person (other than a registered owner of
Bonds, as shown by the registration books kept by the Registrar), of any notice with respect to the
Bonds, including any notice of redemption, or (iii) the payment to any Participant or any other
person, other than a registered owner of Bonds, of any amount with respect to principal of,
premium, if any, or interest on the Bonds. The City, the Registrar and the Paying Agent may treat
and consider the person in whose name each Bond is registered in the registration books kept by
the Registrar as the holder and absolute owner of such Bond for the purpose of payment of
principal, premium and interest with respect to such Bond, for the purpose of registering transfers
with respect to such Bonds, and for all other purposes. The Paying Agent will pay all principal of,
premium, if any, and interest on the Bonds only to or on the order of the respective registered
owners, as shown in the registration books kept by the Registrar, and all such payments will be
valid and effectual to fully satisfy and discharge the City’s obligations with respect to payment of
principal of, premium, if any, or interest on the Bonds to the extent of the sum or sums so paid.
No person other than a registered owner of Bonds, as shown in the registration books kept by the
Registrar, will receive a certificated Bond evidencing the obligation of this resolution. Upon
delivery by DTC to the City Manager of a written notice to the effect that DTC has determined to
substitute a new nominee in place of Cede & Co., the words “Cede & Co.” will refer to such new
nominee of DTC; and upon receipt of such a notice, the City Manager will promptly delive r a copy
of the same to the Registrar and Paying Agent.
7.03. Representation Letter. The City has heretofore executed and delivered to DTC a
Blanket Issuer Letter of Representations (the “Representation Letter”) which will govern payment
of principal of , premium, if any, and interest on the Bonds and notices with respect to the Bonds.
Any Paying Agent or Registrar subsequently appointed by the City with respect to the Bonds will
agree to take all action necessary for all representations of the City in the Representation Letter
with respect to the Registrar and Paying Agent, respectively, to be complied with at all times.
Special city council meeting of October 26, 2020 (Item No. 3a) Page 14
Title: General Obligation Bonds, Series 2020A
7.04. Transfers Outside Book-Entry System. In the event the City, by resolution of the
City Council, determines that it is in the best interests of the persons having beneficial interests in
the Bonds that they be able to obtain Bond certificates, the City will notify DTC, whereupon DTC
will notify the Participants, of the availability through DTC of Bond certificates. In such event the
City will issue, transfer and exchange Bond certificates as requested by DTC and any other
registered owners in accordance with the provisions of this resolution. DTC may determine to
discontinue providing its services with respect to the Bonds at any time by giving notice to the City
and discharging its responsibilities with respect thereto under applicable law. In such event, if no
successor securities depository is appointed, the City will issue and the Registrar will authenticate
Bond certificates in accordance with this resolution and the provisions hereof will apply to the
transfer, exchange and method of payment thereof.
7.05. Payments to Cede & Co. Notwithstanding any other provision of this resolution to
the contrary, so long as a Bond is re gistered in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee of DTC,
payments with respect to principal of, premium, if any, and interest on the Bond and all notices
with respect to the Bond will be made and given, respectively in the manner provided in DTC’s
Operational Arrangements, as set forth in the Representation Letter.
Section 8. Continuing Disclosure.
8.01. Execution of Continuing Disclosure Certificate. “Continuing Disclosure Certificate”
means that certain Continuing Disclosure Certificate executed by the Mayor and City Manager and
dated the date of issuance and delivery of the Bonds, as originally executed and as it may be
amended from time to time in accordance with the terms thereof.
8.02. City Compliance with Provisions of Continuing Disclosure Certificate. The City
hereby covenants and agrees that it will comply with and carry out all of the provisions of the
Continuing Disclosure Certificate. Notwithstanding any other provision of this resolution, failure of
the City to comply with the Continuing Disclosure Certificate is not to be considered an event of
default with respect to the Bonds; however, any Bondholder may take such actions as may be
necessary and appropriate, including seeking mandate or specific performance by court order, to
cause the City to comply with its obligations under this section.
Section 9. Defeasance. When all Bonds and all interest thereon have been discharged
as provided in this section, all pledges, covenants and other rights granted by this resolution to the
holders of the Bonds will cease, except that the pledge of the full faith and credit of the City for the
prompt and full payment of the principal of and interest on the Bonds will remain in full force and
effect. The City may discharge all Bonds which are due on any date by depositing with the
Registrar on or before that date a sum sufficient for the payment thereof in full. If any Bond
should not be paid when due, it may nevertheless be discharged by depositing with the Registrar a
sum sufficient for the payment thereof in full with interest accrued to the date of such deposit.
Special city council meeting of October 26, 2020 (Item No. 3a) Page 15
Title: General Obligation Bonds, Series 2020A
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 October 26, 2020
Thomas K. Harmening, city manager Jake Spano, mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, city clerk
Special city council meeting of October 26, 2020 (Item No. 3a) Page 16
Title: General Obligation Bonds, Series 2020A
Exhibit A
Proposals
Special city council meeting of October 26, 2020 (Item No. 3a) Page 17
Title: General Obligation Bonds, Series 2020A
Exhibit B
Form of bond
No. R-__ $___________
United States of America
State of Minnesota
County of Hennepin
City of St. Louis Park
General Obligation Bond
Series 2020B
Rate
Maturity
Date of
Original Issue
CUSIP
February 1, 20__ November 10, 2020
Registered Owner: Cede & Co.
The City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, a duly organized and existing municipal
corporation in Hennepin County, Minnesota (the “City”), acknowledges itself to be indebted
and for value received hereby promises to pay to the Registered Owner specified above or
registered assigns, the principal sum of $__________ on the maturity date specified above,
with interest thereon from the date hereof at the annual rate specified above (calculated on the
basis of a 360 day year of twelve 30 day months), payable February 1 and August 1 in each year,
commencing August 1, 2021, to the person in whose name this Bond is registered at the close
of business on the fifteenth day (whether or not a business day) of the immediately preceding
month. The interest hereon and, upon presentation and surrender hereof, the principal hereof
are payable in lawful money of the United States of America by check or draft by Bond Trust
Services Corporation, Roseville, Minnesota, as Bond Registrar, Paying Agent, Transfer Agent and
Authenticating Agent, or its designated successor under the Resolution described herein. For
the prompt and full payment of such principal and interest as the same respectively become
due, the full faith and credit and taxing powers of the City have been and are hereby
irrevocably pledged.
The City may elect on February 1, 2029, and on any day thereafter to prepay Bonds due
on or after February 1, 2030. Redemption may be in whole or in part and if in part, at the
option of the City and in such manner as the City will determine. If less than all Bonds of a
maturity are called for redemption, the City will notify The Depository Trust Company (“DTC”)
of the particular amount of such maturity to be prepaid. DTC will determine by lot the amount
of each participant’s interest in such maturity to be redeemed and each participant will then
select by lot the beneficial ownership interests in such maturity to be redeemed. Prepayments
will be at a price of par plus accrued interest.
Special city council meeting of October 26, 2020 (Item No. 3a) Page 18
Title: General Obligation Bonds, Series 2020A
This Bond is one of an issue in the aggregate principal amount of $________ all of like
original issue date and tenor, except as to number, maturity date, redemption privilege, and
interest rate, all issued pursuant to a resolution adopted by the City Council on October
26, 2020 (the “Resolution”), for the purpose of providing money to aid in financing certain
capital projects and improvements to the City’s water system and storm sewer system,
pursuant to and in full conformity with the home rule charter of the City and the Constitution
and laws of the State of Minnesota, including Minnesota Statutes, Chapters 475 and
Chapter 444, as amended, and the principal hereof and interest hereon are payable in part
from ad valorem taxes and in part from net revenues from the water system and storm sewer
system of the City, as set forth in the Resolution to which reference is made for a full statement
of rights and powers thereby conferred. The full faith and credit of the City are irrevocably
pledged for payment of this Bond and the City Council has obligated itself to levy additional ad
valorem taxes on all taxable property in the City in the event of any deficiency in taxes and net
revenues pledged, which taxes may be levied without limitation as to rate or amount. The
Bonds of this series are issued only as fully registered Bonds in denominations of $5,000 or any
integral multiple thereof of single maturities.
This Bond is not a “qualified tax -exempt obligation” within the meaning of
Section 265(b)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended.
IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED AND RECITED That in and by the Resolution, the City has
covenanted and agreed that it will continue to own and operate the water system and storm
sewer system free from competition by other like municipal utilities; that adequate insurance
on said systems and suitable fidelity bonds on employees will be carried; that proper and
adequate books of account will be kept showing all receipts and disbursements relating to the
Water Fund and Storm Sewer Fund, into which it will pay all of the gross revenues from the
water system and storm sewer system, respectively; that it will also create and maintain a
Utility Improvements Account within the General Obligation Bonds, Series 2020A Debt Service
Fund, into which it will pay, out of the net re venues from the water system and storm sewer
system, a sum sufficient to pay principal of the Utility Revenue Bonds (as defined in the
Resolution) and interest on the Utility Revenue Bonds when due; and that it will provide, by ad
valorem tax levies, for any deficiency in required net revenues of the water system and storm
sewer system.
As provided in the Resolution and subject to certain limitations set forth therein, this
Bond is transferable upon the books of the City at the principal office of the Bond Registrar, by
the registered owner hereof in person or by the owner’s attorney duly authorized in writing
upon surrender hereof together with a written instrument of transfer satisfactory to the Bond
Registrar, duly executed by the registered owner or the owner’s attorney; and may also be
surrendered in exchange for Bonds of other authorized denominations. Upon such transfer or
exchange the City will cause a new Bond or Bonds to be issued in the name of the transferee or
registered owner, of the same aggregate principal amount, bearing interest at the same rate
and maturing on the same date, subject to reimbursement for any tax, fee or governmental
charge required to be paid with respect to such transfer or exchange.
The City and the Bond Registrar may deem and treat the person in whose name this
Bond is registered as the absolute owner hereof, whether this Bond is overdue or not, for the
Special city council meeting of October 26, 2020 (Item No. 3a) Page 19
Title: General Obligation Bonds, Series 2020A
purpose of receiving payment and for all other purposes, and neither the City nor the Bond
Registrar will be affected by any notice to the contrary.
IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED, RECITED, COVENANTED AND AGREED that all acts, conditions
and things required by the home rule charter of the City and the Constitution and laws of the
State of Minnesota to be done, to exist, to happen and to be performed preliminary to and in
the issuance of this Bond in order to make it a valid and binding general obligation of the City in
accordance with its terms, have been done, do exist, have happened and have been performed
as so required, and that the issuance of this Bond does not cause the indebtedness of the City
to exceed any constitutional, charter, or statutory limitation of indebtedness.
This Bond is not valid or obligatory for any purpose or entitled to any security or benefit
under the Resolution until the Certificate of Authentication hereon has been executed by the
Bond Registrar by manual signature of one of its authorized representatives.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of St. Louis Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota, by its
City Council, has caused this Bond to be executed on its behalf by the facsimile or manual
signatures of the Mayor and City Manager and has caused this Bond to be dated as of the date
set forth below.
Dated: November 10, 2020
City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota
(Facsimile) (Facsimile)
Mayor City Manager
_________________________________
Certificate of Authentication
This is one of the Bonds delivered pursuant to the Resolution mentioned within.
Bond Trust Services Corporation
By
Authorized Representative
_________________________________
Abbreviations
Special city council meeting of October 26, 2020 (Item No. 3a) Page 20
Title: General Obligation Bonds, Series 2020A
The following abbreviations, when used in the inscription on the face of this Bond, will be
construed as though they were written out in full according to applicable laws or regulations:
TEN COM -- as tenants in common UNIF GIFT MIN ACT
_________ Custodian _________
(Cust) (Minor)
TEN ENT -- as tenants by entireties under Uniform Gifts or Transfers to Minors
Act, State of _______________
JT TEN -- as joint tenants with right of
survivorship and not as tenants in
common
Additional abbreviations may also be used though not in the above list.
________________________________________
Assignment
For value received, the undersigned hereby sells, assigns and transfers unto
________________________________________ the within Bond and all rights thereunder, and
does hereby irrevocably constitute and appoint _________________________ attorney to
transfer the said Bond on the books kept for registration of the within Bond, with full power of
substitution in the premises.
Dated:
Notice: The assignor’s signature to this assignment must correspond with the name
as it appears upon the face of the within Bond in eve ry particular, without
alteration or any change whatever.
Signature Guaranteed:
NOTICE: Signature(s) must be guaranteed by a financial institution that is a member of the
Securities Transfer Agent Medallion Program (“STAMP”), the Stock Exchange Medallion Program
(“SEMP”), the New York Stock Exchange, Inc. Medallion Signatures Program (“MSP”) or other such
“signature guarantee program” as may be determined by the Registrar in addition to, or in
substitution for, STEMP, SEMP or MSP, all in accordance with the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
as amended.
The Registrar will not effect transfer of this Bond unless the information concerning the
assignee requested below is provided.
Name and Address:
Special city council meeting of October 26, 2020 (Item No. 3a) Page 21
Title: General Obligation Bonds, Series 2020A
(Include information for all joint owners if this Bond
is held by joint account.)
Please insert social security or other
identifying number of assignee
_________________________________
Provisions as to Registration
The ownership of the principal of and interest on the within Bond has been registered
on the books of the Registrar in the name of the person last noted below.
Date of Registration
Registered Owner
Signature of
Officer of Registrar
Cede & Co.
Federal ID #13-2555119
Special city council meeting of October 26, 2020 (Item No. 3a) Page 22
Title: General Obligation Bonds, Series 2020A
Exhibit C
Tax levy schedule
YEAR * TAX LEVY
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
2040
2041
__________________________________
* Year tax levy collected.
Special city council meeting of October 26, 2020 (Item No. 3a) Page 23
Title: General Obligation Bonds, Series 2020A
State of Minnesota )
)
County of Hennepin ) SS.
)
City of St. Louis Park )
I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting City Clerk of the City of St. Louis
Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota (the “City”), do hereby certify that I have carefully compared
the attached and foregoing extract of minutes of a special meeting of the City Council of the City
held on October 26, 2020, with the original minutes on file in my office and the extract is a full,
true and correct copy of the minutes insofar as they relate to the issuance and sale of the City’s
General Obligation Bonds, Series 2020A , in the original aggregate principal amount of
$____________.
WITNESS My hand officially as such City Clerk and the corporate seal of the City this ______
day of _______________, 2020.
City Clerk
City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota
(SEAL)
SA140-135 (MNI)
679226v1
Meeting date: October 26, 2020
Executive summary
Title: Ward 2 candidate interviews
Recommended action: The city council to interview the eight candidates who applied for the
city council ward 2 seat vacancy.
Policy consideration: Who does the council want to appoint to the city council ward 2 seat for
the remainder of the term – until January 3, 2022?
Summary: Councilmember Anne Mavity announced and submitted her resignation for Ward 2
seat effective October 31, 2020. The city council accepted her resignation and declared a
vacancy effective October 31, 2020 at their September 8, 2020 regular city council meetin g.
At the September 14, 2020 study session, the council selected to undertake an application
process to fill the vacancy. The city received eight eligible applications.
The eight candidates signed up for a 30-minute interview on a first come , first serve basis. The
interview schedule is as follows:
Applicant Interview time
Mike Ritter 5:30 – 6 :00 PM
Lynette Dumalag 6:00 – 6:30 PM
Joffrey Wilson 6:30 – 7:00 PM
Brenda Uribe 7:00 – 7:30 PM
BREAK 7:30 – 7 :45 PM
Steven Hansen 7:45 – 8:15 PM
Deb Brinkman 8:15 – 8:45 PM
Jim Beneke 8:45 – 9:15 PM
Clemeunt Douglass 9:15 – 9:45 PM
Financial or budget considerations: Not applicable.
Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable.
Supporting documents: Discussion
Applications
Interview questions
Prepared by: Maria Solano, senior management analyst
Reviewed by: Nancy Deno, deputy city manager/HR director
Approve d by: Tom Harmening, city manager
Meeting of October 26, 2020 Page 2
Title: Process for filling council ward 2 seat
Discussion
Requirements:
According to the Minnesota Constitution (Minn. Const. art. VII §§1, 6), an appointee to the St.
Louis Park City Council must:
•be at least 21 years old at the date of tak ing office
•be an eligible voter
•be a U.S. citizen.
•have resided in St. Louis Park for the prior 30 days and live in ward 2 at the time of
applying
•not be convicted of a felony under state or federal law unless the individual’s civil rights
have been restored.
Tentative Timeline
September 14, 2020 City council discussed and selected the appointment process
September 16, 2020 Application was available
October 4, 2020 Application deadline
Week of October 5, 2020 City council re ceived applicatio ns
October 12, 2020 City council determined interview and selection process
October 26, 2020 City council interviews candidates
November 2, 2020 Appointment of new council member
Appointment and oath of office
The council will need to take action to appoint the selected individual, 4 of 6 votes are required
for appointment. The new council member will need to take an oath of office before
undertaking any business.
From:info@stlouispark.org
To:Debbie Fischer; Andrea Wood
Subject:City council vacancy application
Date:Friday, September 18, 2020 11:34:00 AM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you
recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
A new entry to a form/survey has been submitted.
Form Name:City council vacancy (Ward 2) application
Date & Time:September 18, 2020 11:33 a.m.
Response #:4
Submitter ID:15883
IP address:174.20.189.92
Time to complete:33 min. , 58 sec.
Survey Details
Page 1
Applicant information
Name
First name mike Last name ritter
Address
Street address 6319 Oxford City st louis park
State Minnesota ZIP code 55416
Email
schmike1979@gmail.com
Phone number
612.296.0300
Please complete and attach the candidacy eligibility form, which verifies that you are eligible to hold
public office as a city council member in St. Louis Park.
eligibility form.pdf
Why are you interested in becoming a member of the St. Louis Park City Council?
as a council member, i think it is important to work for what is best for this city and its people now and in
Page 3 Meeting of October 26, 2020
Title: Process for filling council ward 2 seat
the future.
im interested in becoming a st louis park council member because i care about the community and the
people who live here. i have been employed by a small business in SLP for 16 years. rented here for 11
years and have owned a home in the city for the past 3 years.
Describe your experiences that have prepared you to serve on the city council.
the ability to get to know and talk to a diverse group of people in this ward has been enjoyable and natural.
i enjoy learning about people and hearing their ideas.
I have been part of the management team of the small business since day one. we have built a successful
business based on honesty and hard work, creativity and having fun. a large part of my career has to do
with listening and understanding my colleagues and our customers.
Briefly describe one to three goals/initiatives you feel are important to your overall vision for St. Louis
Park that you would like to see addressed as a council member.
1. promote diversity and inclusion of all opinions
2. help renters integrate and have the opportunity of becoming permanent residents of the city instead of
just transitional residents by creating permanent housing options.
3.focus on st louis park
If appointed, would you plan to seek reelection to a full term?
(○) Yes
Voluntary information
What is your race/ethnicity?
(○) White (not Hispanic or Latino)
Thank you,
St. Louis Park, MN
This is an automated message generated by the Vision Content Management System™. Please do not reply
directly to this email.
Page 4 Meeting of October 26, 2020
Title: Process for filling council ward 2 seat
From:info@stlouispark.org
To:Debbie Fischer; Andrea Wood
Subject:City council vacancy application
Date:Friday, October 2, 2020 5:55:06 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you
recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
A new entry to a form/survey has been submitted.
Form Name:City council vacancy (Ward 2) application
Date & Time:October 02, 2020 5:54 p.m.
Response #:9
Submitter ID:15932
IP address:75.168.96.245
Time to complete:1 min. , 51 sec.
Survey Details
Page 1
Applicant information
Name
First name Lynette Last name Dumalag
Address
Street address 3340 France Avenue
South
City Saint Louis Park
State Minnesota ZIP code 55416
Email
duma17@yahoo.com
Phone number
952.484.7874
Please complete and attach the candidacy eligibility form, which verifies that you are eligible to hold
public office as a city council member in St. Louis Park.
Candidacy Eligibility Form_Dumalag.pdf
Why are you interested in becoming a member of the St. Louis Park City Council?
Page 5 Meeting of October 26, 2020
Title: Process for filling council ward 2 seat
My husband and I moved to St. Louis Park 2006. When we bought our house, we had the goal to stay in our
home long term. We were welcomed to the neighborhood enthusiastically. During neighborhood
gatherings, neighbors that introduced themselves often included how long they lived there. At the time,
neighbors fell into one of two categories: (1) under 5 years or (2) 20+ years. I have observed fellow Saint
Louis Park residents talk about the length of their residency in the Park with a certain amount of pride.
My experience on the Vision 3.0 Steering Committee was eye opening. When people of color were asked
their experience attending neighborhood meetings, 42% of that subset reported and were more likely to
use the words “disconnected, sad, lonely or isolated, cold, frustrated, secluded, nervous, depressed,
neglected or unsupported. When white respondents were asked that same question on the same survey,
79% responded with positive words. That to me, signified a disconnect. If residents don’t feel comfortable
going to a neighborhood meeting, where important issues are discussed that impact that neighborhood,
then those voices are lost.
I have always been interested in local politics. Given their accessibility to stakeholders, local officials are
held to a different standard. I hope to be a representative that welcomes new ideas and sees challenges as
opportunities for our city to continue to grow.
Describe your experiences that have prepared you to serve on the city council.
I am a commercial real estate broker where I work with clients to secure space for their use. My projects
require that our team works with local municipalities to ensure our projects comply with land use policies
set forth by the governing entity. My professional life requires knowledge of how that approval process
gets navigated at a city or county level, depending on location.
I have worked on Saint Louis Park City led initiatives such as the Vision 3.0 Steering Committee, a City
Council appointment. I was a Sidewalk Poetry Panelist in August. I currently serve on Planning Commission
as Vice Chair.
I have served on numerous nonprofit and business boards over the years, including Aeon, Catholic Charities
of St. Paul & Minneapolis, Minneapolis Downtown Council, MinnPost.com, Urban Land Institute MN, and
Building Owners and Managers of Greater Minneapolis (“BOMA”). I take board roles seriously, knowing that
the decisions I have before me, impact residents/clients/communities.
I have dedicated a significant amount of nonprofit time in affordable housing, both with Aeon and now with
Catholic Charities.
During my 9 years on Aeon’s board, I served as board chair for 2 years and at the time, the organization
experienced tremendous growth. That board follows the Carver Governance model, the same model the
Council uses today.
At times, both my professional and nonprofit community work intersects. Cross sector collaboration can be
an efficient way to address issues in the community. While I only joined the Minneapolis Downtown Council
board just last year (a business focused organization), I have been involved for many years with this group,
working on the 2025 Plan that resulted Ending Street Homelessness as a priority for the organization. Since
2010, I have been on the Ending Street Homelessness Committee where we’ve provided education to
members and stakeholders regarding this issue, fundraised for specific programs with nonprofit social
services providers, and advocated for policies in Minneapolis/Hennepin County/State of MN to remove
barriers to shelter and housing. Other examples of cross sector collaboration can be found in my work with
Harvard Business School’s Young American Leaders Program (“YALP”) where I was selected to participate in
the program in 2016 by both GREATER MSP and the Itasca Project. In 2019, local leaders developed a
similar program with Harvard for our state (mYALP). I was on a team that gave guidance to curriculum for
the inaugural program and served on the selection committee for the Minneapolis/St. Paul cohort. A Saint
Page 6 Meeting of October 26, 2020
Title: Process for filling council ward 2 seat
Louis Park staff member was a participant in that program.
Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion is personally important to me. As a BIPOC woman in a white, male
dominated industry such as commercial real estate, I have worked to build a pipeline of future
professionals in our industry through my involvement in the Commercial Real Estate Diversity Collaborative
(“CREDC”), where we provide scholarship and industry connections to BIPOC candidates. This collaborative
effort involves industry associations and corporations that see the value in diversifying our workforce
because the outcomes are vastly different and improved. Most recently, I have become involved with the
Twin Cities Rebuild Coalition, which focuses on the rebuilding of business that suffered significant damage
during the riots in response to the killing of George Floyd. These businesses are mostly BIPOC owned along
Lake Street, West Broadway, and Hamline Midway. I have formed a team of fellow JLL colleagues, who are
working with these individual business owners, offering the same service we provide our large corporate
clients because we believe that preservation of these diverse business owners is vital to our community and
economy. I have also been involved with the Metropolitan State University’s College of Management
(“COM”), serving on their Dean’s Advisory Committee, working to create pathways into the commercial real
estate industry to graduates of COM.
Briefly describe one to three goals/initiatives you feel are important to your overall vision for St. Louis
Park that you would like to see addressed as a council member.
I wish to advance Council’s 2018 adopted strategic priorities, especially focusing on “creating a more just
and inclusive community for all” and “creating opportunities to build social capital through community
engagement”.
I would also like to focus on safety and equitable resources towards achieving a livability standard for the
city. I believe issue of safety is a regional issue.
If appointed, would you plan to seek reelection to a full term?
(○) Yes
Voluntary information
What is your race/ethnicity?
(○) Asian (not Hispanic or Latino)
Thank you,
St. Louis Park, MN
This is an automated message generated by the Vision Content Management System™. Please do not reply
directly to this email.
Page 7 Meeting of October 26, 2020
Title: Process for filling council ward 2 seat
From:info@stlouispark.org
To:Debbie Fischer; Andrea Wood
Subject:City council vacancy application
Date:Sunday, October 4, 2020 12:57:29 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you
recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
A new entry to a form/survey has been submitted.
Form Name:City council vacancy (Ward 2) application
Date & Time:October 04, 2020 12:57 p.m.
Response #:10
Submitter ID:15935
IP address:199.1.72.4
Time to complete:3 min. , 25 sec.
Survey Details
Page 1
Applicant information
Name
First name Joffrey Last name Wilson
Address
Street address 5826 Goodrich
Avenue
City Saint Louis Park
State Minnesota ZIP code 55416
Email
joffrey.wilson@gmail.com
Phone number
612.275.3887
Please complete and attach the candidacy eligibility form, which verifies that you are eligible to hold
public office as a city council member in St. Louis Park.
candidacyeligibilityform - Joffrey Wilson.pdf
Why are you interested in becoming a member of the St. Louis Park City Council?
Page 8 Meeting of October 26, 2020
Title: Process for filling council ward 2 seat
I am interested in the role as I have a passion for servant leadership. My focus on serving in my
communities has focused on volunteer efforts with employers, non-profit board roles, and an appointed
Government Role with the state.
Over the last 20 years I've volunteered with organizations like 2nd Harvest Heartland, Habitat for Humanity,
and Park and Recreation organizations to address hunger, housing, and youth enrichment. I've also
volunteered on boards to address similar issues and racial equity, working on board for the YMCA, United
Way, National Black MBA and otherwise.
Over the last two years, I've considered running for City Council as a way to drive greater impact in my
community. I have talked to friends, experts and St. Louis Park City Council members to gain perspective as
to whether my skill set and perspective would be valued. I came to the conclusion that I wanted to run for a
seat in 2021. However, the recent vacancy accelerated my timing.
Describe your experiences that have prepared you to serve on the city council.
My experiences in corporate America and non-profit boards have helped prepare me to serve. I have
worked for Ford Motor Company, General Mills, and currently Mortenson. My non-profit Board experience
includes the YMCA, United Way, National Black MBA, Carlson School of Management, and State of
Minnesota Connected and Automated Vehicle Committee. My experience in both corporate America and
non-profits have been rooted in strategic thinking, demonstrated ability to build consensus, and highlighted
my strengths as a leader who can listen.
At both General Mills and Mortenson, I served in corporate strategy roles. In these capacities, I was
responsible for helping shape the long range plan for both companies. This requires a skillset to understand
the internal and environment, distill complex information unto understandable focus areas, and drive
alignment on focus. This is demonstrated through work I led to help diversify the business portfolio of
Mortenson which resulted in entering a new renewable energy business. I see this as applicable to City
Council leadership, as there will be need to develop a strategy for future success and a plan to get there.
With significant experience in organizations that are consensus driven, I have experience in connecting to
stakeholders as well as listening and helping to advance efforts for an organization. I see this as critical to
the future success of St. Louis Park. An effective City Council member must have the ability to develop
rapport, understand stakeholders, and drive towards consensus with other Council members.
Finally, I have experience in leadership. Whether leading student organizations while in undergraduate and
graduate schools, serving as board president for multiple organizations, or my reputation in the community,
I have experience as a leader and a reputation for making sure all voices are heard. Through work with the
Itasca Project, a local organization focused on bettering our region, I have also developed an appreciation
for the type of leadership needed to advance St. Louis Park. Similar to the foundational elements of The
Itasca Project, I believe that we need leadership and collaboration among business, government, and non-
profits to advance St. Louis Park.
Briefly describe one to three goals/initiatives you feel are important to your overall vision for St. Louis
Park that you would like to see addressed as a council member.
Racial Equity: Despite a robust corporate community and amazing philanthropic organizations, the Twin
Cities has continued to fail in the area of racial equity. When we look at metrics including education,
healthcare and economic security, we have much work to do. I feel it is important to understand inequities
that exist and our history, so we can remove barriers that exist and create an equitable city where people
want to live and stay.
Page 9 Meeting of October 26, 2020
Title: Process for filling council ward 2 seat
Renewable Energy: Renewable Energy presents the opportunity to help address climate change while
driving investment and creating jobs. Renewable Energy is a small fraction of today's energy generation.
While generation and transmission are regulated by the Public Utility Commission and driven by utilities, St.
Louis Park has the ability to be a leader in this space. Through establishing our own goals and policies, there
is potential to generate investment and create jobs.
If appointed, would you plan to seek reelection to a full term?
(○) Yes
Voluntary information
What is your race/ethnicity?
(○) Black or African American (not Hispanic or Latino)
Thank you,
St. Louis Park, MN
This is an automated message generated by the Vision Content Management System™. Please do not reply
directly to this email.
Page 10 Meeting of October 26, 2020
Title: Process for filling council ward 2 seat
From:info@stlouispark.org
To:Debbie Fischer; Andrea Wood
Subject:City council vacancy application
Date:Sunday, October 4, 2020 8:47:34 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you
recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
A new entry to a form/survey has been submitted.
Form Name:City council vacancy (Ward 2) application
Date & Time:October 04, 2020 8:47 p.m.
Response #:11
Submitter ID:15936
IP address:75.168.82.217
Time to complete:34 min. , 30 sec.
Survey Details
Page 1
Applicant information
Name
First name Brenda Last name Uribe
Address
Street address 3945 Zarthan Ave S City St Louis Park
State Minnesota ZIP code 55416
Email
brendaburibe@aol.com
Phone number
678.478.6351
Please complete and attach the candidacy eligibility form, which verifies that you are eligible to hold
public office as a city council member in St. Louis Park.
image.jpg
Why are you interested in becoming a member of the St. Louis Park City Council?
I have lived in St Louis Park for 3years now, watching the ever changing climate I feel I need to be active in
Page 11 Meeting of October 26, 2020
Title: Process for filling council ward 2 seat
our community. I moved to this area because I felt a sense of community, now I feel that is disappearing. I
am a active participant in my job and very engaging with those I work with, I feel that I could do this in our
community. This has been a challenging year for most of us and having someone who wants to serve and
most importantly listen to their constituents is the upmost important thing we can do.
Describe your experiences that have prepared you to serve on the city council.
First and foremost I have never served in a public office. I have although served in numerous roles in a
union of 26,000 employees. I am currently a grievance chair for my union so, understanding the differences
of what a person wants and what is allowed by contracts and how to negotiate the the two is an invaluable
resource. I feel having these skills and being in this role for over 20 yrs has given me a skill set most do not
have.
Briefly describe one to three goals/initiatives you feel are important to your overall vision for St. Louis
Park that you would like to see addressed as a council member.
My goal if selected to this position would be to establish unity in out community. Our ward encapsulates a
wide variety of individuals and business, which at this time and in this environment are very vulnerable. I
work with more than 100k employees and feel that I can relate to all ethnicities, races and religions. My
initiative would be to listen, learn and evaluate. Yes, that sounds simple but it’s not. We as a community
need to understand what our neighbors concerns are, it’s not personal, it’s their concerns. On the US stage
Minneapolis is not looked at in a good light, I as a transplant only living here for 5 years, would like to
change that. I came to MSP with the knowledge of Minnesota nice, now when I tell people I live in
Minneapolis they are afraid for me. We as a community have a lot of work to change that, to bring
businesses back, to bring tourism back that is what I would like to achieve
If appointed, would you plan to seek reelection to a full term?
(○) Yes
Voluntary information
What is your race/ethnicity?
(○) White (not Hispanic or Latino)
Thank you,
St. Louis Park, MN
This is an automated message generated by the Vision Content Management System™. Please do not reply
directly to this email.
Page 12 Meeting of October 26, 2020
Title: Process for filling council ward 2 seat
From:info@stlouispark.org
To:Debbie Fischer; Andrea Wood
Subject:City council vacancy application
Date:Monday, September 28, 2020 4:42:14 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you
recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
A new entry to a form/survey has been submitted.
Form Name:City council vacancy (Ward 2) application
Date & Time:September 28, 2020 4:42 p.m.
Response #:5
Submitter ID:15913
IP address:75.168.105.146
Time to complete:23 min. , 25 sec.
Survey Details
Page 1
Applicant information
Name
First name Steven Last name Hansen
Address
Street address 4101 Raleigh
Avenue
City St. Louis Park
State Minnesota ZIP code 55416
Email
hansensteven30@gmail.com
Phone number
952.927.6035
Please complete and attach the candidacy eligibility form, which verifies that you are eligible to hold
public office as a city council member in St. Louis Park.
Scan_0001.pdf
Why are you interested in becoming a member of the St. Louis Park City Council?
Page 13 Meeting of October 26, 2020
Title: Process for filling council ward 2 seat
I grew up in Ward 2 - Class of '65. After college, Peace Corps in Thailand, 4 years in Illinois and 3 years in
Algeria I moved back to ward 2 in 1981 to raise my two daughters - classes of '01 and '03. Having lived most
of my 73 years in Ward 2 I would love to represent my neighbors on the city council as a way of giving back
for the wonderful place this has been to grow up, live and raise a family. Now that I am retired I will be able
to devote myself fully to such a task.
Describe your experiences that have prepared you to serve on the city council.
- Member of the Police Advisory Commission for seven years (2010 -2017). Chairman for the last two of
those years.
- Was a facilitator in the visioning process.
- Served on a housing commission in the 90s.
During my career I was an entrepreneur, teacher. manager. corporate trainer and technical writer. In these
positions I had to work with others as part of a team to produce positive results.
Briefly describe one to three goals/initiatives you feel are important to your overall vision for St. Louis
Park that you would like to see addressed as a council member.
1. Looking proactively at the effects, both positive and negative, the light rail line will have on the city and
Ward 2 on particular when it is completed.
2. Ensuring our water is safe to drink.
3' Working with the St. Louis Park Historical Society to identify ways to preserve our heritage. I can't believe
we tore down the old city hall. What a loss!
If appointed, would you plan to seek reelection to a full term?
(○) No
Voluntary information
What is your race/ethnicity?
(○) White (not Hispanic or Latino)
Thank you,
St. Louis Park, MN
This is an automated message generated by the Vision Content Management System™. Please do not reply
directly to this email.
Page 14 Meeting of October 26, 2020
Title: Process for filling council ward 2 seat
From:info@stlouispark.org
To:Debbie Fischer; Andrea Wood
Subject:City council vacancy application
Date:Tuesday, September 29, 2020 4:04:46 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you
recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
A new entry to a form/survey has been submitted.
Form Name:City council vacancy (Ward 2) application
Date & Time:September 29, 2020 4:04 p.m.
Response #:6
Submitter ID:15919
IP address:70.59.83.251
Time to complete:32 min. , 0 sec.
Survey Details
Page 1
Applicant information
Name
First name Deborah Last name Brinkman
Address
Street address 4327 Alabama Ave
So
City St. Louis Park
State Minnesota ZIP code 55416
Email
deb.brinkman@gmail.com
Phone number
612.803.6142
Please complete and attach the candidacy eligibility form, which verifies that you are eligible to hold
public office as a city council member in St. Louis Park.
Deb Brinkman Eligibility.jpg
Why are you interested in becoming a member of the St. Louis Park City Council?
Page 15 Meeting of October 26, 2020
Title: Process for filling council ward 2 seat
I want to give back to the St. Louis Park community and bring Vision 3.0 to life. I have lived in St. Louis Park
Ward 2 for more than 30 years. St. Louis Park is changing fast. I look forward to being a strong, effective
voice representing our community as we make decisions to usher in these changes.
Describe your experiences that have prepared you to serve on the city council.
I campaigned for six months in 2019 for City Council At Large knocking on about 2000 doors and engaged
residents more than 600 conversations to learn what issues are important to them, their neighbors and in
their neighborhoods. I’m well versed on the issues and have the support of several thousand neighbors.
I established a partnership with the League of Women Voters and FairVote Minnesota and led the effort for
the approval of Ranked Choice Voting by forming a grassroots campaign showing the acceptance and
appreciation of Ranked Choice Voting. This campaign required working closely with St. Louis Park residents,
the St. Louis Park Charter Commission and individual Commissioners. I also participated in the Panel
Discussion that was hosted by the Charter Commission. Our League also partnered with the St. Louis Park
Elections Staff to help educate our St. Louis Park neighbors how Ranked Choice Voting works.
I have been the President of the League of Women Voters St. Louis Park for more than 6 years.
One of our members requested that we do more to engage children in civics. This lead to 3 initiatives: 1) I
established a partnership with KidsVoting Minnesota and then MN Civic Youth who worked with The
League of Women Voters St. Louis Park to start Kids Voting St. Louis Park program. Our success lead to the
initiation of the Student Vote program through the Secretary of State’s office.
2) I implemented a civics game that the LWV St. Louis Park brings to the Children’s First Ice Cream Social
and other events.
3) I led the effort to implement the LWV St. Louis Park scholarship program. The scholarship is awarded
through the Dollars for Scholars program at the St. Louis Park Senior High School.
I have a business process analysis and tech-savvy background as a consultant. I use a business process
canvas to identify problems, opportunities, partners and key performance indicators. I will use this analysis
process to review policies and issues. I help businesses adopt changes and mediate conflict by reaching
consensus.
I have attended several training sessions through Women Winning, Wellstone Winning, and Vote, Run,
Lead.
I continue research and discovery through online blogs, books, white papers and podcasts to learn more
about issues we face such as racial equity and the housing crises.
Briefly describe one to three goals/initiatives you feel are important to your overall vision for St. Louis
Park that you would like to see addressed as a council member.
Safety
• Everyone needs a safe place to call home
• Maintain our affordable housing stock so families are not afraid of being displaced like Meadowbrook
units
• We need a way to get residents safely to and from the light rail stations and around SLP
• I look forward to helping residents advocate for stop signs, reducing the speed limits, exploring traffic
calming measures and promoting the Livable Street designs
Equity
• Promote racial equity, racial equity education, and racial equity acceptance
Page 16 Meeting of October 26, 2020
Title: Process for filling council ward 2 seat
• Increase modes of transportation
• Increase home ownership opportunities
• Access to a fast internet connection
• Partner with the schools to reduce the education gap
• Partner with the Human Rights Commission
• Engage our neighbors to celebrate and appreciate cultural differences so everyone feels welcomed, safe,
supported and valued.
• Snow removal
Environment
I look forward to advocating for changes to help us reach our climate action plan goals
• establishing corporate partnerships
• community engagement
• technological advances
• alternative energy solutions
• energy storage
• energy savings
If appointed, would you plan to seek reelection to a full term?
(○) Yes
Voluntary information
What is your race/ethnicity?
(○) White (not Hispanic or Latino)
Thank you,
St. Louis Park, MN
This is an automated message generated by the Vision Content Management System™. Please do not reply
directly to this email.
Page 17 Meeting of October 26, 2020
Title: Process for filling council ward 2 seat
From:info@stlouispark.org
To:Debbie Fischer; Andrea Wood
Subject:City council vacancy application
Date:Friday, October 2, 2020 3:26:04 AM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you
recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
A new entry to a form/survey has been submitted.
Form Name:City council vacancy (Ward 2) application
Date & Time:October 02, 2020 3:25 a.m.
Response #:7
Submitter ID:15927
IP address:75.168.122.183
Time to complete:8 min. , 15 sec.
Survey Details
Page 1
Applicant information
Name
First name Jim Last name Beneke
Address
Street address 3934 Ottawa Av S City St. Louis Park
State Minnesota ZIP code 55416
Email
jimbeneke@msn.com
Phone number
952.212.7455
Please complete and attach the candidacy eligibility form, which verifies that you are eligible to hold
public office as a city council member in St. Louis Park.
candidacyeligibilityformJimBeneke.pdf
Why are you interested in becoming a member of the St. Louis Park City Council?
I am proud of the city's comprehensive and forward-looking planning to enhance the well-being of all of its
Page 18 Meeting of October 26, 2020
Title: Process for filling council ward 2 seat
citizens. In my different community roles, I have had opportunity to participate in many of the city's
strategic priorities of racial equity, environmental stewardship, housing, mobility, and community
engagement. I would love to now take a comprehensive role to help St. Louis Park build on its strengths,
while ensuring equity and inclusion for all its residents.
Describe your experiences that have prepared you to serve on the city council.
I have played several roles as a community leader in St. Louis Park; serving on both school district and city
committees; serving on both the School Board and the St. Louis Park Planning Commission; and
participating in community initiatives.
Even before being elected to the School Board I served as the school district liaison to both the Community
Education Advisory Committee and to the Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee, including take a turn
chairing both committees. I also had active roles in two rounds of strategic planning for the school district. I
have been on other school district committees such as the Equity and Excellence Task Force.
I have also participated in other city initiatives. I was a member of the joint school/city Community
Recreation Task Force, and participated in the Health in the Park initiative.
After I was elected to the School Board, I helped promote discussion on items such as facilities
improvement, increased mental health support, transgender support, systemic racism and equity, and
environmental stewardship. With the other board members we made it the highest priority to subject each
decision to the equity lens.
I am currently serving on the St. Louis Park Planning Commission. I was pleased to be appointed to this
commission as many planning decisions could have an influence on affordable housing in St. Louis Park, like
the recent discussion on ADU's.
Beyond my other involvement, I have always tried to be knowledgeable about and give my feedback on
issues both in the schools and in the city. Several city council members, past and present, might remember
me contacting them about various issues.
Briefly describe one to three goals/initiatives you feel are important to your overall vision for St. Louis
Park that you would like to see addressed as a council member.
Briefly describe one to three goals/initiatives you feel are important to your overall vision for St. Louis Park
that you would like to see addressed as a council member.
1. Affordable housing.
We have discussed some ideas in Planning Commission on how to increase Naturally Occurring Affordable
Housing by loosening rules on ADUs and duplexes. I hope we will continue to investigate other novel ideas
about how to promote affordable housing.
2. Climate action
Ensure that the city stays on track to achieve its goal of being carbon neutral by 2040. Continue to find
ways to partner with the community to achieve that, like the partnership developed with the school district.
3. Racial equity
I would like to continue to dialogue about ways to achieve racial equity. I support continuing to make it the
lens through which all other decisions are made. I also support developing community education
opportunities to help the community understand the concepts of systemic racism and implicit bias. I plan to
Page 19 Meeting of October 26, 2020
Title: Process for filling council ward 2 seat
continue to educate myself.
4. Mental health and community engagement
Continue to find ways to promote community engagement, which is a key component of mental health.
Public gathering spaces are important, as well as promoting community activities. We should find ways to
involve youth in city government.
If appointed, would you plan to seek reelection to a full term?
(○) Yes
Voluntary information
What is your race/ethnicity?
(○) White (not Hispanic or Latino)
Thank you,
St. Louis Park, MN
This is an automated message generated by the Vision Content Management System™. Please do not reply
directly to this email.
Page 20 Meeting of October 26, 2020
Title: Process for filling council ward 2 seat
From:info@stlouispark.org
To:Debbie Fischer; Andrea Wood
Subject:City council vacancy application
Date:Thursday, September 17, 2020 12:52:06 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you
recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
A new entry to a form/survey has been submitted.
Form Name:City council vacancy (Ward 2) application
Date & Time:September 17, 2020 12:51 p.m.
Response #:2
Submitter ID:15879
IP address:4.14.214.114
Time to complete:38 min. , 15 sec.
Survey Details
Page 1
Applicant information
Name
First name Clemeunt Last name Douglass
Address
Street address 4320 Mackey Ave City St. Louis Park
State Minnesota ZIP code 55424
Email
douglassct@gmail.com
Phone number
612.978.3204
Please complete and attach the candidacy eligibility form, which verifies that you are eligible to hold
public office as a city council member in St. Louis Park.
Douglass candidacyeligibilityform.pdf
Why are you interested in becoming a member of the St. Louis Park City Council?
Having lived in St. Louis Park for over two years now, I have grown extremely fond of the communities it
Page 21 Meeting of October 26, 2020
Title: Process for filling council ward 2 seat
represents. It's diverse population and centralized locale is unique and provides for a lot of opportunity;
neighborhoods feel like neighborhoods here. While the city has its significant positive traits, it also has a lot
of opportunities to grow. The challenge with the Cedar Lake Trail, the affect of COVID-19 on our businesses
and at-risk citizens, and the drive to become a more diverse and inclusive community are all items I take
personally. I want to bring the experiences I've gained to influence positive change in my own community.
Describe your experiences that have prepared you to serve on the city council.
I have a Bachelor's Degree in Homeland Security & Emergency Preparedness which ties closely with social
services. Complementary to that I graduated December 15, 2018 with my MBA from the University of St.
Thomas, which provided me the education I needed to understand P&L's and budgets.
I have been in a job function in the military that centers around community organizing, planning, and
coordination - I have performed this job in vulnerable communities in Iraq, Djibouti, and Ukraine, as well as
trained personnel to perform this job all over the world. My work with people of multiple cultures and
backgrounds has given me the capapbility to understand diversity and inclusion and has driven me to tie my
engagement back to strategic objectives for equal treatment of all people. I have experience speaking
publicly to both small and large groups in both professional and informal situations. I have experience
negotiating solutions and considering the varying points of view that come from planning and alignment
between government and communities.
Briefly describe one to three goals/initiatives you feel are important to your overall vision for St. Louis
Park that you would like to see addressed as a council member.
The current strategic priorities are fantastic. Our locale and population provide us the opportunity to be a
leader in terms of racial equity and inclusion. This is a fundamental characteristic of a successful community
and I would be honored to help drive this objective forward. This is what I've done all over the world with
the military in Civil Affairs.
Secondly, the goal to grow as a leader in environmental issues is very close to my heart as well as my
families. My wife and I compost, grow food, ride bikes, have a hybrid car, and try to influence others to do
the same. There is great opportunity here for that.
Additionally, the importance of diverse housing and neighborhood development as well as transportation
options for those that need it is critical to build confidence in our citizens to want to engage with their
community.
I would like to eventually see a priority in Cybersecurity related awareness to help protect our population
from threats. This is something that, in addition to my Civil Affairs experience, that I can bring to the table.
People can be just as vulnerable online as they are in the physical world.
If appointed, would you plan to seek reelection to a full term?
(○) Yes
Voluntary information
What is your race/ethnicity?
(○) White (not Hispanic or Latino)
Page 22 Meeting of October 26, 2020
Title: Process for filling council ward 2 seat
Thank you,
St. Louis Park, MN
This is an automated message generated by the Vision Content Management System™. Please do not reply
directly to this email.
Page 23 Meeting of October 26, 2020
Title: Process for filling council ward 2 seat
City council ward 2 vacancy
Interview questions
Note, each candidate will have a maximum of 30 minutes to answer the following questions
with the city council.
1.Please tell us about yourself, why you are interested in serving as a council
member and why the council should select you for this vacancy?
2.Please tell us about your current racial equity journey and how you see
racial equity within policymaking.
3.In the application you were asked to describe one to three goals/initiatives
you feel are important to your overall vision for St. Louis Park, can you share
these goals and why they are important to you?
4.Can you share an example from your background that shows how you work
successfully in a team of peers?
5.What questions do you have for the council?
Page 24 Meeting of October 26, 2020
Title: Process for filling council ward 2 seat
Meeting: Study session
Meeting date: October 26, 2020
Written report: 1
Executive summary
Title: September 2020 monthly financial report
Recommended action: No action required at this time.
Policy consideration: Monthly financial reports are part of our financial management policies.
Summary: The monthly financial report provides an overview of general fund revenues and
departmental expenditures comparing them to budget throughout the year.
Financial or budget considerations: At the end of September, general fund expenditures were
at approximately 67.5% of the adopted annual budget, which is about 7.5% under budget.
Permit revenue continues to exceed budget at the end of September.
Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable.
Supporting documents: Discussion
Summary of revenues and departmental expenditures
Prepared by: Darla Monson, accountant
Reviewed by: Nancy Deno, deputy city manager/HR director
Approve d by: Tom Harmening, city manager
Study session meeting of October 26, 2020 (Item No. 1) Page 2
Title: September 2020 monthly financial report
Discussion
Background: This monthly report provides summary information of the overall level of
revenues and departmental expenditures in the general fund compared to the adopted budget
throughout the year
Present considerations:
General Fund
Under normal circumstances, expenditures would generally be at about 75% of the annual
budget at the end of September. This year general fund expenditures are running about 7.5%
under at 67.5% of the adopted annual budget through September and no departments are
exceeding budget. A primary reason for the low er expenditures can be attributed to salary
savings from positions in the general fund that were put on hold due to COVID.
License and permit revenues combined are at 97.5% of budget through September. Net of the
refunds that were issued to businesses due to the COVID-19 closures , business and liquor
license revenue is at 82% of the annual budget. Permit revenue is at 101% of the annual budget
through September and includes the permits for Parkway Place Apartments, The Quentin and
several school district projects. A portion of the 10 West End permit was deferred last year to
2020 to offset related expenditures.
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Actual $2,899 $6,184 $8,981 $11,848 $15,420 $18,566 $21,876 $25,191 $28,127
Budget $3,475 $6,949 $10,424 $13,898 $17,373 $20,847 $24,322 $27,796 $31,271 $34,745 $38,220 $41,694
$0
$5,000
$10,000
$15,000
$20,000
$25,000
$30,000
$35,000
$40,000
$45,000
$ THOUSANDS Monthly Expenditures -General Fund
Summary of Revenues & Departmental Expenditures - General Fund As of September 30, 2020 20202020201820182019201920202020Balance YTD Budget Budget Audited Budget Audited Budget YTD Sept Remaining to Actual %General Fund Revenues: General Property Taxes25,705,886$ 26,597,928$ 26,880,004$ 26,952,306$ 28,393,728$ 14,988,095$ 13,405,633$ 52.79% Licenses and Permits3,924,648 4,001,644 4,103,424 5,264,659 4,660,811 4,545,763 115,048 97.53% Fines & Forfeits269,200 282,146 279,700 274,340 280,000 92,976 187,024 33.21% Intergovernmental1,864,877 2,006,435 1,760,900 1,761,763 1,760,082 984,663 775,419 55.94% Charges for Services2,162,410 2,180,589 2,187,319 2,160,345 2,273,824 1,079,334 1,194,490 47.47% Rents & Other Miscellaneous1,318,037 1,427,744 1,367,012 1,500,867 1,456,102 907,771 548,331 62.34% Transfers In1,929,090 1,929,076 1,999,877 2,012,706 2,038,338 1,486,754 551,584 72.94% Investment Earnings 160,000 251,494 180,000 523,124 210,000 95,487 114,513 45.47% Other Income40,950 35,802 31,300 57,274 621,280 585,883 35,397 94.30% Use of Fund Balance523,835 298,156 230,026 - 0.00%Total General Fund Revenues37,898,933$ 38,712,858$ 39,087,692$ 40,737,411$ 41,694,165$ 24,766,727$ 16,927,438$ 59.40%General Fund Expenditures: General Government: Administration1,341,606$ 1,340,282$ 1,837,620$ 1,673,619$ 1,868,599$ 1,005,745$ 862,854$ 53.82% Finance978,752 964,036 1,034,199 1,078,291 1,124,045 775,357 348,688 68.98% Assessing759,865 710,715 772,746 751,737 808,171 575,201 232,970 71.17% Human Resources796,666 735,050 805,620 756,767 823,209 560,074 263,135 68.04% Community Development1,479,911 1,559,721 1,502,521 1,515,672 1,571,894 1,126,104 445,790 71.64% Facilities Maintenance1,162,342 1,223,109 1,170,211 1,209,474 1,265,337 915,420 349,917 72.35% Information Resources1,589,432 1,526,028 1,674,937 1,474,604 1,709,255 1,171,807 537,448 68.56% Communications & Marketing755,940 829,732 805,674 786,448 828,004 557,841 270,163 67.37% Community Outreach27,637 12,085 0.00%Total General Government8,892,151$ 8,900,758$ 9,603,528$ 9,246,612$ 9,998,514$ 6,687,550$ 3,310,964$ 66.89% Public Safety: Police9,930,681$ 9,877,014$ 10,335,497$ 10,452,038$ 10,853,821$ 7,754,395$ 3,099,426$ 71.44% Fire Protection4,657,973 4,630,520 4,813,078 4,754,524 5,040,703 3,473,959 1,566,744 68.92% Building 2,544,762 2,295,910 2,555,335 2,430,473 2,696,585 1,731,103 965,482 64.20%Total Public Safety17,133,416$ 16,803,444$ 17,703,910$ 17,637,035$ 18,591,109$ 12,959,456$ 5,631,653$ 69.71% Operations: Public Works Administration230,753$ 208,050$ 290,753$ 214,436$ 273,318$ 157,385$ 115,933$ 57.58% Public Works Operations3,091,857 2,998,935 3,111,481 3,099,493 3,331,966 2,252,935 1,079,031 67.62% Vehicle Maintenance1,253,367 1,210,279 1,242,236 1,268,700 1,278,827 778,980 499,847 60.91% Engineering525,834 552,432 570,377 609,567 551,285 362,270 189,015 65.71%Total Operations5,101,811$ 4,969,696$ 5,214,847$ 5,192,196$ 5,435,396$ 3,551,571$ 1,883,825$ 65.34% Parks and Recreation: Organized Recreation1,582,490 1,499,780 1,579,569 1,498,462 1,637,002 1,070,848 566,154 65.42% Recreation Center1,860,755 2,004,937 1,949,657 2,041,386 2,061,394 1,419,338 642,056 68.85% Park Maintenance1,830,530 1,866,744 1,833,297 1,820,455 1,906,363 1,308,406 597,957 68.63% Westwood Nature Center622,346 599,704 643,750 612,266 748,683 437,121 311,562 58.39% Natural Resources559,662 376,359 484,784 429,409 504,143 308,427 195,716 61.18%Total Parks and Recreation6,455,783$ 6,347,524$ 6,491,057$ 6,401,977$ 6,857,585$ 4,544,139$ 2,313,446$ 66.26% Other Depts and Non-Departmental: Racial Equity and Inclusion -$ -$ -$ 4,592$ 314,077$ 201,266$ 112,811$ 64.08% Sustainability26,283 497,484 183,365 314,119 36.86% Transfers Out1,040,000 300,000 0.00% Contingency and Other315,772 186,966 74,350 121,245 0.00%Total Other Depts and Non-Departmental315,772$ 1,226,966$ 74,350$ 452,119$ 811,561$ 384,630$ 426,931$ 47.39%Total General Fund Expenditures37,898,933$ 38,248,388$ 39,087,692$ 38,929,940$ 41,694,165$ 28,127,347$ 13,566,818$ 67.46%Study session meeting of October 26, 2020 (Item No. 1) Title: September 2020 monthly financial report Page 3
Meeting: Study session
Meeting date: October 26, 2020
Written report: 2
Executive summary
Title: Third quarter investment report (July – Sept. 2020)
Recommended action: No action required at this time.
Policy consideration: Reporting on investments quarterly is part of our financial management
policies .
Summary: The quarterly investment report provides an overview of the city’s investment
portfolio, including the types of investments held, length of maturity and yield.
Financial or budget considerations: The total portfolio value at Sept. 30, 2020 is $54.4 million.
Approximately $30.8 million is invested in longer term securities that include U.S. Treasury
notes, federal agency bonds, municipal debt securities and certificates of deposit. The
remaining $23.6 of the portfolio is held in money market accounts for bond projects and
operating cash flow needs between property tax settlements. The overall yield to maturity
decreased to 1.16%. Interest rates on securities and money markets have dropped significantly
since the pandemic.
Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable.
Supporting documents: Discussion
Investment portfolio summary
Prepared by: Darla Monson, accountant
Reviewed by: Nancy Deno, deputy city manager/HR director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, city manager
Study session meeting of October 26, 2020 (Item No. 2) Page 2
Title: Third quarter investment report (July – Sept. 2020)
Discussion
Background: The City’s investment portfolio is focused on cash flow needs and investment in
longer term securities in accordance with Minnesota Statute 118A and the City’s investment
policy ob jectives of: 1) preservation of capital; 2) liquidity; and 3) return on investment.
Present considerations: The portfolio value at Sept. 30, 2020 is $54.4 million . The overall yield
to maturity decreased in the third quarter to 1.16% compared to 1.22% the prior quarter,
1.56% in the first quarter and 1.78% at the end of 2019. This is the combined yield including
both the funds held in money market accounts and long-term investments, and interest rates
on both have decline d significantly over the last several months since the pandemic. The overall
yield is still higher than the two-year Treasury (.13% on September 30, 2020), which is a typical
benchmark used by cities for yield comparison of their overall portfolio, because some of the
older securities in the portfolio have higher yields to maturity .
There was $23.6 million in money market accounts at the end of September, which includes
approximately $6.4 million of bond proceeds for final contract payments on the nature center
and connect the park, SCADA and other utility projects. Money market rates have fallen
significantly in the last 6 months and are now near zero at just .02% to .05%.
The remaining $30.8 million of the portfolio is invested in longer term securities including
municipal bonds ($2.3 mil), Federal agency bonds ($8.3 mil), U.S. Treasury notes ($19.9 mil) and
one CD ($245,000). Municipal bonds are issued by states, local governments, or school districts
to finance special projects. Agency bonds are issued by government agencies such as the
Federal Home Loan Bank and Fannie Mae . There were no trade s during the quarter. Due to the
low interest rates, securities that matured were not reinvested in order to preserve liquidity for
when rates begin to improve.
This table summarizes the City’s portfolio at Sept. 30, 2020:
Next steps: None at this time.
6/30/20 9/30/20
<1 Year 57% 59%
1-2 Years 15% 12%
2-3 Years 14% 15%
3-4 Years 11% 11%
>4 Years 3% 3%
6/30/20 9/30/20
Money Markets/Cash $23,203,253 $23,644,206
Commercial Paper $0 $0
Certificates of Deposit $446,874 $245,194
Municipal Debt $2,348,636 $2,351,103
Agencies/Treasuries $30,645,845 $28,196,141
City of St. Louis Park
Investment Portfolio Summary
Sept 30, 2020
Institution/Broker Investment Type CUSIP
Maturity
Date
Yield To
Maturity Par Value
Market Value
at 9/30/2020
Estimated Avg
Annual Income
4M Liquid Asset Money Market 0.02%2,687,976 2,687,976 538
4M Plus Money Market 0.05%10,001,543 10,001,543 5,001
UBS Institutional Money Market 0.02% 4,571,232 4,571,232 914
UBS Institutional Money Market (bond proceeds)0.02% 6,383,455 6,383,455 1,277
23,644,206
PFM CD - Comenity Cap Bk UT 20033AND4 10/13/2020 2.00% 245,000 245,194 4,900
245,194
PFM Muni Debt - Connecticut State Txble GO Bonds 20772JKN1 10/15/2020 1.78% 1,000,000 1,000,660 17,800
PFM Muni Debt - California State Txble GO Bonds 13063DGA0 04/01/2021 2.80% 450,000 455,382 12,600
PFM Muni Debt - Minnesota State Txble GO Bonds 60412ASE4 08/01/2022 1.76% 200,000 210,006 3,520
PFM Muni Debt - San Jose CA Txbl GO Bonds 798135H51 09/01/2023 2.13% 650,000 685,055 13,845
2,351,103
PFM FHLMC 3137EAEK1 11/17/2020 1.91% 800,000 801,832 15,280
PFM Freddie Mac 3137EAEL9 02/16/2021 2.47% 800,000 806,704 19,760
PFM Fannie Mae 3135G0U27 04/13/2021 2.55% 500,000 506,235 12,750
PFM US Treasury Note 912828Q78 04/30/2021 1.87% 100,000 100,738 1,870
PFM US Treasury Note 912828R77 05/31/2021 2.02% 1,600,000 1,613,504 32,320
PFM Fannie Mae 3135G0U35 06/22/2021 2.76% 700,000 713,216 19,320
PFM FHLB Global 3130A8QS5 07/14/2021 1.25% 750,000 755,925 9,375
PFM US Treasury Note 912828D72 08/31/2021 1.73% 650,000 661,096 11,245
PFM US Treasury Note 912828D72 08/31/2021 1.85% 1,150,000 1,169,631 21,275
PFM FHLB 3130AF5B9 10/12/2021 3.02% 750,000 772,110 22,650
PFM US Treasury Note 912828T67 10/31/2021 1.72% 700,000 708,477 12,040
PFM US Treasury Note 912828T67 10/31/2021 1.64% 575,000 581,963 9,430
PFM US Treasury Note 912828T67 10/31/2021 1.85% 200,000 202,422 3,700
PFM Fannie Mae 3135G0U92 01/11/2022 2.65% 400,000 412,736 10,600
PFM FFCB Bond 3133ELVV3 04/08/2022 0.95% 375,000 375,056 3,563
PFM US Treasury Note 912828X47 04/30/2022 2.12% 500,000 513,790 10,600
PFM US Treasury Note 912828X47 04/30/2022 2.18% 800,000 822,064 17,440
PFM US Treasury Note 912828X47 04/30/2022 2.69% 1,300,000 1,335,854 34,970
PFM US Treasury Note 912828TJ9 08/15/2022 2.76% 430,000 442,079 11,868
PFM US Treasury Note 912828N30 12/31/2022 2.78% 925,000 966,338 25,715
PFM US Treasury Note 912828N30 12/31/2022 2.51% 2,550,000 2,663,960 64,005
PFM US Treasury Note 912828N30 12/31/2022 2.55% 1,675,000 1,749,856 42,713
PFM FHLB 3130AJ7E3 02/17/2023 1.44% 620,000 637,379 8,928
PFM US Treasury Note 912828R69 05/31/2023 2.53% 1,000,000 1,039,531 25,300
PFM US Treasury Note 912828R69 05/31/2023 1.83% 350,000 363,727 6,405
PFM US Treasury Note 912828T91 10/31/2023 1.55% 75,000 78,363 1,163
PFM US Treasury Note 912828T91 10/31/2023 1.48% 450,000 470,367 6,660
PFM Fannie Mae 3135G0V34 02/05/2024 2.58% 475,000 510,644 12,255
PFM FHLB 3130AFW94 02/13/2024 2.58% 500,000 537,800 12,900
PFM US Treasury Note 912828XX3 06/30/2024 1.55% 600,000 640,313 9,300
PFM US Treasury Note 912828XX3 06/30/2024 1.66% 1,600,000 1,708,421 26,560
PFM US Treasury Note 912828XX3 06/30/2024 0.85% 260,000 277,469 2,210
PFM US Treasury Note 912828XX3 06/30/2024 1.36% 350,000 373,516 4,760
PFM US Treasury Note 912828XX3 06/30/2024 1.66% 1,150,000 1,227,266 19,090
PFM FHLB 3130AGWK7 08/15/2024 1.55% 175,000 183,628 2,713
PFM Fannie Mae 3135G0X24 01/07/2025 1.69% 650,000 684,951 10,985
PFM Freddie Mac 3137EAEP0 02/12/2025 1.52% 750,000 787,185 11,400
28,196,141
GRAND TOTAL 54,436,644 633,510
Current Portfolio Yield To Maturity 1.16%
Page 3 Study session meeting of October 26, 2020 (Item No. 2)
Title: Third quarter investment report (July – Sept. 2020)
Meeting: Study session
Meeting date: October 26, 2020
Written report: 3
Executive summary
Title: Update to the council on housing zoning regulations
Recommended action: None at this time. The purpose of this report is to update council on
research staff is conducting and will be presenting to the planning commission in November.
Policy consideration: This item is fourth on the city council’s list of priority discussion topics.
Please inform staff of questions you may have.
Summary: In 2018, a request was submitted by city council members Rog and Miller to review
the housing regulations to prevent lower-value homes from being torn down or added on to for
the construction of higher-value homes. Their request stated:
“In 2006 the city council authorized changes to zoning. These changes were in response to the
move -up in the park initiative which was designed to encourage families to stay in St. Louis
Park, including the St. Louis Park school system, by accommodating modest additions to their
homes instead of seeking a larger home outside the city.”
Today’s housing market in the Minneapolis/St. Paul metropolitan area is seeing a rapid increase
in the price of multiple -family and single -family housing. St. Louis Park is no exception. While
there are many factors that influence the housing market values, this report focuses on the
concern that single -family homes are becoming less affordable as builders and private owners
add onto their homes or tear down old smaller homes and build larger ones.
After some deliberation, city council agreed to discuss the topic at a future study session on July
9, 2018. A copy of th ose meeting minutes is attached. Subsequently, this topic was elevated to
a higher priority for discussion.
Staff reviewed the city council’s comments from the July 9, 2018 study session, rese arched the
history of the low -density residential zoning requirements, and evaluated the scale of housing
relative to lot sizes (i.e. ground floor area ratio and floor area ratio). This report contains a
summary of the research and potential amendments for discussion purposes.
The planning commission has this topic on their work plan and will begin to discuss this item in
a study session on November 4, 2020. Staff will work with the planning commission on this
topic and report back to the council with its recommendations.
Financial or budget considerations: Not at this time.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a broad range of
housing and neighborhood oriented development.
Supporting documents: Discussion; GFAR/FAR analysis ; Citywide maps for GFAR and FAR;
Table of history of code requirements; July 9, 2018 council minutes
Prepared by: Gary Morrison, assistant zoning administrator; Jennifer Monson, senior planner
Reviewed by: Sean Walther, planning and zoning supervisor; Karen Barton, CD director
Approve d by: Tom Harmening, city manager
Study session meeting of October 26, 2020 (Item No. 3) Page 2
Title: Update to the council on housing zoning regulations
Discussion
Background: The city council discussed this topic in study session on July 9, 2018. In summary,
there was consensus on the following points:
1.Multiple -family and single -family housing is becoming less affordable . While the city
council expressed concerned about the affordability of both multiple -family and single -
family housing, the focus of the meeting was on the zoning regulations pertaining to the
scale of single -family houses.
2.The council continue s to support the move -up in the park programs. Nevertheless, some
city council members expressed concerns about the scale of additions and new
construction. Specifically, the impacts larger houses may have on adjacent properties.
3.The city should not regulate aesthetics. The city should focus on the scale and
affordability of single -family homes and avoid regulations that encourage or require
specific aesthetic elements.
4.What impacts is housing having on the climate action plan and energy efficiency goals?
Housing affordability, housing stock and housing demand has been documented in previous
housing market studies. This report does not provide additional information on this topic. Also,
the climate action plan impacts were not clear. While a larger house built in 2020 is very likely
to require more energy than a smaller house built in 2020, it is not as clear that larger new
homes use more energy than a smaller 1960s house. This report does not provide additional
information in this regard.
Instead, staff gathered information about the scale of housing in St. Louis Park relative to the
size of the lots in the city and what this looks like historically. It focuses on two such measures
that are, or have been, regulated by the zoning code.
Present considerations: The zoning ordinance has remained relatively constant since the first
ordinance’s adoption in 1932. Two changes made over time worth noting include the changes
to the ground floor area ratio (GFAR) and deletion of the floor area ratio (FAR).
GFAR is defined by code as the lot area covered by a building measured from the exterior faces
of exterior walls but excluding decks and terraces and detached garages which do not exceed
15 feet in height. (Please note: The GFAR reported includes only the principal buildings. Staff
was unable to identify properties with detached accessory buildings that exceed 15 feet in
height as this information is not readily available.)
FAR Is defined by code as the numerical value obtained by dividing the total floor area of
buildings, excluding the basement, by the lot area on which such buildings are located.
An analysis of both GFAR and FAR is attached to the report and summarized below.
G FAR and FAR analysis : Staff found that the majority of lots with higher GFAR and FAR were
constructed during the city’s largest period of growth, in the 1940s to 1960s. Additionally, h igh
GFAR and FAR is predominantly found on lots smaller than the minimum lot size required by
code today.
Study session meeting of October 26, 2020 (Item No. 3) Page 3
Title: Update to the council on housing zoning regulations
The GFAR and FAR maps show that the GFAR and FAR vary widely throughout the city. The
construction data also show that there are no clear patterns that newer homes have
substantially higher GFAR and FAR than homes built between the 1940s and 1960s.
Additional observations. Striking a balance between the goals of the move -up in the park
initiative and scale of housing is complicated when also trying to provide flexibility and meeting
the expectations and desires of homebuyers in today’s market. Additionally, evaluating the
actual and perceived impacts of additions and new construction is difficult.
Staff will review this research with the planning commission, most likely over more than one
study session meeting. We will review several more recently built houses that have generated
some complaints and/or are larger in size, GFAR or FAR. We will also share some common
characteristics we noticed, such as:
•The size of the original house was particularly small.
•They added upper floors to the original house.
•They had steeper roof pitches than the original house.
•The houses are simply different architectural styles than the original house.
•The first-floor elevation and surrounding grade was higher than the original house.
•The floor to ceiling heights are taller in the newer houses.
The relative change in size from the old house to the new house was one explanation for a few
of the houses that generated complaints. The two following examples illustrate the results of
two houses that were replaced with new houses. Both represent a significant change, however,
both new homes are similar in style and size to other houses found in the city, and in some
cases the same neighborhood and block.
Study session meeting of October 26, 2020 (Item No. 3) Page 4
Title: Update to the council on housing zoning regulations
BEFORE AFTER
Based on council’s direction to continue to support move up in the park and to avoid getting
into purely aesthetic and design style elements, this issue and the first four observations listed
were not further pursued by staff as problems to remedy.
Witho ut getting deeply into the building design and aesthetic requirements, staff considered
the following five issues to discuss further with the planning commission.
1.Establish a maximum allowed increase in the ground floor elevation. When removing a
house to build a new house, or keeping a foundation to build a new house, some of the
newer buildings have raised the ground floor elevation. This was likely done to have a
higher ceiling height in the basement which makes the basement more habitable and
useable for purposes such as bedrooms, bathrooms, and family rooms. Staff could see
this as also attractive for creating accessory dwelling units. Additionally, it gives the
homeowner a potentially cost -effective option to consider instead of expanding the
footprint of the house with costly new construction that takes up more space in the
backyard.
Raising the ground floor elevation, however, may have some perceived or real impacts on
the neighboring properties. Typically, when the ground floor is raised, the homeowner
also raises the grade adjacent to the house. The new grade may alter existing drainage
patterns, and sometimes gives the perception that water is directed onto neighboring
properties, which is not permitted by code.
Before After
Before After
Study session meeting of October 26, 2020 (Item No. 3) Page 5
Title: Update to the council on housing zoning regulations
Additionally, the height of the building is measured from the grade adjacent to the house,
to the mid-point of the gable of the new house. Therefore, when the grade is raised, the
perceived height as seen from the street or next door, is also raised. This may result in
the new house appearing to be taller than, or further out of scale with the neighboring
house when the new house may only be slightly taller than other houses on the block.
If the council wishes to establish a maximum increase in the ground floor elevation, then a
one -foot increase may be reasonable. It allows for some increase in the basement ceiling
floor elevation, while limiting the impact on neighboring properties. If the homeowner
desires more ceiling height than this allows, then they may have the option of lowering
the basement floor when building a new house if the utilities and ground water elevations
allow for it. Digging a lower basement floor elevation will add substantial cost to the
home compared to adding to the top of the existing foundation.
2.F loor to ceiling heights. Similar to the desirability for higher ceilings in basements, newer
homes tend to have ceiling heights of 9 or 10 feet and may have entry ways or living
rooms that are even higher. While these are desirable for interior spaces, they also tend
to result in houses that appear a bit larger than neighboring houses with 7 to 8 feet tall
ceilings. Ceiling heights over a certain size could be deemed in the city code to be a
second story.
3.Increase the side yard setback for the second floor. Requiring a greater setback for the
second story has come up during this conversation. Currently , a minimum side yard of six
feet is required in the R-1 district, and five feet in the R-2 district. This setback applies to
the entire house. While a greater side yard for the second story may reduce the visual
impact the second floor has on a neighboring property, it comes with substantial
disadvantages and increased costs.
A greater side yard setback for the second floor limits the architectural styles allowed in
St. Louis Park. It results in what is sometimes referred to as a wedding cake style house
where the second tier is smaller than the first. This is generally not compatible with many
common architectural styles and looks forced or artificial in nature. This option also drives
up the cost of construction. The load bearing walls of the second floor are located over
the open space of the rooms below. This requires additional engineering and construction
costs. The costs are exacerbated when a homeowner desires an open floor concept on the
first floor.
The City of Edina utilized this code provision for a short period of time. The provision was
struck from the code due to the impacts summarized above; the arguments between
homeowners, contractors and the city; the cost and frequency of physical adjustments
required during construction to meet the code ; and the high number of variances
requested.
4.Adj ust the ground floor area ratio (GFAR). The GFAR, often referred to as the house
footprint, is an effective method to establish a reasonable amount of the lot the house
can cover. As noted above and in the attached history of code changes, the GFAR has
Study session meeting of October 26, 2020 (Item No. 3) Page 6
Title: Update to the council on housing zoning regulations
been adjusted a few times since 1932. For example, the R-1 district in 1932 allowed a
GFAR of .4. This was reduced to .3 in 1959 and remained in place until 2006 when it was
increased to .35 as part of the move -up in the park initiative.
Reducing the GFAR would have greater impacts on smaller lots. For example, a GFAR
maximum of .35 will allow a 2,450 square foot first floor on a 7,000 square foot lot but
only 1,750 square feet on a 5,000 square foot lot. Additionally, lot sizes vary all over the
city . This makes it likely that large houses will periodically be located adjacent to small
houses simply because the GFAR allows for more house to be constructed on large lots.
5.A djust the floor area ratio (FAR). The city first introduced a FAR requirement of .3 in 1959.
The FAR requirement was removed from the code in 1992, so the city currently does not
require a FAR requirement. The FAR, however, is indirectly administered by the GFAR and
maximum height requirements. These two requirements work together to form a
maximum building envelope allowed for each property in which a house may be built. As
a result, it also limits the amount of floor area that can be built. The FAR of a lot alone
treats wide/deep one-story buildings equally to tall buildings with small footprints. FAR
alone is not an effective tool to regulate or have predictable building forms. Staff has
struggled to identify an appropriate FAR based on our research to date and based on the
examples we have reviewed. More definition of the issue and conce rns would be needed
to arrive at a proposal.
Next Steps. This report provides a summary of staff’s research in the existing housing stock,
including recent additions and new construction. It also includes a summary of the history of
code changes since 1932 to present and summarizes some code changes that have been
brought up through the course of the discussion.
Staff will present this research with the planning commission and report back to the council its
findings. Staff also asks if there are other items the city council wishes staff to consider or
research with the planning commission.
Study session meeting of October 26, 2020 (Item No. 3) Page 7
Title: Update to the council on housing zoning regulations
Ground Floor Area Ratio (GFAR) and Floor Area Ratio (FAR)
GFAR is defined by code as the lot area covered by a building measured from the exterior faces
of exterior walls but excluding decks and terraces and detached garages which do not exceed
15 feet in height.
FAR Is defined by code as the numerical value
obtained by dividing the total floor area of
buildings, excluding the basement, by the lot area
on which such buildings are located. The city did
not have a FAR requirement until 1959 when a
FAR of .3 was adopted. The FAR remained until
1992 and is no longe r a required regulation for
single -family homes. Instead the city uses height
and GFAR to limit single -family building scale.
Staff used GIS and assessing data to compute and analyze the GFAR and FAR for single-family
properties to determine if any clear patterns could be found. Maps showing the citywide
analysis are attached at the end of this report.
GFAR The allowed GFAR was .4 until 1959 when it was changed
to .3 and remained until 2006 when it was increased to .35.
Based on the data for GFAR, the majority of homes in the city
have a GFAR of less than .2. Lots in the middle and eastern half
of the city tend to have a higher GFAR than lots that were
constructed in the western half of the city. Typically, these lots
tend to be smaller in size compared with the western half of
the city, which has a more suburban development pattern.
There are 43 homes, or 0.4% of the city’s single-family housing stock across the city with a GFAR
between .3 and .35. 74% of these homes were constructed between 1940 and 1970 when most
the city’s housing stock was constructed.
The average lot size of lots with GFAR between 0.25 and 0.3 is 7,400 square feet and the
average home size on those lots is 1,957 SF. The average size of lots with GFAR greater than 0.3
is 7,400 square feet and the average home size on those lots is 2,205 square feet, with the
smallest home being 912 SF.
Floor Area Ratio. The majority of homes (65%) have a FAR less
than .25, 17% of homes have a FAR between 0.25 and 0.3, and
18% of homes have a FAR greater than 0.3.
81% of homes with FAR greater than .30 were constructed
between 1930 and 1960. However, there are a few homes that
were originally constructed when the city had a maximum FAR
of 0.3 between 1970 to 2006. It is unclear if these homes were
constructed larger than the code allowed, if variances were
received, or the lot size was somehow reduced (i.e. subdivision or right-of-way acquisition).
Ground Floor
Area Ratio
(GFAR)
% of lots
0 to 0.2 86.4%
>0.20 to 0.25 10.7%
>0.25 to 0.30 2.4%
>0.30 to 0.35 0.4%
>0.35 to 0.47 0.1%
Study session meeting of October 26, 2020 (Item No. 3) Page 8
Title: Update to the council on housing zoning regulations
The average lot size for properties with a FAR greater than 0.3 is 6,305 square feet and the
average home size on these lots is 1,696 square feet.
The recently constructed larger homes may be attributed to the city’s “move up in the park”
program which encourages expansions and redevelopment to occur within the city to attract
families to stay in St. Louis Park rather than moving to further suburbs.
Ground Floor Area Ratio Analysis
Single-family lots in R-1, R-2, and R-3 districts
Legend
Ground Floor Area Ratio
0.00 - 0.20 (86.4%)
0.21 - 0.25 (10.7%)
0.26 - 0.30 (2.4%)
0.31 - 0.35 (0.4%)
0.36 - 0.46 (0.1%)´0 0.5 10.25 MilesSource: St. Louis Park Assessing Data and Community Development, 2020
Study session meeting of October 26, 2020 (Item No. 3)
Title: Update to the council on housing zoning regulations Page 9
Floor Area Ratio Analysis
Single-family lots in R-1, R-2, and R-3 districts
Legend
Floor Area Ratio
0.00 - 0.15
0.16 - 0.20
0.21 - 0.25
0.26 - 0.30
0.31 - 0.40
0.41 - 0.72 ´0 0.5 10.25 MilesSource: St. Louis Park Assessing Data and Community Development, 2020
Study session meeting of October 26, 2020 (Item No. 3)
Title: Update to the council on housing zoning regulations Page 10
History of code requirements
Standard 1932 1949 1959 1971 1976 1992 2006 Current
R-1 Density A
Uses 1 & 2-family 1-family 1-family 1-family 1-family 1-family 1-family 1-family
Min lot size 6,000(ex)/7,200(new)6,000(ex)/7,200(new)9,000 9,000 9,000 9,000 9,000 9,000
Min lot size/dwelling 4,800
Min lot width ----75 75 75 75 75 75
Setbacks
Front >of 35, or >of 35, or 35 35 35 >of 30, or >of 30, or 30
average of house on each
side, or
average of house on each
side, or ------
average of house
on each side, or
match house with
smallest front yard --
match house on one side match house on one side --------
Requirement not to
exceed 50.
Requirement not to
exceed 50.--------
Side 9/6*9/6*9/6*
Side: 1-story 4 4 9/6*9/6*9/6*------
Side: > 1-story 7 7 9/11*9/11*9/11*------
Side abutting street ----15 15 15 15 >60 lot width 15 >60 lot width 15 >60 lot width
9 <60 lot width 9 <60 lot width 9 <60 lot width
Rear 35 35 35 25 25 25
Rear: 1-story 15 15 ------------
Rear: 2 1/2 story 20 20 ------------
40 foot rule --------------+2"/1ft>40
GFAR 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.35 0.35
GFAR: interior 40**40**------------
GRAR: corner 50**50**------------
FAR ----0.3 0.3 0.3 --
Max height 2.5 story 2.5 story 30 feet/3 stories 30 feet/3 stories 30 feet/3 stories 30 feet/3 stories 30 feet/3 stories 30
Rear adj to front yard ----= to front yard = to front yard = to front yard = to front yard = to front yard = to front yard
R-2 Density B
Uses 1 & 2-family 1-family 1-family 1-family 1-family 1-family 1-family 1-family
Min lot size 4,800 4,800 7,200 7,200 7,200 7,200 7,200 7,200
Min lot size/dwelling 4,800
Min lot width ----60 60 60 60 60 60
Setbacks
Front >of 25, or >of 25, or 30 30 30 >of 25, or >of 25, or 25
average of house on each
side, or
average of house on each
side, or ------
average of house
on each side, or
match house with
smallest front yard --
match house on one side match house on one side ------------
Requirement not to
exceed 50.
Requirement not to
exceed 50.------------
Side 7/5*7/5*7/5*
Side: 1-story 4 4 9/6*9/6*9/6*------
Side: > 1-story 7 7 9/11*9/11*9/11*------
Side abutting streeet ----15 15 15 15 >60 lot width 15 >60 lot width 15 >60 lot width
9 <60 lot width 9 <60 lot width 9 <60 lot width
Rear 25 25 25 25 25 25
Rear: 1-story 15 15 ------------
Rear: 2 1/2 story 20 20 ------------
40 foot rule ----------+2"/1ft>40 +2"/1ft>40 +2"/1ft>40
GFAR 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.35 0.35
GFAR: interior 40**40**------------
GRAR: corner 50**50**------------
FAR 0.3 0.3 0.3 --
Height 2.5 story 2.5 story 30 feet/3 stories 30 feet/3 stories 30 feet/3 stories 30 feet/3 stories 30 feet/3 stories 30
Rear adj to front yard ----= to front yard = to front yard = to front yard = to front yard = to front yard = to front yard
R-3 Density C
Uses 1 & 2 family 1 & 2 family 1 & 2-familiy 1 & 2-familiy 1 & 2-familiy 1 & 2-familiy 1 & 2-familiy 1 & 2-familiy
Min lot size 4,800 4,800 7,200 7,200 7,200 7,200 7,200 1-family: 7,200
2-family: 8,000 2-family: 8,000 2-family: 8,000
Min lot size/dwelling 2,400 2,400 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000
Min lot width 60 60 60 60 60 60
Setbacks
Front >of 20, or >of 20, or 30 30 30 >of 25, or >of 25, or >of 25, or
average of house on each
side, or
average of house on each
side, or ------
average of house
on each side, or
match house with
smallest front yard
match house with
smallest front yard
match house on one side match house on one side ------------
Requirement not to
exceed 50.
Requirement not to
exceed 50.------------
Side: 1-story 4 4 ------------
Side: > 1-story 7 7 ------------
Side: 1-family 9/6*9/6*9/6*7/5*7/5*7/5*
Side: 2-family 9/11*9/11*9/11*9/6*9/6*9/6*
Side abutting streeet 15 15 15 15 >60 lot width 15 >60 lot width 15 >60 lot width
9 <60 lot width 9 <60 lot width 9 <60 lot width
Rear 30 30 30 25 25 25
Rear: 1-story 15 15 ------------
Rear: 2 1/2 story 20 20 ------------
40 foot rule ------+2"/1ft>50 +2"/1ft>50 +2"/1ft>50
GFAR 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.35 0.35 0.35
GFAR: interior 50**50**------------
GRAR: corner 60**60**------------
FAR 0.4 0.4 0.4 --
Height 3 stories 2.5 or 3 stories 35 feet/3 stories 35 feet/3 stories 35 feet/3 stories 35 feet/3 stories 35 feet/3 stories 35 feet/3 stories
Rear adj to front yard ----= to front yard = to front yard = to front yard = to front yard = to front yard = to front yard
*Both sides lower number with attached garage or alley.
** Measured to center of alley. GFAR is a total of all buildings on the property.
Study session meeting of October 26, 2020 (Item No. 3)
Title: Update to the council on housing zoning regulations Page 11
Meeting: Study session
Meeting date: October 26, 2020
Written report: 4
Executive summary
Title: Community health services and connections
Recommended action: The purpose of this report is to provide an overview of the community
h ealth services and connections in St. Louis Park. This report is informational, n o action is
requested.
Policy consideration: Does the council have any que stions on the community health services
and connections in St. Louis Park?
Summary: At the Aug. 10, 2020 study session, council aske d staff to provide a report with
information on how community health is addressed in St. Louis Park . This report highlights the
importance of community health and provides an overview of key city initiativ es. While the
report focuses on city initiatives, it’s important to note that many other agencies including non-
profit and different levels of government, also provide a wide variety of services and support to
the St. Louis Park residents. The 2040 compr eh ensive plan was developed with the intent of
having h ealth refl ected in p olicies in v irtually all chapters. In recent years, it has become evident
that addressing health is an important part of overall community planning, and those ways in
St. Louis Park are expressed in every section of the city’s 2040 plan for the future . An overview
of the ways the city addresses health can be found in the community health chapter.
The city addresses health considerations in a myriad of ways, as outlined in the discussion
section of this report. The city has taken a proactive approach to health in most departments in
various f orms , with the unde rstanding that our programs must consider the h ealth and well-
being of the pe ople in the community to have a strong city in all respects. The city partners with
many other government and nonprofit agencies to provide resources, funding and services that
address he alth as well. The State and Hennepin County operate the bulk o f s ocial s ervice
programs for the community and the city works to not duplicate those but rather help people in
the community gain access to them. City staff who contributed to this report include Brian
Hoffman (building and energy), Mikael Garland (police), Steve Koering (fire), Alicia Sojourner
(race, e quity and inclusion), and Michele Schnitker (housing).
Financial or budget considerations: None at this time.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to creating opportunities to build
social capital through community engagement.
Supporting documents: Discussion
Aug. 10, 2020 study session agenda and minutes
Prepared by: Laura Smith, volunteer and wellness coordinator
Meg McMonigal, principal planner
Reviewed by: Nancy Deno, deputy city manager/HR director
Approve d by: Tom Harmening, city manager
Study session meeting of October 26, 2020 (Item No. 4) Page 2
Title: Community health services and connections
Discussion
Background: St. Louis Park created a Local Public Health Board and Health Department in 1959,
which includ ed a medical consultant and community health services administrator. The primary
focus was on food and restaurant inspections. The city merged the Health Department with
Building Codes during the late 1970’s. In 1976 the lo cal MN Public Health Act allowed for
consolidation of local Boards into the counties , and permanently relinquish ing them to the
county or state.
F ollowing an analysis of health services in 1989, the city stopped maintaining the minimum
requirements needed for a local Board in the early 1990’s. The city continued to perform food
and beverage inspections until 2012, when the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH)
encouraged smaller city departments to end this service , and Hennepin County was delegated
to perform licensing and inspection of food service establishments in St. Louis Park.
Although the city no longer has a specific department dedicated to health services, the city
strives to meet community health needs through a variety o f ways.
Building and Energy (Brian Hoffman)
Since the transition of the public health board and health inspection responsibilities from the
city to the county and state, the Building and Energy Department remains involved in other areas
of Environmental/Community Health not regulated by MDH, including responding to concerns
and working to resolve hoarding and trash houses, rental housing inspections, licensing and
inspecting businesses that emit environmentally sensitive emissions (body shops, manufacturing),
responding to complaints over noise or vibration, hazardous structures, local contact for VOC soil
vapor concerns, and radon awareness are all provided by inspections staff. In addition to
inspection services, the building and energy department executes initiatives related to the
climate action plan which improve community health through environmental factors.
F ire (Steve Koering)
The fire department has a multi-pronged approach to community health that is designed to
understand the social determinants of health impacting the community, along with specific
residents or neighborhoods that may be most vulnerable to health issues. The department
responds to all emergency and non-emergency medical requests within the community, and
supports the recovery of residents through a better understanding of the following;
1.Resource gaps
2.Barriers that impact access to care
3.Collaboration between community health needs and primary care
4.Connections between community health needs and county public health services by
partnering with Hennepin Public Health.
The fire department’s approach is guided by the specific needs of the overall community and
the connection of community resources to create sustainable solutions. The fire department
continues to be recognized as one of the most trusted support systems that residents look to
for help. Because of this trust, needs are more quickly identified, and solutions are more
appropriately assigned. Long term our community health strategy will expand its influence and
discover opportunities that create a higher quality of life, a lower cost of health care and
increased equity for the entire community.
Study session meeting of October 26, 2020 (Item No. 4) Page 3
Title: Community health services and connections
Police (Mikael Garland)
The connections between policing and health in the community are numerous and long-
standing. Law enforcement officers find themselves on the front lines confronting a variety of
challenges where criminal violations and public health related issues intersect. Our traditional
role in law enforcement is built around preserving health (traffic safety, seat belts), and this too
is done in the interest of public health. Traditionally the interrelated areas of concern for law
enforcement and a healthy community consist of, but are not limited to the following:
1. Public safety, disorder and violence
2. Highway safety/injury and medical emergency response
3. Alcohol and drug abuse
4. Mental illness
5. Domestic/intimate partner/sexual violence
6. Liquor ordinances, tobacco sales regulations, and compliance
7. Response to public health emergencies and epidemics
An ongoing challenge the department works hard to confront is the acknowledgment that law
enforcement plays a critical role in protection or promotion of community health, recognizing
their increasingly active and essential part in this effort. The Police Department takes the lead
at the city level in addressing the effects of, and preventing harm from violence, mental illness,
and substance abuse.
Housing services (Michele Schnitker)
Having safe, affordable housing with adequate support is essential to community health. The
Housing Authority owns and operates public housing at Hamilton House Apartments and in 37
single family homes scattered throughout the city.
The city and Housing Authority also work with a myriad of agencies to provide housing and
other associated services. Notably, STEP and Hennepin County are constant partners in the
various programs. STEP and the county have systems set up where social workers help people
navigate resources and programs. Hennepin County has extensive social service programs with
expertise, staff and systems in place to help people by addressing health needs. The city works
closely with these agencies so as not to duplicate services and be efficie nt with government
dollars.
Below are ways the housing department partners with local agencies to provide programs to
assist community members with housing needs.
• STEP
• Senior Community Services
• Kid’s in the Park program
• Stable Home program
• Family Unification program
• Mainstream vouchers (14)
• Housing
• Tenant Protection program
Study session meeting of October 26, 2020 (Item No. 4) Page 4
Title: Community health services and connections
Racial equity (Alicia Sojourner)
Racism and bias that exists in current systems have create d health inequities which have
resulted in in poorer wellness outcomes for Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC)
communities . The work of the race, equity and inclusion (RE&I) team is focused on seeking a
more equitable city through engagement and increasing opportunities for people of color. In
turn, work of the RE&I team will result in a healthier community for all by serving as a
connector, especially for those who do not historically interact with city government. In
addition, the RE&I team partners with local, county and state agencies as necessary to address
specific health needs of the community as they arise during their outreach.
Staff assists families from the community requesting food resources, rental resources, mental
health resources, and internet access by partnering with organizations such as HACER, CLUES, El
Colegio Mercado, STEP, and National Alliance for Mental Illness (NAMI) and TreeHouse. Staff
are currently designing a 21-day Racial Equity Challenge, supporting our vendors by applying
our diversity and inclusion structure, and will continue to work on community mental health
with the police department.
Internally , the RE&I team helps lead the city’s intern al community engagement workgroup,
which meets monthly to discuss outreach and engagement needs and ideas to better engage
with residents who are not typically engaged. The group intends to continue to innovate and
improve outreach and connections with community members and partners.
Wellness and Volunteer Office
The city’s wellness and volunteer coordinator works between departments to support health
initiatives, collaborates on health needs in the community and supports several health related
efforts, including:
• Health in the Park Champion program
• Healthy Living Grant program
• Serves on the St. Louis Park Mental Health Collaborative
• Serves on the School District Wellness Committee
• Works with STEP, Lenox Community Center, Park Nicollet Foundation, Children First
• Partners with local agencies to identify and facilitate wellbeing promotion and activities
for the community.
• Department support for health policy, outreach, and health related events and
activities.
In addition to working with local agencies, the volunteer and wellness coordinator position
works closely with county and state agencies when necessary, including Hennepin County’s
Healthy Community Planning department. The city partners with the Hennepin County Healthy
Community Planning department on county-wide health initiatives and acquire s funding that
support the city’s efforts to increase bike and pedestrian activity, promote bike and pedestrian
safety, and outreach best practices, and policies.
Study session meeting of October 26, 2020 (Item No. 4) Page 5
Title: Community health services and connections
Other city departments and community health
The highlighted departments and positions above are only part of the city’s responsibility to the
community’s wellbeing. The city’s impact on health and wellbeing through policy and the built
environment is demonstrated in nearly every department. Here are some of the areas that
directly relate to the health of the community:
Operations and Recreation:
Parks and Recreation – including:
• Recreation programs
• Public spaces, parks and green spaces
• Westwood Hills Nature Center
• Tree and canopy maintenance
• Community gardens
Operations - including:
• Streets
• Sewer and water
• Surface Water management
Engineering and Planning and Economic Development - including:
• Mobility and public transportation
• Sidewalks and Trails
• Partner with the Hennepin County Healthy Community Planning, Minnehaha Creek
Watershed District, Metropolitan Council and a myriad of other agencies on health in
the built environment.
• Pavement Management
• Connect the Park
• Comprehensive Planning
• Zoning
• Economic development programs for businesses and jobs in the community
Administration – including:
• Public art
• Volunteer opportunities
• Elections
• Civic engagement
Present considerations: As a city that remains responsive to community needs, community
health is and continues to be a priority when considering programs, policies and infrastructure.
The city continues to strengthen partnerships with local, county and state agencies to monitor
community health and improve access and address needs from the community as they arise.
Staff are confident that departments appropriately respond to the unique needs of the
community and continue to find innovative and creative ways while partnering with local,
county, state and non-profit agencies. This allows staff to be nimble in response while
ultimately serving community health needs.
Meeting: Study session
Meeting date: October 26, 2020
Written report: 5
Executive summary
Title: St. Louis Park 4d Affordable Housing Incentive Program update
Recommended Action: None at this time. This report is intended to provide a brief update on
the 4d program and inform the council of a proposed revision to the length of required
affordability for participants from 10 years to five years.
Policy consideration: Does the council support the staff recommendation to revise the length
of required affordability in the 4d program from ten years to five years?
Summary: At the December 10, 2018 council study session, council approved implementation
of the 4d Affordable Housing Incentive program effective January 1, 2019. The program enables
owners of multi-family rental housing in St. Louis Park to utilize a state provision called 4d, also
known as the Low-Income Rental Classification (LIRC). The 4d statute defines eligible properties
as those which meet two conditions: the owner of the property agrees to rent and income
restrictions serving households at 60% AMI or below and receives “financial assistance” from
federal, state or local government. Based on the defined eligibility criteria, the city create d a
Local 4d program in which qualifying properties receive the 4d tax break in return for agreeing
to conditions which meet the city’s housing policy goals. Participating owners must sign a
commitment to keep at least 20% of units in their building affordable for a term of 10 years. In
return, the city pays the first year application fee to the State of Minnesota for certification of
the 4d property tax classification ($10/unit) and offers a city grant in the amount of $200 per
affordable unit, capped at $6,000/ per property, for the cost of energy efficiency and healthy
homes improvements as identified in the free audit or other property improvements as
approved by the city. Owners participating in this program must also agree to limit future rent
increases to 5% or less annually for existing residents in affordable units.
Despite extensive marketing of the program the past two years, only one property is participating
in the program. Given the lack of interest in the program, staff surveyed local property owners
that could participate in the program and found that a number of the owners indicated an
interest in participating but expressed concerns about the length of commitment for 10 years
considering the uncertainty in the market. In response to this concern and increase participation,
staff is proposing to reduce the required affordability term from 10 years to five years.
Financial or budget considerations: The housing rehab fund and affordable housing trust fund
are the proposed primary funding resources. Adequate funds are available in the housing
rehab fund to support program expenses for 2021.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a broad range of
housing and neighborhood oriented development.
Supporting documents: Discussion
Prepared by: Michele Schnitker, community development deputy director/housing supervisor
Reviewed by: Karen Barton, community development director
Approve d by: Tom Harmening, city manager
Study session Meeting of October 26, 2020 (Item No. 5) Page 2
Title: St. Louis Park 4d Affordable Housing Incentive Program update
Discussion
Current St. Louis Park 4d Affordable Housing Incentive Program
The 4d program enables owners of multi-family rental housing in St. Louis Park to utilize a state
provision called 4d, also known as the Low-Income Rental Classification (LIRC). To be eligible,
properties must meet two conditions: the owner of the property agrees to rent and income
restrictions serving households at 60% AMI or below and they must receive “financial
assistance” from federal, state or local government. This allows the city to create a Local 4d
program in which qualifying properties receive the 4d tax break in re turn for agreeing to
conditions which meet the city’s housing policy goals. Participating owners must sign a
commitment to keep at least 20% of units in their building affordable for 10 years. Owners
participating in this program must also agree to limit f uture rent increases to 5% or less
annually for existing residents in affordable units.
Program benefits
Qualified building owners that agree to keep at least 20% of the units affordable at or below
60% area median rents and incomes for ten years receive:
•40% property tax reduction on qualifying units (4d property tax classification)
•Payment of first year application fee to the State of Minnesota for certification of the 4d
property tax classification ($10/unit)
•Free energy efficiency and healthy homes audits
•Utility rebates and city grants offered to each 4d property in the amount of $200 per
affordable unit, capped at $6,000/ per property for the cost of energy efficiency and healthy
homes improvements as identified in the free audit or other property improvements as
approved by the city
Eligibility guidelines
Owners of market-rate multifamily properties must meet the following criteria:
•Buildings with at least three rental units, licensed properties in good standing with no code
compliance issue s.
•At least 20% of the rental units in a building must be occupied by and affordable to
households whose income is at or below 60% of the Area Median Income .
•Existing tenants in units that have program compliant rents do not need to be income qualified .
•Income qualification is determined upon initial occupancy for new tenants. Thereafter,
increased incomes of tenants in affordable units will not violate the program requirements.
•Buildings can include units with owner occupants, but only rental units are eligible for 4d
tax status.
•Property Owners will select the percentage of their building to restrict, with a minimum of
20%. If they select more than 20%, after five years and upon request, the City will approve a
reduction of the percentage of restricted units to the minimum level of 20% of the units per
building.
•City will draft and record a declaration against the property that limits the rents and incomes
on the qualified units for 10 years (a recorded document is required for 4d tax classification
status) Staff is proposing that the term for the rent restrictions be reduced to five years.
•Deadline for annual application to the state of MN for tax payable in following year is
March 31. Deadline for submitting applications to the city to participate in the program is
February 22.
Study session Meeting of October 26, 2020 (Item No. 5 ) Page 3
Title: St. Louis Park 4d Affordable Housing Incentive Program update
Present considerations: To date, only one property is participating in the 4d program despite
extensive marketing of the program over the past two years. The participating property is a
NOAH multi-family residential rental property with a total of 22 units. The owner committed 17
of the units as affordable at 60% area medium income for a 10-year period. Several multi-family
property owners have indicated an interest in participating in the program but expressed
concerns about the length of commitment considering the uncertainty in the market. To
address this issue and increase participation, staff is proposing to reduce the required
affordability term from 10 years to five years.
Next Steps: The 4d Affordable Housing Incentive program, along with several other city
programs focuse d on preserving naturally occurring affordable housing, will be marketed to
multi-family residential ren tal owners starting this fall through a SPARC newsletter distribution
to all owners of properties that have a rental license. Marketing efforts will continue through
January and February 2021. MN Housing’s deadline for applications to participate in the 4d
program for 2022 is March 31, 2021.
Meeting: Study session
Meeting date: October 26, 2020
Written report: 6
Executive summary
Title: Sustainability Division update for Q4 2020
Recommended Action: No action is required at this time. This report is for information
purposes only.
Policy consideration: None at this time. Please inform staff of any questions you might have .
Summary: This report is the first of future quarterly reports to provide council with a high-level
overview of the projects and programs that the division has completed, is currently working on,
and is planning.
• Conservation in the Park campaign
o Campaign complete; e ngagement and survey data being compiled
• Intercity Home Energy Squad Challenge currently underway
• Efficient Building Benchmarking ordinance
o Compliance period complete; building scorecards to be mailed in November
o Report to council summarizing year one planned for late 2020
• Climate Champions
o Meeting with Energy Smart to plan 2021 program launch
o Refining incentives and planning to report to council in early 2021
• Electric vehicle charger installatio n (in collaboration with Operations & Recreation)
o Completed Cities Charging Ahead 2.0 cohort meetings
o Surveyed park sites ; developing estimated costs and preparing for grant
solicitations
• Green Building Policy (in collaboration with Community Development)
o Conducting research and meeting to discuss possible policy changes
• Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions inventory
o Community-wide GHG inventory complete through 2019; waiting on analysis
o Planning report to council early 2021 on options for tracking CAP progress
• City facilities
o Researched energy projects for solar and water heating at Rec Center
o Assisted with LED lighting retrofit and occupancy sensors at the Police Station
o Completed analysis of city building energy use during shutdown and presented
to Minnesota Conference on Architecture
Financial or budget considerations: None
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to continue to lead in
environmental stewardship.
Supporting documents: None
Prepared by: Emily Ziring, sustainability manager
Reviewed by: Brian Hoffman, director of building and energy
Approve d by: Tom Harmening, city m anager
Meeting: Study session
Meeting date: October 26, 2020
Written report: 7
Executive summary
Title: Update on US Internet in St. Louis Park
Recommended action: No action required. This is a periodic update to council on the status of
US Internet (USI) fiber-to-the -premise offerings in the City of St. Louis Park.
Policy consideration: Does council have any questions about the status of US Internet’s fiber
service offerings and direction described below? In 2015 the council identified its desire for St.
Louis Park to be a technology connected community.
Summary: In 2012, a study of the city’s fiber optic infrastructure was completed by CTC, a
telecommunications consultant. The central study question at that time was, “What else should
the City of St. Louis Park consider doing with the fiber optic network built jointly by the city and
St. Louis Park Schools since most major city and school buildings were being served by it?”
Resulting study recommendations included that the city:
1. Continue to take advantage of public works construction projects to inexpensively install
at least conduit to support future fiber connections;
2. Use existing and additional fiber conduit to build redundant fiber connections to major
public buildings to support disaster recovery and business continuity; and
3. Consider leasing unused fiber strand capacity to other parties to accelerate deployment
of high-speed broadband capacity to homes and businesses as part of an overall
community and economic development strategy.
These and other study recommendations were adopted. Most have already been fulfilled.
Recommendations #1 and #2 above have been substantially met. Recommendation #3 is the
focus of this report. Fiber strand capacity was leased to US Internet to support fiber-to-the -
home and business (also known as “fiber-to-the -premise”). This helps improve choice,
competition and state -of-the -art broadband in the city. USI has made some progress since its
initial offering in 2017.
Financial or budget considerations: Leasing of city fiber assets has resulted in the city being
able to expand its fiber network and enhancing redundancy and resiliency, without out-of-
pocket costs. This has been done by trading assets that benefit both the city and USI.
Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable.
Supporting documents: Discussion
Prepared by: Clint Pires, chief information officer
Approve d by: Tom Harmening, city manager
Study session meeting of October 26, 2020 (Item No. 7) Page 2
Title: Update on US Internet in St. Louis Park
Discussion
Background: US Internet (USI) made its service debut in St. Louis Park in June 2017 by bringing
fiber-to-the -home service to Era on Excelsior, previously known as Meadowbrook Manor. This
was a commitment made by USI to contribute to addressing equity in offering choice of
internet service providers . That and a sample of other areas receiving service between 2017
and 2019 are listed below , along with overall status highlights for 2019 and 2020.
2017
• Era on Excelsior– 551 households
• Village in the Park – 204 households
• Apartment complex es south of Wayzata Boulevard and west of Park Place Boulevard
• Wayzata Boulevard business corridor
• Park Glen Road business area
• Parkdales area
• West End area
• Interchange Tower
2018
• South Sorensen neighborhood – single -family setting \debut
• Louisiana Court Apartments
• Village Garden Apartments
2019 overall status
• USI is in 30 commercial buildings.
• USI is in 43 multiple dwelling units encompassing 1,652 units.
• USI has about 500 units in backlog. This includes Hoigaard Village.
• Louisiana Court is live but has few active customers.
• South Sorenson has experienced a subscription rate of approximately 25 percent.
This is lagging behind USI’s current Minneapolis subscription rate of 30 percent.
2020 plan highlights
• USI will have another 13 multiple dwelling units encompassing 142 units coming
online .
• USI will install fiber in most of the Willow Park neighborhood (second single family
area) in 2020 and possibly service the multiple dwelling units just to the west of that
neighborhood.
• USI has also acquired an office in St. Louis Park for fiber distribution.
Study session meeting of October 26, 2020 (Item No. 7) Page 3
Title: Update on US Internet in St. Louis Park
Summary of 2017 - 2020
• The first 3 years of USI’s presence in St. Louis Park have shown a fiber-to-the -premise
provider is viable in this city .
• Subscription rates in the first single -family neighborhood (South Sorensen) have lagged
behind those in Minneapolis.
• Subscription rates in the second single -family neighborhood (Willow Park) will be key in
determining USI’s investment trajectory in serving additional single -family neighborhoods.
• Subscription rates in MDUs and commercial buildings have met or exceeded those of
Minneapolis.
• Overall, USI continues to build and increase its subscriber base in St. Louis Park.
• Fiber-to-the -premise, additional cho ice and competition are happening.
• Fiber and wireless will continue to co-exist and complement each other. Pressure is
building from cellular companies to deploy more fiber. They are also interested in 5G
deployment, which will likely happen over a period of years.
• Major city council policy directives are being achieved to make St. Louis Park a
technology connected community.
• Advancing racial equity is being served through guided deployment of newer
technologies , though significant subscription rates may take time to achieve.
Next steps: Much work was completed during the 2017 – 2020 timeframe on US Internet’s
entrance to the St. Louis Park market. USI’s work to build its subscriber rates continues, the
pace of which may vary widely between MDU and commercial buildings and single -family
neighborhoods. City staff and USI will be meeting in 2020 to discuss plans for 2021 and beyond.
That said, it is im portant to understand USI is a private company unregulated by the city in
terms of service deployment speed or areas of the city served.