HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017/09/11 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - Study SessionAGENDA
SEPTEMBER 11, 2017
6:30 p.m. STUDY SESSION – Community Room
Discussion Items
1. 6:30 p.m. Future Study Session Agenda Planning – September 18 & 25, 2017
2. 6:35 p.m. Solid Waste Program Update
3. 7:20 p.m. Advancing Racial Equity Update and Council Discussion
4. 8:50 p.m. Highway 169 Mobility Study
9:20 p.m. Communications/Updates (Verbal)
9:25 p.m. Adjourn
Written Reports
5. 2018 Budget & Service Charges for Special Service District (SSD) Nos. 1 - 6
6. Right-of-Way Ordinance Update- Small Wireless Facility Permit
Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. To make arrangements, please call
the Administration Department at 952/924-2525 (TDD 952/924-2518) at least 96 hours in advance of meeting.
Meeting: Study Session
Meeting Date: September 11, 2017
Written Report: 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Future Study Session Agenda Planning – September 18 & September 25, 2017
RECOMMENDED ACTION: The City Council and the City Manager to set the agenda for the
Special Study Session on September 18 and the Regular Study Session on September 25.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the Council agree with the agendas as proposed?
SUMMARY: This report summarizes the proposed agenda for the Special Study Session on
September 18 and the Regular Study Session on September 25, 2017. Also attached to this report
is the Study Session Prioritizaton & Tentative Discussion Timeline.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Tentative Agenda – September 18 & 25, 2017
Study Session Prioritization & Projected Discussion Timeline
Prepared by: Debbie Fischer, Administrative Services Office Assistant
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 1) Page 2
Title: Future Study Session Agenda Planning – September 18 & September 25, 2017
SEPTEMBER 18, 2017
6:15 p.m. – Special Study Session – SLP High School Board Room (C350)
Tentative Discussion Items
1.Election Process - RCV – Administrative Services (60 minutes)
Continuation of council discussion on election process and the topic of Ranked Choice Voting.
End of Meeting: 7:20 p.m.
SEPTEMBER 25, 2017
6:30 p.m. – Study Session – SLP High School Board Room (C350)
Tentative Discussion Items
1. Future Study Session Agenda Planning – Administrative Services (5 minutes)
2.SLP Policing Model/Critical Incident Planning (Session 2 of 4) – Police (60 minutes)
This is the second of 4 separate monthly sessions being held to outline the St. Louis Park Police
service delivery model. This session will review police department policies and procedures
regarding biased policing, citizen contacts, use of force, vehicle pursuits and current policing
issues involving immigration and de-escalation.
3.Affordable Housing Preservation Policies/Ordinance – Community Development (60 minutes)
Staff will review a draft ordinance of an Advance Notice of Sale requirement for multi-family
residential buildings owners intending to sell their property. Staff will also update the council
on the status of other NOAH preservation policies/strategies and review input received from
rental owners/landlords at the NOAH Preservation Policy information meetings.
4.Platia Place Preliminary Plat & Preliminary PUD – Community Development (30 minutes)
Discuss proposed redevelopment plan and preliminary tax increment financing request for a
proposed redevelopment at 9808 and 9920 Wayzata Blvd (former Santorini site). The proposal
includes a 112-room hotel and 149-unit apartment building.
Communications/Meeting Check-In – Administrative Services (5 minutes)
Time for communications between staff and Council will be set aside on every study session
agenda for the purposes of information sharing.
Written Reports
5. Comprehensive Plan Update
End of Meeting: 9:10 p.m.
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 1) Page 3
Title: Future Study Session Agenda Planning – September 18 & September 25, 2017
Study Session Prioritization & Projected Discussion Timeline
Priority Discussion Topic Comments Date Scheduled
5 SLP Policing Model/Critical Incident
Planning Session 1 of 4 (held on 8/14/17) Ongoing
5 SLP Policing Model/Critical Incident
Planning Session 2 of 4 September 25, 2017
5 SLP Policing Model/Critical Incident
Planning Session 3 of 4 October 9, 2017
5 SLP Policing Model/Critical Incident
Planning Session 4 of 4 November 13, 2017
4 Preserving the Walker Building Combined w/Walker Lake Branding
Discussion (held on 8/28/17) Ongoing
4 Race Equity Communication to HRC
on Outreach & Next Steps September 11, 2017
4 Race Equity/Inclusion
Courageous Conversations September 11, 2017
4 Affordable Housing
Preservation
September 25, 2017
4 Flavored Tobacco Ordinance October 2, 2017
4 Climate Action Plan
Draft being updated by consultant. Time
needed for review by E&S Commission
& staff before ready for council
4th Qtr 2017
3 Revitalization of Walker/Lake Area Part of Preserving Walker Building report
(held on 8/28/17)
Ongoing
3 Utilization of DBE Vendors Part of Race Equity items September 11, 2017
3 Ranked Choice Voting Spec. Study Session including City Attorney September 18, 2017
3 Historical Society Space Part of Preserving Walker Building report October ____
3 Policy for Funding Non-Profits Part of 2018 Budget item October 9, 2017
3 The Nest October 9, 2017
3 Field Improvements/Girls Fastpitch
Softball October 9 / Ongoing
3 Living Streets Policy After Vision 3.0 work is completed 4th Qtr 2017
3 Develop a Youth Advisory Commission 1st Qtr 2018
2 Bird Friendly Glass
2 Dark Skies Ordinance (Light Pollution)
2 Community Center Project
TH 169 Mobility Study +Request from Councilmember Brausen September 11, 2017
? Overview of Crime Free Ordinance Priority not yet determined. Fall 2018
3 Property Tax Relief for Seniors Part of 2018 Budget item (Councilmember
Brausen: "No further study needed.") October 9, 2017
2 Sidewalk Snow Removal
Part of 2018 Budget item (Majority of
councilmembers determined no need to discuss
further at this time.)
October 9, 2017
2 Active Space Matching Grants w/
Multi- Family Communities
Part of 2018 Budget item (Will be included
in 2018 Budget Proposal.) October 9, 2017
Priority Key
5 = High priority/discuss ASAP
4 = Discuss sooner than later
3 = Discuss when time allows
2 = Low priority/no rush
1 = No need to discuss
Meeting: Study Session
Meeting Date: September 11, 2017
Discussion Item: 2
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Solid Waste Program Update
RECOMMENDED ACTION: The purpose of this discussion is to provide the City Council with
an overview of the draft 2018-2023 Hauler Request for Proposal (RFP) and other related program
activities, including the proposed 2018 Zero Waste Packaging (ZWP) exemptions.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the Council agree with the proposed additions to 2018-2023
RFP? Does the Council support the 2018 ZWP exemptions?
SUMMARY: The new significant items or major program changes that are being proposed in the
RFP include:
General – Encouraging alternate bids for alternate methods of collection, allowing 5-plex to 8-plex
multi-family buildings with similar collection needs into city collection program; requiring hauler
participation in city pilot projects and coordination of educational tours.
Recycling – Requesting price quotes for both every week and every other week recycling
collection and allowing options for revenue sharing.
Garbage – Requesting price quotes for every week and every other week garbage for the 20-gallon
and 30-gallon service levels, elimination of the 450-gallon and 540-gallon service levels.
Organics – Requesting price quotes for organics recycling co-collected with yard waste and
alternate collection options; adding multi-family drop-sites (pending successful completion of
pilot); allowing alternative transfer and processing locations.
Yard Waste – Eliminating “no grass clippings” yard waste credit.
A detailed description of the significant program changes are provided in the “Discussion” section
of this report. A summary of these and other changes can be found in Attachment 1.
Staff recently completed a survey to gauge resident’s satisfaction with the program and what
changes they would like to see. Results show that overall residents have been very satisfied with
our current program. A description of the survey is provided in the “Discussion” section of this
report. A summary of the highlighted data can be found in Attachment 2.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: None at this time.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a leader in environmental
stewardship. We will increase environmental consciousness and responsibility in all areas of city
business.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion, RFP Program Changes (Attachment 1),
Highlighted Program Survey Data (Attachment 2), 2018 ZWP Proposed Acceptable Material and
Exemptions List (Attachment 3)
Prepared by: Scott Merkley, Public Works Services Manager; Kala Fisher, Solid Waste
Program Coordinator; Emily Barker, Solid Waste Program Specialist
Reviewed by: Mark Hanson, Public Works Superintendent; Cynthia S. Walsh, Director of
Operations & Recreation
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 2) Page 2
Title: Solid Waste Program Update
DISCUSSION
Request for Proposal (RFP) new significant items or major program changes
During the May 22, 2017 study session discussion, staff discussed a number of program change
considerations with City Council. As a result of the discussion and staff research, the following
items are being incorporated or removed from the RFP.
General
• Collection methods: The RFP will request price quotes for the current methods of collection
that are in practice for the residential collection program, but also encourage quotes for
alternate methods of collection for any of the material streams collected through the city’s
program.
• Multi-family: Allow 5-plex to 8-plex multi-family buildings with similar collection needs
on existing collection routes to opt-in to city collection program for all material streams.
• Pilot projects: Past RFPs have not addressed pilot projects. The RFP language would
require the haulers to provide services outlined by the city for pilot projects during the
contract period.
• Education: Require haulers to provide educational tours for residents, either at their own
facilities, or by coordinating tours at other facilities that accept the city’s material or local
recycling facilities that manufacture new products from recycled material.
Recycling
• Collection frequency: Require price quotes for both every week and every other week
recycling collection.
• Revenue sharing: Allow options for revenue sharing to include either pricing by market
indexes or by blended value; both are typical revenue share options and have been used
previously by the city.
Garbage
• Collection frequency: Request price quotes for both every week garbage collection for all
service levels (20- through 360-gallons) and every other week garbage collection for the
20- and 30-gallon service levels.
• 450- and 540-gallon service levels: These service levels are proposed to be eliminated in
order to encourage waste reduction.
Organics Recycling & Yard Waste
• Alternate collection methods: Request price quotes for organics recycling co-collected with
yard waste and encourage alternate collection options.
• Drop-sites: Add multi-family drop-site collection (pending successful completion of pilot).
• Alternate locations: Remove site specific language to allow delivery of the material to
alternate transfer sites and processing locations as determined by the city without requiring
contract changes.
• Credit: Eliminate the “no grass clippings” yard waste credit due to inability to track use
and shift the savings to support future program initiatives.
Solid Waste Resident Program Survey
During the months of July and August a solid waste program survey was mailed to 933 randomly
selected residents who receive city residential collection services. Surveyed addresses were
chosen, proportionate to the number of residential solid waste customers in each of the five
collection day routes in the city. The survey was also made available online to other residents.
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 2) Page 3
Title: Solid Waste Program Update
A total of 741 responses were received, 306 responses by mail and another 435 online responses.
Responses were analyzed from both sources and found to be very consistent. The information
provided in this report reflects the combined responses.
Overall, the vast majority of respondents rate the solid waste collection services, educational
materials, and program costs as either good or excellent. Staff wants council to be aware of several
key questions that were asked in the survey regarding possible solid waste program changes. Those
questions and their responses are noted below. Visual representations of these responses may also
be found in Attachment 2.
Recycling
• If recycling collection service was provided weekly, how much more would residents be
willing to pay per quarter? A majority of respondents were in favor if quarterly fees stayed
low (increase of $2.50 or less). Support dropped to 34% in favor if increases reach
$5/quarter.
Garbage
• How many respondents support a switch to every other week garbage collection? About
25% of respondents were supportive. Of those that support, 65% expect quarterly solid
waste fees to be reduced by at least 25%.
Organics Recycling
• Would residents continue to participate in the organics recycling program if they had to
purchase compostable bags for food scrap collection? Almost half of the respondents
(49%) said they would still participate, 18% would not and others were unsure.
Yard Waste
• How frequently do residents use the city brush drop-off site, 2501 Edgewood Ave. S., to
dispose of branches that are too large for curbside collection? A little over half of the
respondents have not yet used the site and 20% of respondents were not aware of this
option.
Over 232 suggestions for program improvements were also provided by respondents and are being
evaluated. A detailed analysis of the solid waste program survey findings will be provided in a
written report this fall.
Organics Recycling Program Update
The elimination of the $10 per quarter subscription fee on January 1, 2017 resulted in a dramatic
increase in participation for the organics recycling program. Household participation in December
2016 was 15%. As of September 1, 2017 participation in the program reached 29%.
Staff is working to notify residents of a temporary change in the collection of organics recycling
and yard waste by the city’s hauler (Advanced Disposal - AD), which will occur during the months
of October and November this year. AD will be collecting the contents of organics carts in a
separate truck from resident’s yard waste placed for collection outside of the organics cart.
Residents will not have to make any changes to how they collect or set out organics and yard waste.
Both organics and yard waste will still be collected weekly, on the regular collection day for each
household. However, the time of day that collection occurs will be different for organics carts
verses yard waste outside of the cart, as it will be collected in a separate truck. This change will be
communicated to residents through the Park Perspective, city website, and by the hauler leaving
information tags directly on organics carts during the weeks leading up to the change. This
collection change was required by Specialized Environmental Technologies’ (SET) to aid
processing of the city’s organics and yard waste and to free up more space at the composting
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 2) Page 4
Title: Solid Waste Program Update
facility during the peak yard waste months. SET is the compost processor where our organics
recycling and yard waste materials are taken to.
Staff is currently working with AD and SET, as well as other area composting facilities to
determine if long term changes need to be made to the collection method or if the city’s material
needs to be delivered to a another local composting facility to be processed.
Every-Other-Week (EOW) Garbage Collection Pilot Program
Staff is starting a six-month pilot project to test optional every other week garbage collection. The
goal of the pilot is to determine if every other week garbage collection is a viable method for
providing collection for smaller volumes of garbage, using existing carts, and to understand any
issues that arise from doing so. This pilot will be available to residents who have the 20- or 30-
gallon garbage service levels and participate in organics recycling. An invitation letter arrived in
homes beginning August 21, 2017. Staff received an overwhelming response to the letter, with
over 450 households signing up for the pilot by the registration deadline. A detailed analysis of
the EOW pilot findings will be provided in a written report next spring. The new agreement with
the selected hauler for the next contract period will be written to allow for EOW collection for 20-
or 30-gallon garbage service levels, should the pilot be successful and the city deems this is the
direction to move to.
Multi-Family Organics Recycling Drop-off Pilot Program
The city is conducting a multi-family organics drop-site pilot to evaluate the possibility of creating
permanent organics recycling drop-sites for multi-family residents on several city properties,
similar to what is currently being done in Minneapolis and other metro locations. The pilot began
in mid-July and is scheduled to end October 15. The drop-sites are located at three city parks
(TexaTonka Park, Creekside Park, and Bass Lake Park). These locations were chosen based on
their proximity to multi-family buildings. Approximately 100 households have signed up to
participate. Thus far, there has been consistent participation, with the TexaTonka location having
the most material collected on a regular basis. Contamination has been minimal, with just a few
non-compostable items being included. When issues arise, staff provides feedback to participants
in a timely manner via email, so issues are resolved quickly. A survey has been sent to participants
to gauge actual participation and to gather additional feedback on the program. If the pilot is
determined to be a success, it is staffs intent to continue the program for multi-family residents.
City staff and the city’s Minnesota GreenCorps member will review the program in late September
to determine any changes that are needed to continue the program.
Proposed Process for Solid Waste Collection Contracts / Timeline
New contracts for garbage, recycling, organics recycling and yard waste collection should be
awarded before the end of March, 2018 to allow contractors time to adequately prepare for the
work. If this deadline cannot be met, extensions of the current contracts will need to be negotiated.
Listed below is a schedule showing major steps to develop and award new collection contracts.
Item Completion Date
Staff / Council determine proposal and contract requirements Sept. 2017
Request for Proposal and Contract completed Sept. – Oct. 2017
Ordinance changes, if any needed, are identified Oct. 2017
Ordinance revisions made (if needed) Oct. 2017 – March 2018
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 2) Page 5
Title: Solid Waste Program Update
Council authorizes Request for Proposal Oct. 2017
Staff sends out RFPs to selected vendors Nov. 2017
Proposals received by Staff Nov. – Dec. 2017
Proposals and staff recommendations reviewed with Council Jan. 2018
Staff negotiates collection contracts with vendors Jan. – Feb. 2018
Council approves new collection contracts March 2018
Staff conducts public education outreach with residents April – Sept. 2018
New collection contracts begin Oct. 1, 2018
RFP Next Steps
Next steps for the RFP listed above are based on the timeline outlined in the report above and will
be adjusted if needed based on the City Council input provided during the study session discussion.
Zero Waste Packaging Ordinance: 2018 Temporary Exemptions and Update
The Zero Waste Packaging (ZWP) ordinance went into effect on January 1, 2017. Since then,
numerous restaurants have converted their packaging to recyclable or compostable items. Staff
continues to work with businesses that have not yet changed their packaging in order to bring them
into compliance.
In preparation for 2018, staff have reviewed the current temporary exemptions for items that are
not recyclable or compostable but which are being allowed due to limited compliant alternatives.
For 2018, the city plans to keep the same exemptions as were allowed in 2017, largely because
available alternatives continue to be an issue. Those exemptions are:
1. Paper food wraps: Plastic or foil-lined (e.g. fast food wrappers)
2.Asian takeout pails: Plastic-lined paper, fold-top style (e.g. Chinese takeout boxes)
3. Hot cup lids: Rigid polystyrene (#6, PS)
4. Portion cups (2 ounce or smaller) and lids: Rigid polystyrene (#6, PS)
Council will be asked to approve the 2018 Zero Waste Packaging exemptions at an upcoming
council meeting.
In 2018, staff will place a greater focus on the collection of packaging discarded in-house at food
establishments. While some locations have added the required bins to collect recyclable or
compostable packaging, many businesses lack the necessary containers. Space and cost have been
two of the primary barriers to updating collection containers.
City staff recently met with staff from the cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul in an effort to
harmonize the to-go packaging policies in the region. Currently Minneapolis exempts polyethylene
(PE) plastic-lined paper hot and cold cups and containers and polystyrene lids, but is taking
comments to determine if they will end those exemptions in April 2018. The City of St. Louis Park
supports Minneapolis in ending the exemption on cups to create less confusion for residents who
travel between the cities, as well as creating greater demand for products which can increase
availability and potentially decrease costs for businesses. The City of St. Paul’s exemptions are
not yet determined, as the ordinance has not yet been updated from its original text. The three cities
have agreed to utilize the “Green to Go” branding created by the City of Minneapolis, with the
ability to customize with each city’s logo, website, and tagline. This should also help patrons of
impacted food establishments know to look for compostable or recyclable packaging.
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 2) Page 6
Title: Solid Waste Program Update
Attachment 1
Request for Proposal – Program Changes
General
•Adding collection services for 5-8 plex multi-family buildings with similar collection needs on
existing collection routes who choose to opt-in to the city’s programs.
•Allowing alternate bids for collection methods that are different from current methods.
•Requiring all contractors to host or coordinate at least two tours of local recycling, composting,
incineration, landfill facilities and/or local end market facilities for city customers and city
staff.
•Requiring contractors to provide collection containers and material collection for up to four
community events per year.
•Allowing Saturday collection to begin at 8 a.m.
•Allowing 5-plex to 8-plex multi-family buildings with similar collection needs on existing
collection routes to opt-in to city collection program for all material streams.
•Requiring contractor to cooperate with the city to provide collection services and record
keeping for pilot projects.
•Requiring contractors to provide educational tours for residents, either at their own facilities,
or by coordinating tours at other facilities that accept the city’s material or local recycling
facilities that manufacture new products from recycled material.
Garbage
•Clarifying that bulk items requiring recycling (e.g. electronics and appliances) are transported
to licensed recycling facilities.
•Requesting additional pricing for every other week garbage collection for 20- and 30-gallon
service levels.
•Requiring contractor to distribute educational material at cleanup events if city requests.
•Increasing free cart swaps per month from 80 to 100.
•Eliminating 450- and 540-gallon service levels in order to encourage waste reduction.
Recycling
•Requiring proposals for both weekly and every other week collection of recyclables.
•Requiring recycling audits during the month of May, each year.
•Increase free cart swaps per month to 50.
•Allowing options for revenue sharing to include either pricing by market indexes or blended
value.
Organics Recycling
•Allowing for multi-family organics drop-sites collection services (pending successful
completion of the 2017 pilot).
•Requiring participation with three organics audits annually.
•Requiring contractor to conduct participation studies.
•Requiring pricing for organics only collection during the months of December – March.
Yard Waste
•Requiring separate collection of live holiday trees during the first three weeks of January, at
no extra cost to the City.
•Requiring pricing for yard waste collection, combined with organics, during April – November
only.
Q31 Overall, how would you rate the following aspects of the solid waste
program? (Leave blank if not applicable or unsure)
Answered: 690 Skipped: 51
0.00%
0
1.32%
9
9.96%
68
39.24%
268
49.49%
338 683
0.24%
1
1.19%
5
8.79%
37
33.73%
142
56.06%
236 421
0.29%
2
0.58%
4
8.14%
56
38.23%
263
52.76%
363 688
0.16%
1
0.80%
5
7.40%
46
36.33%
226
55.31%
344 622
1.00%
6
2.17%
13
22.24%
133
48.49%
290
26.09%
156 598
1.34%
8
2.85%
17
37.02%
221
44.22%
264
14.57%
87 597
Very Poor Poor Average Good Excellent
Recycling
service
Organics
recycling...
Garbage
service
Yard waste
service
Educational
materials
Solid waste
program cost
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
VERY POOR POOR AVERAGE GOOD EXCELLENT TOTAL
Recycling service
Organics recycling service
Garbage service
Yard waste service
Educational materials
Solid waste program cost
2017 Solid Waste Program Survey
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 2)
Title: Solid Waste Program Update Page 7
Q7 If recycling collection service was changed to weekly instead of every
other week collection, how much more would you be willing to pay per
quarter? Indicate which of the following quarterly rate increases you
would be willing to pay for the service:
Answered: 722 Skipped: 19
88.23%
562
11.77%
75 637 2.00
51.77%
292
48.23%
272 564 2.00
34.25%
187
65.75%
359 546 2.00
15.25%
79
84.75%
439 518 2.00
7.16%
36
92.84%
467 503 2.00
5.21%
26
94.79%
473 499 2.00
Yes No
+$0 +$2.50 +$5 +$10 +$15 +$20
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
YES NO TOTAL WEIGHTED AVERAGE
+$0
+$2.50
+$5
+$10
+$15
+$20
2017 Solid Waste Program SurveyStudy Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 2)
Title: Solid Waste Program Update Page 8
24.47%173
63.93%452
11.60%82
Q23 Would you support a change in garbage collection service to every
other week instead of weekly collection?
Answered: 707 Skipped: 34
TOTAL 707
Yes (Go to Question #3)No (Go to Question #4)Unsure
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Yes (Go to Question #3)
No (Go to Question #4)
Unsure
2017 Solid Waste Program SurveyStudy Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 2)
Title: Solid Waste Program Update Page 9
8.70%22
9.09%23
17.00%43
22.92%58
13.83%35
28.46%72
Q24 If you support a change to every other week garbage collection, how
much less would you expect to pay per quarter for solid waste collection
services? Indicate which of the following quarterly rate decreases you
would expect.
Answered: 253 Skipped: 488
TOTAL 253
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
Greater than
30%
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
Greater than 30%
2017 Solid Waste Program SurveyStudy Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 2)
Title: Solid Waste Program Update Page 10
49.23%224
18.02%82
32.75%149
Q16 Would you continue to participate in the program if you had to
purchase your own compostable bags?
Answered: 455 Skipped: 286
TOTAL 455
Yes No I don't know
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Yes
No
I don't know
2017 Solid Waste Program SurveyStudy Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 2)
Title: Solid Waste Program Update Page 11
20.00%142
56.34%400
20.70%147
2.96%21
Q20 How frequently do you use the city brush drop-off site, 2501
Edgewood Ave. S., to dispose of branches that are too large for curbside
collection?
Answered: 710 Skipped: 31
TOTAL 710
Wasn’t aware
of this option
Aware of the
option, but...
1 – 2 times
per year
3 or more
times per year
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Wasn’t aware of this option
Aware of the option, but haven’t used it
1 – 2 times per year
3 or more times per year
2017 Solid Waste Program SurveyStudy Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 2)
Title: Solid Waste Program Update Page 12
St. Louis Park Public Works Division • 7305 Oxford St., St. Louis Park, MN 55426
www.stlouispark.org • Phone: 952.924.2562 • Fax: 952.924.2560 • TTY: 952.924.2518
Attachment 3
Zero Waste Packaging Ordinance
2018 Acceptable Materials & Exemption List
Acceptable Recyclable Packaging Materials – The following materials meet the definition for
“Recyclable Packaging” in subsection 12.202(f)(2) of the ordinance.
1.Plastic
a.Polyethylene Terephthalate (#1 PET or PETE)
b.High Density Polyethylene (#2 HDPE)
c.Polypropylene (#5 PP)
2.Metal
a. Aluminum (foil and containers)
Acceptable Compostable Packaging Materials – The following materials meet the definition for
“Compostable Packaging” in subsection 12.202(f)(3) of the ordinance.
1.Paper
a.Unlined/uncoated paper products
b.Unlined/uncoated butcher paper
c.Unlined/uncoated parchment paper
2.Certified Compostable (must be BPI Certified Compostable or Cedar Grove Accepted)
a. Paper
b.Plastic
c.Bagasse
d.Bamboo
Temporarily Acceptable (Exempt) Packaging Materials – The following materials do not meet
the definitions for “Zero Waste Packaging” in subsection 12.202(f). However, due to the limited
acceptable alternatives currently available, these items are exempt until December 31, 2018.
1.Paper food wraps: Plastic or foil-lined (e.g. fast food wrappers)
2.Asian takeout pails: Plastic-lined paper, fold-top style (e.g. Chinese takeout boxes)
3.Hot cup lids: Rigid polystyrene (#6, PS)
4.Portion cups (2 ounce or smaller) and lids: Rigid polystyrene (#6, PS)
Food establishments that choose to utilize temporarily exempt items must provide information
to customers to clearly indicate these items cannot be recycled or composted, and must be
placed in the garbage. This must be done in print, for example on menus, posted signage, or
directly on the packaging.
September 1, 2017
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 2)
Title: Solid Waste Program Update Page 13
Meeting: Study Session
Meeting Date: September 11, 2017
Discussion Item: 3
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Advancing Racial Equity Update and Council Discussion
RECOMMENDED ACTION: The City Council has set aside time for updates and discussion
on next steps related to advancing race equity and inclusion.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Are the actions of city staff in keeping with Council
expectations? Does the City Council have direction for staff and commission? Is there other
information needed at this time?
SUMMARY: A high priority for the City Council is our continued work on advancing race equity
and inclusion. The purpose of this discussion is to provide an update to Council on activities and
programs, allow Council time to talk about activities and actions, and to discuss next steps.
The discussion at this study session will include the following:
• Update on work by staff.
- Overview of action plans created by each department in line with the Council Action Plan:
measurable steps for advancing race equity 2017.
- Review of tools for use in advancing race equity: Tool kit, map, employee continued
education and outreach.
- Listing of summary of staff activities, education/learning and continued work with
GARE/CSI and the League of MN Cities.
• Continued discussion on action plan developed by Council in working with Consultant Gordon
Goodwin in February and March 2017. The focus will be on next steps and further defining
Council Action Plan numbers 3 and 4, particularly related to providing guidance to the Human
Rights Commission (HRC) as follow up to the January joint meeting.
• Other activities, connections and discussions/education.
• Also, general discussion by Council.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged
community.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Summary of Activities
Department Action Plans
Toolkit
Map
Race Equity TED Talks
2016 HRC Annual Report
Prepared by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 3) Page 2
Title: Advancing Racial Equity Update and Council Discussion
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: Advancing race equity and inclusion is a high priority for Council. Education
with staff and elected officials, along with work in various areas, began in earnest in 2016 when
the City started participating in the program through the League of MN Cities along with Center
for Social Inclusion (CSI). The City continues work with CSI and LMC in 2017 with another
group of staff participating in the introduction to advancing race equity, and the group that
participated in 2016 continues with the advanced program. Council continues to participate in
sessions provided for elected officials through the LMC. The St. Louis Park Human Rights
Commission and Multicultural Advisory Group continue with work, outreach and discussions in
advancing race equity and inclusion. There have also been several meetings with a number of
individuals from the City, St. Louis Park Schools, Allies of St. Louis Park, the HRC and MAC,
and community members to talk about ongoing work, support, connections, questions, activities
and general discussion on advancing race equity.
Is there information to share showing work done or tools to use? Yes, staff has been working
to create various tools and information to use in their work each day. This information is in line
with guidance provided by CSI and with direction provided in the Council Action Plan. Attached
is the following information:
• Summary sheet showing various work by staff, activities and steps to this date.
• Department action plans developed in April/May 2017 with assistance from Julie Nelson and
Gordon Goodwin, Consultants from Center for Social Inclusion (CSI). The action plans follow
the policy document developed by Council.
• RE toolkit for policies, programs, activities, projects and service delivery.
• St. Louis Park demographics map.
• TED Talks - Advancing Racial Equity: Staff conversation opportunities hosted by staff liaison
leaders.
Has City Council adopted an action plan for advancing racial equity? Yes. On February 13,
2017, City Council worked with Consultant Gordon Goodwin and developed an Action Plan:
Measurable Steps for Advancing Racial Equity 2017.
Council Action Plan: Measurable Steps for Advancing Racial Equity 2017
1. Gather information during Vision process on advancing racial equity, hearing voices and
include in all areas of Vision/Comp Plan.
2. Workforce Initiatives
- Staffing: Initiatives to include avenues for success in hiring and advancing racial equity at
our workplace.
- Contractors and wealth creation (opportunities that open up inclusion with
underrepresented groups/vendors).
3. Council to work on connecting with potential leaders in the community to diversify boards,
commissions and involvement in other areas.
4. Council to work with HRC to continue to increase awareness in advancement of racial equity
in the community, including outreach.
Is there additional work or clarification needed with the Council Action Plan? Yes, in
working with Consultant Gordon Goodwin in March, the focus was to further define 3 and 4. At
the end of this discussion, Mr. Goodwin stated he would frame the scope of duties and obligations
with a timeframe for the Council and for HRC; noting the items HRC will do with the Council and
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 3) Page 3
Title: Advancing Racial Equity Update and Council Discussion
on the Council’s behalf. Below is information from Consultant Gordon Goodwin with
details/recommendations on Council action plan items 3 and 4.
Outcomes:
A. Communication to HRC (#4 above)
Council respectfully requests that HRC host up to six City of St. Louis Park racial equity
information sessions for St. Louis Park resident associations (timeframe to be determined).
These sessions should engage all segments of our community, especially reputational leaders
of ethnic and racially diverse groups living in St. Louis Park.
These information sessions will serve as an orientation to the City of St. Louis Park racial
equity approach. Questions that will be discussed in these sessions include:
• Why is racial equity the focus of our work?
• What are some desired results for racial equity in the City of St. Louis Park?
• How might St. Louis Park residents’ lives be positively impacted by City of St. Louis Park
racial equity?
• How can St. Louis Park residents help with this effort?
B. Outreach in Community with other Groups/Partners (#3 above)
• As a way of preparing for the community information sessions, the Mayor, City Manager
and two other councilmembers will coordinate a meeting with a number of interested
parties to connect on what is happening with advancement of race equity. Initial meeting
will be set up and future check in will be determined.
- City of St. Louis Park
- School District/Community Education
- Allies
- Interfaith
- HRC Chair
- Other
C. Staff to set regular check in meetings with City Council
Does the City Council agree with the details for items 3 and 4 in the Action Plan? Are there
additions or changes to the information provided above from our consultant? Is the Council in
agreement to move forward with the details for steps 3 and 4? How does Council wish to proceed?
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 3) Page 4
Title: Advancing Racial Equity Update and Council Discussion
Racial Equity – Moving Forward Together as a City
St. Louis Park, MN
Summary of Ongoing Activity
9/5/17
BACKGROUND: In 2016, a team from the City of St. Louis Park started work with Center for
Social Inclusion (CSI) and League of Minnesota Cities (LMC) to learn about advancing racial
equity and transforming government. Program leaders are Glenn Harris, CSI President, and Julie
Nelson, Director, Government Alliance on Race and Equity and Senior Vice President, CSI. Part
of the program was to attend a racial equity workshop and other sessions throughout the year to
learn about racial equity and develop action plans and tools to use. The program with CSI and
LMC was offered again in 2017, with an intro and advanced level. St. Louis Park continues to
participate by having new participants in the intro level and continue in the advanced program
along with elected official programs in both 2016 and 2017.
As program participants, we are:
• Developing understanding and awareness of racial equity.
• Exploring the role, challenges, responsibilities and opportunities for government to advance
racial equity in the metro area.
• Developing racial equity tools to use when deciding policies, practices, programs and budget.
• Learning about national best practices to normalize racial equity as a key value and
operationalize racial equity via new policies and institutional practice.
• Creating connections and partnerships with other institutions and the community to advance
racial equity region-wide.
As with the Vision process, race and equity work will be integrated long-term into the City’s
practices as we develop programs; review, create and update policies; and provide services to
residents.
Council, Human Rights Commission, Multi-Cultural Advisory Group and other community
members, organizations and citizens have had and continue to have discussions, gathering events,
activities and programs on racial equity and inclusion. We also know there are many conversations
and activities in the community, schools, and places of worship and other gathering spaces
regarding race and the metro area, state and across the nation.
Below is a summary of work, education, activities, etc., related to Advancing Race Equity and
Inclusion. The main focus is related to staff activities and will be modified as needed:
• December 14, 2017: Introduction to Advancing Race Equity for new staff. All other staff
participated in this training in December 2016. Council participated in the training in January
2017. Consultant Gordon Goodwin from Center for Social Inclusion will facilitate session.
• November 2017: Supervisor interactive session scheduled on how to start and lead difficult
conversations around inclusion and diversity. Consultant Denise Barreto of Relationships
Matter Now will facilitate session.
• September 11, 2017: Study session discussion with Council on continued work in advancing
race equity and inclusion.
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 3) Page 5
Title: Advancing Racial Equity Update and Council Discussion
• August 2017: Racial Equity Coordinator position developed and recruitment began with over
300 applications received.
• August 2017: In process of development of a listing and resource for staff to use (to solicit)
contractors and wealth creation in line with Council action plan (opportunities that open up
inclusion with underrepresented groups/vendors). Staff will meet again to further develop
listing, contacts and resources for staff to use when purchasing goods, services and contract
work.
• July 2017: Advancing race equity toolkit developed and distributed to supervisors. It is a
toolkit for policies, programs, activities, projects and service delivery. The toolkit was
developed with guidance by CSI to help our work as we seek to increase opportunities for all
by ending racial disparities internal to the City and by strengthening City services and resident
engagement through inclusion of all racial groups.
• June 2017: St. Louis Park received the Presidential Award at the League of MN cities
conference for participation and work in advancing race equity.
• June 2017: Maps developed showing demographics, census block groups and neighborhoods
by race for St. Louis Park for use by staff.
• 1st half 2017: Development of Police Trainee program. Multi-jurisdictional recruitment and
training program for police officers. Applicants from non-traditional and diverse backgrounds
recruited to enter into a training program, and successful candidates would be hired into
participating police departments.
• May 2017: Community Partners first meeting. Mayor and City Manager invited others to meet
and discuss advancing race equity and work in the community. Individuals from St. Louis
Park Schools, Allies of St. Louis Park, Human Rights Commission, Multi-Cultural Advisory
Group, community members and others invited to gather. Discussion was held on education,
community activities, concerns, opportunities and connections. Regular meetings continue
(June, August and September in process of being scheduled) and will also further define
purpose of group.
• May 2017: Continuing education on race equity and staff discussion opportunities were created
by the staff liaison leaders. A listing of TED talks on advancing race equity was created and
staff have been invited to attend. Race equity TED talks are held each month at various times
and locations in the City and are hosted by staff liaison leaders; started in June 2017 and
continue through December.
• April 27, 2017: Development of department action plans for advancing race equity, with
assistance from CSI Consultants Julie Nelson and Gordon Goodwin. This is an internal process
completed by department directors, staff liaison/leaders and other supervisors. Each
department had a team work on action plans for advancing race equity in the work we do. The
action plan items are based on direction from the Council Action Plan that was developed in
February 2017. Items will be action based and must be measurable. Department action plans
were finalized in June and are in place. Check in and documentation on progress will take
place fourth quarter 2017.
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 3) Page 6
Title: Advancing Racial Equity Update and Council Discussion
• March 23, 2017: Mayor Spano and Council – State of the City presentation to community held
at Matter. Part of the presentation was on advancing race equity. You can watch Mayor Spano
talk about the City and race equity here https://youtu.be/v0-igS0qFE8
• March 20, 2017: Council continued discussion on next steps on action plan items at study
session facilitated by Consultant Gordon Goodwin. Next step is for Council to further define
#3 and #4 below:
Council Action Plan: 2/13/17 Measurable Steps for 2017
1. Gather information during Vision process on advancing racial equity, hearing voices and
include this in all areas of Vision/Comp Plan. Comment: in process
2. Workforce Initiatives. Comment: staff will incorporate into action plans when they are
developed in April 2017.
• Staffing: Initiatives to include avenues for success in hiring and advancing racial equity
at our workplace.
• Contractors and wealth creation (opportunities that open up inclusion with
underrepresented groups/vendors).
3. Council to work on connecting with potential leaders in the community to diversify boards,
commissions and involvement in other areas.
4. Council to work with HRC to continue to increase awareness in advancement of racial
equity in the community, including outreach.
• February 27 and 28, 2017: Cities of Bloomington, Maplewood and St. Louis Park partnered
on training with Pacific Education Group to provide additional training and support on
diversity and inclusion. This two-day program, also used by St. Louis Park Schools, will allow
department liaisons, executive staff and others to further develop an understanding, have
conversations, gather tools and develop next steps for the organization. Each city will have
approximately 25 seats for individuals to attend the two-day program. HRC, MAC and
Council also invited to attend.
• February 13, 2017: Council review of workshop discussion and draft development of
measurable steps for 2017. Discussion on continued connection with HRC and next
steps/direction and possibilities with outreach and working with others.
• January 27, 2017: Council discussion, learning and understanding advancing race equity at
annual workshop. Discussion on ideas for measures of success. Began development of
Council Action Plan: Develop Measurable Steps for 2017.
Draft: Council Action Plan: Develop Measurable Steps for 2017
5. Gather information during Vision process on advancing racial equity, hearing voices and include this
in all areas of Vision/Comp Plan.
6. Workforce Initiatives
- Staffing: Initiatives to include avenues for success in hiring and advancing racial equity at our
workplace.
- Contractors and wealth creation (opportunities that open up inclusion with underrepresented
groups/vendors).
7. Council to work on connecting with potential leaders in the community to diversify boards, commissions
and involvement in other areas.
8. Council to work with HRC to continue to increase awareness in advancement of racial equity in the
community, including outreach.
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 3) Page 7
Title: Advancing Racial Equity Update and Council Discussion
• January 23, 2017: Joint meeting of City Council, Human Rights Commission and Multi-
Cultural Advisory Group. Facilitated by Gordon Goodwin from Center of Social Inclusion.
• December/January: Human Rights Commission and Multicultural Advisory Committee to
provide input to Council regarding race and equity.
• December 8, 19 and 20, 2016: All staff training on introduction to advancing racial equity.
CSI Consultants Julie Nelson and Gordon Goodwin to conduct six training sessions for all
staff. Each staff member will attend one four-hour session. Staff liaisons will be scheduled to
attend several sessions to provide additional support, training and connections with staff.
• November-December 2016: Register for year two with our cohort team with CSI and LMC to
continue working with other agencies in support of race and equity work. Directors and some
other staff who did not participate in 2016 co-hort are in 2017 first year co-hort. First year co-
hort participants signed up for year two. This is an opportunity for continued growth and
learning in the new session of the year-long program on advancing race equity.
• November 14, 2016: Council continued discussion on race, equity and inclusion. Human
Rights Commission and Multicultural Advisory Committee members were invited to attend
this study session.
• November 2016: Check in with cohort team and leaders to talk about next steps and support
staff training sessions in December.
• October 2016 Staff Liaison Training: CSI Consultants Julie Nelson and Gordon Goodwin
presented Building Racial Equity Expertise: Train the Trainer (half-day workshop) for the 30
staff members who volunteered as department liaisons. This group will also learn racial equity
facilitation and training skills that will support transformation and change within the
organization.
• October 2016 Supervisor Training: CSI Consultants Julie Nelson and Gordon Goodwin
presented Introduction to Advancing Racial Equity (half day workshop) to supervisors.
• September 2016: Increased staff support and leadership for race and equity work. City Manager
Tom Harmening asked for staff volunteers (at least two from each of the eight departments)
who would be interested in continuing race and equity learning, support and program
development to serve as liaisons/leaders to help support work and answer questions from staff
in each department. After a great response from staff from all levels, we have 30 liaisons to
help with continued race and equity work.
• September 2016: Meeting with Human Rights Commission (HRC) and Multicultural Advisory
Committee (MAC). Overview of racial equity program and St. Louis Park demographics.
Mayor Spano and Councilmember Lindberg attended the meeting and a request was made to
both HRC and MAC to provide recommendation(s) to Council.
• July 2016: Overview of racial equity program with supervisors. Council discussion on race,
equity and inclusion.
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 3) Page 8
Title: Advancing Racial Equity Update and Council Discussion
• March-December 2016: Regular meeting of cohort team consisting of Jake Spano, Gregg
Lindberg, Tom Harmening, John Luse, Jason West, Jacque Larson, Jane Adade, Sagal
Abdirahman and Nancy Deno to work on St. Louis Park homework.
• January-December 2016: Participant in LMC, GARE and CSI Race, Equity and Inclusion
program via a cohort team and elected official track. Outcomes included a St. Louis Park Racial
Equity Statement, Action Plan and development of next steps including staff training and
requesting volunteers as department liaisons.
DEPARTMENT ACTION PLAN: Administrative Services
Page | 1 June 16, 2017
Outcome & Actions Who & What Timeline Lead &
Accountability Performance Measure Progress Report
Diversity and inclusion with focus
on low turnover for new hires of
color.
New hires of color and current
employees of color will be
surveyed. Leverage liaisons,
why team and supervisors for
effective onboarding.
May
2017 and
ongoing
Ali Timpone, HR
Manager
Survey results, survey
participation, and turnover
data.
Reduce implicit bias in hiring. Supervisors will review
applications without names.
May
2017 and
moving
forward
Ali Timpone, HR
Manager
Increase interviews of
candidates of color.
This has been done in
facilities maintenance and
inspections in 2016.
Explore and implement
opportunities to hire candidates
of color.
Work with high schools to
allow for students to explore
city government. Expand
alternative pathways to
government hiring. Use police
trainee program and
internships as guide.
Sept
2016 –
ongoing
Ali Timpone, HR
Manager
Additional career path
options/positions.
PD trainee program in
process 2016 & 2017, # in
program with conditional
offer.
Educate staff by convening small
group discussion on for inclusion
of minority and wbe (women
business enterprise).
Finance Division will facilitate
discussion and provide tools
End of
2017
Mark
Ebensteiner,
Finance
Number of documented
contracts awarded to
minority or wbe under
adopted procedures.
Explore ways to reduce implicit
bias in selection of board and
commission members.
Melissa will suggest removing
names from applications.
2017-
2018
Melissa
Kennedy, City
Clerk
Track data on number of
non-white commissioners
apply, interview and
appointed.
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 3)
Title: Advancing Racial Equity Update and Council Discussion Page 9
DEPARTMENT ACTION PLAN: Community Development
Page | 1 June 16, 2017
Outcome & Actions Who & What Timeline Lead &
Accountability Performance Measure Progress Report
Increased use of business
resources geared towards
minority and women owned
businesses. Explore other
resources for minority and
women owned businesses.
Engage minority and women
owned businesses to identify
needs for potential financing,
partner with banks, and
connection to targeted
organizations, and effective
marketing to minority and
women owned business
owners.
4th
quarter
2017
Julie Number of businesses
helped or expanded, new
programs offered
resources, the creation of
new business resources
Increase opportunities to provide
affordable housing for diverse
populations at all income levels.
Increase affordable housing
rental units
Increase landlord participation
in housing choice voucher
program
Recruitment of developers for
affordable housing
Create/implement shallow
rent subsidy program
Explore preservation of NOAH
strategies and tools
Continue to monitor
inclusionary housing policy
2017 and
beyond
Michele Increase total number of
AH units in SLP
Increase total number of
landlords participating in
HCV program
Recruit developers for AH.
Implementation of shallow
rent subsidy program.
Empower people of color to be
engaged in community decisions
Identify nontraditional
outreach methods, expand
options for engagement to
reach more minorities, reduce
barriers.
2017 and
beyond
Sean Documentation via staff
identification of impact of
changes on participation in
process.
Measured through
collection of demographic
data and survey of
satisfaction in the process.
Track number of methods
used to reach out, track
number of people reached
out to.
Identify diverse individuals to
apply for boards and
commissions.
Provide information on
opportunities on city wide
boards and commissions.
Q4 2017
and
beyond
Department
Heads
Data collected by city clerk
of those applied,
interviewed, and selected.
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 3)
Title: Advancing Racial Equity Update and Council Discussion Page 10
DEPARTMENT ACTION PLAN: Community Development
Page | 2 June 16, 2017
Outcome & Actions Who & What Timeline Lead &
Accountability Performance Measure Progress Report
Compile demographic data for
consistent city wide use
Provide consistent racial data
across all city departments
Q4 2017
and
beyond
Meg A working data set for
distribution to
departments. Update
annually and adjust based
on department needs.
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 3)
Title: Advancing Racial Equity Update and Council Discussion Page 11
DEPARTMENT ACTION PLAN: Engineering
Page | 1 June 16, 2017
Outcome & Actions Who & What Timeline Lead &
Accountability Performance Measure Progress Report
Engage with all races on a project •Approach MAC for
feedback on the How
•Understand demographic
data for each project using
census data
•Attend neighborhood
meetings/ NNO in
neighborhoods where a
project is scheduled the
following year
3rd Qtr
2017 &
beyond
Director •Number of people at
meetings
•Demographics at
meetings compared to
neighborhood
•Meeting on available
GIS data on
demographics- June
2017
Review Capital Improvement
Plan (CIP) with Race Equity lens
•Overlay CIP on census race
data to see that there is
not an unbalance.
•Review CIP annually
4th Qtr
2017 &
beyond
Director •Road condition in
pavement areas
•% of sidewalk system
gaps in pavement areas
•CIP is condition driven,
not complaint driven
•New policy to not assess
for improvements has
made CIP more
equitable
Increase use of DBE contractors
DBEs are minority and female
owned businesses
•Outreach to groups to
discuss upcoming projects
•Develop a list of DBE
contractors to solicit bids
for projects under $100K
4th Qtr
2017 &
beyond
Director •Number of contracts
signed with DBEs
•Number of DBEs
bidding
•Value of contracts
awarded to DBEs
Broaden the candidate pool for
Engineering positions to include
more people of color
•On the job training- Hiring
interns with intent to train
•Participate in career fairs
1st Qtr
2018 &
beyond
Joe Shamla •Number of applicants
•Number of events
attended
•Number hired
Maintain Multi-modal access
during construction projects for
all users. (transit, sidewalk and
bikeway)
•When multi-modal system
is disrupted, minimize
duration and impact
•Accommodate at the
neighborhood level
•Adjust to ensure equity
April
2017 &
beyond
Jack Sullivan •Maintain service within
reasonable distance
•Bus detour for Texas on
Sumter
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 3)
Title: Advancing Racial Equity Update and Council Discussion Page 12
DEPARTMENT ACTION PLAN: Fire
Page | 1 June 16, 2017
Outcome & Actions Who & What Timeline Lead &
Accountability Performance Measure Progress Report
WORKFORCE INITIATIVE
Outcome: Workforce should
more closely reflect the diversity
in our Community.
Actions: Develop pathways to
success for underrepresented
groups.
Pathway 1: Leveraging the
PTFF recruiting and
development process to
increase the # of people of
color in our workforce
Pathway 2: Develop
employment pathways for
people of color within
alternative EMS service
delivery (partnership with
HCMC & Minneapolis Fire
Dept.)
Pathway 3: Create internship
opportunities & non-sworn
part time positions for
people of color as potential
“stepping stones” for entry
into sworn, PT & career
positions.
Pathway 4: Develop a plan to
create awareness of our
Racial Equity plan with the
current fire commission
members.
Summer
2017 &
ongoing
Winter
2018 &
ongoing
Summer
2018 &
ongoing
Searle/Helberg
Searle/Helberg
Wolff/Koering
Track applications,
interview and hire data for
persons of color
Track applications,
interview and hire data for
persons of color
Track applications,
interview and hire data for
persons of color
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 3)
Title: Advancing Racial Equity Update and Council Discussion Page 13
DEPARTMENT ACTION PLAN: Fire
Page | 2 June 16, 2017
CONTRACTOR WEALTH
CREATION
Outcome: Contractor/Vendor
wealth creation make up should
more closely reflect the diversity
in our Community.
Actions: Increase vendor
diversity and wealth creation.
Identify current women &
minority (W&M) owned
vendor relationships and
compare to non W&M
vendor relationships to
determine nature and extent
of the gap.
Develop a plan to identify
W&M owned business to
increase the racial diversity of
the department spend.
Summer
2017
Fall 2017
Wolff/Rosholt
Koering/Wolff
Tracking Women &
Minority business that we
currently contract with…
BOARD/COMMISSION
DIVERSITY
Outcome & Actions : Identify
diverse individuals to apply for
boards & commissions.
Staff to partner with
commissioners &
stakeholders to recruit
persons of color for city
board, commissions and
volunteer opportunities.
Fall 2017
&
Ongoing
Koering Collect data on recruits,
applicants, interviews and
selection
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
Outcome: Improve fire and
home safety awareness in our
high risk populations, diverse
neighborhoods and
communities.
Actions: Target community
engagement/fire prevention at
high risk populations, diverse
neighborhoods & communities.
Develop messaging and
delivery methods for diverse
populations.
Partner with PD on their
neighborhood engagement
focusing on increased
connections with diverse
communities.
Increase visibility &
community engagement with
proactive EMS bike patrols on
trails, through neighborhoods
and city parks with a focus on
race equity and inclusion.
Fall 2017
Summer
2017
Winter
2018
Smith/Wolff
Koering/Smith
Wolff/Powers
Documents are done
# of neighborhood
meetings in diverse
neighborhoods
# of contacts with persons
of color
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 3)
Title: Advancing Racial Equity Update and Council Discussion Page 14
DEPARTMENT ACTION PLAN: Information Resources
Page | 1 June 16, 2017
Outcome & Actions Who & What Timeline Lead &
Accountability Performance Measure Progress Report
Broaden the candidate pool for IT
positions to include more people
of color
•Develop an internship
program within
information technology
(IT) to introduce people of
color to careers in both IT
and local government.
•Budget item for 2018
•Partner with technical
schools to identify
applicants
Q4 2017
/ Q1
2018
ongoing
Jason Huber •Understand the
challenges for
recruiting people of
color to IT/government
roles
•Complete outreach by
December 31, 2017
•Application screening
•Hire starting Q1 2018
Identify diverse individuals to
apply for boards and
commissions, including
Telecommunications Advisory
Commission (TAC)
•Recruit diverse applicants
to apply for TAC & other
commissions
•Partner with school
district to identify student
reps for commissions
June
2017-
ongoing
Jacque Larson
and IR staff in
partnership with
Administrative
Services
•Contact Nexus
Community Partners to
assist with
training/recruitment of
potential boards &
commissions members
•Determine # applied,
interviewed,
appointed, and
successful to measure
progress
Increase racial equity in
purchasing
•Consider opportunities to
use minority or women-
owned businesses for
purchases.
Q4 2017 Clint Pires, in
partnership with
Finance
•Identify sources
•Communicate
opportunities to
minority or women-
owned businesses
•Track increases in
purchasing from
minority or women-
owned businesses
Continue to develop St. Louis
Park as a technology connected
community via fiber to the
premise (FTTP) infrastructure by
encouraging providers to place
service in low-income, racially
•Work with providers to
ensure racially equitable
distribution across the
city.
•Ensure people of color can
access FTTP (households,
businesses, non-profits).
May
2017-
ongoing
Clint Pires •Number of homes and
businesses passed with
fiber.
•Premises in
underserved portions
of the city passed.
•US Internet to complete
FTTH at Era on Excelsior
(formerly Meadowbrook
Manor) by 2Q 2017
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 3)
Title: Advancing Racial Equity Update and Council Discussion Page 15
DEPARTMENT ACTION PLAN: Information Resources
Page | 2 June 16, 2017
Outcome & Actions Who & What Timeline Lead &
Accountability Performance Measure Progress Report
diverse and/or historically
underserved portions of the city.
•FTTP adoption rate
(total and in
underserved portions
of the city)
•Promote city wifi
locations to people of
color as places to
connect
Improved, more complete
delivery of city mail to residents,
especially those in multiple
dwelling units (MDUs). Ability to
target communications more to
various areas of the city in order
to reach communities of color
effectively.
•Work with community
development on compiling
demographic information
for the city to allow for
targeted mailing
•Meet with post office to
understand delivery
methods of bulk mail,
especially to MDUs. How
much discretion do
individual carriers have,
and how much influence
can the city exert for
change?
•Meet with MDUs via St.
Louis Park Area Rental
Coalition (SPARC) to
gather information on
how mail is received.
•Continue working to
refine the city mailing
database.
•Consider use of an
electronic delivery
method similar to tool
used by school district
4Q 2017-
ongoing
Jacque Larson
and Clint Pires
•Determine cost-benefit
of increasing mailing
effectiveness to reach
people of color.
•Determine if mailing is
improved via anecdotal
evidence (ie asking
residents,
management, etc. if
they are receiving mail)
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 3)
Title: Advancing Racial Equity Update and Council Discussion Page 16
DEPARTMENT ACTION PLAN: Inspections
Page | 1 June 16, 2017
Outcome & Actions Who & What Timeline Lead &
Accountability Performance Measure Progress Report
Work Force Equity – to more
reflect the community we serve
Review and update job
descriptions to be open and
inviting to people of color.
Determine where to advertise
jobs to recruit people of color
Summer
2017 and
ongoing
Brian Hoffman Document and update by
tracking data during the
application, interviewing
and hiring process
Increase racial equity in contract
procurement
Target and use minority and
woman business enterprise
(WBE) owned
businesses/responsive bids
Summer
2017 and
ongoing
Rutager West Record minority and WBE
quotes, received and
secured
Multiple Language “Way Finder”
at city hall for diverse population
Diverse populations coming
into city hall can easily get
information/directions for city
services, locations and general
information by selecting their
language
Start
1/1/2018;
placement
2019
Brian Hoffman Include in 2018 budget to
determine what cost are
associated and install by
2019
Exploring service delivery
opportunity for diverse
customers
Many minorities work hours
that conflict with our work
schedule. Offering extended
hours of operation would
provide more services to the
diverse community.
7/1/2018
and
ongoing
Ann Boettcher
and Dave Skallet
Survey customers ;
schedule and track
participants
Develop inspector trainee
program to provide pathways for
underrepresented groups
Develop employment
pathways for people of color
in the department
Winter
2018 and
ongoing
Brian Hoffman 2018 Budget and data
tracking
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 3)
Title: Advancing Racial Equity Update and Council Discussion Page 17
DEPARTMENT ACTION PLAN: Operations & Recreation
Page | 1 June 16, 2017
Outcome & Actions Who & What Timeline Lead &
Accountability Performance Measure Progress Report
Increase Race Equity in contract
procurement
Identify women and minority
business list and utilize when
working on projects
2nd half
of 2017
and
beyond
Lead: Jay Hall
Also Supervisors
from all
divisions
*List created by each
division and shared
*keep track of those
contracted
Broaden candidate pool to
include more people of color
*Review job descriptions to
remove barriers to applicants
of color
*Determine where to market
and find applicants of color
*Expand marketing so jobs
can be posted in new areas to
recruit people of color
2017 and
beyond
Lead: Jason
West
*Update job descriptions
*Track applicants,
interviews and hires
In process
Increase organic collection for
people of color
*Determine demographic
breakdown in current organics
program
*Translate into other
languages (Spanish, Somali
and Russian)
End of
2017 and
beyond
Lead: Emily
Barker
*participation rates go up
* Track participation rates
in people of color
Train staff frequently interacting
with the public on how to use the
language line to better serve
residents who speak other
languages
Accommodate the needs of
non-english speaking peoole
End of
2017 and
beyond
Lead: Jason
Eisold
*All identified staff trained
by the end of 2017
Review CIP through Race Equity
lens
*Accumulate demographic
data
*Review data to ensure we
are serving all equitably
2018 and
beyond
Lead: Rick
Beane
*obtain and track data on
where we are investing
money for projects relative
to demographics
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 3)
Title: Advancing Racial Equity Update and Council Discussion Page 18
DEPARTMENT ACTION PLAN: Police
Page | 1 June 16, 2017
Outcome & Actions Who & What Timeline Lead &
Accountability
Performance
Measure Progress Report
Diversify workforce to reflect
the community we serve.
Upward mobility opportunities.
Department-wide recruiting,
•Mentorship Program:
Kraayenbrink
•Internships: Garland
•CSO Cadets: Afton
•Police Trainee Program
•Explorers/Reserves
May
2017 &
Ongoing
Chief Harcey, HR,
Afton – CSO Cadet,
Garland, DC –
Mentorship,
Outreach –
Internships
Tracking success:
applicants, interviewed,
hired (data from HR).
Retention: HR creating
plan for this.
•Two Police
Trainees currently
enrolled in
Pathways to
Policing program.
•Three interns
hired, all with
diverse
backgrounds.
Community Engagement:
Building Trust
Cops N’ Kids Shopping, Fishing
with a Cop, Basketball in the
Park; Citizens Academy; New
Americans Academy;
Neighborhood Meetings; Iftar
Continue Harcey,
Kraayenbrink
Data on participation
and officers involved.
•Two sessions of
Fishing with a Cop
have been
completed.
•Applications being
taken for Citizen
Academy. Citizen
Academy begins in
Sept.
•Iftar completed.
•A couple of weeks
left for Basketball
in the Park
Boards & Commissions •MAC Strategic Planning
•Identify & encourage
diverse applicants
May
2017 &
Ongoing
Harcey;
•MAC: Afton
•HRC:
Breanna
•PAC: Harcey
Statistical data •MAC Strategic
planning process
completed. Now in
implementation
phase.
Catering for events & training to
provide culturally diverse food
and to invest in locally, female,
and/or minority-owned
businesses
Outreach Team, Training
Coordinator
Continue Kraayenbrink;
•Afton
•Lincoln
List of events, purchases •Culturally diverse
food options
served up at MAC
Acquire and Utilize Community
Engagement Vehicle
Outreach Team researching,
planning, acquiring, and
outfitting a vehicle to reach
2018 Harcey;
•Outreach
Team
Purchased and ready •Renderings
complete
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 3)
Title: Advancing Racial Equity Update and Council Discussion Page 19
DEPARTMENT ACTION PLAN: Police
Page | 2 June 16, 2017
Outcome & Actions Who & What Timeline Lead &
Accountability
Performance
Measure Progress Report
community members not
currently being reached
•Currently being
priced and spec’d
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 3)
Title: Advancing Racial Equity Update and Council Discussion Page 20
Advancing Race Equity – City of St. Louis Park
Toolkit for policies, programs, activities, projects and service delivery
With the help of this Advancing Race Equity Toolkit, we seek to increase opportunities for all by ending racial disparities
internal to the city and by strengthening city services and resident engagement through inclusion of all racial groups.
Every department, division and employee has an impact in advancing race equity
in all the work the city does, now and in the future.
This toolkit is designed to:
•Ensure that the city’s actions and decisions are geared towards racially equitable outcomes
•Help city staff to understand the root causes of existing inequities within the city, to engage people of color in
decision-making and to take actions that can improve inequities
•Collect and analyze data to identify existing racial disparities and consequences
•Identify workable, sustainable strategies to promote racial equity within the City of St. Louis Park
•Monitor and measure progress on racial equity and provide feedback
How do I use this toolkit? Use this as a tool routinely for all current and future city activities, programs, policies,
projects, initiatives, service delivery and budgeting.
Why are we using this toolkit to advance race equity? To achieve racial equity, it’s important that outreach, review and
decision making is deliberate and intentional. Using this toolkit helps review the process for any plan, policy, program,
initiative, procedure, service delivery and budget to reach a better outcome.
Start here: ADVANCING RACE EQUITY TOOLKIT
Step 1: Describe the policy, plan, program, initiative, budget issue etc. under consideration.
ü What are the desired results and outcomes (within our organization and the community)?
ü What/who does this proposal/item have the ability to affect? Some examples are:
children/youth community engagement contracting equity
criminal justice economic development education
environment food access and affordability government practices
health housing human services
infrastructure jobs parks and recreation
planning/development transportation workforce equity
low income residents people of color immigrants
(turn over & consider all of the following in your work on the policy, plan, program, initiative, budget issue etc.)
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 3)
Title: Advancing Racial Equity Update and Council Discussion Page 21
Step 2: Collect relevant data.
ü Review how data was collected and what the data tells you.
ü Will this have impacts in a specific neighborhood or geographic area? What are the racial demographics of
those living in the area?
ü What does the population data tell you about existing racial inequities? What does it tell you about causes or
factors influencing racial inequities?
ü Are there data gaps? What additional data would be helpful in analyzing this? If there are data gaps, how can
you obtain better data?
Step 3: Engage neighborhoods and residents.
ü Review how neighborhoods and residents were engaged in the development process and if there were missed
opportunities to expand and engage others.
ü Who are the most affected community members who are concerned with or have experience related to this?
ü How have you involved these community members in the development of this?
ü What has your engagement process told you about the burdens or benefits for different groups?
ü What has your engagement process told you about the factors that produce or perpetuate racial inequity related
to this?
Step 4: Consider how your initiative impacts racial equity.
ü Given what you have learned about stakeholder involvement, how will this increase or decrease racial equity?
Who would benefit from or be burdened by this?
ü What are the potential unintended consequences? What are the ways in which your proposal/project/program
could be modified to enhance positive impacts or reduce negative impacts?
ü Are there complementary strategies that you can implement? What are the ways in which existing partnerships
could be strengthened to maximize impact in the community? How will you partner with stakeholders for long-
term positive change?
ü Are the impacts aligned with your community outcomes defined in Step #1?
Step 5: Describe the plan for implementation.
ü Is your plan realistic?
ü Is your plan adequately funded? Resourced with personnel? Resourced with mechanisms to ensure successful
implementation and enforcement? Resourced to ensure on-going data collection, pubic reporting, and
community engagement? If the answer to any of these questions is NO, what resources or actions are needed?
ü How will you market or roll out this initiative so that those who may benefit are aware?
Step 6: Ensure accountability, communication and evaluation of results.
ü How will the impacts be documented and evaluated? Are the anticipated outcomes being achieved? Are you
having impact on the community?
ü What are your messages and communication strategies to help advance racial equity?
ü How often will you check in to review if outcomes are being achieved? Who will be responsible for this?
ü How will you continue to partner and deepen relationships with communities to make sure your work to advance
racial equity is working and sustainable for the long-haul?
Result: Review has been made and changes, as needed, have been incorporated.
We continue to review and adjust to advance racial equity.
June 16, 2017
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 3)
Title: Advancing Racial Equity Update and Council Discussion Page 22
City of St. Louis Park Demographics
Census Block Groups by Race: Percent of Nonwhite Population
Eliot
Aquila
Fern Hill
Lenox
Wolfe Park
Oak Hill
BlackstoneWestwood Hills
Birchwood
Elmwood
Triangle
Sorensen
Creekside
Bronx ParkCedar Manor
Cobblecrest
Lake Forest
Texa Tonka
WillowPark
Minikahda Vista
Browndale
South Oak Hill
Brooklawns
Brookside
Meadowbrook
Eliot View
Shelard Park
Cedarhurst
Minne- haha
PennsylvaniaPark
KilmerPond
Crest-view
AmhurstWest-dale
MinikahdaOaks
2010 Census Block Groups
Percent NonWhite
4% - 8%
9% - 14%
15% - 21%
22% - 37%
38% - 56%
Neighborhood Boundary
0 0.5 10.25
MilesFOR INTERNAL USE ONLY
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 3)
Title: Advancing Racial Equity Update and Council Discussion Page 23
TED Talks - Advancing Racial Equity
Hosted by SLP Racial Equity Liaisons
Control+Click on title to play
Date/Time Location/Host Description
June 21,
2017
9 a.m.
Fire Station 1
Steve Powers
Paul Rosholt
The Danger of a Single Story
~ Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie ~
Our lives and our cultures are composed of many overlapping
stories. Novelist Chimamanda Adichie tells the story of how
she found her authentic cultural voice – and warns that if we
hear only a single story about another person or country, we
risk a critical misunderstanding. Helpful in sharing the biases
and ideas we may have of others. Explains how to not buy in
to a single story of a group of people. Adichie is well known
African writer. Length: 18:42 mins.
July 19,
2017
1 p.m.
City Hall
Community Room
(1st Floor)
Ann Boettcher
Joe Shamla
How to Overcome Our Biases
Walk Boldly Toward Them
~ Verna Myers ~
Helps people embrace their biases and then gives them an
action path to deal with these biases. Who is in your circle?
Who is missing? Questions that actually could very easily be
turned into a conversation for staff. Length: 17:49 mins.
August 24,
2017
3:30 p.m.
Police
Department
Mike Harcey
Siar Nadem
Don Lewis
Afton Martens
What Does My Headscarf Mean To You?
~ Yassmin Abdel-Magied ~
What do you think when you look at this speaker? Well, think
again. (And then again.) In this funny, honest, empathetic talk,
Yassmin challenges us to look beyond our initial perceptions,
and to open doors to new ways of supporting others.
Length: 14:02 mins.
September 18,
2017
11 a.m.
City Hall
Community Room
(1st Floor)
Amy Fokuo
Sean Walther
The Little Problem I Had Renting a House
~ James A White ~
53 years ago, James A. White Sr. joined the US Air Force. But
as an African American man, he had to go to shocking lengths
to find a place for his young family to live nearby. He tells this
powerful story about the lived experience of “everyday racism”
–how it echoes today in the way he’s had to teach his
grandchildren to interact with police. Goes along well with our
first film and talks about the journey. Length: 13:53 mins.
October 13,
2017
8:30 a.m.
MSC
Emily Barker
Rick Beane
Jeff Wolff
A prosecutors vision for a better justice system
~ Adam Foss~
When a kid commits a crime, the US justice system has a
choice: prosecute to the full extent of the law or take a step
back and ask if saddling young people with criminal records is
the right thing to do every time. Adam Foss, a prosecutor with
the Suffolk County District Attorney’s office in Boston makes
this case for a reformed justice system that replaces wrath with
opportunity, changing people’s lives for the better instead of
ruining them. Length: 16 mins.
November 15,
2017
2 p.m.
City Hall
Community Room
(1st Floor)
Ali Timpone
Laura Smith
Mark Ebensteiner
Color Blind or Color Brave?
~ Mellody Hobson ~
The subject of race can be very touchy. As finance executive
Mellody Hobson says, it’s a “conversational third rail.” But, she
says, that’s exactly why we need to start talking about it. In
this engaging, persuasive talk, Hobson makes the case that
speaking openly about race – and particularly about diversity
in hiring – makes for better businesses and a better society.
Does a nice job of talking about how hard it is to talk about
the subject of race. Length: 14:14 mins.
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 3)
Title: Advancing Racial Equity Update and Council Discussion Page 24
2016 Annual Report
Board or Commission: Human Rights Commission
I.2016 Goals and Key Initiatives: Provide a progress report on your 2016 goals and list the
most significant activities undertaken in 2016.
Our goals for 2016 were 1) host 2 “Coffee and Culture Chats” 2) Continue our collaboration
with the Multicultural Advisory Committee (“MAC”) and Police Advisory Committee
(“PAC”) in hopes that we can create an event that furthers goals from all three group’s 2016
Work Plans, and 3) host a food-based event that would allow us to highlight cultural
traditions and ethnic cuisines.
We achieved our first goal, hosting Coffee and Culture Chats on May 10 and October 27,
2016. Our May 10 event did not have a specific theme. Instead, we used the opportunity to
have an open-ended conversation with the community about race and equity in St. Louis
Park. The event was facilitated by Savannah Curtin, who was the Chair of the Human Rights
Commission at the time of the event. Our October 27 event was a conversation focused on
the “Black Lives Matter” and “Thank You SLP Police” lawn signs that had appeared in the
community. The event was co-facilitated by Katherine Arnold, who was the Chair of the
Human Rights Commission at the time of the event, and Angela Martinez Grande, a member
of the MAC.
We also achieved our second goal. On July 19th, the MAC, PAC, and HRC collaborated
with the Friends of the Arts “Our Town Sings” event. All three groups had tables set up with
representatives and information from each group. We were able to meet with community
members and get the word out about work being done in our community and opportunities
to get involved.
We were not able to complete our third goal in 2016. In part, this is attributable to the
considerable change over in the Commissioners sitting on the HRC. Due to a variety of
reasons, including health concerns, term expirations, and one individual moving out of St.
Louis Park, more than half of the seats on the HRC were turned over in 2016. Although the
HRC remains interested in hosting food-based events for the community, the reconstituted
HRC decided to focus its efforts on continued collaboration with the MAC and creating an
ongoing dialogue with the City Council regarding the HRC’s rights and responsibilities as a
Commission.
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 3)
Title: Advancing Racial Equity Update and Council Discussion Page 25
2016 Annual Report
Board or Commission: Human Rights Commission
II. 2017 Goals: List your board/commission’s most important goals (up to 3) for 2017. These
goals should be statements that reflect the board/commission’s highest priorities, which may
or may not change from year-to-year.
a. Continue to work with the City Council to identify areas where the HRC can and should
provide advice and input to the City Council in the early stages of city projects, and
follow through on findings.
b. Continue to host community events to gather information about residents’ concerns and
priorities for the city with respect to Human Rights issues, and to engage in community
discussions about such issues, particularly with respect to racial equity.
c. Engage with the community and the City Council in carrying out the city’s racial equity
initiative.
III. 2017 Key Initiatives/Activities: For each goal listed above, list 1-2 key initiatives or
activities that the Board/Commission will working on in 2017 that will help make progress
toward that particular goal.
a. Continue to work with the City Council to identify areas where the HRC can and should
provide advice and input to the City Council in the early stages of city projects, and
follow through on findings.
For this goal, the HRC and the City Council have already taken action in 2017,
beginning with a joint meeting that was held on January 23. The HRC will be discussing
that meeting and coming up with a strategy for continuing to move forward at its next
regular monthly meeting on February 21. The HRC anticipates having additional
updates available for the Council when its annual report is presented on February 27.
b. Continue to host community events to gather information about residents’ concerns and
priorities for the city with respect to Human Rights issues, and to engage in community
discussions about such issues, particularly with respect to racial equity.
The HRC has already begun its work on this goal for 2017, hosting a screening of the
documentary “13th” at the Lenox Community Center on February 1. The screening was
followed by a discussion of the film.
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 3)
Title: Advancing Racial Equity Update and Council Discussion Page 26
2016 Annual Report
Board or Commission: Human Rights Commission
We also have a Coffee and Culture Chat scheduled for March 22. The HRC will be
identifying dates for additional future events.
c. Engage with the community and the City Council in carrying out the city’s racial equity
initiative.
The HRC is awaiting further information from the city regarding actions the HRC can
take to assist the city in this initiative.
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 3)
Title: Advancing Racial Equity Update and Council Discussion Page 27
Meeting: Study Session
Meeting Date: September 11, 2017
Discussion Item: 4
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Highway 169 Mobility Study
RECOMMENDED ACTION: City Councilmember Brausen and staff wish to discuss the
elements of the Highway 169 Mobility Study relating to St. Louis Park and provide direction on
the alternatives provided.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council support the following recommendations?
• Support Alternative #2, Highway 55 route, for the Bus Rapid Transit/MnPASS in this corridor.
• Consider additional alternatives for the TH169 at Cedar Lake Road interchange, possibly with
options at Minnetonka Boulevard.
SUMMARY: The Minnesota Department of Transportation, Scott County, and the Metropolitan
Council initiated the Highway 169 Mobility Study in September 2015. A consultant was hired to
conduct a process to evaluate long term, cost-effective options for improving transit service and
reducing congestion on Highway 169 in the southwest metro area. The study is focused on
assessing the viability of Bus Rapid Transit, MnPASS Express Lanes, and lower cost/ high benefit
spot mobility improvements. The study also evaluated the potential for intercity bus service
improvements between Mankato and the Twin Cities. It should be noted that funding for these
alternatives has not been identified. Since funding has not been identified, the implementation
date of these concepts is also unknown. Councilmember Brausen served on the Policy Advisory
Committee for this study.
Considerations for St. Louis Park (see attached maps)
For SLP, there are two routes for BRT and MnPASS being considered – I-394 or Highway 55:
• Alternative 1 - BRT from Marschall Road (in Scott County) to downtown Minneapolis via
Highway 169 and I-394 and MnPASS between Marschall Road and TH 55.
• Alternative 2 - BRT from Marschall Road to downtown Minneapolis via TH 55 and MnPASS
between Marschall Road and TH 55.
In addition, alternatives for the Cedar Lake Road/Highway169 interchange are being considered.
These alternatives are detailed further in the Discussion portion of the report, and on the attached
maps. Staff and the consultant for the study will be present to review the concepts.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: At this time there have not been any requests
for City financial participation.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged
community.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Maps Showing Alternatives
Prepared by: Joseph Shamla, Sr. Engineering Project Manager
Meg McMonigal, Principal Planner
Reviewed by: Debra Heiser, Engineering Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 4) Page 2
Title: Highway 169 Mobility Study
DISCUSSION
St. Louis Park is a partner in the Highway 169 Mobility Study, along with other cities along the
corridor and the other public agencies as noted below. Council Member Brausen is the city’s Policy
Advisory Committee (PAC) member, and staff on the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) are
Joe Shamla, Senior Project Engineer, and Meg McMonigal, Principal Planner.
Partners in Study
• Communities along the study area
• Federal Highway Administration
• Hennepin County
• Highway 169 Corridor Coalition
• Metro Transit
• Metropolitan Council
• Minnesota Valley Transit Authority
• MnDOT (Metro District and District 7)
• Scott County
• Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community
• SouthWest Transit
STUDY BACKGROUND:
The scope of the Highway 169 Mobility Study includes assessment of existing traffic and transit
conditions, development of managed lane and transit alternatives, and evaluating and prioritizing
alternatives. The evaluation includes travel demand forecasting, market analysis, travel time
reliability evaluation, traffic operations analysis, and benefit-cost. The study will ultimately
recommend a feasible set of improvements along Highway 169 and an implementation plan for
their phased deployment.
Purpose and Need
The project goals and evaluation criteria were established by the PMT, TAC, and PAC early in the
study, as part of the development of the project purpose and need statement. The project goals are:
• Improve access to local and regional destinations, activity centers, and employment
concentrations;
• Provide better mobility in the corridor and options to avoid congestion;
• Improve the attractiveness of transit to serve more people in the corridor;
• Provide a high long-term return on the transportation investment;
• Prioritize service to existing transit-supportive areas and to those committed to
implementing development patterns that support transit service; and
• Preserve and enhance the quality of the built and natural environments.
The Highway 169 Mobility Study included two tasks:
Task 1 - identify and evaluate cost-effective options for improving transit and reducing
congestion on Hwy 169 between Hwy 41 in Shakopee and Hwy 55 in Golden Valley. The
study focuses on:
1. Highway Bus Rapid Transit (BRT)
2. MnPASS Express Lanes
3. Lower cost/high benefit improvements along the highway such as adding auxiliary
lanes, turn lanes, modifying interchanges and creating ways for buses to get through
traffic more efficiently
Task 2 - analyze bus connections and study the potential for expanded Intercity Bus Service
along the Hwy 169 corridor between Mankato and the Twin Cities.
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 4) Page 3
Title: Highway 169 Mobility Study
What is Highway Bus Rapid Transit (BRT)?
Highway BRT is bus service that travels on the highway and stops only at designated stations right
on or immediately adjacent to the highway. Highway BRT operates frequently from early in the
morning to late at night.
A 2014 Highway Transitway Corridor Study indicated that when compared to other highways
across the region, Hwy 169 between downtown Minneapolis and Marschall Road in Shakopee is
an ideal candidate for Highway BRT.
What are MnPASS Express Lanes?
MnPASS is a state transportation system that provides a congestion-free travel option during peak-
drive times on highways with high levels of congestion. MnPASS Express Lanes give all
commuters a reliable travel choice that saves them time, increases a highway’s capacity to move
more people through a corridor, and allows faster, more reliable public bus service. MnPASS
Express lanes are on highways and are dedicated to buses, carpools, (2+ people) motorcyclists or
for solo motorists who pay a fee during peak-drive times. All motorists may use the lanes outside
of peak-drive times.
CONSIDERATIONS FOR ST. LOUIS PARK:
A. BRT/MnPASS Alternatives (see attached maps):
For SLP, there are two alternative BRT and MnPASS routes being considered - I-394 or
Highway 55:
• Alternative 1 - BRT from Marschall Road (in Scott County) to downtown Minneapolis
via Highway 169 and I-394 and MnPASS between Marschall Road and TH 55.
• Alternative 2 - BRT from Marschall Road to downtown Minneapolis via TH 55 and
MnPASS between Marschall Road and TH 55.
B. Cedar Lake Road/169 Intersection Alternatives (see attached maps):
Four alternatives have been looked at:
• 17 – widen Cedar Lake Road bridge, add new crossover bridges and entrances and exits
• 17A - widen Cedar Lake Road bridge, add new crossover bridges and entrances and exits
• 17B - widen Cedar Lake Road bridge, add new crossover bridges and entrances and exits
• 17C – widen Cedar Lake Road bridge, add frontage road, add bridge on Cove Drive to the
south, eliminate direct access to 169 south from Cedar Lake Road and direct access to
Cedar Lake Road when northbound. Access would be via Minnetonka Boulevard and the
frontage road.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
A. BRT/MnPASS Option – I394 or Highway 55 to downtown?
I394 has very good bus service in St. Louis Park now. Adding more buses to the roadway will not
provide much in the way of better service; however it would add more vehicles. Placing the BRT
buses on Highway 55 provides an alternate route of transit for the sub-regional area, would work
to spread out transit traffic, and serves more people without access to rapid transit in and out of
downtown. Having good transit options on two east-west corridors in the area provides more
alternatives for everyone.
Staff believes the Highway 55 BRT route would encourage more transit ridership and provide
more alternatives for St. Louis Park, Golden Valley and communities to the west.
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 4) Page 4
Title: Highway 169 Mobility Study
B. Cedar Lake Road
All of the options shown on Cedar Lake Road are complex, adding a lot of infrastructure. The
many new crossover bridges and new access points are likely very expensive. In addition they all
would have impacts on the surrounding neighborhoods. Option 17 C also removes direct access
to Highway 169 from Cedar Lake Road in the northbound and southbound direction.
In looking at the potential for more ridership, the consultant shows there would be very low
ridership at the Cedar Lake Road bus stop - fewer than 200 boardings per day. It is a very complex
and expensive undertaking which changes the neighborhoods in the area with little benefit.
One alternative, though not a part of this study, would be to consider a BRT station at Minnetonka
Boulevard instead of Cedar Lake Road, should future study be undertaken.
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 4)
Title: Highway 169 Mobility Study Page 5
17
SEGMENT 7/SEGMENT 8
SEGMENT 8
DESIGN FILE:3/30/2017 9:26:35 PMPLOTTED BY:J:\Jobs\64426 TH 169 Managed Lane-BRT Study\TechProd\Work\CADD\Plan Sheets\MnPass\64426_17.dgnpglaserPEN TABLE:MnDOT Pen Table (Color).tblPLOTTED ON:SHEET
OF
TH 169 TRANSITWAY AND MNPASS
MNDOT TH 169 STUDY
C O U N C I L
MNPASS CONCEPT
DRAFT TH 169 -
200
SCALE IN FEET
21
CONSTRUCT CONCRETE WALK
CONSTRUCT/EXPAND BRIDGE
CONSTRUCT MEDIAN BARRIER
CONSTRUCT MNPASS LANE
CONSTRUCT SHOULDER
CONSTRUCT ROADWAY
EXISTING BRIDGE
INPLACE SHOULDER
INPLACE ROADWAY ??FUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMH??FUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHPEDPEDPEDFFFFPEDPBW PEDPEDTOP PEDTOP PEDVLTTOP PEDTOP PED?????FUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMH?????FUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMH??FUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMH??FUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHPEDPEDPEDFFFFPEDPBW PEDPEDTOP PEDTOP PEDVLTTOP PEDTOP PEDUU?????FUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMH?????FUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHMI
N
N
E
T
O
N
K
A
B
L
V
D
12' THRU12' THRU12' MNPASS12' MNPASS
12' THRU12' THRU
VAR. RAMP
12' AUX
12' AUX
12' AUX
8
SEGMENT7
SEGMENT
12' SHLD
12' THRU
12' THRU
12' MNPASS
12' MNPASS
12' THRU
12' THRU
12' BUFFER
12' SHLD
12' THRU
12' THRU
12' MNPASS
12' MNPASS
12' THRU
12' THRU
12' SHLD16' RA
M
P16' RAMP
16' RAMP
12' BUFFER
12' SHLD
12
' SHLD
12
' THRU
12
' THRU
12
' MNPASS
12
' MNPASS
12
' THRU
12
' THRU
12
' BUFFER
12
' BUFFER
12
' SHLD
JORDAN AVE S
W 28TH STCOVE DR169
INTERSTATE
494
MINNESOTA
62
INTERSTATE
394
MINNESOTA
55
169169
169
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 4)
Title: Highway 169 Mobility Study Page 6
p
•
-o
\ \ \ \\ \\ \\ \\
CONSTRUCT ROADWAY c::::::::::::J INPLACE ROADWAY
-CONSTRUCT SHOULDER c::::::::::::J INPLACE SHOULDER
CONSTRUCT MNPASS LANE -EXISTING BRIDGE
-CONSTRUCT MEDIAN BARRIER
-CONSTRUCT/EXPAND BRIDGE
-CONSTRUCT CONCRETE WALK
200
SCALE IN FEET
m,
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
--
)1 lm��I
METROPOLIT!AN ConsultlngG..,.p, Inc.
COU NC IL
HNTB MNDOT TH 169 STUDY
TH 169 TRANSITWAY AND MNPASS SHEET 1------------------1 17 A
DRAFT TH 169 -MNPASS CONCEPT
OF 21
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 4)
Title: Highway 169 Mobility Study Page 7
17B
SEGMENT 8
SEGMENT 7/SEGMENT 8
DESIGN FILE:3/30/2017 9:27:19 PMPLOTTED BY:J:\Jobs\64426 TH 169 Managed Lane-BRT Study\TechProd\Work\CADD\Plan Sheets\MnPass\64426_17B.dgnpglaserPEN TABLE:MnDOT Pen Table (Color).tblPLOTTED ON:SHEET
OF
TH 169 TRANSITWAY AND MNPASS
MNDOT TH 169 STUDY
C O U N C I L
MNPASS CONCEPT
DRAFT TH 169 -
200
SCALE IN FEET
21
CONSTRUCT CONCRETE WALK
CONSTRUCT/EXPAND BRIDGE
CONSTRUCT MEDIAN BARRIER
CONSTRUCT MNPASS LANE
CONSTRUCT SHOULDER
CONSTRUCT ROADWAY
EXISTING BRIDGE
INPLACE SHOULDER
INPLACE ROADWAY ??FUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMH??FUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHPEDPEDPEDFFFFPEDPBW PEDPEDTOP PEDTOP PEDVLTTOP PEDTOP PED?????FUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMH?????FUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHMI
N
N
E
T
O
N
K
A
B
L
V
D
12' THRU12' THRU12' MNPASS12' MNPASS
12' THRU12' THRU
VAR. RAMP
12' AUX
12' AUX
12' AUX
8
SEGMENT7
SEGMENT
12' SHLD
12' THRU
12' THRU
12' MNPASS
12' MNPASS
12' THRU
12' THRU
12' SHLD
12' THRU
12' THRU
12' MNPASS
12' MNPASS
12' THRU
12' THRU16' RA
M
P16' RAMP
16' RAMP
16' RAMP 16' RAM
P12' AUX
12' AUX
12
' SHLD
12
' THRU
12
' THRU
12
' MNPASS
12
' MNPASS
12
' THRU
12
' THRU
12
' SHLD
12
' AUX
12
' AUX
JORDAN AVE S
W 28TH STCOVE DR169
INTERSTATE
494
MINNESOTA
62
INTERSTATE
394
MINNESOTA
55
169169
169
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 4)
Title: Highway 169 Mobility Study Page 8
17C
SEGMENT 8
SEGMENT 7/SEGMENT 8
DESIGN FILE:3/30/2017 9:27:34 PMPLOTTED BY:J:\Jobs\64426 TH 169 Managed Lane-BRT Study\TechProd\Work\CADD\Plan Sheets\MnPass\64426_17C.dgnpglaserPEN TABLE:MnDOT Pen Table (Color).tblPLOTTED ON:SHEET
OF
TH 169 TRANSITWAY AND MNPASS
MNDOT TH 169 STUDY
C O U N C I L
MNPASS CONCEPT
DRAFT TH 169 -
200
SCALE IN FEET
21
CONSTRUCT CONCRETE WALK
CONSTRUCT/EXPAND BRIDGE
CONSTRUCT MEDIAN BARRIER
CONSTRUCT MNPASS LANE
CONSTRUCT SHOULDER
CONSTRUCT ROADWAY
EXISTING BRIDGE
INPLACE SHOULDER
INPLACE ROADWAY ??FUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMH??FUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHPEDPEDPEDFFFFPEDPBW PEDPEDTOP PEDTOP PEDVLTTOP PEDTOP PED?????FUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMH?????FUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMH??FUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMH??FUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHPEDPEDPEDFFFFPEDPBW PEDPEDTOP PEDTOP PEDVLTTOP PEDTOP PEDUU?????FUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMH?????FUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHMI
N
N
E
T
O
N
K
A
B
L
V
D
12' THRU12' THRU12' MNPASS12' MNPASS
12' THRU12' THRU
VAR. RAMP
12' AUX
12' AUX
12' AUX
8
SEGMENT7
SEGMENT
12' SHLD
12' THRU
12' THRU
12' MNPASS
12' MNPASS
12' THRU
12' THRU
12' SHLD
12' SHLD
12' THRU
12' THRU
12' MNPASS
12' MNPASS
12' THRU
12' THRU
12' SHLD
16' RAMP
12' SERVICE RD
12' SERVICE RD
12' SHLD
12' THRU
12' THRU
12' MNPASS
12' MNPASS
12' THRU
12' THRU
12' SHLD
12' SERVICE RD
12' SERVICE RDMI
N
N
E
T
O
N
K
A
B
L
V
D
12' THRU12' THRU12' MNPASS12' MNPASS
12' THRU12' THRU
VAR. RAMP
12' AUX
12' AUX
12' AUX
8
SEGMENT7
SEGMENT
W 28TH STCOVE DR169
INTERSTATE
494
MINNESOTA
62
INTERSTATE
394
MINNESOTA
55
169169
169
169
169
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 4)
Title: Highway 169 Mobility Study Page 9
Meeting: Study Session
Meeting Date: September 11, 2017
Written Report: 5
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: 2018 Budget & Service Charges for Special Service District (SSD) Nos. 1 - 6
RECOMMENDED ACTION: No action needed. This report is meant solely to provide Council
with an update on the City’s six Special Service Districts (SSD) in preparation for action by the
Council in October.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: The proposed 2018 budgets and property owner service charges
for each service district (attached) will be presented for Council action at the October 2 Council
meeting. Does Council need any additional information regarding the Special Service Districts?
SUMMARY: The 2018 proposed budgets and service charges are similar to that of past years.
Staff has recently held meetings with the property owners from each of the six districts and
received their support for approving the 2018 budgets and service charges. The public hearing for
Special Service Districts 1 - 6 budget will be held on October 2, 2017.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The City owns property in several Special
Service District’s and will incur service charge costs for those properties. The service charge costs
incurred are as follows: Special Service District 1: $20,204 to the Parks Maintenance budget;
Special Service District 2: $40 to Public Works / Operations budget; Special Service District 4:
$432 to Public Works / Operations budget; and Special Service District 6: $2,052 to EDA/TIF
Administration budget.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to promoting an integrating arts,
culture and community aesthetics in all City initiatives, including implementation where
appropriate.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Prepared by: Scott Merkley, Public Works Services Manager
Reviewed by: Mark Hanson, Public Works Superintendent
Cynthia S. Walsh, Director of Operations and Recreation
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 5) Page 2
Title: 2018 Budget & Service Charges for Special Service District (SSD) Nos. 1 – 6
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND:
History
In 1996, Council approved a resolution authorizing Special Service District (SSD) 1. Since then,
five additional service districts have been set up within the City (SSD’s 1-4 are along Excelsior
Boulevard, SSD 5 is along Park Place Boulevard near West End, and SSD 6 is along W. 36th Street
near Hoiggard Village). City staff provides management services for the service districts.
Budget/Service Charge Overview
Each Special Service District has its own budget with a reserve that is carried over from year to
year. The goal for each fund is to maintain a fund reserve equal to 50% of the budget. If fund
reserves are high in a district, the annual budget will not match the total service charge since excess
fund reserves will be used to offset (lower) the service charges. Property owners are used to
“fluctuations” in service charge amounts as they understand infrastructure services and repairs
cannot be accurately predicted (such as snow removal costs). A summary of budget highlights is
presented below:
• SSD 1: $10,000 decrease to the budget; $10,009 decrease in service charges.
• SSD 2: No changes to the budget; no change in service charges.
• SSD 3: 2,000 decrease to the budget; no change in service charges.
• SSD 4: No change in budget; $7,007 increase in service charges (service charge increase
to keep the fund reserve at the desired amount).
• SSD 5: $1,402 increase in budget (budget increase needed based on anticipated upcoming
expenditures); $4,702 increase in service charges (service charge increase to keep the fund
reserve at the desired amount).
• SSD 6: $1,244 increase in budget (budget increase needed based on anticipated upcoming
expenditures); $3,245 increase in service charges (service charge increase to keep the fund
reserve at the desired amount).
Current/Planned Activities:
Highlights of planned services or activities for 2016 are provided below:
1) Sidewalk snow removal contracts for SSD 1 and SSD 3 with Twin City Outdoor Services
expire at the end of 2019.
2) Landscape and irrigation contracts for SSD 1-6 with Custom Products and Services expire
at the end of 2018.
3) Continuation of the decorative “twinkle” lighting is planned for Districts 1-5. There is no
lighting in SSD 6, as there are not any trees in the medians. Over the past several years we
have been transitioning to LED lights that have a longer lifespan and are more energy
efficient to operate.
4) More infrastructure maintenance and rehabilitation is starting to occur as the infrastructure
ages. Some of the recent rehab work consists of landscape material replacement, irrigation
systems, decorative fence, pavers, bollards, trash containers, and bike racks.
5) Council should be aware that Special Service District 2 will expire at the end of 2018.
SSD 2 is currently in its second 10-year term of existence and is located along Excelsior
Blvd from France Ave to Monterey Drive/38th St. Staff will be starting the renewal process
to extend the district for another 10 years in early 2018.
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 5) Page 3
Title: 2018 Budget & Service Charges for Special Service District (SSD) Nos. 1 – 6
Summary/Next Steps:
Several steps are needed to complete the service district budget and special assessment processes
for 2018.
1) Staff mailed the budget and service charges to all property owners. A voting memorandum
requesting approval of budget and service charges was included with the 2018 budget and
service charge documents. All six districts supported the approval of the budgets and service
charges.
2) Staff met with available service district property owners of SSD 1-6 on August 28 to present
the 2018 budget / property owner service charges and discuss planned maintenance activities
and solicit any suggestions or concerns the property owners had.
3) The public hearing for the 2018 budget and property owner service charges will occur at the
October 2, 2017, council meeting.
4) In November the City certifies the 2018 assessments (service charges) to Hennepin County.
Meeting: Study Session
Meeting Date: September 11, 2017
Written Report: 6
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Right-of-Way Ordinance Update - Small Wireless Facility Permit
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS: No action at this time. The purpose of this report is to inform
the City Council of the proposed updates to the City’s right-of-way ordinance to include provisions
for Small Wireless Facility Permits. The ordinance is scheduled to be brought to Council for first
reading on September 18.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council have questions about the update to the
right-of-way ordinance to include provisions for Small Wireless Facility Permits?
SUMMARY: On May 30, 2017, Gov. Dayton signed into law a bill amending Minnesota’s
Telecommunications Right-of-Way User Law. The amendments cleared up any confusion about
whether wireless providers are treated the same as other telecommunications right-of-way users
under state law, but created a separate, streamlined permitting system for placement of small
wireless facilities on city-owned structures in rights of way. Most of the bill provisions became
effective on May 31, 2017.
In the last month, staff has received inquiries from Mobilite and AT&T regarding what our process
is for installing Small Cell Wireless Facilities within the right-of-way. City Attorney, Soren
Mattick, has advised staff that in order to regulate these facilities and have them located within the
right-of-way, we need to incorporate the provisions of the new law into our city code.
Our current right-of-way ordinance, Section 24-251 was adopted in 1976. In order to incorporate
the new language, we have updated the entire chapter. In addition to the Small Cell Wireless
Facility Permit, the updated chapter includes provisions for restoration, relocation, and delay that
apply to all permits and do not exist in our current code. The new chapter is based on the League
of Minnesota Cities Model Right-of-Way Ordinance.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The updated ordinance also includes an
update to our fee schedule. See discussion for more information.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
New State Law Requirements Summary
Draft Ordinance
Prepared by: Debra M. Heiser, Engineering Director
Reviewed by: Phillip Elkin, Sr. Engineering Project Manager
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 6) Page 2
Title: Right-of-Way Ordinance Update - Small Wireless Facility Permit
DISCUSSION
Background: On May 30, 2017, Gov. Dayton signed into law a bill amending Minnesota’s
Telecommunications Right-of-Way User Law. The amendments cleared up any confusion about
whether wireless providers are treated the same as other telecommunications right-of-way users
under state law, but created a separate, streamlined permitting system for placement of small
wireless facilities on city-owned structures in rights of way. Most of the bill provisions became
effective on May 31, 2017
In the last month, staff has received inquiries from Mobilite and AT&T regarding what our process
is for installing Small Cell Wireless Facilities within the right- of- way. City Attorney, Soren
Mattick, has advised staff that in order to regulate these facilities and have them located within the
right-of-way, we need to incorporate the provisions of the new law into our city code. Currently,
our code allows for excavation and obstruction permits.
What follows is a summary of the major changes in the ordinance to incorporate Small Cell
Wireless Facility Permits and to better assist staff in managing our right-of-way.
Small Cell Wireless Facility Timeframe for Responding to Permits
The new law requires approval or denial of a permit within 90-days. Upon receipt of a Small Cell
Wireless Facility Permit, the City must provide a written notice of incompleteness to the applicant
within 30 days of receipt of the application. Since we do not currently have a Small Cell Wireless
Facility Permit in our code, we do not have the ability to determine what “incomplete” means or
what we require of providers for these permits. If we were to receive an application, we would
need to approve or deny it within 90-days or it would be considered approved.
These timeframe limitations do not apply to excavation or obstruction permits.
Fees
When we manage rights of way, we incur costs. When we establish a fee, it must be based on the
actual costs incurred by the city in managing the public right of way. The updated ordinance
includes a fee structure for Small Cell Wireless Permits. These fees are based on estimated staff
time to process, review, and inspect the installation of small cell wireless facilities.
The new ordinance also includes a delay penalty. This may be collected from any Permittee that
impact the public due to unreasonable delays in the right-of-way excavation, obstruction, patching,
or restoration.
Small Cell Wireless Facility Rent
A city may elect to charge each small wireless facility attached to a wireless support structure
owned by the local government unit a fee (rental fee), in addition to other fees or charges allowed
under the law, consisting of: (1) up to $150 per year for rent to occupy space on a wireless support
structure; (2) up to $25 per year for maintenance associated with the space occupied on a wireless
support structure; and (3) an additional monthly fee for electricity used to operate a small wireless
facility, if not purchased directly from a utility, at the rate set forth in the statute.
Small Cell Wireless Facility Agreements
This law also does not affect existing agreements approved before May 31, 2017. We currently
have a Master Licensing Agreement with Verizon Wireless to collocate small cell wireless
facilities. This agreement will stand until it expires in 2022.
The amendments allow cities to enter collocation agreements with telecommunications right-of-
way users, if they choose, as long as the collocation agreement for small wireless facilities is made
available in a substantially complete form no later than six months after the effective date of this
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 6) Page 3
Title: Right-of-Way Ordinance Update - Small Wireless Facility Permit
act or three months after receiving a small wireless facility permit application from a wireless
service provider.
Our City Attorney has recommended that we develop an agreement for providers. We are working
on this draft agreement. It will be shared with the city council within 6 months.
Right of Way Patching and Restoration
The updated ordinance includes a section that clearly defines what is required for patching and
restoration of the right-of-way after work is complete. It also includes provisions that allow the
City to complete the work should the Permittee not do so in a satisfactorily or timely manner.
Mapping Data
Each right-of-way user shall provide mapping information to city of the work proposed to be
completed and as-builts of the work after completion. This will assist the City with accurate record
keeping and assist with city led construction projects.
Location and Relocation of Facilities
Provisions are included in the ordinance that formalize the requirement for right of way users to
relocate, at their cost, facilities within the right-of-way. It also includes a timeline requirement for
when relocation work needs to be completed by, and the ability to charge users for costs incurred
by the city because relocation is not completed in the scheduled timeframe.
Adoption Process and Schedule
Staff has developed the following steps and schedule for adopting the ordinance:
Study Session - Report September 11, 2017
First Reading September 18, 2017
Second Reading (adopt ordinances, approve summary, and authorize
summary publication) October 2, 2017
Submit Summary to Sun Sailor October 5, 2017
Summary Publication October 12, 2017
Ordinance Effective Date October 27, 2017
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS:
The ordinance update will include updates to the City’s fee Schedule to incorporate Small Cell
Wireless Facility Permit fees.
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 6) Page 4
Title: Right-of-Way Ordinance Update - Small Wireless Facility Permit
NEW STATE LAW REQUIREMENTS
GOVERNING PLACEMENT OF SMALL WIRELESS FACILITIES IN RIGHTS OF WAY
A summary of the provisions of the new law:
•Small wireless facilities and wireless support structures are a permitted use, except that in
districts zoned as single-family residential use or district identified as historic (either by
federal law or ordinance), a local government unit can require a conditional use permit.
•Cities must not require an applicant for a small wireless facility permit to provide any
information that the applicant previously had provided to the city in a different application
for a small wireless permit (which the applicant must identify by specific reference
number).
•Cities must not require an application to provide information that is not reasonably
necessary to review a permit application for compliance with generally applicable and
reasonable health, safety, and welfare regulations, or to demonstrate compliance with
applicable Federal Communications Commission regulations governing radio frequency
exposure, or other information required by this section.
•Permits for small cell facility collocation or placement of a new wireless support structure
must specify that the term of a small wireless facility permit equals the length of time that
small wireless facility is in use, unless the permit is revoked under this section.
•The total application fee for a small wireless facility permit must comply with the statutory
requirement regarding costs related to the permit.
•The city must allow applicants for small wireless facility permits to file a consolidated
permit application to collocate up to 15 small wireless facilities (or a greater number if
agreed to by a local government unit), provided that all the small wireless facilities in the
application are located within a two-mile radius, consist of substantially similar equipment,
and are to be placed on similar types of wireless support structures.
•The city has 90 days after the date a small wireless facility permit application is filed to
issue or deny the permit, or the permit is automatically issued.
•To toll the 90-day clock, the city must provide a written notice of incompleteness to the
applicant within 30 days of receipt of the application, identifying all missing documents or
information, and providing the applicant with a time to cure that complies with the statute3.
•If the city receives applications within a single seven-day period from one or more
applicants seeking approval of permits for more than 30 small wireless facilities, the city
may extend the 90-day deadline by an additional 30 days. If a city elects to invoke this
extension, it must inform in writing any applicant to whom the extension will be applied.
•A city cannot require placement of small wireless facilities on any specific wireless support
structure other than the one proposed in the permit application.
•A city must not limit the placement of small wireless facilities, either by minimum
separation distances between small wireless facilities or maximum height limitations,
except that each wireless support structure installed in the right of way after the effective
date of this act shall not exceed 50 feet above ground level (unless the local government
unit agrees to a greater height).
•A city can set forth in its ordinance separation requirements for placement of wireless
support structures in relation to other wireless support structures.
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 6) Page 5
Title: Right-of-Way Ordinance Update - Small Wireless Facility Permit
• A city still may deny permit for health, safety, and welfare reasons or for noncompliance
with decorative wireless support structures or signs.
• A city cannot require a person to pay a small wireless facility permit fee, obtain a small
wireless facility permit, or enter into a small wireless facility collocation agreement solely
in order to conduct routine maintenance of a small wireless facility; replace a small wireless
facility with a new facility that is substantially similar or smaller in size, weight, height,
and wind or structural loading; or install, place, maintain, operate, or replace micro wireless
facilities suspended on cables strung between existing utility poles in compliance with
national safety codes.
• A city cannot require an applicant to apply for or enter any individual license, franchise, or
other agreement with the local government unit or any other entity, other than the optional
standard small wireless facility collocation agreement.
• A city may require notice of any work that will obstruct a public right of way.
• A city is not required to have a separate agreement, but can choose to enter collocation
agreements with applicants locating small wireless facilities onto city owned structures to
address terms and conditions of the use of the structures. If a city chooses to do so, then it
must make the agreement available to the public in a substantially complete format no later
than six months after the effective date or three months after receiving a small wireless
facility permit application from a wireless service provider.
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 6) Page 6
Title: Right-of-Way Ordinance Update - Small Wireless Facility Permit
ORDINANCE NO. ____-17
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
AN ORDINANCE REPEALING
ST. LOUIS PARK CITY CODE SECTIONS 24.251-24.256
AND REPLACING THEM WITH SECTIONS 24.251-24.288
REGULATING CITY RIGHTS-OF-WAY
AND AMENDING APPENDIX A, FEE SCHEDULE
TO ADD PERMIT, RENT, MAINTENANCE, AND ELECTRIC FEES
FOR SMALL WIRELESS FACILITIES
THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DOES ORDAIN:
Section 1. St. Louis Park City Code Chapter 24, Article VII, Division II is repealed in its entirety
and replaced by adding the following:
Sec. 24.251 Findings, purpose, and intent.
To provide for the health, safety, and welfare of its citizens, and to ensure the integrity of its streets
and the appropriate use of the rights-of-way, the city strives to keep its rights-of-way in a state of
good repair and free from unnecessary encumbrances.
Accordingly, the city hereby enacts this chapter of this Code relating to rights-of-way permits and
administration. This chapter imposes reasonable regulation on the placement and maintenance of
facilities and equipment currently within its rights-of-way or to be placed therein at some future time.
It is intended to complement the regulatory roles of state and federal agencies. Under this chapter,
persons excavating and obstructing the rights-of-way will bear financial responsibility for their work.
This chapter provides for recovery of out-of-pocket and projected costs from persons using the public
rights-of-way.
This chapter shall be interpreted consistently with 1997 Minnesota Session Laws, Chapter
123; and 2017 Minnesota Session Laws, Chapter 94, substantially codified in Minnesota Statutes
237.16, 237.162, 237.163, 237.79, 237.81, and 238.086 (the “Act”) and the other laws governing
applicable rights of the city and users of the right-of-way. This chapter shall also be interpreted
consistent with Minnesota Rules 7819.0050—7819.9950 and Minnesota Rule Chapter 7560 where
possible. To the extent any provisions of this chapter cannot be interpreted consistently with the
Minnesota Rules, that interpretation most consistent with the Act and other applicable statutory and
case law is intended. This chapter shall not be interpreted to limit the regulatory and police powers
of the city to adopt and enforce general ordinances necessary to protect the health, safety, and welfare
of the public.
Sec. 24.252. Election to manage the public rights-of-way
Pursuant to the authority granted to the city under state and federal statutory, administrative and
common law, the city hereby elects, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 237.163 subd. 2(b), to
manage rights-of-way within its jurisdiction.
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 6) Page 7
Title: Right-of-Way Ordinance Update - Small Wireless Facility Permit
Sec. 24.253. Definitions.
The following definitions apply in this chapter of this Code. References hereafter to “sections” are,
unless otherwise specified, references to sections in this chapter. Defined terms remain defined
terms, whether or not capitalized.
Abandoned facility. A facility no longer in service or physically disconnected from a portion
of the operating facility, or from any other facility, that is in use or still carries service. A facility is
not abandoned unless declared so by the right-of-way user.
Applicant. Any person requesting permission to excavate or obstruct a right-of-way or to
place a small wireless facility or wireless support structure in the public right-of-way.
City. The City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota. For purposes of Section 24.279 city also means
the city’s elected officials, officers, employees and agents.
Collocate or collocation. To install, mount, maintain, modify, operate, or replace a small wireless
facility on, under, within, or adjacent to an existing wireless support structure that is owned
privately or by a local government unit.
Commission. The State Public Utilities Commission.
Congested right-of-way. A crowded condition in the subsurface of the public right-of-way that
occurs when the maximum lateral spacing between existing underground facilities does not allow
for construction of new underground facilities without using hand digging to expose the existing
lateral facilities in conformance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 216D.04 subdivision 3, over a
continuous length in excess of 500 feet.
Construction performance bond. Any of the following forms of security provided at
permittee’s option:
• Individual project bond;
• Cash deposit;
• Security of a form listed or approved under Minnesota Statutes Section 15.73
subdivision 3;
• Letter of Credit, in a form acceptable to the city;
• Self-insurance, in a form acceptable to the city;
• A blanket bond for projects within the city, or other form of construction bond, for a
time specified and in a form acceptable to the city.
Degradation. A decrease in the useful life of the right-of-way caused by excavation in or disturbance
of the right-of-way, resulting in the need to reconstruct such right-of-way earlier than would be
required if the excavation or disturbance did not occur.
Degradation cost. Subject to Minnesota Rules 7819.1100 means the cost to achieve a level of
restoration, as determined by the city at the time the permit is issued, not to exceed the maximum
restoration shown in plates 1 to 13, set forth in Minnesota Rules parts 7819.9900 to 7819.9950.
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 6) Page 8
Title: Right-of-Way Ordinance Update - Small Wireless Facility Permit
Degradation fee. The estimated fee established at the time of permitting by the city to recover costs
associated with the decrease in the useful life of the right-of-way caused by the excavation, and
which equals the degradation cost.
Department. The Cit y of St. Louis Park Engineering Department
Director. The Engineering Director for the City of St. Louis Park.
Delay penalty. The penalty imposed as a result of unreasonable delays in right-of-way excavation,
obstruction, patching, or restoration as established by permit.
Emergency. A condition that (1) poses a danger to life or health, or of a significant loss of property;
or (2) requires immediate repair or replacement of facilities in order to restore service to a
customer.
Equipment. Any tangible asset used to install, repair, or maintain facilities in any right-of-way.
Excavate. To dig into or in any way remove or physically disturb or penetrate any part of a right-
of-way.
Excavation permit. The permit which, pursuant to this chapter, must be obtained before a person
may excavate in a right-of-way. An Excavation Permit allows the holder to excavate that part of
the right-of-way described in such permit.
Excavation permit fee. Money paid to the city by an applicant to cover the costs as provided in
section 24.263.
Facility or facilities. Any tangible asset in the right-of-way required to provide Utility Service.
Five-year project plan. Shows projects adopted by the city for construction within the next
five years
High density corridor. A designated portion of the public right-of-way within which
telecommunications right-of-way users having multiple and competing facilities may be required
to build and install facilities in a common conduit system or other common structure.
Hole. An excavation in the pavement, with the excavation having a length less than the
width of the pavement.
Local representative. A local person or persons, or designee of such person or persons, authorized
by a registrant to accept service and to make decisions for that registrant regarding all matters
within the scope of this chapter.
Management costs. The actual costs the city i ncurs in managing its rights-of-way, including such
costs, if incurred, as those associated with registering applicants; issuing, processing, and verifying
right-of-way or small wireless facility permit applications; inspecting job sites and restoration
projects; maintaining, supporting, protecting, or moving user facilities during right-of-way work;
determining the adequacy of right-of-way restoration; restoring work inadequately performed after
providing notice and the opportunity to correct the work; and revoking right-of-way or small
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 6) Page 9
Title: Right-of-Way Ordinance Update - Small Wireless Facility Permit
wireless facility permits. Management costs do not include:
(1) payment by a telecommunications right-of-way user for the use of the public
right-of-way;
(2) unreasonable fees of a third-party contractor used by the city as part of
managing public right-of-way, including but not limited to any third-party
contractor fee tied to or based upon customer counts, access lines, revenue
generated by the telecommunications right-of-way user, or revenue generated
for the city; or
(3) the fees and cost of litigation relating to the interpretation of Minnesota Session
Laws 2017, Chapter 94; Minnesota Statutes Sections 237.162 or 237.163; or
any ordinance enacted under those sections; or the city fees and costs related to
appeals taken pursuant to Section 24.287 of this chapter.
Micro wireless facility. A small wireless facility that is no larger than 24 inches long, 15 inches
wide, and 12 inches high, and whose exterior antenna, if any, is no longer than 11 inches.
Obstruct. To place any tangible object in a right-of-way so as to hinder free and open passage over
that or any part of the right-of-way.
Obstruction permit. The permit which, pursuant to this chapter, must be obtained before a person
may obstruct a right-of-way, allowing the holder to hinder free and open passage over the specified
portion of that right-of-way, for the duration specified therein.
Obstruction permit fee. Money paid to the city by permittee to cover the costs as provided in
section 24.263.
Patch or patching. A method of pavement replacement that is temporary in nature. A patch consists
of (1) the compaction of the subbase and aggregate base, and (2) the replacement, in kind, of the
existing pavement for a minimum of two feet beyond the edges of the excavation in all directions.
A patch is considered full restoration only when the pavement is included in the city’s five-year
project plan.
Pavement. Any type of improved surface that is within the public right-of-way and that is paved
or otherwise constructed with bituminous, concrete, aggregate, or gravel.
Permit. Has the meaning given “right-of-way permit” in Minnesota Statues, Section 237.162 and
includes a small wireless facility permit.
Permittee. Any person to whom a permit to excavate or obstruct a right-of-way or to whom a small
wireless facility permit has been granted by the city under this chapter.
Person. An individual or entity subject to the laws and rules of this state, however organized,
whether public or private, whether domestic or foreign, whether for profit or nonprofit, and
whether natural, corporate, or political.
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 6) Page 10
Title: Right-of-Way Ordinance Update - Small Wireless Facility Permit
Registrant. Any person who (1) has or seeks to have its equipment or facilities located in any right-
of-way, or (2) in any way occupies or uses, or seeks to occupy or use, the right-of-way or place its
facilities or equipment in the right-of-way.
Restore or restoration. The process by which an excavated right-of-way and surrounding
area, including pavement and foundation, is returned to the same condition and life expectancy
that existed before excavation.
Public right-of-way or right-of-way. The area on, below, or above a public roadway, alleyway,
highway, street, cartway, bicycle lane or public sidewalk in which the city has an interest, including
other dedicated rights-of-way for travel purposes and utility easements of the city. A right-of-way
does not include the airwaves above a right-of-way with regard to cellular or other nonwire
telecommunications or broadcast service. (Note: this definition does not include other public
grounds that may be the subject of other city requirements.)
Right-of-way permit/small wireless facility permit. Either an excavation permit or an obstruction
permit or a permit to place a small wireless facility in the public right-of-way or any combination
of the three depending on context, required by this chapter.
Right-of-way user. (1) A telecommunications right-of-way user as defined by Minnesota Statutes
Section 237.162 Subdivision 4; or (2) a person owning or controlling a facility in the right-of-way
that is used or intended to be used for providing utility service, and who has a right under law,
franchise, or ordinance to use the public right-of-way
Service or utility service. Includes (1) those services provided by a public utility as defined in
Minnesota Statutes Section 216B.02 Subdivisions 4 and 6; (2) services of a telecommunications
right-of-way user, including transporting of voice or data information; (3) services of a cable
communications system as defined in Minnesota Statutes Chapter 238; (4) natural gas or electric
energy or telecommunications services provided by the city; (5) services provided by a cooperative
electric association organized under Minnesota Statutes Chapter 308A; and (6) water, and sewer,
including service laterals, steam, cooling or heating services.
Service lateral. An underground facility that is used to transmit, distribute or furnish “gas,
electricity, communications, or water from a common source to an end-use customer. A service
lateral is also an underground facility that is used in the removal of wastewater from a customer’s
premises.
Small wireless facility.
(1) a wireless facility that meets both of the following qualifications:
(i) each antenna is located inside an enclosure of no more than six cubic feet in volume or, in the
case of an antenna that has exposed elements, the antenna and all its exposed elements could fit
within an enclosure of no more than six cubic feet; and
(ii) all other wireless equipment associated with the small wireless facility, excluding electric
meters, concealment elements, telecommunications demarcation boxes, battery backup power
systems, grounding equipment, power transfers switches, cutoff switches, cable, conduit, vertical
cable runs for connection of power and other services, and any equipment concealed from public
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 6) Page 11
Title: Right-of-Way Ordinance Update - Small Wireless Facility Permit
view within or behind an existing structure or concealment, is in aggregate no more than 28 cubic
feet in volume; or
(2) a micro wireless facility.
Small wireless facility permit fee. Money paid to the city by permittee to cover the costs as provided
in section 24.263.
Supplementary application. An application made to excavate or obstruct more of the right-of-way
than allowed in, or to extend, a permit that had already been issued.
Telecommunication right-of-way user. A person owning or controlling a facility in the public right-
of-way, or seeking to own or control a facility in the public right-of-way that is used or is intended
to be used for providing wireless service or transporting telecommunication or other voice or data
information. For purposes of this division, a cable communication system defined and regulated
under Minnesota Statutes Chapter 238, and telecommunication activities related to providing
natural gas or electric energy services, a public utility as defined in Minnesota Statutes Section
216B.02, a municipality, a municipal gas or power agency organized under Minnesota Statutes
Chapters 453 and 453A, or a cooperative electric association organized under Minnesota Statutes
Chapter 308A, are not telecommunications right-of-way users, except to the extent these entities
are offering wireless services.
Temporary surface. The compaction of subbase and aggregate base and replacement, in
kind, of the existing pavement only to the edges of the excavation. It is temporary in nature except
when the replacement is of pavement included in the city’s two-year plan, in which case it is
considered full restoration.
Trench. An excavation in the pavement, with the excavation having a length equal to or
greater than the width of the pavement.
Two year project plan. Shows projects adopted by the city for construction within the next
two years.
Utility pole. A pole that is used in whole or in part to facilitate telecommunications or electric
service.
Wireless facility. Equipment at a fixed location that enables the provision of wireless services
between user and equipment and a wireless service network, including: (1) equipment associated
with wireless service; (2) a radio transceiver, antenna, coaxial or fiber-optic cable, regular and
backup power supplies, and comparable equipment, regardless of technological configuration; and
(3) a small wireless facility. Wireless facility does not include: (1) wireless support structures, (2)
wireline backhaul facilities, or (3) coaxial or fiber-optic cables between utility poles or wireless
support structures, or that are not otherwise immediately adjacent to or directly associated with a
specific antenna.
Wireless service. Any service using licensed or unlicensed wireless spectrum, including the use of
Wi-Fi whether at a fixed location or by means of a mobile device, that is provided using wireless
facilities. Wireless service does not include services regulated under Title VI of the
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 6) Page 12
Title: Right-of-Way Ordinance Update - Small Wireless Facility Permit
Communications Act of 1934, as amended, including a cable service under United States Code,
title 47, section 522 clause (6).
Wireless support structure. A new or existing structure in a public right-of-way designed to support
or capable of supporting small wireless facilities, as reasonably determined by the city.
Wireline backhaul facility. A facility used to transport communications data by wire from a
wireless facility to a communications network.
Sec. 24-254. Administration.
The director is the principal city official responsible for the administration of the rights-of-way, right-
of-way permits, small wireless facility permits, and the ordinances related thereto. The director may
delegate any or all of the duties hereunder.
Sec. 24-.255. Registration and right-of-way occupancy.
(1) Registration. Each person who occupies or uses, or seeks to occupy or use, or seeks to place
any equipment or facilities, small wireless facilities, or wireless support structures in or on
the right-of-way, including persons with installation and maintenance responsibilities by
lease, sublease or assignment, must register with the city. Registration will consist of
providing application information.
(2) Registration prior to work. No person may collocate, construct, install, repair, remove,
relocate, or perform any other work on, or use any facilities, small wireless facilities, or
wireless support structures, or any part thereof, in any right-of-way without first being
registered with the city.
(3) Exceptions to registration. Nothing herein shall be construed to repeal or amend the
provisions of a city ordinance permitting persons to plant or maintain boulevard plantings or
gardens in the area of the right-of-way between their property and the street curb. Persons
planting or maintaining boulevard plantings or gardens shall not be deemed to use or occupy
the right-of-way, and shall not be required to obtain any permits or satisfy any other
requirements for planting or maintaining such boulevard plantings or gardens under this
chapter. However, nothing herein relieves a person from complying with the provisions of
the Minnesota Statutes Chapter 216D, Gopher One Call Law.
Sec. 24-256. Registration information.
(1) Information required. The information provided to the city at the time of registration shall
include, but not be limited to:
(a) Each registrant's name, Gopher One-Call registration certificate number, address
and e-mail address, if applicable, and telephone and facsimile numbers.
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 6) Page 13
Title: Right-of-Way Ordinance Update - Small Wireless Facility Permit
(b) The name, address and e-mail address, if applicable, and telephone and facsimile
numbers of a local representative. The local representative or designee shall be
available at all times. Current information regarding how to contact the local
representative in an emergency shall be provided at the time of registration.
(c) A certificate of insurance or self-insurance:
(1) Verifying that an insurance policy has been issued to the registrant by an
insurance company licensed to do business in the State of Minnesota, or a
form of self-insurance acceptable to the city;
(2) Verifying that the registrant is insured against claims for personal injury,
including death, as well as claims for property damage arising out of the (i)
use and occupancy of the right-of-way by the registrant, its officers, agents,
employees and permittees, and (ii) placement and use of facilities and
equipment in the right-of-way by the registrant, its officers, agents,
employees and permittees, including, but not limited to, protection against
liability arising from completed operations, damage of underground
facilities and collapse of property;
(3) Naming the city as an additional insured as to whom the coverages required
herein are in force and applicable and for whom defense will be provided
as to all such coverages;
(4) Requiring that the city be notified thirty (30) days in advance of cancellation
of the policy or material modification of a coverage term;
(5) Indicating comprehensive liability coverage, automobile liability coverage,
workers compensation and umbrella coverage established by the city in
amounts sufficient to protect the city and the public and to carry out the
purposes and policies of this chapter.
(6) The city may require a copy of the actual insurance policies.
(7) If the person is a corporation, a copy of the certificate is required to be filed
under Minnesota Statutes Section 60A.07 as recorded and certified to by the
Secretary of State.
(8) A copy of the person's order granting a certificate of authority from the
Minnesota Public Utilities Commission or other authorization or approval
from the applicable state or federal agency to lawfully operate, where the
person is lawfully required to have such authorization or approval from said
commission or other state or federal agency.
(2) Notice of changes. The registrant shall keep all of the information listed above current at
all times by providing to the city information as to changes within fifteen (15) days following the
date on which the registrant has knowledge of any change.
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 6) Page 14
Title: Right-of-Way Ordinance Update - Small Wireless Facility Permit
Sec. 24.257. Reporting obligations.
(1) Operations. Each registrant shall, at the time of registration and by December 1 of each
year, file a construction and major maintenance plan for underground facilities with the city. Such
plan shall be submitted using a format designated by the city and shall contain the information
determined by the city to be necessary to facilitate the coordination and reduction in the frequency
of excavations and obstructions of rights-of-way. The plan shall include:
(a) The locations and estimated beginning and ending dates of all projects to be
commenced during the next calendar year (in this section, a “next-year” project);
and
(b) To the extent known, the tentative locations and estimated beginning and ending
dates for all projects contemplated for the five years following the next calendar
year (in this section, a “five-year project”).
The term “project” in this section shall include both next-year projects and five-year projects.
By January 1 of each year, the city will have available for inspection in the city’s office a composite
list of all projects of which the city has been informed of the annual plans. All registrants are
responsible for keeping themselves informed of the current status of this list.
Thereafter, by February 1, each registrant may change any project in its list of next-year projects,
and must notify the city and all other registrants of all such changes in said list. Notwithstanding
the foregoing, a registrant may at any time join in a next-year project of another registrant listed
by the other registrant.
(2) Additional next-year projects. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the city will not deny an
application for a right-of-way permit for failure to include a project in a plan submitted to
the city if the registrant has used commercially reasonable efforts to anticipate and plan for
the project.
Sec. 24.258. Permit requirement.
(1) Permit required. Except as otherwise provided in this Code, no person may obstruct or
excavate any right-of-way without first having obtained the appropriate right-of-way
permit from the city to do so.
(a) Excavation permit. An excavation permit is required by a registrant to excavate that
part of the right-of-way described in such permit and to hinder free and open
passage over the specified portion of the right-of-way by placing facilities described
therein, to the extent and for the duration specified therein.
(b) Obstruction permit. An obstruction permit is required by a registrant to hinder free
and open passage over the specified portion of the right-of-way by placing
equipment described therein on the right-of-way, to the extent and for the duration
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 6) Page 15
Title: Right-of-Way Ordinance Update - Small Wireless Facility Permit
specified therein. An obstruction permit is not required if a person already possesses
a valid excavation permit for the same project.
(2) Permit extensions. No person may excavate or obstruct the right-of-way beyond the date
or dates specified in the permit unless (i) such person makes a supplementary application for
another right-of-way permit before the expiration of the initial permit, and (ii) a new permit or
permit extension is granted.
(3) Delay penalty. In accordance with Minnesota Rule 7819.1000 subpart 3 and
notwithstanding paragraph 2 of this section, the city shall establish and impose a delay penalty for
unreasonable delays in the right-of-way excavation, obstruction, patching, or restoration. The
delay penalty shall be established from time to time by city council resolution.
(4) Permit display. Permits issued under this chapter shall be conspicuously displayed or
otherwise available at all times at the indicated work site and shall be available for inspection by
the city.
Sec. 24.259. Small wireless facility permit requirement.
(1) Small wireless facility permit. Except as otherwise provided in this Code, no person may
install a new or replacement wireless support structure for a small wireless facility or
collocate a small wireless facility in a public right of way without first having obtained the
appropriate small wireless facility permit from the city to do so.
(2) Term. The term of a small wireless facility permit shall be equal to the length of time that
the small wireless facility is in use, unless the permit is revoked.
(3) Permit display. Permits issued under this chapter shall be conspicuously displayed or
otherwise available at all times at the indicated work site and shall be available for
inspection by the city.
(4) Special exceptions for small wireless facilities. As required by state law, a person is not
required to pay a small wireless facility permit fee, obtain a small wireless facility permit,
or enter into a small wireless facility collocation agreement solely in order to conduct any
of the following activities:
(a) routine maintenance of a small wireless facility;
(b) replacement of small wireless facility with a new facility that is substantially similar or
smaller in size, weight, height, and wind or structural loading than the small wireless facility being
replaced; or
(c) installation, placement, maintenance, operation, or replacement of micro wireless facilities
that are suspended on cables strung between existing utility poles in compliance with national
safety codes.
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 6) Page 16
Title: Right-of-Way Ordinance Update - Small Wireless Facility Permit
Persons that perform these excepted activities shall provide the city advance notification of these
activities if the work will obstruct a public right-of-way.
Sec. 24.260. Permit applications.
Application for a permit under this chapter is made to the city. Excavation, obstruction, and small
wireless facility permit applications shall contain, and will be considered complete only upon
compliance with, the requirements of the following provisions:
(1) Registration with the city pursuant to this chapter;
(2) Submission of a completed permit application form, including all required attachments,
and scaled drawings showing the location and area of the proposed project and the location
of all known existing and proposed facilities.
(3) Payment of money due the city for:
(a) permit fees, estimated restoration costs and other management costs;
(b) prior obstructions or excavations;
(c) any undisputed loss, damage, or expense suffered by the city because of applicant's prior
excavations or obstructions of the rights-of-way or any emergency actions taken by the
city;
(d) franchise fees or other charges, if applicable.
(4) Payment of disputed amounts due the city by posting security or depositing in an escrow
account an amount equal to at least 110% of the amount owing.
(5) Posting an additional or larger construction performance bond for additional facilities when
applicant requests a permit to install additional facilities and the city deems the existing
construction performance bond inadequate under applicable standards.
Sec. 24.261. Issuance of permit; conditions.
(1) Permit issuance. If the applicant has satisfied the requirements of this chapter, the city
shall issue a permit.
(2) Conditions. The city may impose reasonable conditions upon the issuance of the permit
and performance of the applicant thereunder to protect the health, safety, and welfare or
when necessary to protect the right-of-way and its current use. In addition, a permittee
shall comply with all requirements of local, state, and federal laws, including but not
limited to Minnesota Statutes sections 216D.01-.09 (Gopher One Call Excavation Notice
System) and Minnesota Rules chapter 7560.
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 6) Page 17
Title: Right-of-Way Ordinance Update - Small Wireless Facility Permit
(3) Small wireless facility conditions. In addition to subdivision 2, the erection or installation
of a wireless support structure, the collocation of a small wireless facility, or other
installation of a small wireless facility in the right-of-way, shall be subject to the following
conditions
a. A small wireless facility shall only be collocated on the particular wireless support
structure, under those attachment specifications, and at the height indicated in the
applicable permit application.
b. No wireless support structure installed within the right of way shall exceed 50 feet
above ground level in height except that a wireless support structure that replaces
an existing wireless support structure in the public right-of-way that is greater than
50 feet above ground level in height may be placed at the height of the existing
wireless support structure.
c. No wireless facility constructed in the right-of-way after May 30, 2017 may extend
more than ten feet above a wireless support structure existing on May 30, 2017.
d. Where an applicant proposes to install a new wireless support structure in the right
of way, the city may impose separation requirements between such structure and
any existing wireless support structure or other facilities in and around the right of
way.
e. Where an applicant proposes collocation on a decorative wireless support structure,
sign, or other structure not intended to support small wireless facilities, the city may
impose reasonable requirements to accommodate the particular design, appearance,
or intended purpose of such structure;
f. Where an applicant proposes to replace a wireless support structure, the city may
impose reasonable restocking, replacement, or relocation requirements on the
replacement of the structure.
(4) Small wireless facility agreement. A small wireless facility shall only be collocated on a
wireless support structure owned or under the control of the city, or any other city asset in the right
of way, after the applicant has executed a standard small wireless facility collocation agreement
with the city. The standard collocation agreement may require payment of the following:
a. Management costs;
b. Up to $150 per year for rent to collocate on the city structure;
c. $25 per year for maintenance associated with the collocation;
d. A monthly fee for electrical service as follows:
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 6) Page 18
Title: Right-of-Way Ordinance Update - Small Wireless Facility Permit
1. $73 per radio node less than or equal to 100 maximum watts;
2. $182 per radio node over 100 maximum watts; or
3. The actual cost of electricity, if the actual costs exceed the foregoing.
The standard collocation agreement shall be in addition to, and not in lieu of, the required small
wireless facility permit, provided however, that the applicant shall not be additionally required to
apply for or enter into any individual license, franchise, or other agreement with the city in order
to collocate. Issuance of a small wireless facility permit does not supersede, alter or affect any
then-existing agreement between the city and applicant.
Sec. 24.262. Time for review of applications.
(1) Deadline for action. The director shall approve or deny a small wireless facility permit
application within 90-days of receiving a completed application. The small wireless facility
permit, and any associated encroachment or building permit shall be deemed approved if
the city fails to approve or deny the application within the review periods established in
this section.
(2) Consolidated applications. An applicant may file a consolidated small wireless facility
permit application addressing the proposed collocation of up to 15 small wireless facilities,
or a greater number if agreed by the city, provided that all small wireless facilities in the
application:
a. are located within a two-mile radius;
b. consist of substantially similar equipment; and
c. are to be placed on similar types of wireless support structures.
In rendering a decision on a consolidated permit application, the city may approve some small
wireless facilities and deny others, but may not use denial of one or more permits as a basis to
deny all small wireless facilities in the application.
(3) Tolling of deadline for action. The 90-day deadline for action may be tolled if:
a. The city receives applications within a single seven-day period from one or more
applicants seeking approval of permits for more than 30 small wireless facilities. In
such case, the city may extend the 90-day deadline for all such applications by an
additional 30 days by informing the affected applicants in writing of such extension.
b. The applicant fails to submit all required documents or information and the city
provides written notice of incompleteness to the applicant within 30 days of receipt
of the application clearly and specifically delineating all missing documents or
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 6) Page 19
Title: Right-of-Way Ordinance Update - Small Wireless Facility Permit
information. Information delineated in the notice is limited to documents or
information publicly required as of the date of application and reasonably related
to the city’s determination whether the proposed equipment falls within the
definition of a small wireless facility and whether the proposed deployment satisfies
all health, safety, and welfare regulations applicable to the small wireless facility
permit request. Upon applicant’s submittal of additional documents or information
in response to a notice of incompleteness, the city has 10 days to notify the applicant
in writing of any information requested in the initial notice of incompleteness that
is still missing. Second or subsequent notices of incompleteness may not specify
documents or information that were not delineated in the original notice of
incompleteness. Requests for information not requested in the initial notice of
incompleteness do not toll the 90-day deadline for action.
c. The city and applicant may agree in writing to toll the review period.
Sec. 24.263. Permit f ees.
(1) Excavation permit fee. The city shall impose an excavation permit fee in an amount
sufficient to recover the following costs:
a. city management costs; and
b. degradation costs, if applicable.
(2) Obstruction permit fee. The city shall impose an obstruction permit fee in an amount
sufficient to recover city management costs.
(3) Small wireless facility permit fee. The city shall impose a small wireless facility permit fee
for the placement of small wireless facilities and wireless support structures in the public
right-of-way in an amount sufficient to recover:
a. city management costs; and
b. city engineering, make-ready, and construction costs associated with collocation of
small wireless facilities.
(4) Costs of initial engineering survey and preparatory construction work associated with
collocation. Any initial engineering survey and preparatory construction work associated
with collocation must be paid by the cost causer in the form of a onetime, nonrecurring,
commercially reasonable, nondiscriminatory, and competitively neutral charge to recover
costs associated with a proposed attachment.
(5) Payment of permit fees. No excavation, obstruction, or small wireless facility permit shall
be issued without payment of the respective excavation, obstruction, or small wireless
facility permit fees. The city may allow applicant to pay such fees within thirty (30) days
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 6) Page 20
Title: Right-of-Way Ordinance Update - Small Wireless Facility Permit
of billing.
(6) Nonrefundable. Permit fees that were paid for a permit that the city has revoked
are not refundable.
Section 24.264. Right-of-way patching and restoration.
(1) Timing. The work to be done under the excavation permit, and the patching and restoration
of the right-of-way as required herein, must be completed within the dates specified in the
permit, increased by as many days as work could not be done because of circumstances
beyond the control of the permittee or when work was prohibited as unseasonal or
unreasonable under Section 24.267.
(2) Patch and restoration. Permittee shall patch its own work. The city may choose either to
have the permittee restore the right-of-way or restore the right-of-way itself.
(a) City restoration. If the city restores the right-of-way, permittee shall pay the costs
thereof within thirty (30) days of billing. If, following such restoration, the
pavement settles due to permittee’s improper backfilling, the permittee shall pay to
the city, within thirty (30) days of billing, all costs associated with correcting the
defective work.
(b) Permittee restoration. If the permittee restores the right-of-way itself, it shall at the
time of application for an excavation permit post a construction performance bond
in accordance with the provisions of Minnesota Rule 7819.3000.
(c) Degradation fee in lieu of restoration. In lieu of right-of-way restoration, a right-
of-way user may elect to pay a degradation fee. However, the right-of-way user
shall remain responsible for patching and the degradation fee shall not include the
cost to accomplish these responsibilities.
(3) Standards. The permittee shall perform excavation, backfilling, patching and restoration
according to the standards and with the materials specified by the city and shall comply
with Minnesota Rule 7819.1100.
(4) Duty to correct defects. The permittee shall correct defects in patching or restoration
performed by permittee or its agents. The permittee upon notification from the city, shall
correct all restoration work to the extent necessary, using the method required by the city.
Said work shall be completed within five (5) calendar days of the receipt of the notice from
the city, not including days during which work cannot be done because of circumstances
constituting force majeure or days when work is prohibited as unseasonable or
unreasonable under Section 24.267.
(5) Failure to Restore. If the permittee fails to restore the right-of-way in the manner and to
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 6) Page 21
Title: Right-of-Way Ordinance Update - Small Wireless Facility Permit
the condition required by the City, or fails to satisfactorily and timely complete all
restoration required by the City, the City at its option may do such work. In that event, the
permittee shall pay to the City, within thirty (30) days of billing, the cost of restoring the
right-of-way. If permittee fails to pay as required, the City may exercise its rights under
the construction performance bond.
Sec. 24.265. Joint applications.
(1) Joint application. Registrants may jointly apply for permits to excavate or obstruct the
right-of-way at the same place and time.
(2) Shared fees. Registrants who apply for permits for the same obstruction or excavation,
which the city does not perform, may share in the payment of the obstruction or excavation
permit fee. In order to obtain a joint permit, registrants must agree among themselves as to
the portion each will pay and indicate the same on their applications.
Sec. 24.266. Supplementary applications.
(1) Limitation on area. A right-of-way permit or small wireless facility permit is valid only for
the area of the right-of-way specified in the permit. No permittee may do any work outside
the area specified in the permit, except as provided herein. Any permittee which determines
that an area greater than that specified in the permit must be obstructed or excavated must
before working in that greater area (i) make application for a permit extension and pay any
additional fees required thereby, (ii) be granted a new permit or permit extension.
(2) Limitation on dates. A right-of-way permi t or small wireless facility permit is valid only
for the dates specified in the permit. No permittee may begin work before the permit start
date or, except as provided herein, continue working after the end date. If a permittee does
not finish the work by the permit end date, it must apply for a new permit for the additional
time it needs, and receive the new permit or an extension of the old permit before working
after the end date of the previous permit. This supplementary application must be submitted
before the permit end date.
Sec. 24.267. Other obligations.
(1) Compliance with other laws. Obtaining a right-of-way permit or small wireless facility
permit does not relieve permittee of its duty to obtain all other necessary permits, licenses,
and authority and to pay all fees required by the city or other applicable rule, law, or
regulation. A permittee shall comply with all requirements of local, state, and federal laws,
including but not limited to Minnesota Statutes, Section 216D.01-.09 (Gopher One Call
Excavation Notice System) and Minnesota Rules Chapter 7560. A permittee shall perform
all work in conformance with all applicable codes and established rules and regulations,
and is responsible for all work done in the right-of-way pursuant to its permit, regardless
of who does the work.
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 6) Page 22
Title: Right-of-Way Ordinance Update - Small Wireless Facility Permit
(2) Prohibited work. Except in an emergency, and with the approval of the city, no right-of-
way obstruction or excavation or collocation of a small wireless facilities or installation or
maintenance of a wireless support structures may be done when seasonally prohibited or
when conditions are unreasonable for such work.
(3) Interference with right-of-way. A permittee shall not so obstruct a right-of-way that the
natural free and clear passage of water through the gutters or other waterways shall be
interfered with. Private vehicles of those doing work in the right-of-way may not be parked
within or next to a permit area, unless parked in conformance with city parking regulations.
The loading or unloading of trucks must be done solely within the defined permit area
unless specifically authorized by the permit.
(4) Trenchless excavation. As a condition of all applicable permits, permittees employing
trenchless excavation methods, including but not limited to Horizontal Directional Drilling,
shall follow all requirements set forth in Minnesota Statutes Chapter 216D and Minnesota
Rules Chapter 7560 and shall require potholing or open cutting over existing underground
utilities before excavating, as determined by the director.
Sec. 24.268. Denial of permit.
(1) Reasons for denial. The city may deny an application for a permit for failure to meet the
requirements and conditions of this chapter or if the city determines that the denial is
necessary to protect the health, safety, and welfare or when necessary to protect the right-
of-way and its current use.
(2) Procedural requirements. The denial or revocation of a permit must be made in writing
and must document the basis for the denial. The city must notify a telecommunications
right-of-way user in writing within three business days of the decision to deny a permit. If
a permit application is denied, the telecommunications right-of -way user may cure the
deficiencies identified by the city and resubmit its application. If the telecommunications
right-of-way user resubmits the application within 30 days of receiving written notice of
denial, it may not be charged an additional filing or processing fee. The city must approve
or deny the revised application within 30 days after the revised application is submitted.
Sec. 24.269. Revocation of permits.
(1) Substantial breach. The city reserves its right, as provided herein, to revoke any right-of-
way permit or small wireless facility permit without a fee refund, if there is a substantial breach of
the terms and conditions of any statute, ordinance, rule, or regulation, or any material condition of
the permit. A substantial breach by permittee shall include, but shall not be limited to, the
following:
(a) The violation of any material provision of the right-of-way permit or small wireless
facility permit;
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 6) Page 23
Title: Right-of-Way Ordinance Update - Small Wireless Facility Permit
(b) An evasion or attempt to evade any material provision of the right-of-way permit
or small wireless facility permit, or the perpetration or attempt to perpetrate any
fraud or deceit upon the city or its citizens;
(c) Any material misrepresentation of fact in the application for a right-of-way permit
or small wireless facility permit;
(d) The failure to complete the work in a timely manner, unless a permit extension is
obtained or unless the failure to complete work is due to reasons beyond the
permittee's control; or
(e) The failure to correct, in a timely manner, work that does not conform to a condition
indicated on an order issued pursuant to Section 24.271.
(2) Written notice of breach. If the city determines that the permittee has committed a
substantial breach of a term or condition of any statute, ordinance, rule, regulation or any
condition of the permit, the city shall make a written demand upon the permittee to remedy
such violation. The demand shall state that continued violations may be cause for
revocation of the permit. A substantial breach, as stated above, will allow the city, at its
discretion, to place additional or revised conditions on the permit to mitigate and remedy
the breach.
(3) Response to notice of breach. Within twenty-four (24) hours of receiving notification of
the breach, permittee shall provide the city with a plan, acceptable to the city that will cure
the breach. Permittee's failure to so contact the city, or permittee's failure to timely submit
an acceptable plan, or permittee's failure to reasonably implement the approved plan, shall
be cause for immediate revocation of the permit.
(4) Revocation. Revocation of a right-of-way permit or small wireless facility permit shall be
made in writing within three business days of the decision to revoke the permit and shall document
the basis for the revocation.
(5) Reimbursement of city costs. If a right-of-way permit or small wireless facility permit is
revoked, the permittee shall also reimburse the city for the city's reasonable costs, including
restoration costs and the costs of collection and reasonable attorneys' fees incurred in connection
with such revocation.
Sec. 24.270. Installation requirements.
The excavation, backfilling, patching, and restoration, and all other work performed in the
right-of-way shall be done in conformance with Minnesota Rules 7819.1100 and 7819.5000 and
other applicable local requirements, in so far as they are not inconsistent with Minnesota Statutes,
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 6) Page 24
Title: Right-of-Way Ordinance Update - Small Wireless Facility Permit
Sections 237.162 and 237.163. Installation of service laterals shall be performed in accordance
with Minnesota Rules Chapter 7560 and these ordinances. Service lateral installation is further
subject to those requirements and conditions set forth by the city in the applicable permits and/or
agreements referenced in section 24.274 subdivision 2 of this ordinance.
Sec. 24.271. Inspection.
(1) Notice of completion. When the work under any permit hereunder is completed, the
permittee shall furnish a completion certificate in accordance with Minnesota Rule 7819.1300.
(2) Site inspection. Permittee shall make the work-site available to the city and to all others as
authorized by law for inspection at all reasonable times during the execution of and upon
completion of the work.
(3) Authority of director.
(a) At the time of inspection, the director may order the immediate cessation of any
work which poses a serious threat to the life, health, safety, or well-being of the
public.
(b) The director may issue an order to the permittee for any work that does not conform
to the terms of the permit or other applicable standards, conditions, or codes. The
order shall state that failure to correct the violation will be cause for revocation of
the permit. Within ten (10) days after issuance of the order, the permittee shall
present proof to the director that the violation has been corrected. If such proof has
not been presented within the required time, the director may revoke the permit
pursuant to section 24.269.
Sec. 24.272. Work done without a permit.
(4) Emergency situations. Each registrant shall immediately notify the director of any event
regarding its facilities that it considers to be an emergency. The registrant may proceed to
take whatever actions are necessary to respond to the emergency. Registrant’s notification
to Gopher State One Call regarding an emergency situation does not fulfill this
requirement. Within two (2) business days after the occurrence of the emergency, the
registrant shall apply for the necessary permits, pay the fees associated therewith, and fulfill
the rest of the requirements necessary to bring itself into compliance with this chapter for
the actions it took in response to the emergency.
If the city becomes aware of an emergency regarding a registrant's facilities, the city will attempt
to contact the local representative of each registrant affected, or potentially affected, by the
emergency. In any event, the city may take whatever action it deems necessary to respond to the
emergency, the cost of which shall be borne by the registrant whose facilities occasioned the
emergency.
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 6) Page 25
Title: Right-of-Way Ordinance Update - Small Wireless Facility Permit
(2) Non-emergency situations. Except in an emergency, any person who, without first having
obtained the necessary permit, excavates or obstructs or places a small wireless facility or wireless
support structure in the right-of-way must subsequently obtain a permit and, as a penalty, pay
double the normal fee for said permit, pay double all the other fees required by the city Code,
deposit with the city the fees necessary to correct any damage to the right-of-way, and comply
with all of the requirements of this chapter.
Sec. 24.273. Supplementary notification.
If the obstruction or excavation or the placement of a small wireless facility or wireless support
structure in the right-of-way begins later or ends sooner than the date given on the permit, permittee
shall notify the city of the accurate information as soon as this information is known.
Sec. 24.274. Mapping data.
(1) Information required. Each registrant, permittee shall provide mapping information
required by the city in accordance with Minnesota Rules 7819.4000 and 7819.4100. Within
ninety (90) days following completion of any work pursuant to a permit, the permittee shall
provide the director accurate maps and drawings certifying the "as-built" location of all
equipment installed, owned and maintained by the permittee. Such maps and drawings
shall include the horizontal and vertical location of all facilities and equipment and shall
be provided consistent with the City's electronic mapping system, when practical or as a
condition imposed by the director. Failure to provide maps and drawings pursuant to this
subsection shall be grounds for revoking the permit holder's registration.
(2) Service laterals. All permits issued for the installation or repair of service laterals, other
than minor repairs as defined in Minnesota Rules 7560.0150 subpart 2, shall require the
permittee’s use of appropriate means of establishing the horizontal locations of installed
service laterals and the service lateral vertical locations in those cases where the director
reasonably requires it. Permittees or their subcontractors shall submit to the director
evidence satisfactory to the director of the installed service lateral locations. Compliance
with this subdivision 2 and with applicable Gopher State One Call law and Minnesota
Rules governing service laterals installed after December 31, 2005 shall be a condition of
any city approval necessary for:
(a) payments of contractors working on a public improvement project including those
under Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429; and
(b) city approval under the development agreements or other subdivision or site plan
approval under Minnesota Statutes Chapter 462. The Director shall reasonably
determine the appropriate method of providing such information to the city.
Failure to provide prompt and accurate information on the service laterals installed may result in
the revocation of the permit issued for the work or future permits to the offending permittee or its
subcontractors.
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 6) Page 26
Title: Right-of-Way Ordinance Update - Small Wireless Facility Permit
Sec. 24.275. Location and relocation of facilities.
(1) Rule. When directed by the city, a right-of-way user shall promptly and at his, her, or its
own expense, with due regard for seasonal working conditions, permanently remove and
relocate its facilities in the right-of-way when it is necessary to prevent interference, and
not merely for the convenience of the city, in connection with: (1) a present or future City
use of the right-of-way for a public project; (2) the public health or safety; or (3) the safety
and convenience of travel over the right-of-way. The registrant shall restore any rights-of-
way to the condition it was in prior to removal and relocation. Placement, location, and
relocation of facilities must comply with the Act, with other applicable law, and with
Minnesota Rules 7819.3100, 7819.5000, and 7819.5100, to the extent the rules do not limit
authority otherwise available to cities.
(2) Relocation schedule notification procedures. The director shall notify the registrant or
permit holder at least three months in advance of the need to relocate existing facilities.
The director shall provide a second notification to the registrant or permit holder one month
before the date by which the relocation must be completed. To the extent technically
feasible, all utilities must be relocated within one month or in a time frame determined by
the director.
(3) Delay to city project. If the registrant or permit holder fails to meet the relocation schedule
due to circumstances within the owner’s control, the city may charge the owner for all costs
incurred by the city because the relocation is not completed in the scheduled timeframe.
(4) Joint trenching. All facilities shall be placed in appropriate portions of the right-of-way so
as to cause minimum conflict with other underground facilities. When technically
appropriate and no safety hazards are created facilities shall be installed, constructed, or
placed within the same trench. Notwithstanding the foregoing, gas and electric lines shall
be placed in conformance with Minnesota Rules part 7819.5100 subpart 2, governing
safety standards.
(5) Corridors. The city may assign a specific area within the right-of-way, or any particular
segment thereof as may be necessary, for each type of facilities that are or, pursuant to
current technology, the city expects will someday be located within the right-of-way. All
excavation, obstruction, or other permits issued by the city involving the installation or
replacement of facilities shall designate the proper corridor for the facilities at issue. A
typical crossing section of the location for utilities may be on file at the director’s office.
This section is not intended to establish “high density corridors.”
Any registrant who has facilities in the right-of-way in a position at variance with the corridors
established by the city may rem ain at that location until the city requires facilities relocation to the
corridor pursuant to relocation authority granted under Minnesota Rules part 7819.3100 or other
applicable law.
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 6) Page 27
Title: Right-of-Way Ordinance Update - Small Wireless Facility Permit
(6) Nuisance. One year after the passage of this chapter, any facilities found in a right-of-way
that have not been registered shall be deemed to be a nuisance. The city may exercise any
remedies or rights it has at law or equity, including, but not limited to, abating the nuisance
or taking possession of the facilities and restoring the right-of-way to a useable condition.
(7) Limitation of space. To protect the health, safety, and welfare, or when necessary to protect
the right-of-way and its current use, the city shall have the power to prohibit or limit the
placement of new or additional facilities within the right-of-way. In making such decisions,
the city shall strive to the extent possible to accommodate all existing and potential users
of the right-of-way, but shall be guided primarily by considerations of the public interest,
the public’s needs for the particular utility service, the condition of the right-of-way, the
time of year with respect to essential utilities, the protection of existing facilities in the
right-of-way, and future city plans for public improvements and development projects
which have been determined to be in the public interest.
Sec. 24.276. Pre-excavation facilities location.
In additions to complying with the requirements of Minn. Stat. § 216D.01-.09 (“One Call
Excavation Notice System”) before the start date of any right-of-way excavation, each registrant
who has facilities or equipment in the area to be excavated shall mark the horizontal and vertical
placement of all said facilities. Any registrant whose facilities are less than twenty (20) inches
below a concrete or asphalt surface shall notify and work closely with the excavation contractor to
establish the exact location of its facilities and the best procedure for excavation.
Sec. 24.277. Damage to other facilities.
When the city does work in the right-of-way and finds it necessary to maintain, support, or move
a registrant's facilities to protect it, the city shall notify the local representative as early as is
reasonably possible. The costs associated therewith will be billed to that registrant and must be
paid within thirty (30) days from the date of billing. Each registrant shall be responsible for the
cost of repairing any facilities in the right-of-way which it or its facilities damage. Each registrant
shall be responsible for the cost of repairing any damage to the facilities of another registrant
caused during the city's response to an emergency occasioned by that registrant's facilities.
Sec. 24.278. Right-of-way vacation.
If the city vacates a right-of-way that contains the facilities of a registrant, the registrant’s
rights in the vacated right-of-way are governed by Minnesota Rules 7819.3200.
Sec. 24.279. Indemnification and liability
By registering with the city, or by accepting a permit under this chapter, a registrant or permittee
agrees to defend and indemnify the city in accordance with the provisions of Minnesota Rule
7819.1250.
Sec. 24.280. Abandoned and unusable facilities.
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 6) Page 28
Title: Right-of-Way Ordinance Update - Small Wireless Facility Permit
(1) Discontinued operations. A registrant who has determined to discontinue all or a portion of
its operations in the city must provide information satisfactory to the city that the registrant's
obligations for its facilities in the right-of-way under this chapter have been lawfully assumed
by another registrant.
(2) Removal. Any registrant who has abandoned facilities in any right-of-way shall remove it from
that right-of-way if required in conjunction with other right-of-way repair, excavation, or
construction, unless this requirement is waived by the city.
Sec. 24.281. Appeal.
A right-of-way user that: (1) has been denied registration; (2) has been denied a permit; (3) has
had a permit revoked; or (4) believes that the fees imposed are not in conformity with Minn. Stat.
§ 237.163, Subd. 6; or (5) disputes a determination of the director regarding Section 24.274
subdivision 2 of this ordinance may have the denial, revocation, fee imposition, or decision
reviewed, upon written request, by the city council. The city council shall act on a timely written
request at its next regularly scheduled meeting, provided the right-of-way user has submitted its
appeal with sufficient time to include the appeal as a regular agenda item. A decision by the city
council affirming the denial, revocation, or fee imposition will be in writing and supported by
written findings establishing the reasonableness of the decision.
Sec. 24.288. Division not applicable to city work.
The provisions of this division shall not be applicable to any work being performed by the
city or pursuant to a contract with the city.
Section 2. City Code Appendix A is amended by deleting the strikethrough language and
adding the underlined language as follows:
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
Installation/repair of Sidewalk, Curb Cut or
Curb and Gutter Permit
$12 per 10 linear feet
AdministrativeBase Fee (all permits) $60
Work in Public Right-of-Way Permits
Delay penalty
2 times total permit fee
Excavation or Obstruction Permit
Administrative Base Fee (all permits)
Hole in Roadway/Blvd (larger than 10 inch"
diameter)
$60
$60 per hole
Trenching in Boulevard $200 per 100 linear feet (minimum $200)
Trenching in Roadway $400 per 100 linear feet (minimum $400)
Small Cell Wireless Facility Permit
Permit fee $1500 per antenna
Rent to occupy space on a city-owned wireless $150 per year per antenna
Study Session Meeting of September 11, 2017 (Item No. 6) Page 29
Title: Right-of-Way Ordinance Update - Small Wireless Facility Permit
support structure
Maintenance associated with space on a city- $25 per year per antenna
owned wireless support structure
Electricity to operate small wireless facility,
if not purchased directly from a utility $73 per radio node less than or equal to 100 max
watts;
$182 per radio node over 100 max watts;
Actual costs of electricity, if the actual costs exceed the amount in item (i) or (ii).
Section 4. This Ordinance shall take effect following its passage and publication on
XXXXXX XX, 2017.
ADOPTED this ______ day of _______________, 2017, by the City Council of the City
of St. Louis Park.
Public Hearing
First Reading
Second Reading
Date of Publication
Date Ordinance takes effect
Reviewed for Administration Adopted by City Council
____________________________________ ____________________________________
Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor
Attest: Approved as to Form and Execution:
____________________________________ ____________________________________
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Soren Mattick, City Attorney