HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024/06/03 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - RegularAGENDA
JUNE 3, 2024
6:20 p.m. Economic Development Authority meeting – Council Chambers
1.Call to order
a.Roll call
2.Approve agenda.
3.Minutes
a.Minutes of May 20, 2024 EDA meeting
4.Consent items
a.Approve EDA disbursements
b.Amended and restated contract with Metropolitan Consortium of Community
Developers
5.Public hearings – none.
6.Regular business – none.
7.Communications and announcements – none.
8.Adjournment.
6:30 p.m. City council meeting– Council Chambers
1. Call to order
a.Roll call.
b.Pledge of Allegiance.
2. Approve agenda.
3. Presentations
a.Proclamation observing June 2024 as Pride Month
b.Proclamation observing Juneteenth in 2024
4. Minutes
a.Minutes of May 6, 2024 special study session
b.Minutes of May 20, 2024 city council meeting
c.Minutes of May 20, 2024 special study session
Agenda EDA meeting, city council meeting and special study session of June 3, 2024
5.Consent items
a.Approve city disbursements
b.Resolution awarding the sale of General Obligation Bonds, Series 2024A
c.Park Plaza 2nd Addition final plat at 5775 Wayzata Boulevard - Ward 4
d.Resolution amending the city council rules of procedure
e.Approve temporary liquor license for Southern Anoka Community Assistance (SACA
Food Shelf & Thrift Store) - Ward 2
f.Resolution authorizing special assessment to abate unsafe conditions of hazardous
building - Ward 4
6.Public hearings – none.
7.Regular business
a.Support Three Rivers Park District CP Rail Regional Trail route recommendation
8.Communications and announcements – none.
9.Adjournment.
Following city council meeting - special study session - Community Room
Discussion items
1. Future infrastructure project planning
2. Proposed agenda topic
Members of the public can attend St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority and city council
meetings in person. Official minutes of meetings are available on the city website once approved.
Watch St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority or regular city council meetings live at
bit.ly/watchslpcouncil or at www.parktv.org, or on local cable (Comcast SD channel 14/HD channel
798). Recordings of the meetings are available to watch on the city's YouTube channel at
www.youtube.com/@slpcable, usually within 24 hours of the end of the meeting.
City council study sessions are not broadcast.
The council chambers are equipped with Hearing Loop equipment and headsets are available to borrow.
If you need special accommodations or have questions about the meeting, please call 952.924.2505.
Meeting: Economic development authority
Meeting date: June 3, 2024
Minutes: 3a
Unofficial minutes
EDA meeting
St. Louis Park, Minnesota
May 20, 2024
1. Call to order.
President Dumalag called the meeting to order at 6:23 p.m.
a. Roll call
Commissioners present: President Dumalag, Paul Baudhuin, Tim Brausen, Sue Budd, Yolanda
Farris, Margaret Rog
Commissioners absent: none
Staff present: City manager (Ms. Keller)
2. Approve agenda.
It was moved by Commissioner Brausen, seconded by Commissioner Farris, to approve the EDA
agenda as presented.
The motion passed 7-0.
3. Minutes.
a. EDA meeting minutes of May 6, 2024
It was moved by Co mmissioner Brausen, seconded by Commissioner Rog, to approve the EDA
meeting minutes of May 6, 2024, as presented.
The motion passed 7-0.
4. Consent item.
a. EDA Resolution No. 24-09 approving letter of no default – Beltline Station Development
– Ward 1.
It was moved by Co mmissioner Rog, seconded by Commissioner Budd, to approve the consent
items as listed and to waive reading of all resolutions .
The motion passed 7-0.
5. Public hearings – none.
Economic development authority meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 3a) Page 2
Title: EDA meeting minutes of May 20, 2024
6. Regular business – none.
7. Communications and announcements - none.
8. Adjournment.
The meeting adjourned at 6:24 p.m.
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Melissa Kennedy, EDA secretary Lynette Dumalag, EDA president
Meeting: Economic development authority
Meeting date: June 3, 2024
Consent agenda item: 4a
Executive summary
Title: Approve EDA disbursements
Recommended action: Motion to approve EDA disbursement claims for the period April 27 -
May 28, 2024.
Policy consideration: Does the EDA approve the disbursements listed for the period ending
May 28, 2024?
Summary: The finance division prepares this report monthly for the EDA to review and
approve. The attached report shows both EDA disbursements paid by physical check and those
by wire transfer or Automated Clearing House (ACH) when applicable.
Financial or budget considerations: Review and approval of disbursements by the EDA is
required and provides another layer of oversight to further ensure fiscal stewardship.
Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable.
Supporting documents: EDA disbursement summary
Prepared by: Estela Mulugeta, accounting specialist
Reviewed by: Amelia Cruver, finance director
Approved by: Kim Keller, city manager
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
5/28/20244/27/2024 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
617.17CENTERPOINT ENERGY 4300 36 1/2 (affordable comm)HEATING GAS
617.17
288.00KENNEDY & GRAVEN BELTLINE SWLRT DEVELOPMENT LEGAL SERVICES
460.00MTKA BLVD PROPERTIES LEGAL SERVICES
1,144.004300 36 1/2 (affordable comm)LEGAL SERVICES
1,144.77WOODDALE STATION TIF DIST G&A LEGAL SERVICES
333.00WEST END TIF DIST G&A LEGAL SERVICES
209.00DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A LEGAL SERVICES
3,578.77
10,000.00WELLS ROADSIDE LLC DEVELOPMENT - EDA BALANCE SHEE LOANS RECEIVABLE - CURRENT
10,000.00
157.50XCEL ENERGY 4300 36 1/2 (affordable comm)ELECTRIC SERVICE
157.50
Report Totals 14,353.44
Economic Development Authority meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approve EDA disbursements Page 2
Meeting: Economic development authority
Meeting date: June 3, 2024
Consent agenda item: 4b
Executive summary
Title: Amended and restated contract with Metropolitan Consortium of Community Developers
Recommended action: Motion to adopt EDA resolution approving the amended and restated
contract for services with the Metropolitan Consortium of Community Developers (MCCD).
Policy consideration: Does the EDA wish to approve the amended and restated contract for
services with the Metropolitan Consortium of Community Developers (MCCD) which allows the
installation of fat, oil, and/or grease interceptors as an eligible activity to be financed under the
EDA’s two percent loan program and extends the contract with MCCD for another two years?
Summary: The EDA entered into a professional services agreement with the Metropolitan
Consortium of Community Developers (MCCD) on August 8, 2023. Under the agreement, MCCD
agreed to provide certain program and loan services to the EDA including administering the
EDA’s two percent loan program.
The city adopted a licensing and inspection program through ordinance to reduce the
accumulation of fats, oils, and grease (FOG) in public sewer mains. Restaurants and food
manufacturers are the primary sources of FOG entering the sewer system, which solidify in the
mains and cause reduced flow or blockage. Older restaurants were not required to install
grease interceptors, and state statute prevents the city from requiring upgrades to meet
current code standards. Such interceptors can cost up to $2 5,000 depending on size and
location within the building.
Staff in community development and building & energy worked collaboratively to identify a
funding program and source to incentivize and encourage business owners to install FOG
interceptors. Rather than creating a separate program for this purpose, it is proposed that the
EDA add this cost to the list of eligible items to be financed under the EDA’s existing two
percent loan program. The EDA would provide loans to qualified applicants for FOG projects
costing a minimum of $5,000 and a maximum of $25,000 at two percent interest for a term up
to 10 years. MCCD would be responsible for administering these FOG loans on behalf of the
EDA just as it does for any other eligible activity authorized under the program.
The professional services agreement with MCCD expires at the end of 2024. Since revisions are
proposed to the agreement relative the two percent program, it is efficacious to extend the
term of the agreement at the same time versus waiting until the end of the year.
Financial or budget considerations: Funding for the two-percent loan program is provided for
in the 2024 budget.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a broad range of
housing and neighborhood oriented development.
Supporting documents: EDA Resolution
Prepared by: Greg Hunt, economic development manager
Reviewed by: Karen Barton, community development director/ EDA executive director
Approved by: Cindy Walsh, deputy city manager
Economic development authority meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 4b) Page 2
Title: Amended and restated contract with Metropolitan Consortium of Community Developers
EDA Resolution No. 24 - ___
Approving a modification to the authority’s two percent loan
program and an amended and restated professional services
agreement with the Metropolitan Consortium of Community
Developers to administer loans under said program
Whereas, the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority (the “authority”)
established the two percent loan program (the “program”) and adopted program guidelines on
March 25, 2019 (the “guidelines”) pursuant to which the authority provides low interest loans
to businesses and property owners improving, renovating, or expanding their buildings and
purchasing property within the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota (the “city”) to further enhance
the city’s economic success, vibrancy and historic character; and
Whereas, the program is administered by the Metropolitan Consortium of Community
Developers, a Minnesota nonprofit corporation (“MCCD”), pursuant to a professional services
agreement between the authority and MCCD, dated August 8, 2023 (the “service agreement”);
and
Whereas, pursuant to Minnesota Rules, Part 4714 of the Minnesota Plumbing Code,
restaurants in the city need to install and operate fat, oil, and/or grease interceptor systems
(“grease traps”) to prevent blockages and obstructions to the sewer system, and to facil itate
these installations, the authority wishes to amend the program (the “amended program”) to
allow for applicants to apply for loans to pay for the installation of grease traps and make other
changes to the program; and
Whereas, there have been prepared amended guidelines (the “amended guidelines”)
and an amended and restated service agreement with MCCD (the “amended and restated
service agreement”); and
Whereas, the amended guidelines and the amended and restated service agreement
have been presented to the board of commissioners of the authority; and
Now therefore be it resolved by the board of commissioners (the “board”) of the authority
as follows:
1. The board approves the amended guidelines and the amended and restated service
agreement in substantially the forms presented to the board, together with any related
documents necessary in connection therewith, including without limitation all documents,
exhibits, certifications, or consents, referenced in or attached to the amended guidelines and the
amended and restated service agreement (the “documents”).
2. The board hereby authorizes the president and executive director, in their
discretion and at such time, if any, as they may deem appropriate, to execute the documents on
behalf of the authority, and to carry out, on behalf of the authority, the authori ty’s obligations
Economic development authority meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 4b) Page 3
Title: Amended and restated contract with Metropolitan Consortium of Community Developers
thereunder when all conditions precedent thereto have been satisfied. The documents shall be
in substantially the form on file with the authority and the approval hereby given to the
documents includes approval of such additional details therein as may be necessary and
appropriate and such modifications thereof, deletions therefrom and additions thereto as may
be necessary and appropriate and approved by legal counsel to the authority and by the officers
authorized herein to execute said documents prior to their execution; and said officers are
hereby authorized to approve said changes on behalf of the authority. The execution of any
instrument by the appropriate officers of the authority herein authorized shall be conclusive
evidence of the approval of such document in accordance with the terms hereof. This resolution
shall not constitute an offer and the documents shall not be effective until the date of execution
thereof as provided herein.
3. In the event of absence or disability of the officers, any of the documents
authorized by this resolution to be executed may be executed without further act or
authorization of the board by any duly designated acting official, or by such other officer or
officers of the board as, in the opinion of the city attorney, may act in their behalf. Upon
execution and delivery of the documents, the officers and employees of the board are hereby
authorized and directed to take or cause to be taken such actions a s may be necessary on behalf
of the board to implement the documents.
4. The board hereby delegates to the executive director and authority staff the
authority to administer the amended program in accordance with the amended guidelines,
including without limitation processing and approving applications and executing loan
documents.
Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the Economic Development
Authority June 3, 2024
Karen Barton, executive director Lynette Dumalag, president
Attest
Melissa Kennedy, secretary
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: June 3, 2024
Presentation: 3a
Executive summary
Title: Proclamation observing June 2024 as Pride Month
Recommended action: Mayor to read proclamation recognizing June 2024 as Pride month.
Policy consideration: None
Summary: Pride Month is recognized annually in June to recognize the LGBTQ+ (Lesbian, Gay,
Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer+) community and their resilience, contributions and
achievements. Pride month provides an opportunity to advance and deepen our commitment
to stand in solidarity with our LGBTQ+ employees and community members against
discrimination and injustice.
Financial or budget considerations: Not applicable
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to being a leader in racial equity
and inclusion in order to create a more just and inclusive community for all.
Supporting documents: Resource page
Proclamation
Prepared by: Jocelyn Hernandez Guitron, race, equity, and inclusion specialist
LGBTQ+ employee resource group
Reviewed by: Cheyenne Brodeen, administrative services director
Approved by: Kim Keller, city manager
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 3a) Page 2
Title: Proclamation observing June 2024 as Pride Month
Resource page
In Pride month, the City of St. Louis Park invites you to:
• Learn about the history of LGBTQ+ communities in our state
o LGBTQ History in Minneapolis | Meet Minneapolis
o Over the Rainbow: Queer and Trans History in Minnesota | MNopedia
o Glossary of Terms - Human Rights Campaign (hrc.org)
• Consider supporting or attending an event or exhibit that highlights Pride and LGBTQ+
communities
o Golden Valley Pride Festival
o Hopkins Pride Festival
o Upcoming Events – Twin Cities Pride
• Connect with LGBTQ+ organizations in Minnesota
o OutFront Minnesota
o Twin Cities Pride (tcpride.org)
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 3a) Page 3
Title: Proclamation observing June 2024 as Pride Month
Proclamation observing June 2024 as Pride month
Whereas, LGBTQ+ communities are an integral part of the diversity that makes St. Louis
Park a great place to experience life; and
Whereas, this month celebrates the diverse stories and resilience of Americans with
varying sexual orientations and gender identities such as, Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender,
Queer, Intersex, Asexual, Two Spirit, Pansexual and others; and
Whereas, the City of St. Louis Park has an active LGBTQ+ Employee Resource Group
committed to creating a safer and more inclusive workplace for LGBTQ+ employees and allies ;
and
Whereas, LGBTQ+ community members from all walks of life - small business owners,
community leaders, and advocates have helped create a more just and inclusive community for
all; and
Whereas, progress for LGBTQ+ rights has often left out People of Color, transgender,
and gender non-conforming people; and
Whereas, Pride month is an opportunity to learn about how the LGBTQ+ community,
which is made up of many intersecting identities, continues to experience higher rates of
poverty, violence, harassment and discrimination; and
Whereas, the City of St. Louis Park reaffirms our commitment to challenge sexism,
homophobia, biphobia, transphobia and other negative prejudices. St. Louis Park strives to be a
community where our LGBTQ+ community members have a place to be their authentic selves
and receive respect, compassion and equality,
Now therefore, let it be known that the Mayor and city council of the City of St. Louis
Park, Minnesota, hereby honor June 2024 as Pride month in our community.
Wherefore, I set my hand and cause the
Great Seal of the City of St. Louis Park to be
affixed this 3rd day of June 2024.
_________________________________
Nadia Mohamed, mayor
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: June 3, 2024
Presentation: 3b
Executive summary
Title: Proclamation observing Juneteenth in 2024
Recommended action: Mayor to read proclamation observing Juneteenth in 2024.
Policy consideration: None
Summary: Juneteenth is a federal holiday that recognizes the day when enslaved people in
Texas were granted freedom from slavery under the Emancipation Proclamation, marking
freedom from chattel slavery across the country. Today, it is observed as a reminder of the
horrific legacy of slavery and an opportunity to recommit ourselves to fighting for human rights
for all.
Financial or budget considerations: Not applicable
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to being a leader in racial equity
and inclusion in order to create a more just and inclusive community for all.
Supporting documents: Resource page
Proclamation
Prepared by: Jocelyn Hernandez Guitron, race, equity and inclusion specialist
Reviewed by: Cheyenne Brodeen, administrative services director
Approved by: Cindy Walsh, deputy city manager
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 3b) Page 2
Title: Proclamation observing Juneteenth in 2024
Resource page
In recognition of Juneteenth, the City of St. Louis Park invites you to:
• Learn about the history of Juneteenth
o Juneteenth - Minnesota Humanities Center (mnhum.org)
o Juneteenth | National Museum of African American History and Culture (si.edu)
• Consider attending St. Louis Park’s Juneteenth event
o Juneteenth Celebration – Discover St. Louis Park (discoverstlouispark.com)
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 3b) Page 3
Title: Proclamation observing Juneteenth in 2024
Proclamation
“Juneteenth 2024”
Whereas, Much of the economic growth and development of our country was made
possible by the use of forced labor by generations of enslaved Africans who suffered the horror
of the transatlantic trafficking and chattel slavery of their people; and
Whereas, Juneteenth has been observed by Black Americans since 1865, when word of
the Emancipation Proclamation that granted freedom from slavery finally reached Texas - two
years after it was written into law; and
Whereas, Juneteenth serves as a reminder of the long struggle faced internally by the
United States to eradicate chattel slavery of Black people; and
Whereas, Recognition of Juneteenth as an observed city holiday in St. Louis Park is a
significant step in understanding the painful legacy of slavery; and
Whereas, Juneteenth is commemorated as “Freedom day” and opened possibilities for
generations of Black people in the United States; and
Whereas, The generational trauma of slavery and the ongoing impacts of anti-Black
institutional racism can still be felt and witnessed today; and
Whereas, Challenging racism and oppression in our communities honors Juneteenth
and contributes to our strategic priority of being a leader in racial equity and inclusion in order
to create a just community for all,
Now therefore, let it be known that the mayor and city council of the City of St. Louis
Park, Minnesota, hereby observe Juneteenth 2024 in our community.
Wherefore, I set my hand and cause the
Great Seal of the City of St. Louis Park to be
affixed this 3rd day of June 2024.
_________________________________
Nadia Mohamed, mayor
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: June 3, 2024
Minutes: 4a
Unofficial minutes
City council special study session
St. Louis Park, Minnesota
May 6, 2024
The meeting convened at 5:35 p.m.
Council members present: Mayor Nadia Mohamed, Paul Baudhuin, Tim Brausen, Sue Budd,
Yolanda Farris, Lynette Dumalag, Margaret Rog
Council members absent: none
Staff present: City manager (Ms. Keller), deputy city manager (Ms. Walsh), city clerk (Ms.
Kennedy), city attorney (Mr. Mattick), engineering director (Ms. Heiser), engineering services
manager (Mr. Elkin), public works director (Mr. Hall), finance director (Ms. Cruver)
Discussion items
1. City council meeting protocols.
Ms. Kennedy presented the report.
Council Member Rog asked for the rationale behind the proposal to change the city council’s
regular meeting time. Ms. Keller explained this was originally proposed by council members at
their annual retreat as a topic for future consideration. She noted many cities are moving to
earlier start times for evening meetings, ranging from 6-7 p.m., and brought up staff and
council considerations for starting and ending meetings earlier.
Council Member Budd stated she is flexible on meeting start time. Council Member Farris
stated her preference is an earlier start time.
Council Member Dumalag asked how long staff works after meetings are completed. Ms. Walsh
stated the communications staff stays an extra 30-45 minutes, noting schedules are
coordinated with their supervisor and any extra time worked is either flexed or they receive
comp time.
Council Member Rog stated she is open to change but noted 6 p.m. feels like more of a barrier
for the public as it is dinner time for many. She asked if there is flexibility to move the order of
items on the agenda, such as public hearings, so folks do not have to be at a meeting for two
hours before they get to speak.
Ms. Kennedy stated the order of items on the agenda is set in the adopted council rules of
procedure, which is under the council’s purview to amend.
Mayor Mohamed stated she is in favor of an earlier meeting start time and concluding the
meetings earlier.
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 4a) Page 2
Title: Special study session meeting minutes of May 6, 2024
Council Member Baudhuin stated he is in favor of an earlier start time, but also has concerns
about community engagement and asked if there is a way to gather data on what the
community prefers.
Ms. Keller stated currently there is no data concerning the earlier start time and but generally it
seems that people attend meetings when they have an interest in an item on the agenda. Ms.
Keller asked staff and the city attorney if they had observed any impacts on meeting
attendance in cities who have moved to earlier start times. Mr. Mattick shared the
considerations of staff time and a general increase in the number of public meetings that take
place in the evening. He stated in his experience, the agenda drives the public interest and
attendees will come to a meeting if they feel compelled to do so.
Mayor Mohamed stated that to truly engage people, meetings would not take place after work
hours or on weekday. She stated with this current structure, it makes it difficult for folks to
attend. She stated the earlier 30-minute start time probably would not make a difference.
Council Member Baudhuin asked if staff could publish a predicted public hearing meeting time.
Ms. Keller stated this becomes problematic if the meeting moves more quickly or slowly than
anticipated or communicated.
Council Member Brausen stated those that want to attend meetings do attend, and city council
meetings are one way to see community government at work.
Council Member Rog stated it would be helpful to give an approximate timeframe of public
hearings.
Council Member Dumalag stated that when working with an interested party, she usually
presents the agenda and points out the public hearing, stipulating that she cannot give a
precise timeframe of when the hearing would begin. She added she is in favor of an earlier start
time.
Council Member Brausen stated he likes keeping the meetings as is, but if the consensus is to
change, he would agree to the Economic Development Authority meeting starting at 6:00 p.m.
and the city council meeting starting at 6:15 p.m. He observed that special study sessions would
then start at the end of the regular meeting, and those evenings could be very long.
Council Member Rog shared that starting a meeting earlier than 6:00 p.m. makes it difficult for
her to make it in time due to her job. She understands the rationale, adding it seems that there
are more special study sessions recently, which makes the meetings longer as well.
Mayor Mohamed asked what works for this council body, noting that future councils can adapt
their meeting times. Ms. Keller observed that starting earlier than 6 p.m. is challenging for a
couple of members.
It was the consensus of the city council to proceed with a change so Economic Development
meetings begin at 6 p.m. and regular city council meetings begin at 6:15 p.m. On evenings when
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 4a) Page 3
Title: Special study session meeting minutes of May 6, 2024
only a study session is scheduled, the meeting would start at 6 p.m. unless otherwise noted on
the agenda based on need.
Council Member Brausen stated he is comfortable with the current protocols in place for public
comment. He is not in favor of adding a public comment period at every meeting, and added
this is a representative democracy and there are adequate opportunities for citizens to reach
out with concerns to the council directly or to staff. He observed that this time can become
performative or ineffective if attendees have expectations that cannot be met.
Council Member Rog asked for more information on first amendment considerations.
Ms. Kennedy stated the consideration refers to the inability to limit or control what a person
chooses to say during a public meeting.
Mr. Mattick stated public comments have become much more complex in terms of a productive
meeting versus a forum to yell. The amplification of comments has ramped up and, in some
cities, council members have observed public comments that come across as hate speech.
Mr. Mattick advised that by law, cities are not required to have an open public comment
process for residents to petition the government. In St. Louis Park, the ability for a person to
address the council on any item that is on the agenda is adequate. Residents also have the right
to contact council members directly. Open meeting law grants people the right to be present at
a meeting, but the first amendment does not give attendees a right to speak at a meeting
unless it is part of a public hearing item.
Mr. Mattick added that in Minnesota, there used to be a provision under law that allowed a
person who disrupted a meeting to be arrested and charged with disorderly conduct. That law
has been removed as it was found by the court to be unconstitutional. He noted there is no
mechanism to prevent people from speaking their mind, no matter how hateful. In the event of
a comment like this, some cities take a recess or adjourn the meeting and come back later. Mr.
Mattick observed that St. Louis Park is one of the most open meetings in the state.
Council Member Dumalag stated the school board has an open forum during their meetings,
once a month at the end of the meeting.
Council Member Budd stated members of the public can request time on a council agenda
using the form provided on the city website. She noted there has been only one submission
since the form was published last year.
Mayor Mohamed stated she has spoken to her colleagues around the country about the issue
of open comment periods at public meetings. She shared there have been instances of conflict
in other cities when people would bring their comments and concerns forward and found their
issues were not in the city’s purview to handle or the council was not prepared with
information to respond or assist at the meeting and referred people back to staff for follow-up.
This makes a city council meeting and the practice ineffective, and she would prefer not to go
down that road.
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 4a) Page 4
Title: Special study session meeting minutes of May 6, 2024
Council Member Budd stated members of the public can request time on a council agenda
using the form provided on the city website. She noted there has been only one submission
since the form was published last year. She stated that she is comfortable with the
opportunities the city currently offers for people to participate in meetings.
Council Member Rog agreed that an open public forum in this day and age is generally
ineffective. She would like to see the process for participation made even clearer, particularly
around how to elevate an idea or topic to the full council for consideration.
Council Member Dumalag stated public forums can be disruptive and it becomes very
challenging for council to maintain productivity. She stated she is in favor of keeping things as is
versus putting an open public comment period into city council meetings.
Council Member Baudhuin observed that public comments can go bad very quickly but can also
be powerful and beautiful at times. He noted a difference between public comments and
speaking privately with a council member. When the comment is public, there is greater
accountability as it is publicly stated, and not simply communication via an email or a call. He
noted this gives residents more voice and he is in favor, on occasion, of having public forums.
However, he noted that this opportunity can be abused, can derail productive discussion, and
keeps the council from conducting the business of the meeting. Council Member Baudhuin
pointed out that it is also part of the council’s role to listen to residents. He concluded that he
has seen disruption happen with the school board meetings at times and he is torn on this
issue.
Recess and Reconvene
It was moved by Council Member Brausen, seconded by Council Member Rog to recess the
special study session meeting at 6:20 p.m.
The motion passed 7-0.
The meeting reconvened at 7:43 p.m.
Council Member Baudhuin referenced city staff videos that have been placed on social media
recently. He added this platform would be helpful in sharing city council topics and agenda
information for upcoming meetings.
Ms. Kennedy stated staff is working on this and developing other tools based on previous
conversations around civic engagement. She acknowledged staff is also being mindful of the
fact that not all residents follow social media for city information.
Mayor Mohamed stated in the interest of time, the remaining operational topics on the list will
be discussed by council at a future study session.
2. Utility risk assessment update.
Ms. Heiser and Mr. Elkin presented the report.
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 4a) Page 5
Title: Special study session meeting minutes of May 6, 2024
Council Member Dumalag asked for details regarding the pipe that was assessed. Mr. Elkin
stated the pipe is made up of 20-foot sections and a break can happen at any point.
Council Member Rog asked whether it is more common to see a sanitary sewer break or be
blocked. Mr. Elkin stated roots can get into and block the pipe and also that pipes can develop
cracks, but typically pipe sections can be spot-repaired, cleaned and lined inside. He added
condition is key to the risk assessments.
Council Member Rog asked if breaks take the effects of corrosive soil into consideration. Mr.
Elkin stated they do not, since there is not a record of this. . Ms. Heiser stated that there is not
a comprehensive soil inventory everywhere in the city, and we only have records of the soil
when breaks do occur, or for construction projects.
Council Member Rog stated 26% of pipes are of unknown material. She asked if staff knows
how many might be lead pipes. Mr. Hall confirmed that there are no lead pipes or lead services
left within the city.
Council Member Rog asked for confirmation that the city identifies lead pipes when they go out
to do work, and Mr. Hall confirmed. She asked about those who have had no work done at their
home. Mr. Hall stated all water meters were changed in 2015-16, every service was checked,
and there are no lead pipes left. Ms. Heiser confirmed the city has not used or installed any
lead pipes within the city since September of 1951.
Council Member Rog asked about the 26% of pipes that are of unknown material, and how they
are factored into the risk analysis. Mr. Hall stated that it is more than likely those pipes are cast
iron, based on age.
Council Member Rog asked if this information is available to the public. Ms. Keller stated yes,
the presentation is available to the public on the city website.
Council Member Rog asked if there are any situations where the city would replace the sewer
instead of lining it. Mr. Elkin stated that the city would replace the sewer if the section
collapsed and was past the point of repair.
Council Member Baudhuin noted lining can only be done once and at 10% of the cost of
replacement. Ms. Heiser confirmed this was correct.
Council Member Budd asked if new buildings developed in the city could impact the sewer
system. Ms. Heiser observed that it depends and noted that a redevelopment on 36th Street
brought the city to the edge of capacity and the proposed development at Nash Frame put the
city over limit, along with the future redevelopment of the Burlington Coat Factory site.
Council Member Budd asked if, in general, the city has 200% capacity. Ms. Heiser stated no.
Council Member Rog asked about pavement management and costs. She stated Ward 1 has a
lot of areas coded in red, yellow and orange as per the report’s color code. She also asked
about critical areas to review and if the information in the presentation supports continuing
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 4a) Page 6
Title: Special study session meeting minutes of May 6, 2024
with pavement management plans for 2027. Ms. Heiser stated that it will take time to
understand how the risk assessment will be incorporated into the CIP. When performing pipe
replacement, a road still needs to be dug up. There are costs in the long term and lots of things
to consider in replacement plans.
Council Member Budd asked if this conversation pertains to the 2026 budget. Ms. Cruver stated
the risk assessment data will not be incorporated in the 2025 budget, since she will be
presenting the 2025 budget to the council this summer. Ms. Heiser added that any changes
would be approved in 2025, designed in 2026 and implemented in 2027.
Council Member Rog asked about the privately-owned utilities at Knollwood. Mr. Elkin stated
when a private pipe is replaced, they are responsible for paying, but they will need permits
from the city to do the work. He added, however, the city is not financially responsible for the
private utilities at Knollwood.
Council Member Brausen asked about the West End and if that is private utilities. Mr. Elkin
stated it depends on where it is, if it is on public right of way, it is likely public utilities, but
utilities in the Costco area and the developments along Highway 394 are private land.
Written Reports
3. Letter of no-default Beltline Station development – Ward 1.
Communications/meeting check-in (verbal)
Council Member Dumalag referenced the Parktacular parade and asked how the council should
attend, noting that funds are subject to public purpose. Council members discussed further
details and possibilities for their presence at Parktacular and Ms. Keller confirmed public
purpose guidelines.
Ms. Keller stated she will forward the information pertaining to this issue to the council.
The meeting adjourned at 9:02 p.m.
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Nadia Mohamed, mayor
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: June 3, 2024
Minutes: 4b
Unofficial minutes
City council meeting
St. Louis Park, Minnesota
May 20, 2024
1. Call to order.
Mayor Mohamed called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m.
a. Pledge of allegiance
b. Roll call
Council members present: Mayor Nadia Mohamed, Paul Baudhuin, Tim Brausen, Sue Budd,
Lynette Dumalag, Yolanda Farris, Margaret Rog
Council members absent: none
Staff present: City manager (Ms. Keller), city attorney (Mr. Mattick), deputy city manager (Ms.
Walsh), administrative services director (Ms. Brodeen), community engagement coordinator
(Mr. Coleman), deputy city clerk (Ms. Scott-Lerdal); fire chief Koering
2. Approve agenda.
It was moved by Council Member Dumalag, seconded by Council Member Farris, to approve the
agenda as presented.
The motion passed 7-0.
3. Presentations.
a. Recognition of Daniel Yaekel on his 31 years of service with the Fire Department
Mayor Mohamed read Lt. Daniel Yaekel’s recognition of 31 years of service into the record.
Fire Chief Koering recognized Lt. Yaekel also for his many accomplishments and contributions to
the fire department. He described how Lt. Yaekel brings a sense of calm and control in a crisis
situation and knows how to build relationships both within and outside of the department . Lt.
Yaekel’s presence will be missed. Fire Chief Koering thanked Lt. Yaekel for supporting the
department all these many years.
Lt. Yaekel thanked Chief Koering, the city council, and his firefighter colleagues for their
support, sharing that this has been his dream job. He shared that he was honored and blessed
to work for the city of St. Louis Park.
Mayor Mohamed also thanked Fire Chief Koering for his service. City Manager Keller noted that
Chief Koering has recently given his retirement notice.
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 4b) Page 2
Title: City council meeting minutes of May 20, 2024
Council Member Rog added her thanks also for Lt. Yaekel’s many years of service. She noted
the fire department is regarded as the most trusted public safety institution and she can see
why that is so.
Council Member Brausen added his thanks for Lt. Yaekel’s service and his work to uplift the
culture of the fire department, noting the department’s response to increased medical outcalls.
b. Recognition of donations
Mayor Mohamed thanked the large number of donors for their contributions to the Parks and
Recreation Access to Fun Scholarship program. She also thanked Park Coin for donating $250,
Paul Reetz for donating $100, and the SLP Friends of the Arts for donating $50 for the fire
prevention programs and equipment. She also thanked 95 individuals for donating $1349 to the
Parks and Recreation department and the League of Minnesota Cities for donating $950 to the
annual conference attendance fees for Council Member Budd and City Manager Keller to
attend.
Council Member Budd thanked residents for their donations, and stated their generosity is
reflective of how the city values parks and public safety.
4. Minutes.
a. Minutes of April 15, 2024 city council meeting
b. Minutes of April 15, 2024 special study session
c. Minutes of April 24, 2024 study session
d. Minutes of May 6, 2024 city council meeting
It was moved by Council Member Dumalag, seconded by Council Member Farris, to approve the
minutes of April 15, 2024 city council meeting and special study session; the minutes of April 24,
2024 study session; and, the minutes of May 6, 2024 city council meeting as presented.
The motion passed 7-0.
5. Consent items.
a. Resolution No. 24-062 honoring Daniel Yaekel on his 31 years of service with the Fire
Department
b. Resolution No. 24-063 supporting the City of St. Louis Park becoming a 2024-2025
Minnesota GreenCorps member host site
c. Resolution No. 24-064 to accept donations to the Fire Department
d. Resolution No. 24-065 to accept donations to the Parks and Recreation Department’s
Access to Fun scholarship program
e. Resolution No. 24-066 to accept donations from the League of Minnesota Cities
f. Resolution No. 24-067 to accept FEMA Assistance to Firefighters Grant
g. Resolution No. 24-068 approving letter of no default – Beltline Station Development –
Ward 1
h. Approve bid for 2024 Cedar Lake Road improvement project (4023-1100) – Ward 4
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 4b) Page 3
Title: City council meeting minutes of May 20, 2024
i. Resolution No. 24-069 authorizing final payment for watermain inspection support
work (4022-5000)
j. Approve professional services contract for Comprehensive Safety Action Plan
k. Approve temporary extension of licensed premises – Yard House – Ward 4
Council Member Rog stated she is happy to see donations to the park and recreation
department for the fun scholarship programs. She hopes there will be more donations such as
this in the future, so that more residents can participate in programs and fewer will be turned
away.
It was moved by Council Member Rog, seconded by Council Member Brausen, to approve the
consent items as listed; and to waive reading of all resolutions and ordinances.
The motion passed 7-0.
6. Public hearings – none.
7. Regular business – none.
8. Communications and announcements
Ms. Keller noted on June 8, there will be an annual clean-up day from 8 a.m. – 1 p.m. and there
is more information on the city website.
Council Member Rog noted there are two events on gardening, one on May 21 from 5 -7 p.m. at
the ROC for a tool swap, and a rain garden workshop at Willow Park from 5:30 – 7:30 p.m.
Council Member Dumalag noted on May 22 at the R OC, students from Susan Lindgren will
present projects at a showcase and council members may attend to speak with students about
their projects.
9. Adjournment.
The meeting adjourned at 6:57 p.m.
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Nadia Mohamed, mayor
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: June 3, 2024
Minutes: 4c
Unofficial minutes
City council special study session
St. Louis Park, Minnesota
May 20, 2024
The meeting convened at 6:57 p.m.
Council members present: Mayor Nadia Mohamed, Paul Baudhuin, Tim Brausen, Sue Budd,
Yolanda Farris, Lynette Dumalag, Margaret Rog
Council members absent: none
Staff present: City manager (Ms. Keller), deputy city manager (Ms. Walsh), city attorney (Mr.
Mattick), administrative services director (Ms. Brodeen), city clerk (Ms. Kennedy), community
engagement coordinator (Mr. Coleman), communications director (Ms. Smith)
Discussion items
1. Boards and commissions roles and responsibilities, appointment process and
compensation.
Ms. Brodeen presented the staff report. She reviewed the policy considerations that council is
asked to provide direction on including how the council wants to provide policy direction to
boards and commissions, does the council want to make changes to the appointment process
and does the council want to offer compensation to eligible members.
Council Member Rog asked how the council provides policy direction to boards and
commissions when boards and commissions should be providing recommendations to the
council. Ms. Walsh stated the boards and commissions need to know what to discuss. They
would receive general direction from the council and then provide recommendations and
direction back.
Council Member Rog asked if the questions may be asked differently by the various boards and
commissions, as they have different functions. Ms. Brodeen stated the policy questions for the
purposes of this discussion are only directed towards the advisory boards and commissions. Ms.
Walsh clarified there could be separate policy questions and discussions in the future related to
statutory boards and commissions if the council wants to make changes. The questions tonight
are how – and how often - council wants to get information relating to policy direction to the
advisory boards and commissions.
Council Member Brausen asked what the mechanism is to send policy direction to boards and
commissions.
Mayor Mohamed added that statutory commissions already have their set items to address, so
those items do not change. Ms. Keller agreed, noting the statutory commissions already have a
set scope of work.
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 4c) Page 2
Title: Special study session meeting minutes of May 20, 2024
Council Member Dumalag shared that when she was on the planning commission, they were
tasked with reviewing the comprehensive plan and accessory dwelling units, which are not in
statute, and was directed by staff or council to review. She stated there are also times when a
commission does the work directed by the council, and the council will not accept a
recommendation.
Council Member Farris asked if there was a time when the council and commissions connected.
Ms. Walsh confirmed this did take place and described how commissions presented to the
council individually and as a group.
Council Member Budd shared she has heard commissions preferred meeting individually with
the council. Council Member Rog agreed and stated the challenge was there was no mechanism
for follow-up when all the commissions met with the council together.
Council Member Dumalag added when she was on the planning commission, she thought it was
more effective to meet and present the work plan to the council as an individual commission
and not in a large group. She added the group meeting was more of a celebration with a
presentation.
Council Member Dumalag stated a policy does not fit for all commissions and boards, so there
needs to be a process that works for both advisory and statutory groups.
Council Member Baudhuin stated the annual meeting is not enough and there needs to be a
mechanism that improves communication, possibly using liaisons to both the council and
commissions. Commissions should be responsible for staying informed via meeting minutes and
bringing a report back to the council each month. He stated he would be willing to be a liaison
to several of the boards and commissions.
Mayor Mohamed noted this would take a lot of time for the council members, noting that some
have time, and some do not. She would not want anyone penalized for not being a liaison, nor
does she desire to create a culture that might be uncomfortable.
Council Member Baudhuin stated he is not talking about attending every month, but possibly
attending one or two meetings a year and creating more communication between commissions
and the council. He added commissions generally do not communicate with the council unless
they go through staff, which has created barriers. He stated reading emails and reading through
minutes would be helpful in the communication process.
Mayor Mohamed stated she keeps hearing the commissions cannot contact the council and
questioned where that narrative is coming from. She stated her email is open and feels like they
are allowed and do contact council members, so she is concerned about this perception.
Council Member Budd stated the time constraint might be helped if there is a liaison between
the council and commissions versus council members reviewing all the commissions’ agendas
and minutes.
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 4c) Page 3
Title: Special study session meeting minutes of May 20, 2024
Council Member Brausen stated he is not supportive of a council liaison to the boards and
commissions because council members end up being an advocate for that group. He stated he
does read all the minutes of boards and commissions in the packets, and it is important to read
all the material. He added he shares the mayor’s concerns about time constraints. He advised if
a commissioner has an issue, they should contact council members.
Council Member Rog stated she is concerned the council will return to its former practice with
boards and commissions. Boards and commissions want more of the council’s time and it is
concerning that this is not happening. The consultants stated these issues should be worked on
over time. She asked if the liaison model can be attempted at this point by the council. She
noted also that Council Member Brausen’s concerns about a council member being an advocate
for a commission and stated that staff has functioned as an advocate for commissions as well.
She stated board and commission members are residents and the council are residents also,
and there is a special relationship that is different than with staff.
Council Member Brausen stated he would not like the liaison model and prefers to meet with
commissions at council meetings and create more engagement that way.
Council Member Farris stated she would not like the liaison model either and would prefer
commissions to come to the council to present and discuss their work plans.
Mayor Mohamed asked if the liaison model would pertain to the statutory commissions or just
the advisory bodies. Council Member Baudhuin clarified that he was speaking of advisory
commissions only.
Mayor Mohamed asked if the liaison model is adopted, what happens if not all council
members can participate, leaving all the commissions to a few council member liaisons.
Council Member Rog stated she would like to give the liaison model a try to see how it goes and
see if it takes as much time as they think it will.
Council Member Brausen asked if the liaison model is used, would the liaison be the person
providing direction instead of the city council. He asked how the model would affect the full
council setting policy and hearing back from boards and commissions.
Council Member Rog gave an example of how the liaison role could benefit a board or
commission. She provided an example of the Housing Authority board and her understanding is
that they do not hear what the council is doing. She offered that if she were the liaison to them,
she would work to inform the board and work with staff to help them have an awareness of
what is happening.
Council Member Farris asked why staff cannot do that work and furthermore, why do council
members need to take it on.
Ms. Keller stated there are potential unintended consequences in a liaison model. There is a
possibility that the group forms a special relationship with the liaison, when ultimately, boards
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 4c) Page 4
Title: Special study session meeting minutes of May 20, 2024
and commissions need to have a special relationship with the council and not just with one
individual. She said this would also make direction from the council very unclear.
Council Member Dumalag stated the council can look at priorities for each commission and
then when the council meets with each commission, they can discuss their work plans.
Mayor Mohamed stated she likes the idea of meeting about priorities at the beginning of the
year. She added there is also a lack of relationship and communication because the council has
not met with boards and commissions for so long. This policy direction should come from the
entire council, adding this model works best for her. Once there is efficiency again in
communication and closing informational gaps, then the city council can add to the basic
process.
Council Member Baudhuin stated he understands the concerns with the liaison model, but
would like staff to investigate the concept and think about the pros and cons. He does not know
how this can all be decided if the council does not get into the “small bowl” details.
Mayor Mohamed pointed out that the last time the council asked for staff to work on this
policy question, staff put a great deal of time and effort into the work and council did not
accept the recommendations. Council Member Dumalag agreed.
Council Member Baudhuin asked how then the council makes decisions if they don’t get into
the details.
Council Member Brausen observed that four council members do not want to pursue the
liaison model, so he does not want staff to put more work into it at this point. Council Member
Baudhuin questioned if the council did not come to consensus on the liaison model, what
alternatives there are.
Council Member Rog added she is also frustrated and noted it is a heavy lift for the council to
be asked to move forward without more information on how to address the policy
recommendations.
Ms. Brodeen clarified that staff proposed this policy question to the council based on the
direction from council; the council previously stated they wanted to play a bigger role with
boards and commissions. Staff needed more information from the council on what they wanted
their role to be. Ms. Keller added that staff have provided a great deal of data in previous
reports and presentations; staff recommendations were not accepted, and council asked for
more discussion.
Council Member Budd stated she is hearing the options are the liaison model, the annual
meeting model, and the model meeting individually with boards and commission. She also
shared the option of doing a session like the legislative sessions where priorities are discussed.
Council Member Dumalag asked if the city website portal can be used for boards and
commissions to submit items also.
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 4c) Page 5
Title: Special study session meeting minutes of May 20, 2024
Council Member Baudhuin stated he does not want one council member to speak for the entire
council but thought of the liaison model as a way to bring commissioner’s questions forward to
the council. He asked if commissions could submit study session topics and questions. Ms.
Brodeen confirmed that a general request form is currently available to any member of the
public on the city website.
Council Member Rog stated it is important that commissioners have a connection to the council
and a way to communicate with them. She agreed that having a board and commission study
session item request form that goes to the council - the same way as council member study
session item request forms go to the full council - is important and would be very helpful.
Council Member Brausen shared that the sooner the council can have an annual meeting with
boards and commissions the better and bringing them into the discussions will be helpful.
Ms. Keller observed that a majority of the council agrees on an annual meeting with boards and
commissions to discuss priorities. The majority of the council also agree on holding one-on-one
meetings with commissions to discuss the systems approach and their work plans. She added
there is also interest in commissions and boards utilizing an existing tool on the city website
portal; using the request forms as a way to elevate items directly to the council.
Council Member Baudhuin added he believes requests made by the boards and commissions
should have higher priority than general requests.
Mayor Mohamed asked Council Member Rog to clarify an earlier comment, and asked if there
is more information she is aware of with the Housing Authority. Council Member Rog stated the
board has expressed a desire for more support for housing in the city, and that there was a
board or commission specifically for housing. She stated they have indicated to staff and the
consultants that they want more from their roles and they see themselves as being
underutilized. She noted Thom Miller did email staff and has discussed this with her as well,
and stated the council needs to discuss this further.
Mayor Mohamed stated she is aware of the Housing Authority’s priorities and noted if they
were elevated, then it would show favoritism to the Housing Authority, adding the importance
of perception.
Ms. Keller asked if the scope of work could be changed for some of the statutory commissions.
Mr. Mattick stated the scope cannot be changed on statutory commissions; subjects outside of
defined limits cannot be addressed.
Ms. Keller asked if there is interest from the council to discuss the scope of statutory
commissions. The council’s consensus agreed on further discussion.
Mayor Mohamed asked if the council is interested in changing the process for appointments.
Council Member Brausen stated he would like to change the process and would like staff to
recommend who should be interviewed.
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 4c) Page 6
Title: Special study session meeting minutes of May 20, 2024
Council Member Budd stated it is a very good process and she appreciated the council was able
to narrow down the applicants and then make recommendations.
Council Member Bauduin stated he has not been through the process and does not have a firm
stance on it.
Council Member Rog stated she would be interested in term limits, diversity, expanding
membership, having diversity targets, holding board seats open until diversity targets are met,
and clear criteria such as diversity or experience. She added she would like to see publicizing
the racial and gender component of boards and commissions and holding the council and city
accountable to the composition of commissions.
Council Member Dumalag added she likes the idea of term limits to give others a chance to
participate and give people opportunities for leadership. She also expressed support for
showing our demographic breakdown as it relates to our racial equity policies and who the
commission serves.
Mayor Mohamed agreed with the comments made, but noted she does not support the current
rating system because it has not worked in the past. She supports people of color serving on
boards and commissions opportunities but is not in support of targets or holding a spot open
for a person of color. She noted concerns that it may diminish a person of color if someone is
perceived to be chosen solely to achieve a diversity goal.
Mr. Mattick stated he would need to understand more about holding a spot open for certain
appointees. He stated professional qualifications and racial analysis are two different things.
Council Member Rog suggested holding an application process open until diverse candidates
have applied, ensuring persons of color can be included in the candidate pool.
Mayor Mohamed agreed with this versus holding a position open for a diverse candidate.
Council Member Farris shared her concern that any process needs to be fair.
Council Member Brausen felt staff should screen applicants, but Council Member Dumalag did
not agree. Council Member Rog stated she would prefer the council to screen applicants and
require resumes as well.
Council Member Brausen stated the council needs to decide the criteria used before agreeing
to staff doing all the screening.
It was the consensus of the council that staff do the initial screening of applicants using criteria
determined by the council, then council conduct scoring and further review.
Council Member Rog shared that her work in grants and scoring criteria has taught her that
applicants need to know which scoring criteria is part of the application process. She stated this
information needs to be discussed before applications go out. The resume should also be
included, though she noted this can be a barrier.
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 4c) Page 7
Title: Special study session meeting minutes of May 20, 2024
Council Member Dumalag stated she is also interested in an applicant’s experience. A resume
or body of work should also be included.
Ms. Keller stated it was the consensus of the council that staff would establish application
criteria, screen applicants and provide recommendations on who to interview. All applications
would be passed on to the council as part of the process.
Mayor Mohamed noted the final question the council will need to address related to providing
compensation to eligible board members. She does agree with the option of $25 per meeting
with 22 meetings per year, or $49 per meeting with 12 meetings per year.
Council Member Brausen stated he is in favor of a stipend and stated $49 per month is
acceptable for all members of commissions and for all monthly meetings.
Council Member Rog stated she would like to pay more, although she understands the tax
implications. She stated there is a lot of work, research as well as other prep work that happens
outside of the meeting itself. She added the Maple Grove model is paid per quarter.
Council Member Baudhuin agreed.
Council Member Brausen added if a commissioner misses more than three meetings, they
should have a conversation with staff.
Ms. Keller and Mr. Mattick determined that more information was needed on any legal or HR
factors impacting on the salary and stipend models.
Ms. Brodeen summarized that staff would bring edits on the boards and commission policy as
next steps.
Council Member Budd asked if virtual attendance is allowed. Mr. Mattick stated it is allowed
but must be scheduled in advance, conducted from a public place, and the address of the
location where the member will be appearing from must be included in the legal notice of the
meeting.
Ms. Keller stated that communications staff are not currently assigned to boards and
commissions meetings, which would be needed to provide the level of tech support needed for
virtual attendance.
2. City council meeting protocols
Ms. Kennedy explained this is a continuation of a previous discussion.
Mayor Mohamed addressed the council’s protocols when a member needs to be absent. She
stated protocol has generally been to email her on an issue if a council member needs to be
absent from a meeting so they can have their input shared with the group. Someone who is
absent cannot cast a formal vote, but the council member’s position will be in the record of
minutes and colleagues have an opportunity to hear their thoughts.
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 4c) Page 8
Title: Special study session meeting minutes of May 20, 2024
Council Member Dumalag stated she summarized statements from absent council members at
the last meeting as Mayor Pro Tem and thought it went well. Delaying the meeting was not an
option and the council did their best to include input from missing members.
Council Member Rog gave the example of the Dakota Park Bridge issue and other ward-specific
issues where a council member’s comments have a case to make. If that ward representative is
absent, it would be beneficial to explore if it would be legally allowed to delay a vote, especially
on a longstanding issue. In some rare and important cases, it would be beneficial to hold off a
vote or decision until the council member could be present at the meeting.
Council Member Brausen stated except for land use issues, there is a chance to go back and
discuss further and revisit an issue.
Mr. Mattick stated it is legally possible to delay but there might be constraints in some cases on
land use. Ms. Keller added there may be constraints also when a project is going out for bid.
Council Member Baudhuin stated the council members need to note planned absences from
meetings so staff can adjust the agenda. Ms. Keller confirmed that staff do adjust meeting
agendas for when council members have communicated in advance that they will be absent.
Council Member Baudhuin stated it seems to be a rare occurrence to miss an important issue,
but added he would like to see how the process can be more accommodating.
Council Member Farris stated that she was aware of Council Member Rog’s opinion before the
meeting and so did not feel the need to postpone the vote.
Council Member Rog stated she just wanted her voice heard at the Dakota Park Bridge meeting
and to be able to ask questions about some new information that was provided. She asked if
there was openness to requesting that an item on an agenda be postponed if needed.
Ms. Kennedy stated that opportunity exists currently, and each item needs to be considered on
a case-by-case basis, depending on the circumstances involved. Ms. Keller stated the process
would be to ask for a delay at the meeting if the council needs more information, but to delay
an issue for one person who may be absent from the meeting introduces variability and can
also be weaponized. She stated the criteria should be ‘does the council need more information
before they can make a decision.’
Mayor Mohamed stated the city council does not generally make a decision based on what one
person wants. The council makes decisions as a group, based on many factors. She noted if
someone is out sick and misses a vote, then they miss the vote. She added even if one ward
member is out, residents of that ward still have three people representing them, including the
mayor and two at-large council members, so there is no way someone will not be represented.
She added she does not want to set a precedent for future city councils either.
Council Member Baudhuin asked about tabling an issue at a meeting or a study session. Mr.
Mattick stated that can be done at either meeting if there is consensus by the council. Council
Member Baudhuin stated he is comfortable with that process.
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 4c) Page 9
Title: Special study session meeting minutes of May 20, 2024
Ms. Keller asked the policy question of offering a call-in option for residents and asked the
council for their input. Ms. Smith reviewed the practice that was implemented during the
pandemic, noting why the city stopped the practice once the council was able to safely conduct
meetings in-person. She clarified that there are numerous considerations, not the least of
which is that technology sometimes can fail and this creates significant issues if a person is told
they can participate remotely and then are unable to do so.
Mr. Mattick added the legal concern that if technology fails during a public hearing, whether
the public hearing was valid is called into question.
Mayor Mohamed added some people are more comfortable speaking on an issue remotely
than coming in person.
Council Member Rog added she would like to receive any comments staff receives after the
agenda packet goes out earlier than at the. Ms. Kennedy stated staff can both email comments
and print them out to have at the meeting for the council members.
Council Member Brausen stated he is in favor of the public hearing protocols listed in the report
and feels that people get ample opportunity to speak.
Ms. Keller stated an updated protocol is quarterly mandatory training before regular council
meetings. For these training sessions and council meetings or study sessions that start at or
before 5:30 p.m., food will be available for attendees. She noted there likely will be fewer
meetings going forward that start at or earlier than 5:30 p.m.
Mayor Mohamed noted that sharing a meal after the council meeting has always been an
important way for council members to connect.
Council Member Brausen added that council members do not discuss city business at these
dinners after council meetings, but they are a good way to team-build, and he would be
interested in doing these once per month. He stated it is understood that the council members
would need to participate at their own expense.
Mayor Mohamed offered to coordinate shared meals after meetings if the council members are
interested.
Council Member Rog stated it does not fall within staff’s responsibility to get the council
members together socially, but if the council members want to go out after an early meeting is
over, that is fine and should be optional. She asked how staff became involved in coordinating
events for the council. Ms. Kennedy stated the council had asked staff to help coordinate
dinners or social events at a previous council retreat.
Written Reports – none.
Communications/meeting check-in (verbal)
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 4c) Page 10
Title: Special study session meeting minutes of May 20, 2024
Ms. Walsh provided an update on staff recommendations regarding a consultant for the next
phase of the council retreat that was requested by council. The general consensus of the
council was to proceed with staff recommendations.
The meeting adjourned at 9:30 p.m.
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Nadia Mohamed, mayor
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: June 3, 2024
Consent agenda item: 5a
Executive summary
Title: Approve city disbursements
Recommended action: Motion to approve city disbursement claims for the period of April 27-
May 28, 2024.
Policy consideration: Does the city council approve city disbursements for the period ending
May 28, 2024?
Summary: The finance department prepares this report monthly for the city council to review
and approve. The attached report shows both city disbursements paid by physical check and
those by wire transfer or Automated Clearing House (ACH) when applicable.
Financial or budget considerations: Review and approval of the information by council is
required by the city charter and provides another layer of oversight to further ensure fiscal
stewardship.
Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable.
Supporting documents: Disbursement summary
Prepared by: Estela Mulugeta, accounting specialist
Reviewed by: Amelia Cruver, finance director
Approved by: Kim Keller, city manager
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
5/28/20244/27/2024 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
323.003RD LAIR SKATEBOARD PROGRAMS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
323.00
86.50ABERNATHY, LISA ORGANIZED REC G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR
86.50
284.67ADVANCED ENG & ENVIRONMENTAL SRVCS WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
732.00WATER UTILITY G&A ENGINEERING SERVICES
284.67SEWER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
591.00SEWER UTILITY G&A ENGINEERING SERVICES
284.66STORM WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
2,177.00
880.21AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES FACILITIES MCTE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
134.78POLICE G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
378.99POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
187.95POLICE G & A POLICE EQUIPMENT
4,687.71POLICE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
68.97FIRE OPERATIONS FIRE PREVENTION SUPPLIES
176.31PUBLIC WORKS G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
346.86SEWER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
883.64TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENT
63.98NATURAL RESOURCES G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
7,809.40
190.00AMERICAN CITY BUSINESS JOURNALS INC COMM & MARKETING G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
190.00
370.98AMERICAN PRESSURE, INC.ENTERPRISE G & A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
370.98
81,866.50APADANAMUNICIPAL BLDGS G&A IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
81,866.50
627.90ARC DOCUMENT SOLUTIONS, LLC TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
627.90
35,316.96ASET SUPPLY AND PAPER INC SOLID WASTE G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
35,316.96
725.24ASPEN MILLS FIRE OPERATIONS UNIFORMS
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 2
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
5/28/20244/27/2024 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
725.24
4,387.00BADGER STATE INSPECTION LLC WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
79,950.00WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
84,337.00
32.05BALLOU SARA WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
32.05
306.00BARNA, GUZY & STEFFEN LTD HUMAN RESOURCES GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
306.00
85.65BATTERIES PLUS BULBS WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
21.15SEWER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
106.80
1,610.32BAUER BUILT INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
1,610.32
37,962.19BECKER ARENA PRODUCTS PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
1,660.00REC CENTER BUILDING GENERAL SUPPLIES
39,622.19
42,254.75BITUMINOUS ROADWAYS INC STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
42,254.75
730.36BOB BARKER COMPANY, INC.POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
730.36
72.11BOLTON & MENK INC STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
373.62PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
72.11WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
45.89SEWER CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
91.77STORM WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
655.50
1.00BONFES PLUMBING & HEATING BLDG & ENERGY G & A DUE TO OTHER GOVTS
110.00BLDG & ENERGY G & A PLUMBING
111.00
48.60BOUND TREE MEDICAL, LLC POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 3
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
5/28/20244/27/2024 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
2,115.90FIRE OPERATIONS OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
2,164.50
54,804.86BOYER TRUCKS VEHICLES & EQUIPMENT G&A MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENT
54,804.86
164.96BRADY WORLDWIDE PUBLIC WORKS G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
164.97VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
329.93
74.85BRANDMARKER LEAH WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
74.85
172.02BRECKLE WILLIAM FIRE OPERATIONS SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
172.02
33.50BRODEN, PAUL CABLE TV G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR
33.50
1,400.00BROOKSIDE MINNOCO PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
1,400.00
7.50BROXEY BRANDON BLDG & ENERGY G & A DUE TO OTHER GOVTS
337.50BLDG & ENERGY G & A PLUMBING
345.00
1,917.36BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS INC PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE LANDSCAPING MATERIALS
1,917.36
75.14BTR OF MINNESOTA LLC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
75.14
202.70BUILDING CONTROLS & SOLUTIONS FACILITIES MCTE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
202.70
40.00BUNDUL JAMIE BEAUTIFICATION / FLOWERS TREE MAINTENANCE
40.00
822.74BUSINESS ESSENTIALS COMM & MARKETING G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
822.74
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 4
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
5/28/20244/27/2024 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
396.00CAMPBELL KNUTSON PROF ASSOC ADMINISTRATION G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
72.00COMM & MARKETING G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
884.50IT G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
18,209.73FINANCE G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
180.00COMM DEV G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
6,582.042023 MSA STREET PROJECT G&A LEGAL SERVICES
432.00WOODDALE STATION TIF DIST G&A LEGAL SERVICES
26,756.27
95.68CAPOBIANCO, JENNIFER POLICE G & A TRAVEL/MEETINGS
95.68
5,000.00CARE RESOURCE CONNECTION FIRE OPERATIONS GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
5,000.00
151.87CARLSON DAVID WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
151.87
1,127.00CBIZ BENEFITS & INSURANCE SERVICES INC EMPLOYEE BENEFITS FUND G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
1,127.00
6,339.55CDW GOVERNMENT INC TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENT
6,339.55
1,000.00CEDAR PARTNERS LLC ESCROWS GENERAL
1,000.00
68,912.96CENTER FOR ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT AFFORD HOUS TRUST FUND G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
250.00MOVE-UP PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
69,162.96
13,466.23CENTERPOINT ENERGY FACILITIES MCTE G & A HEATING GAS
2,402.52FACILITY OPERATIONS HEATING GAS
6,255.10WATER UTILITY G&A HEATING GAS
578.76REILLY G & A HEATING GAS
782.90SEWER UTILITY G&A HEATING GAS
2,151.43PARK MAINTENANCE G & A HEATING GAS
8,644.49REC CENTER BUILDING HEATING GAS
34,281.43
19.80CENTRAL MCGOWAN CONCESSIONS OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 5
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
5/28/20244/27/2024 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
19.80
11,450.00CENTRAL PENSION FUND EMPLOYEE BENEFITS FUND BAL SHT OTHER RETIREMENT
11,450.00
227.40CENTURY LINK CABLE TV G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
569.91CELLPHONES, IPADS, ETC.TELEPHONE
797.31
5.00CHAMBERLAIN LAURA COMM DEV PLANNING G & A TRAINING
32.23COMM DEV PLANNING G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR
37.23
29.01CHAMPOUX KATELYN COMM DEV PLANNING G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR
29.01
100.00CHANG MAYLYNN PARK BUILDINGS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS
100.00
434.34CINTAS CORPORATION FACILITIES MCTE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
77.24FACILITIES MCTE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
32.40PUBLIC WORKS G & A DEACTIVIATE GENERAL SUPPLIES
50.77PUBLIC WORKS G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
41.32WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
82.64PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
60.75PARK MAINTENANCE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
146.93REC CENTER BUILDING GENERAL SUPPLIES
82.40VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
348.36VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
1,357.15
346.24CITIZENS INDEPENDENT BANK GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
1,334.92ADMINISTRATION G & A TRAINING
374.35-ADMINISTRATION G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
8,950.94ADMINISTRATION G & A TRAVEL/MEETINGS
632.06ADMINISTRATION G & A MEETING EXPENSE
948.18HUMAN RESOURCES RECRUITMENT
33.57HUMAN RESOURCES RECOGNITION
313.27HUMAN RESOURCES SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
20.00HUMAN RESOURCES TRAINING
84.60COMM & MARKETING G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 6
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
5/28/20244/27/2024 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
240.80COMM & MARKETING G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
419.00COMM & MARKETING G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
244.46COMM & MARKETING G & A TRAINING
1,922.08IT G & A TRAINING
1,050.40IT G & A TRAVEL/MEETINGS
835.00ASSESSING G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
1,847.58FINANCE G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
1.00-FINANCE G & A MISC EXPENSE
19.36COMM DEV PLANNING G & A POSTAGE
49.27COMM DEV PLANNING G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
48.00COMM DEV PLANNING G & A TRAINING
441.70FACILITIES MCTE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
693.32POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
1,190.00POLICE G & A POLICE EQUIPMENT
2,431.13POLICE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
3,126.00POLICE G & A TRAINING
98.00POLICE G & A TRAVEL/MEETINGS
957.49POLICE G & A MEETING EXPENSE
1,265.00POLICE G & A LICENSES
1,736.02FIRE OPERATIONS FIRE PREVENTION SUPPLIES
175.79FIRE OPERATIONS OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
5.14FIRE OPERATIONS SMALL TOOLS
255.96FIRE OPERATIONS UNIFORMS
305.00FIRE OPERATIONS SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
1,067.00FIRE OPERATIONS TRAINING
1,448.93FIRE OPERATIONS SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
305.00BLDG & ENERGY G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
150.00BLDG & ENERGY G & A TRAINING
550.00SUSTAINABILITY G&A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
4.33SUSTAINABILITY G&A MEETING EXPENSE
1,937.29PUBLIC WORKS G & A DEACTIVIATE SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
34.23ENGINEERING G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
134.95PUBLIC WORKS G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
66.87CABLE TV G & A OTHER
26.11HOUSING REHAB G & A POSTAGE
12.26SIDEWALK & TRAILS G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
28.60STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
167.53PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
329.00DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
1,150.99WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
151.18WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 7
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
5/28/20244/27/2024 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
16.34SEWER CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
200.00SOLID WASTE G&A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
32.69STORM WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
280.00EMPLOYEE BENEFITS FUND G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
34.72ORGANIZED REC G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
37.50ORGANIZED REC G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
242.01ORGANIZED REC G & A PRINTING & PUBLISHING
240.00ORGANIZED REC G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
34.95SOFTBALLOPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
93.23SPECIAL PROGRAMS ADVERTISING
131.00SPECIAL EVENTS GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
426.46HOLIDAY PROGRAMS GENERAL SUPPLIES
36.98PARK MAINTENANCE G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
328.88PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
16.88WESTWOOD G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
910.59WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
129.18WESTWOOD G & A CONCESSION SUPPLIES
320.00WESTWOOD G & A ADVERTISING
120.00WESTWOOD G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
40.00SCHOOLGENERAL SUPPLIES
27.30WINTER BREAK GENERAL SUPPLIES
20.00REC CENTER BUILDING MOTOR FUELS
56.89INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS OFFICE SUPPLIES
413.07INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
39.98VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A OFFICE SUPPLIES
244.14VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A LICENSES
390.00GENERAL REPAIR SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
44,071.99
5,607.70CITY OF CRYSTAL BASKETBALL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
5,607.70
3,815.46CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY DMV VEHICLES & EQUIPMENT G&A MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENT
1,367.20YOUTH PROGRAMS PROGRAM FEE ASSISTANCE AMT
2,669.18BASKETBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
7,851.84
846.36CITY OF SAINT PAUL PUBLIC WORKS G & A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
846.36
461.67CIVITALI RESTAURANT CORPORATION ADMINISTRATION G & A LIQUOR
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 8
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
5/28/20244/27/2024 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
461.67
50.00CLARK AMANDA STORM WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
50.00
1,117.88COLE PAPERS FACILITIES MCTE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
1,117.88
17,461.14COLICH & ASSOCIATES ADMINISTRATION G & A LEGAL SERVICES
17,461.14
2,551.00COLLINS ELECTRICAL INSURANCE FUND G&A UNINSURED LOSS
2,551.00
7.85-COMCAST FIRE OPERATIONS EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS
202.86CABLE TV G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
59.48REC CENTER BUILDING OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
254.49
500.00COMMUNITY STORYTELLING FORUM PUBLIC ART OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
500.00
31,601.63COMPASS MINERALS AMERICA PUBLIC WORKS G & A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
31,601.63
456.62CONGDON JILLIAN POLICE G & A TRAVEL/MEETINGS
103.72POLICE G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR
560.34
26,710.17CORE & MAIN LP WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
26,710.17
134.80COREMARKGENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
134.80
12,500.00CORNERSTONE ADVOCACY SERVICE POLICE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
12,500.00
4,700.00CORPORATE MECHANICAL REC CENTER BUILDING BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
1,047.00ARENA MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
5,747.00
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 9
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
5/28/20244/27/2024 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
119.95COTTON ALISSA PARK MAINTENANCE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
119.95
919.20CROSS NURSERIES INC.TREE REPLACEMENT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
919.20
160.81CROWN MARKING INC.COMM & MARKETING G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
160.81
119.00CULLIGAN BOTTLED WATER FACILITIES MCTE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
119.00
106.02CUMMINGS JANICE WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
106.02
1,032.48CUMMINS SALES AND SERVICE WATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
1,032.48
386.45CUSTOM REFRIGERATION INC FACILITIES MCTE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
2,486.08FACILITIES MCTE G & A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
2,872.53
31.20DACOTAH PAPER COMPANY FACILITIES MCTE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
31.20
4,869.32DALCO ENTERPRISES INC FACILITIES MCTE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
4,869.32
353.97DECOTEAU WILL FIRE OPERATIONS SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
353.97
619.08DELI DOUBLE HUMAN RESOURCES RECOGNITION
619.08
222.60DEM-CON DUMPSTERS LLC VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICE
222.60
9,364.86DEPARTMENT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY BLDG & ENERGY G & A DUE TO OTHER GOVTS
9,364.86
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 10
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
5/28/20244/27/2024 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
216.60DETECTACHEM, INC.POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
216.60
65.93DINGES FIRE COMPANY FIRE OPERATIONS UNIFORMS
65.93
940.50DIWHY, LLC.WESTWOOD G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
940.50
85.00DOBBERKE JOSEPH SPECIAL PROGRAMS PROGRAM REVENUE
85.00
477.82DO-GOOD.BIZ INC COMM & MARKETING G & A POSTAGE
1,194.82COMM & MARKETING G & A PRINTING & PUBLISHING
394.50FIRE OPERATIONS GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
38.23SIDEWALK & TRAILS G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
121.48STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
689.70PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
503.75WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
71.52SEWER CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
143.03STORM WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
314.52NATURAL RESOURCES G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
3,949.37
612.51DUAX JACOB EMPLOYEE BENEFITS FUND G&A TUITION
612.51
500.00ECHO DATA ANALYTICS FIRE OPERATIONS GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
500.00
473.24ECM PUBLISHERS INC ADMINISTRATION G & A LEGAL NOTICES
473.24
7,700.00EDDIE'S JUNK REMOVAL LLC BLDG & ENERGY G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
7,700.00
2,100.00EGAN FIELD & NOWAK INC MUNICIPAL BLDGS G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
2,100.00
148.44EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC 2021A GO DEBT SERV G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
148.442020A GO DEBT SERV G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 11
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
5/28/20244/27/2024 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
2,648.442019A GO DEBT SERV G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
148.442018A GO DEBT SERV G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
148.442012A GO HIA DEBT SERV G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
148.442019B GO DEBT SERV G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
148.442017A GO DEBT SERV G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
148.442014A GO DEBT SERV G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
148.442016A GO DEBT SERV G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
148.44LA CT DEBT SERV RES G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
148.44LA CRT 2010C DEBT SERV G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
148.41HOIGAARD 2010A DEBT SERV G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
200.00BELTLINE SWLRT PROJ G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
182.33TEXA TONKA TIF DIST REV/EXPS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
182.33WAYZATA BLVD TIF DIST G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
182.33PARKWAY RESID TIF DIST G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
182.33BRIDGEWATER BK TIF DIST G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
182.33WOODDALE STATION TIF DIST G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
182.33ELMWOOD APTS TIF DIST G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
182.334900 EXC BLVD TIF DIST G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
182.33ELIOT PARK TIF DIST G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
182.41WEST END TIF DIST G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
182.33ELLIPSE II G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
182.33VICTORIA PONDS G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
182.33PARK CENTER HOUSING G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
182.33CSM TIF DIST G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
400.00DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
182.33MILL CITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
182.33PARK COMMONS G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
182.33ELMWOOD VILLAGE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
182.33WOLFE LAKE COMMERCIAL TIF G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
182.33SHOREHAM TIF DIST G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
182.33AQUILA COMMONS G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
182.33RISE ON 7 TIF DIST G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
182.33HWY 7 BUSINESS CENTER G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
182.24HARD COAT G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
8,892.50
400.00ELECTRIC PUMP INC PARK EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
400.00
2,419.53EMERGENCY APPARATUS MTNCE GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
2,419.53
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 12
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
5/28/20244/27/2024 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
2,808.27ENTERPRISE FM TRUST VEHICLES & EQUIPMENT G&A RENTAL EQUIPMENT
2,808.27
192.00ENVIRONMENTAL WOOD SUPPLY LLC NATURAL RESOURCES G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
192.00
2,750.00EQUIX HOLDINGS INC SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
2,750.00
1,428.70ERIC-STANDER- NEW LIFE CONTRACTING BLDG & ENERGY G & A BUILDING
1,428.70
12.10EUCHER JAMES WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
12.10
987.44FACTORY MOTOR PARTS CO GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
8.79GENERAL REPAIR GENERAL SUPPLIES
996.23
665.00FAUL PSYCHOLOGICAL PLLC HUMAN RESOURCES RECRUITMENT
665.00
130.00FERGUSON ENTERPRISES INC WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
592.35WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
722.35
4,087.70FERGUSON WATERWORKS WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
4,087.70
44.45FERRELLGASVEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A MOTOR FUELS
44.45
2,250.00FIDELIS SAFETY SOLUTIONS FIRE OPERATIONS EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS
2,250.00
713.87FINANCE & COMMERCE, INC.SIDEWALK & TRAILS G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
1,427.732023 MSA STREET PROJECT G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
92.11WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
23.03SEWER CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
46.06STORM WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 13
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
5/28/20244/27/2024 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
2,302.80
82.90FIRE SAFETY USA INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
82.90
73.42FIRST ADVANTAGE HUMAN RESOURCES GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
73.42
3,690.00FIRST RESPONSE MENTAL HEALTH INC POLICE G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
3,690.00
69.68FRANCIS, ERICK STORM WATER UTILITY G&A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR
69.68
154.21FRATTALLONESPARK MAINTENANCE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
182.89REC CENTER BUILDING OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
337.10
236.51FRIEDERICH NIKKI ORGANIZED REC G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR
236.51
1.17GENUINE ELECTRIC BLDG & ENERGY G & A DUE TO OTHER GOVTS
115.95BLDG & ENERGY G & A ELECTRICAL
117.12
35,159.15GERBER COLLISION- MIDWEST INC INSURANCE FUND G&A UNINSURED LOSS
35,159.15
3,500.00GETTY IMAGES COMM & MARKETING G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
3,500.00
100.00GIPS TERRY PARK BUILDINGS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS
100.00
120.00GO LAW ENFORCEMENT LLC HUMAN RESOURCES RECRUITMENT
120.00
577.15GOERS LAND SURVEYING LLC STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
7,119.24PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
362.53WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
140.25SEWER CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 14
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
5/28/20244/27/2024 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
2,975.83STORM WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
11,175.00
1,198.80GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
1,198.80
610.00GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFICERS ASSOCIATIONFINANCE G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
610.00
277.59GRAINGER INC.GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
127.11WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
50.66GENERAL REPAIR GENERAL SUPPLIES
455.36
13,367.46GRANICUSCOMM & MARKETING G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
13,367.46
270.00GRAPHIC SOURCE INC HUMAN RESOURCES RECRUITMENT
270.00
3,838.82GRIES OLIVIA EMPLOYEE BENEFITS FUND G&A TUITION
3,838.82
16,107.19GUARDIAN FLEET SAFETY VEHICLES & EQUIPMENT G&A MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENT
16,107.19
19.98GUZMAN ELIZABETH WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
19.98
350.00HARRINGTON PROPERTIES OF MN LLC ESCROWS PMC ESCROW
350.00
27,665.20HAWKINS INC WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
4,406.22WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
7,451.11AQUATIC PARK MAINTENANCE OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
39,522.53
4,364.21HDR ENGINEERING INC WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
4,364.21
225.31HEAD JUSTIN FIRE OPERATIONS SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 15
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
5/28/20244/27/2024 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
225.31
150.00HEITKAMP NICHOLAS STORM WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
150.00
604.69HENNEPIN COUNTY PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE
604.69
3,722.52HENNEPIN COUNTY INFORMATION TECHNOLOGYPOLICE G & A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
2,649.70FIRE OPERATIONS RADIO COMMUNICATIONS
208.40PUBLIC WORKS G & A RADIO COMMUNICATIONS
208.39WATER UTILITY G&A RADIO COMMUNICATIONS
208.40SEWER UTILITY G&A RADIO COMMUNICATIONS
208.40STORM WATER UTILITY G&A RADIO COMMUNICATIONS
7,205.81
80,475.00HENNEPIN COUNTY OFFICE BUDGET & FINANCE GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET UNREALIZED GRANT REVENUE
80,475.00
350,000.00HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY TAX ELIOT PARK TIF DIST G&A TAX INCREMENT - REPAYMENT
377,898.00ELLIPSE ON EXC TIF DIST G&A TAX INCREMENT - REPAYMENT
445,899.00SHOREHAM TIF DIST G&A TAX INCREMENT - REPAYMENT
1,173,797.00
6.00HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER SUNSET RIDGE HIA OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
6.00BRIDGWALK HIA OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
4,386.26WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
4,386.26SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
4,386.26STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
4,386.27PARK MAINTENANCE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
17,557.05
5,491.42HENRICKSEN PSG FACILITIES MCTE G & A OFFICE EQUIPMENT
5,491.42
155,510.14HOFFMAN AND MCNAMARA NURSERY & LANDSCAPESTREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
670.74PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
5,768.33WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
5,734.79STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
458.00NATURAL RESOURCES G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
168,142.00
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 16
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
5/28/20244/27/2024 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
120,732.06HOGLUND BUS COMPANY VEHICLES & EQUIPMENT G&A MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENT
120,732.06
136.79HOIGAARD VILLAGE MANAGEMENT WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
136.79
7,053.00HOLY FAMILY CATHOLIC CHURCH ESCROWS GENERAL
7,053.00
158.62HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES PUBLIC WORKS G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
5.98WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
44.40WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
233.57PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
15.93PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
7.09PARK EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
51.44SPLASH PAD MAINT - Oak Hill Pk GENERAL SUPPLIES
150.00RECREATION OUTDOOR CENTER OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
667.03
3,075.84HORIZON COMMERCIAL POOL SUPPLY SPLASH PAD MAINT - Oak Hill Pk GENERAL SUPPLIES
3,075.84
3,900.00HSR MSP LLC ESCROWS PMC ESCROW
3,900.00
1,715.00I.U.O.E. LOCAL NO 49 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS FUND BAL SHT UNION DUES
1,715.00
2,500.00ICONIC ENVIRONMENTS ESCROWS DEMO / BROOKSIDE TRAFFIC
2,500.00
24,173.19IMAGETREND, INC TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
24,173.19
1,457.13IMPACT POWER TO CONNECT WATER UTILITY G&A POSTAGE
1,457.12SEWER UTILITY G&A POSTAGE
1,457.13SOLID WASTE G&A POSTAGE
1,457.12STORM WATER UTILITY G&A POSTAGE
5,828.50
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 17
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
5/28/20244/27/2024 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
364.18INDELCOWATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
18.25PARK MAINTENANCE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
36.80IRRIGATION MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
57.36REC CENTER BUILDING GENERAL SUPPLIES
476.59
4,014.32INTERNATIONAL FILTRATION SERVICES INC FACILITIES MCTE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
4,014.32
566.43INVER GROVE FORD GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
559.44GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
1,125.87
243.00ISI SPORTS INDUSTRY INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS GENERAL SUPPLIES
243.00
312.71I-STATE TRUCK CENTER GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
312.71
1,300.33JAYTECH, INC.REC CENTER BUILDING OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
1,300.33
358.49JEFFERSON FIRE & SAFETY INC FIRE OPERATIONS PROTECTIVE CLOTHING
358.49
32.32JERRY'S HARDWARE GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
26.79WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
26.28PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
22.48PARK MAINTENANCE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
23.80BEAUTIFICATION/LANDSCAPE GENERAL SUPPLIES
8.99PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
47.69BRICK HOUSE (1324)OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
110.65NATURAL RESOURCES G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
3.19GENERAL REPAIR GENERAL SUPPLIES
302.19
9,000.00JLG ARCHITECTS PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
9,000.00
35.99JOHNSON CHRISTINE POLICE G & A TRAVEL/MEETINGS
35.99
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 18
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
5/28/20244/27/2024 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
1,627.52JOHNSON PAPER & SUPPLY CO.REC CENTER BUILDING GENERAL SUPPLIES
1,627.52
20.77JUREK JESSIE ASSESSING G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR
20.77
29.29KASSEN ALLEN WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
29.29
75.00KENNEDY & GRAVEN ESCROWS UNION PARK APTS
4,512.50ESCROWSSEMBLE EXCAVATING
298.50ESCROWS3801 WOODDALE (ALDERSGATE)
213.00ESCROWSPARKWAY RESIDENCES
5,099.00
7,535.28KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.ENGINEERING G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
43,096.46SIDEWALK & TRAILS G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
4,547.022023 MSA STREET PROJECT G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
75,653.022024 MSA STREET PROJECT G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
2,927.02WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
822.77SEWER CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
5,819.46STORM WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
140,401.03
5,859.25KLEIN UNDERGROUND LLC WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
7,915.50SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
13,774.75
754.48LAKE FOREST ASSOCIATION NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
754.48
490.24LANDKAMMER ANDY WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
490.24
1,255.05LANGUAGE LINE SERVICES INC POLICE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,255.05
40.00LANOUX KIMBERLY BEAUTIFICATION / FLOWERS TREE MAINTENANCE
40.00
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 19
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
5/28/20244/27/2024 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
2,500.00LARSON MARISSA ESCROWS PMC ESCROW
2,500.00
4,312.62LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR SERVICES INC EMPLOYEE BENEFITS FUND BAL SHT UNION DUES
4,312.62
101.16LAWRENCE JOE FIRE OPERATIONS SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
101.16
501.28LAWSON PRODUCTS INC VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
501.28
328,121.00LEAGUE OF MN CITIES INSURANCE TRUST EMPLOYEE BENEFITS FUND G&A League of MN Cities dept'l exp
155,560.00INSURANCE FUND BAL SHEET PREPAID EXPENSES
463.65INSURANCE FUND G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
484,144.65
4,302.50LHB INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET ESCROW PAYABLE
4,302.50
699.00LINE-X PROS GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
699.00
1,283.00LOCKGUARD LOCKSMITHS FACILITIES MCTE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,493.00FACILITIES MCTE G & A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
2,776.00
283.20LOFFLERIT G & A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
283.20
1,050.92LOFFLER COMPANIES IT G & A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
1,050.92
118.59LOMBARDI, JIM ORGANIZED REC G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR
118.59
2,369.13LUBE-TECH & PARTNERS LLC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
443.56GENERAL REPAIR GENERAL SUPPLIES
2,812.69
209.59M G INCENTIVES HUMAN RESOURCES RECOGNITION
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 20
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
5/28/20244/27/2024 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
209.59
165.64MACQUEEN EQUIP CO GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
347.57SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
513.21
37.92MALIK PRAKSHI CABLE TV G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR
37.92
56.95MANDLER, CARRIE WESTWOOD G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR
56.95
2,670.00MARIE RIDGEWAY LICSW LLC POLICE G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
2,670.00
1,479.94MARTIN MARIETTA MATERIALS WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
1,479.94
31.50MATHESON TRI-GAS, INC.VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
31.50
67.69MATTHEW MCNEELY POLICE G & A TRAVEL/MEETINGS
67.69
31.94MENARDSFACILITIES MCTE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
116.87PUBLIC WORKS G & A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
122.49WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
167.92PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
85.79BRICK HOUSE (1324)OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
129.93WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
9.98GENERAL REPAIR GENERAL SUPPLIES
664.92
19,681.20METROPOLITAN COUNCIL BLDG & ENERGY G & A DUE TO OTHER GOVTS
435,440.05SEWER UTILITY G&A CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICE
455,121.25
20,917.00MGX EQUIPMENT SERVICES, LLC VEHICLES & EQUIPMENT G&A MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENT
20,917.00
9,771.00MID AMERICA RINK SERVICES ARENA MAINTENANCE BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 21
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
5/28/20244/27/2024 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
9,771.00
372.00MINNEAPOLIS FINANCE DEPT POLICE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
372.00
1,795.35MINNESOTA CHILD SUPPORT PYT CTR EMPLOYEE BENEFITS FUND BAL SHT WAGE GARNISHMENTS
1,795.35
375.28MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY FACILITIES MCTE G & A GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE
375.28VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
750.56
120.00MINNESOTA SECRETARY OF STATE- NOTARY ORGANIZED REC G & A TRAINING
120.00
378.00MN FIRE SERVICE CERTIFICATION BOARD FIRE OPERATIONS TRAINING
378.00
283.60MORTON KENT WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
283.60
245.00MOST DEPENDABLE FOUNTAINS PARK EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
245.00
25.00MOUNTAIN PRESS PUBLISHING INC WESTWOOD G & A CONCESSION SUPPLIES
25.00
335.00MR CUTTING EDGE REC CENTER BUILDING EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
335.00
238.44MTI DISTRIBUTING CO GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
238.44
295.83MUEHLBACH RYAN WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
295.83
9,099.60MULTIQUIP INC VEHICLES & EQUIPMENT G&A MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENT
9,099.60
3,253.50MUNICIPAL EMERGENCY SERVICES FIRE OPERATIONS PROTECTIVE CLOTHING
3,253.50
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 22
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
5/28/20244/27/2024 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
18.08MURPHY MARTIN WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
18.08
271.31MUSCO SPORTS LIGHTING LLC PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
271.31
1,208.20NAPA (GENUINE PARTS CO)GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
98.53FACILITIES MCTE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
33.46PUBLIC WORKS G & A EQUIPMENT PARTS
34.75WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
92.18WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
381.46GENERAL REPAIR GENERAL SUPPLIES
89.10GENERAL REPAIR SMALL TOOLS
1,937.68
574.16ND CHILD SUPPORT DIVISION EMPLOYEE BENEFITS FUND BAL SHT WAGE GARNISHMENTS
574.16
50.00NELSON EVAN STORM WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
50.00
1,155.00NOISEADMINISTRATION G & A LEGAL SERVICES
1,155.00
234.95NOKOMIS SHOE SHOP PARK MAINTENANCE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
234.95
1.00NOREE DEE BLDG & ENERGY G & A DUE TO OTHER GOVTS
75.00BLDG & ENERGY G & A PLUMBING
76.00
533.19NORTH AMERICAN SAFETY INC PARK MAINTENANCE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
533.19
1,919.93NORTHLAND MECHANICAL CONTRACTORS INC FACILITIES MCTE G & A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
1,919.93
1,390.00NRPAORGANIZED REC G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
1,390.00
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 23
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
5/28/20244/27/2024 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
199.01ODP BUSINESS SOLUTIONS LLC COMM & MARKETING G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
61.59COMM DEV PLANNING G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
112.37POLICE G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
133.00BLDG & ENERGY G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
71.62PUBLIC WORKS G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
110.40SOLID WASTE G&A OFFICE SUPPLIES
70.73ORGANIZED REC G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
758.72
89.00OELKE ERIK & RACHEL SPECIAL PROGRAMS PROGRAM REVENUE
89.00
89.00OELKE RACHEL BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS
89.00
67.00ON SITE SANITATION NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
6,873.47PORTABLE TOILETS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
134.00OFF-LEASH DOG PARK OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
7,074.47
21.06O'REILLY FIRST CALL GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
21.06
50.00ORTON LYNN STORM WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
50.00
2,261.71OVERHEAD DOOR CO FACILITIES MCTE G & A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
2,261.71
1,186.22OXYGEN SERVICE COMPANY INC FIRE OPERATIONS OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
1,186.22
4,000.00PARK STREET PUBLIC LLC ADMINISTRATION G & A LEGAL SERVICES
4,000.00
628.55PEEK TROY POLICE G & A SALARIES - REGULAR EMPLOYEES
628.55
400.00PERIOLAT MICHAEL PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS
400.00
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 24
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
5/28/20244/27/2024 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
29,824.14PIPE SERVICES SEWER CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
29,824.14
131.95PORTER GAIL WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
131.95
69.40POWERPLAN OIB GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
69.40
3,460.00PRAIRIE RESTORATIONS INC BEAUTIFICATION / FLOWERS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
3,460.00
327.75PRECISE MRM, LLC.PUBLIC WORKS G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
327.75WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
327.75SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
327.75STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,311.00
118.26PREMIUM WATERS FIRE OPERATIONS OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
118.26
5,000.00PRIMACY STRATEGY GROUP LLC.ADMINISTRATION G & A LEGAL SERVICES
5,000.00
1.00PRONTO HEATING AND AIR BLDG & ENERGY G & A DUE TO OTHER GOVTS
75.00BLDG & ENERGY G & A ELECTRICAL
76.00
625.00PURDY BRYCE CLIMATE INVESTMENT FUND G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
625.00
12,655.00QUALITY FLOW SYSTEMS INC WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
157,029.00WATER UTILITY G&A IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
3,290.00SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
172,974.00
361.75R & R SPECIALTIES OF WISCONSIN, INC. ARENA MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
361.75
10.00RABINE ELLIE SUSTAINABILITY G&A TRAVEL/MEETINGS
10.00
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 25
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
5/28/20244/27/2024 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
3,270.00READY WATT ELECTRIC FIRE OPERATIONS EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS
3,270.00
300.00RECYCLING ASSOC OF MN SOLID WASTE G&A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
300.00
726.98RED WING BUSINESS ADVANTAGE ACCOUNT PARK MAINTENANCE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
726.98
250.00RED WING STORE ENGINEERING G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
456.99PUBLIC WORKS G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
706.99
4,944.22REFERRAL COLLISION INSURANCE FUND G&A UNINSURED LOSS
4,944.22
500.00REGION 3 AA CABLE TV G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
500.00
2,500.00REID SCOTT ESCROWS DEMO / BROOKSIDE TRAFFIC
2,500.00
2,195.56REISSMANN-DORING CASSI EMPLOYEE BENEFITS FUND G&A TUITION
2,195.56
7,285.40REPUBLIC SERVICES FACILITIES MCTE G & A GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE
75,324.40SOLID WASTE G&A ORGANICS
6,448.85REC CENTER BUILDING GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE
89,058.65
24.97RIGID HITCH INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
24.97
2,367.02ROBERT HALF TECHNOLOGY FIRE OPERATIONS GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
2,367.02
64.35ROBERT LEE THOMAS POLICE G & A REPAIRS
64.35
1.00RUPP SUZANNE BLDG & ENERGY G & A DUE TO OTHER GOVTS
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 26
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
5/28/20244/27/2024 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
75.00BLDG & ENERGY G & A ELECTRICAL
76.00
13,931.54SAFEASSURE CONSULTANTS INC EMPLOYEE BENEFITS FUND G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
13,931.54
515.08SAFE-FAST INC SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
515.08
124.00SARA BROWN-HONEST EXTERIORS BLDG & ENERGY G & A BUILDING
124.00
315.15SAWYER AMY WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
315.15
3,797.64SCHINDLER ELEVATOR CORP FACILITIES MCTE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
3,797.64
1,094.16SCHUMACHER'S TREE REPLACEMENT LANDSCAPING MATERIALS
1,094.16
43.89SENEVIRATNE, SHEREEN LEONTIA WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
43.89
75.00SETS DESIGN INC.POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
75.00
50.00SEXTON HAILEY STORM WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
50.00
47,011.25SHADYWOOD TREE EXPERTS & LANDSCAPING NATURAL RESOURCES G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
47,011.25
1,005.00SHAPCO PRINTING INC COMM & MARKETING G & A PRINTING & PUBLISHING
397.00TREE MAINTENANCE OFFICE SUPPLIES
1,402.00
1,000.00SHARBONO, MATTHEW EMPLOYEE BENEFITS FUND G&A TUITION
1,000.00
225.00SHELTER ARCHITECTURE + DESIGN MOVE-UP PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 27
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
5/28/20244/27/2024 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
225.00
44.46SHRED-IT ADMINISTRATION G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
304.52IT G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
348.98
214.95SHURSLEP ALEX WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
214.95
1,925.15SITEONE LANDSCAPE SUPPLY LLC IRRIGATION MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
1,925.15
50.00SKELLENGER DENNIS STORM WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
50.00
2,450.40SLP FF ASSOC IAFF LOCAL #993 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS FUND BAL SHT UNION DUES
2,450.40
142.43SLUMBERLAND INC WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
142.43
588.00SNAP-ON INDUSTRIAL VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A SMALL TOOLS
588.00
1,443.89SNYDER ELECTRIC PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
1,443.89
200.00SORENSON AJA ESCROWS PMC ESCROW
200.00
16.02SPS COMPANIES INC WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
648.11PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
54.64PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
1,924.96REC CENTER SALARIES EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
2,643.73
3,934.96SRF CONSULTING GROUP INC DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A PLANNING
3,934.96
1,086.25ST LOUIS PARK COMMUNITY EDUCATION AQUATIC PARK G & A TRAINING
1,086.25
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 28
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
5/28/20244/27/2024 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
1,590.00STAKING UNIVERSITY PUBLIC WORKS G & A TRAINING
1,590.00
46.96STERICYCLE, INC.FINANCE G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
671.60POLICE G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
22.23BLDG & ENERGY G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
52.94PUBLIC WORKS G & A DEACTIVIATE GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
793.73
5,450.00STRATUS BUILDING SOLUTIONS OF ST. PAUL FACILITIES MCTE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
2,850.00REC CENTER BUILDING OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
350.00RECREATION OUTDOOR CENTER OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
8,650.00
2,812.62STREICHER'S POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
406.00POLICE G & A REPAIRS
3,218.62
3,034.87SUBURBAN TIRE WHOLESALE GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
3,034.87
4,483.25SUMMIT ENVIROSOLUTIONS INC REILLY G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
4,483.25
170.77SUMMIT FIRE PROTECTION FACILITIES MCTE G & A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
170.77
9,009.00SWANSON FLO-SYSTEMS CO WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
9,009.00
17.42SZE LINDA FINANCE G & A TRAVEL/MEETINGS
17.42
4,860.00TACTICAL ADVANTAGE POLICE G & A POLICE EQUIPMENT
4,860.00
1,415.00TECH SALES CO SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
1,415.00
238.00TEE JAY NORTH, INC.REC CENTER BUILDING BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 29
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
5/28/20244/27/2024 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
238.00
238.56TEMPLEMAN KRISTIN WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
238.56
681.34TENNANT SALES AND SERVICE CO.REC CENTER BUILDING EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
681.34
301.00TERMINIX COMMERCIAL FACILITIES MCTE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
131.00REC CENTER BUILDING OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
432.00
144.00THE MPX GROUP COMM & MARKETING G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
415.24SOLID WASTE G&A PRINTING & PUBLISHING
559.24
71.27THE SHERWIN WILLIAMS CO FACILITIES MCTE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
188.53WATER UTILITY G&A BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES
33.71WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
267.25REILLY G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
560.76
228.00THE SIGN PRODUCERS INC FACILITIES MCTE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
228.00
150.00THELEN REBECCA STORM WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
150.00
366.89THOMSON REUTERS WEST PAYMENT CENTER POLICE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
366.89
426.60THRIVEPASSEMPLOYEE BENEFITS FUND G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
426.60
1,685.63TIMESAVER OFF SITE SECRETARIAL ADMINISTRATION G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,685.63
354.84TK ELEVATOR CORPORATION REC CENTER BUILDING OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
354.84
12.75TOLL GAS & WELDING SUPPLY WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 30
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
5/28/20244/27/2024 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
12.75
120.00TOP CHOICE PLUMBING BLDG & ENERGY G & A PLUMBING
120.00
344.00TOTAL MECHANICAL SERVICES, INC.REC CENTER BUILDING BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
2,079.00REC CENTER BUILDING EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
1,397.50ARENA MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
3,820.50
4,250.00TOUCHSTONE IQ LLC SUSTAINABILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
4,250.00
877.55TRI-STATE BOBCAT GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
853.52PUBLIC WORKS G & A EQUIPMENT PARTS
853.52SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
853.52STORM CLEAN UP OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
3,438.11
4,666.74UHL CO INC FACILITIES MCTE G & A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
1,700.81PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
6,367.55
85.09ULINEFACILITIES MCTE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
433.02POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
106.39REC CENTER BUILDING GENERAL SUPPLIES
624.50
400.00UNFIBLDG & ENERGY G & A Fog Licenses
400.00
342.00UNITED RENTALS-NORTH AMERICA INC RECREATION OUTDOOR CENTER OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
342.00
80.31US AUTOFORCE GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
80.31
1,475.14VALPAK OF MINNEAPOLIS / ST PAUL AQUATIC PARK G & A ADVERTISING
1,475.14
48.75VECTOR SERVICES LLC BLDG & ENERGY G & A MECHANICAL
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 31
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
5/28/20244/27/2024 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
48.75
29.00VERIFIED CREDENTIALS LLC.HUMAN RESOURCES RECRUITMENT
29.00
8,255.25VERIZONIT G & A DATACOMMUNICATIONS
8,255.25
1,810.02VESSCO INC WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
1,810.02
375.00VETERAN ELECTRIC FACILITIES MCTE G & A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
1,900.00AQUATIC PARK MAINTENANCE BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
2,275.00
495.80VIKING INDUSTRIAL CTR SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
495.80
1,167.30-VINELAND TREE CARE STREET CAPITAL PROJ BAL SHEET RETAINAGE PAYABLE
23,346.002023 MSA STREET PROJECT G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
22,178.70
80.00VOEGEL JESSICA PARK MAINTENANCE G & A REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS
80.00
128.10VORPAHL RITA HUMAN RESOURCES MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR
128.10
275.00WACONIA ROLL-OFF SERVICE PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE
275.00
85,362.00WASTE CONTAINER SYST SOLID WASTE G&A YARD WASTE SERVICE
85,362.00
3,000.00WEIDNER PROPERTY MANAGEMENT ESCROWS GENERAL
3,000.00
405.00WFCA: DAILY DISPATCH HUMAN RESOURCES RECRUITMENT
405.00
50.00WILLIAMS ERIK STORM WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 32
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
5/28/20244/27/2024 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
50.00
40.00WILSON ETOLLIA BEAUTIFICATION / FLOWERS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
40.00
1,162.00WILSON EVAN RIGHT-OF-WAY OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,162.00
7,718.27WM CORPORATE SERVICES INC SOLID WASTE G&A YARD WASTE SERVICE
7,718.27
1,203.42WM MUELLER & SONS INC PUBLIC WORKS G & A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
1,203.42
73.92WOLFE CALEB WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
73.92
171.64WRIGHT LERAE WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
171.64
20.93WRIGHT WAY BUILDERS LLC WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
20.93
318.50WSB ASSOC INC IT G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
8,132.25STORM WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
8,450.75
17,610.84XCEL ENERGY FACILITIES MCTE G & A ELECTRIC SERVICE
177.91FACILITIES MCTE G & A INTEREST/FINANCE CHARGES
26,157.70PUBLIC WORKS G & A ELECTRIC SERVICE
3,854.11WATER UTILITY G&A ELECTRIC SERVICE
1,232.98REILLY G & A ELECTRIC SERVICE
4,416.09SEWER UTILITY G&A ELECTRIC SERVICE
2,156.82STORM WATER UTILITY G&A ELECTRIC SERVICE
4,220.07PARK MAINTENANCE G & A ELECTRIC SERVICE
37.08BRICK HOUSE (1324)ELECTRIC SERVICE
79.94WW RENTAL HOUSE (1322)ELECTRIC SERVICE
59,943.54
2,712.51YOUNG ENV. CONSULTING GROUP, LLC. STORM WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
2,712.51
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 33
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
Council Check Summary
5/28/20244/27/2024 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
5,475.39ZIEGLER INC VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
5,475.39
20.64ZIRING EMILY SUSTAINABILITY G&A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR
20.64
Report Totals 4,401,482.85
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approve city disbursements Page 34
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: June 3, 2024
Consent agenda item: 5b
Executive summary
Title: Resolution awarding the sale of General Obligation Bonds, Series 2024A
Recommended action: Motion to adopt Resolution awarding the sale of Charter General
Obligation (G.O.) Bonds, Series 2024A).
Policy consideration: Does the city council wish to accept the lowest bid for the sale of the
Charter G.O. Bonds, Series 2024A?
Summary: At the May 6, 2024 council meeting, council authorized the sale of 2024A Charter
G.O. Bonds in the amount of $3,265,000 and received the pre-sale report for the series. The
proposed issue includes financing for the 2024 street rehabilitation and connect the Park
projects:
• County Minnetonka Blvd - $2,410,000
• Local Street Rehab (Area 2) Connect the Park- $280,000
• Local Street Rehab (Area 2) Living Streets - $575,000
On May 29, 2024 Standard and Poor’s (S&P) affirmed the Cities AAA credit rating.
The competitive bids for the bonds will be received and tabulated by the city’s municipal
advisor, Ehlers and Associates, Inc. on Monday, June 3. Ehlers will present the competitive bids
received and a recommendation to the city council at the June 3, 2024 city council meeting. The
bond resolution will be filled out with the final bond sale information received on Monday.
The Bonds count against the Net Debt Limit of 3% of the estimated market value of taxable
property in the City, which is currently $292.466 million. Including this Bond issue, the City has
$40.775 million in outstanding debt that counts against this limit. This leaves approximately
$248 million in unused debt limit for the City.
Financial or budget considerations: Debt service will be paid from property taxes and the
anticipated increase has been factored into the city’s long range financial plans as a part of the
2024 budget process.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a variety of options for
people to make their way around the city comfortably, safely and reliably.
Supporting documents: Resolution
Prepared by: Amelia Cruver, finance director
Reviewed by: Cheyenne Brodeen, administrative services director
Approved by: Kim Keller, city manager
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5b) Page 2
Title: Resolution awarding the sale of General Obligation Bonds, Series 2024A
Resolution No. 24-_________
Awarding the sale of General Obligation Bonds, Series 2024A, in the
original aggregate principal amount of $3,265,000; fixing their form
and specifications; directing their execution and delivery; and
providing for their payment
Be it resolved by the city council (the “city council”) of the City of St. Louis Park,
Hennepin County, Minnesota (the “city”) as follows:
Section 1. Sale of bonds.
1.01. Authorization. Pursuant to a resolution adopted by the city council on
May 6, 2024 (the “authorizing resolution”), the city authorized the sale of its General Obligation
Bonds, Series 2024A (the “bonds”), pursuant to Section 6.15 of the charter (the “charter”) of
the city and Minnesota Statutes, chapter 475, as amended (the “act”), to finance various capital
projects including the improvement and reconstruction of Minnetonka Boulevard, the Local
Street Rehab (area 2) Connect the Park project, and the Local Street Rehab (area 2) Living
Streets project (collectively, the “capital projects”). The authorizing resolution was approved by
a vote of at least six (6) members of the city council.
1.02. Award to the purchaser and interest rates. A tabulation of proposals received is
attached hereto as Exhibit A. The proposal of ________________________ (the “purchaser”) to
purchase the bonds is hereby found and determined to be a reasonable offer and is hereby
accepted, the proposal being to purchase the bonds at a price of $____________ (par amount of
$3,265,000, [plus original issue premium of $_________,] [less original issue discount of
$_________,] less underwriter’s discount of $__________), plus accrued interest, if any, to the
date of delivery for bonds bearing interest as follows:
Year of
maturity
Interest rate
Year of
maturity
Interest rate
2026 % 2034 %
2027 2035
2028 2036
2029 2037
2030 2038
2031 2039
2032 2040
2033
True interest cost: ______________%
1.03. Purchase contract. The amount proposed by the purchaser in excess of the
minimum bid shall be credited to the debt service fund hereinafter created or deposited in the
construction fund hereinafter created, as determined by the finance director of the city in
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5b) Page 3
Title: Resolution awarding the sale of General Obligation Bonds, Series 2024A
consultation with the city’s municipal advisor. The good faith deposit of the purchaser shall be
retained and deposited until the bonds have been delivered and shall be deducted from the
purchase price paid at settlement. The mayor and city manager are directed to execute a contract
with the purchaser on behalf of the city if requested by the purchaser.
1.04. Terms and principal amounts of the bonds. The city will forthwith issue and sell the
bonds pursuant to the charter and the act, in the total principal amount of $3,265,000, originally
dated June 25, 2024, in fully registered form, in the denomination of $5,000 each or any integral
multiple thereof, numbered no. r-1, upward, bearing interest as above set forth, and maturing
serially on February 1 in the years and amounts as follows:
Year of
maturity
Amount
Year of
maturity
Amount
2026 $ 2034 $
2027 2035
2028 2036
2029 2037
2030 2038
2031 2039
2032 2040
2033
1.05. Optional redemption. The city may elect on February 1, 2034, and on any day
thereafter to prepay bonds due on or after February 1, 2035. Redemption may be in whole or in
part and if in part, at the option of the city and in such manner as the city will determine. If less
than all bonds of a maturity are called for redemption, the city will notify DTC (as defined in
section 7 hereof) of the particular amount of such maturity to be prepaid. DTC will determine by
lot the amount of each participant’s interest in such maturity to be redeemed and each participant
will then select by lot the beneficial ownership interests in such maturity to be redeemed.
Prepayments will be at a price of par plus accrued interest.
[TO BE COMPLETED IF TERM BONDS ARE REQUESTED 1.06. Mandatory redemption; term
bonds. The bonds maturing on February 1, 20____ and February 1, 20____ shall hereinafter be
referred to collectively as the “term bonds.” The principal amount of the term bonds subject to
mandatory sinking fund redemption on any date may be reduced through earlier optional
redemptions, with any partial redemptions of the term bonds credited against future mandatory
sinking fund redemptions of such term bond in such order as the city shall determine. The term
bonds are subject to mandatory sinking fund redemption and shall be redeemed in part at par plus
accrued interest on February 1 of the following years and in the principal amounts as follows:]
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5b) Page 4
Title: Resolution awarding the sale of General Obligation Bonds, Series 2024A
Sinking fund installment date
February 1, 20___ term bond Principal amount
____________________
* Maturity
February 1, 20___ term bond Principal amount
____________________
* Maturity
Section 2. Registration and payment.
2.01. Registered form. The bonds will be issued only in fully registered form. The interest
thereon and, upon surrender of each bond, the principal amount thereof, is payable by check or
draft issued by the registrar described herein.
2.02. Dates; interest payment dates. Each bond will be dated as of the last interest
payment date preceding the date of authentication to which interest on the bond has been paid or
made available for payment, unless (i) the date of authentication is an interest payment date to
which interest has been paid or made available for payment, in which case the bond will be dated
as of the date of authentication, or (ii) the date of authentication is prior to the first interest
payment date, in which case the bond will be dated as of the date of original issue. The interest on
the bonds is payable on February 1 and August 1 of each year, commencing August 1, 2025, to the
registered owners of record thereof as of the close of business on the fifteenth day of the
immediately preceding month, whether or not such day is a business day.
2.03. Registration. The city will appoint a bond registrar, transfer agent, authenticating
agent and paying agent (the “registrar” and “paying agent”). The effect of registration and the
rights and duties of the city and the registrar with respect thereto are as follows:
(a) Register. The registrar must keep at its principal corporate trust office a
bond register in which the registrar provides for the registration of ownership of bonds and
the registration of transfers and exchanges of bonds entitled to be registered, transferred
or exchanged.
(b) Transfer of bonds. Upon surrender for transfer of a bond duly endorsed by
the registered owner thereof or accompanied by a written instrument of transfer, in form
satisfactory to the registrar, duly executed by the registered owner thereof or by an
attorney duly authorized by the registered owner in writing, the registrar will authenticate
and deliver, in the name of the designated transferee or transferees, one or more new
bonds of a like aggregate principal amount and maturity, as requested by the transferor.
The registrar may, however, close the books for registration of any transfer after the
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5b) Page 5
Title: Resolution awarding the sale of General Obligation Bonds, Series 2024A
fifteenth day of the month preceding each interest payment date and until that interest
payment date.
(c) Exchange of bonds. When bonds are surrendered by the registered owner
for exchange the registrar will authenticate and deliver one or more new bonds of a like
aggregate principal amount and maturity as requested by the registered owner or the
owner’s attorney in writing.
(d) Cancellation. Bonds surrendered upon transfer or exchange will be
promptly cancelled by the registrar and thereafter disposed of as directed by the city.
(e) Improper or unauthorized transfer. When a bond is presented to the
registrar for transfer, the registrar may refuse to transfer the bond until the registrar is
satisfied that the endorsement on the bond or separate instrument of transfer is valid and
genuine and that the requested transfer is legally authorized. The registrar will incur no
liability for the refusal, in good faith, to make transfers which it, in its judgment, deems
improper or unauthorized.
(f) Persons deemed owners. The city and the registrar may treat the person in
whose name a bond is registered in the bond register as the absolute owner of the bond,
whether the bond is overdue or not, for the purpose of receiving payment of, or on
account of, the principal of and interest on the bond and for all other purposes, and
payments so made to a registered owner or upon the owner’s order will be valid and
effectual to satisfy and discharge the liability upon the bond to the extent of the sum or
sums so paid.
(g) Taxes, fees and charges. The registrar may impose a charge upon the owner
thereof for a transfer or exchange of bonds sufficient to reimburse the registrar for any tax,
fee or other governmental charge required to be paid with respect to the transfer or
exchange.
(h) Mutilated, lost, stolen or destroyed bonds. If a bond becomes mutilated or
is destroyed, stolen or lost, the registrar will deliver a new bond of like amount, number,
maturity date and tenor in exchange and substitution for and upon cancellation of the
mutilated bond or in lieu of and in substitution for any bond destroyed, stolen or lost, upon
the payment of the reasonable expenses and charges of the registrar in connection
therewith; and, in the case of a bond destroyed, stolen or lost, upon filing with the registrar
of evidence satisfactory to it that the bond was destroyed, stolen or lost, and of the
ownership thereof, and upon furnishing to the registrar an appropriate bond or indemnity
in form, substance and amount satisfactory to it and as provided by law, in which both the
city and the registrar must be named as obligees. Bonds so surrendered to the registrar will
be cancelled by the registrar and evidence of such cancellation must be given to the city. If
the mutilated, destroyed, stolen or lost bond has already matured or been called for
redemption in accordance with its terms it is not necessary to issue a new bond prior to
payment.
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5b) Page 6
Title: Resolution awarding the sale of General Obligation Bonds, Series 2024A
(i) Redemption. In the event any of the bonds are called for redemption,
notice thereof identifying the bonds to be redeemed will be given by the registrar by
mailing a copy of the redemption notice by first-class mail (postage prepaid) at least 30 and
not more than 60 days prior to the redemption date to the registered owner of each bond
to be redeemed at the address shown on the registration books kept by the registrar and
by publishing the notice if required by law. Failure to give notice by publication or by mail
to any registered owner, or any defect therein, will not affect the validity of the
proceedings for the redemption of bonds. Bonds so called for redemption will cease to
bear interest after the specified redemption date, provided that the funds for the
redemption are on deposit with the place of payment at that time.
2.04. Appointment of initial registrar. The city appoints Bond Trust Services Corporation,
Roseville, Minnesota, as the initial registrar. The mayor and the city Manager are authorized to
execute and deliver, on behalf of the city, a contract with the registrar. Upon merger or
consolidation of the registrar with another corporation, if the resulting corporation is a bank or
trust company authorized by law to conduct such business, the resulting corporation is authorized
to act as successor registrar. The city agrees to pay the reasonable and customary charges of the
registrar for the services performed. The city reserves the right to remove the registrar upon thirty
(30) days’ notice and upon the appointment of a successor registrar, in which event the
predecessor registrar must deliver all cash and bonds in its possession to the successor registrar
and must deliver the bond register to the successor registrar. On or before each principal or
interest due date, without further order of the city council, the finance director of the city must
transmit to the registrar moneys sufficient for the payment of all principal and interest then due.
2.05. Execution, authentication and delivery. The bonds will be prepared under the
direction of the city manager and executed on behalf of the city by the signatures of the mayor
and the city manager, provided that those signatures may be printed, engraved or lithographed
facsimiles of the originals. If an officer whose signature or a facsimile of whose signature appears
on the bonds ceases to be such officer before the delivery of a bond, that signature or facsimile
will nevertheless be valid and sufficient for all purposes, the same as if the officer had remained in
office until delivery. Notwithstanding such execution, a bond will not be valid or obligatory for any
purpose or entitled to any security or benefit under this resolution unless and until a certificate of
authentication on the bond has been duly executed by the manual signature of an authorized
representative of the registrar. Certificates of authentication on different bonds need not be
signed by the same representative. The executed certificate of authentication on a bond is
conclusive evidence that it has been authenticated and delivered under this resolution. When the
bonds have been so prepared, executed and authenticated, the city manager will deliver the same
to the purchaser upon payment of the purchase price in accordance with the contract of sale
heretofore made and executed, and the purchaser is not obligated to see to the application of the
purchase price.
Section 3. Form of bond.
3.01. Execution of the bonds. The bonds will be printed or typewritten in substantially
the form set forth in Exhibit B.
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5b) Page 7
Title: Resolution awarding the sale of General Obligation Bonds, Series 2024A
3.02. Approving legal opinion. The city manager is authorized and directed to obtain a
copy of the proposed approving legal opinion of Kennedy & Graven, Chartered, Minneapolis,
Minnesota, and cause the opinion to be printed on or accompany each bond.
Section 4. Payment; security; pledges and covenants.
4.01. Debt service fund. The bonds will be payable from the General Obligation Bonds,
Series 2024A Debt Service Fund (the “debt service fund”) hereby created. The debt service fund
shall be administered and maintained by the finance director as a bookkeeping account separate
and apart from all other funds maintained in the official financial records of the city. The finance
director shall timely deposit in the debt service fund the ad valorem taxes hereinafter levied (the
“taxes”), which taxes are pledged to the debt service fund. There is also appropriated to the debt
service fund (i) capitalized interest financed with proceeds of the bonds; (ii) amounts over the
minimum purchase price paid by the purchaser, to the extent designated for deposit in the debt
service fund in accordance with Section 1.03 hereof; (iii) all investment earnings on amounts in the
Debt Service Fund; and (iv) any other funds appropriated for the payment of principal or interest
on the Bonds.
4.02. Construction fund. The city hereby creates the General Obligation Bonds,
Series 2024A Construction Fund (the “construction fund”). Proceeds of the bonds, less the
appropriations made in Section 4.01 hereof, together with taxes and any other funds appropriated
for the capital projects collected during the construction of the capital projects, will be deposited
in the construction fund to be used solely to defray expenses of the capital projects and the
payment of principal and interest on the bonds prior to the completion and payment of all costs of
the capital projects. When the capital projects are completed and the cost thereof paid, the
construction fund is to be closed and any funds remaining may be deposited in the debt service
fund.
4.03. General obligation pledge. For the prompt and full payment of the principal of and
interest on the bonds, as the same respectively become due, the full faith, credit and taxing
powers of the city will be and are hereby irrevocably pledged. If the balance in the debt service
fund is ever insufficient to pay all principal and interest then due on the bonds and any other
bonds payable therefrom, the deficiency will be promptly paid out of monies in the general fund of
the city which are available for such purpose, and such general fund may be reimbursed with or
without interest from the debt service fund when a sufficient balance is available therein.
4.04. Pledge of tax levy. For the purpose of paying the principal of and interest on the
bonds, there is levied a direct annual irrepealable ad valorem tax upon all of the taxable
property in the city, which will be spread upon the tax rolls and collected with and as part of
other general taxes of the city. The taxes will be credited to the debt service fund above
provided and will be in the years and amounts as attached hereto as Exhibit C.
4.05. Debt service coverage. It is hereby determined that the estimated collection of
the foregoing taxes will produce at least five percent (5%) in excess of the amount needed to
meet when due the principal and interest payments on the bonds. The tax levy herein provided
is irrepealable until all of the bonds are paid, provided that at the time the city makes its annual
tax levies the finance director may certify to the Auditor/Treasurer of Hennepin County,
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5b) Page 8
Title: Resolution awarding the sale of General Obligation Bonds, Series 2024A
Minnesota (the “county auditor/treasurer”) the amount available in the debt service fund to
pay principal and interest due during the ensuing year, and the county auditor/treasurer will
thereupon reduce the levy collectible during such year by the amount so certified.
4.06. Registration of resolution. The city manager is authorized and directed to file a
certified copy of this resolution with the county auditor/treasurer and to obtain the certificate
required by section 475.63 of the act.
Section 5. Authentication of transcript.
5.01. City proceedings and records. The officers of the city are authorized and directed to
prepare and furnish to the purchaser and to the attorneys approving the bonds certified copies of
proceedings and records of the city relating to the bonds and to the financial condition and affairs
of the city, and such other certificates, affidavits and transcripts as may be required to show the
facts within their knowledge or as shown by the books and records in their custody and under
their control, relating to the validity and marketability of the bonds, and such instruments,
including any heretofore furnished, will be deemed representations of the city as to the facts
stated therein.
5.02. Certification as to official statement. The mayor, the city manager, and/or the
finance director are authorized and directed to certify that they have examined the official
statement prepared and circulated in connection with the issuance and sale of the bonds and that
to the best of their knowledge and belief the official statement is a complete and accurate
representation of the facts and representations made therein as of the date of the official
statement.
5.03. Other certificates. The mayor, the city manager, and/or the finance director are
hereby authorized and directed to furnish to the purchaser at the closing such certificates as
are required as a condition of sale. Unless litigation shall have been commenced and be
pending questioning the bonds or the organization of the city or incumbency of its officers, at
the closing the mayor, the city manager, and the finance director shall also execute and deliver to
the purchaser a suitable certificate as to absence of material litigation, and the finance director
shall also execute and deliver a certificate as to payment for and delivery of the bonds. If an
officer whose signature or a facsimile of whose signature appears on any aforementioned
certificate or other similar document ceases to be such officer before the delivery of such
document, that signature or facsimile will nevertheless be valid and sufficient for all purposes,
the same as if the officer had remained in office until delivery.
5.04. Electronic signatures. The electronic signature of the mayor, the city manager,
the finance director, and/or the city clerk to this resolution and any certificate authorized to be
executed hereunder shall be as valid as an original signature of such party and shall be effective
to bind the city thereto. For purposes hereof, (i) “electronic signature” means a manually
signed original signature that is then transmitted by electronic means; and (ii) “transmitted by
electronic means” means sent in the form of a facsimile or sent via the internet as a portable
document format (“pdf”) or other replicating image attached to an electronic mail or internet
message.
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5b) Page 9
Title: Resolution awarding the sale of General Obligation Bonds, Series 2024A
5.05. Payment of costs of issuance. The city authorizes the purchaser to forward the
amount of bond proceeds allocable to the payment of issuance expenses in accordance with
the closing memorandum to be prepared and distributed by Ehlers and Associates, Inc., the
municipal advisor to the city, on the date of closing.
Section 6. Tax covenants.
6.01. Tax-exempt bonds. The city covenants and agrees with the holders from time to
time of the bonds that it will not take or permit to be taken by any of its officers, employees or
agents any action which would cause the interest on the bonds to become subject to taxation
under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “code”), and the treasury regulations
promulgated thereunder, in effect at the time of such actions, and that it will take or cause its
officers, employees or agents to take, all affirmative action within its power that may be necessary
to ensure that such interest will not become subject to taxation under the code and applicable
treasury regulations, as presently existing or as hereafter amended and made applicable to the
bonds.
6.02. Rebate. For purposes of qualifying for the small issuer exception to the federal
arbitrage rebate requirements, the city hereby finds, determines, and declares that the aggregate
face amount of all taxexempt bonds (other than private activity bonds) issued by the city (and all
subordinate entities of the city) during the calendar year in which the Bonds are issued and
outstanding at one time is not reasonably expected to exceed $5,000,000, all within the meaning
of Section 148(f)(4)(D) of the Code.
6.03. Not private activity bonds. The city further covenants not to use the proceeds of
the bonds or to cause or permit them or any of them to be used, in such a manner as to cause the
bonds to be “private activity bonds” within the meaning of Sections 103 and 141 through 150 of
the code.
6.04. Qualified tax-exempt obligations. In order to qualify the bonds as “qualified tax-
exempt obligations” within the meaning of section 265(b)(3) of the code, the city makes the
following factual statements and representations:
(a) the bonds are not “private activity bonds” as defined in Section 141 of the
code;
(b) the city designates the bonds as “qualified tax-exempt obligations” for
purposes of Section 265(b)(3) of the code;
(c) the reasonably anticipated amount of tax-exempt obligations (other than
private activity bonds that are not qualified 501(c)(3) bonds) which will be issued by the city
(and all subordinate entities of the city) during calendar year 2024 will not exceed
$10,000,000; and
(d) not more than $10,000,000 of obligations issued by the city during calendar
year 2024 have been designated for purposes of Section 265(b)(3) of the code.
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5b) Page 10
Title: Resolution awarding the sale of General Obligation Bonds, Series 2024A
6.05. Procedural requirements. The city will use its best efforts to comply with any
federal procedural requirements which may apply in order to effectuate the designations made by
this section.
Section 7. Book-entry system; limited obligation of city.
7.01. DTC. The bonds will be initially issued in the form of a separate single typewritten
or printed fully registered bond for each of the maturities set forth in Section 1.04 hereof. Upon
initial issuance, the ownership of each bond will be registered in the registration books kept by the
registrar in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee for The Depository Trust Company, New York,
New York, and its successors and assigns (“DTC”). Except as provided in this section, all of the
outstanding bonds will be registered in the registration books kept by the registrar in the name of
Cede & Co., as nominee of DTC.
7.02. Participants. With respect to bonds registered in the registration books kept by the
registrar in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee of DTC, the city, the registrar and the paying agent
will have no responsibility or obligation to any broker dealers, banks and other financial
institutions from time to time for which DTC holds bonds as securities depository (the
“participants”) or to any other person on behalf of which a participant holds an interest in the
bonds, including but not limited to any responsibility or obligation with respect to (i) the accuracy
of the records of DTC, Cede & Co. or any participant with respect to any ownership interest in the
bonds, (ii) the delivery to any participant or any other person (other than a registered owner of
bonds, as shown by the registration books kept by the registrar), of any notice with respect to the
bonds, including any notice of redemption, or (iii) the payment to any participant or any other
person, other than a registered owner of bonds, of any amount with respect to principal of,
premium, if any, or interest on the bonds. The city, the registrar and the paying agent may treat
and consider the person in whose name each bond is registered in the registration books kept by
the registrar as the holder and absolute owner of such bond for the purpose of payment of
principal, premium and interest with respect to such bond, for the purpose of registering transfers
with respect to such bonds, and for all other purposes. The paying agent will pay all principal of,
premium, if any, and interest on the bonds only to or on the order of the respective registered
owners, as shown in the registration books kept by the registrar, and all such payments will be
valid and effectual to fully satisfy and discharge the city’s obligations with respect to payment of
principal of, premium, if any, or interest on the bonds to the extent of the sum or sums so paid. No
person other than a registered owner of bonds, as shown in the registration books kept by the
registrar, will receive a certificated bond evidencing the obligation of this resolution. Upon delivery
by DTC to the city manager of a written notice to the effect that DTC has determined to substitute
a new nominee in place of Cede & Co., the words “Cede & Co.” will refer to such new nominee of
DTC; and upon receipt of such a notice, the city manager will promptly deliver a copy of the same
to the registrar and paying agent.
7.03. Representation letter. The city has heretofore executed and delivered to DTC a
blanket issuer letter of representations (the “representation letter”) which will govern payment of
principal of, premium, if any, and interest on the bonds and notices with respect to the bonds. Any
paying agent or registrar subsequently appointed by the city with respect to the bonds will agree
to take all action necessary for all representations of the city in the representation letter with
respect to the registrar and paying agent, respectively, to be complied with at all times.
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5b) Page 11
Title: Resolution awarding the sale of General Obligation Bonds, Series 2024A
7.04. Transfers outside book-entry system. In the event the city, by resolution of the city
council, determines that it is in the best interests of the persons having beneficial interests in the
bonds that they be able to obtain bond certificates, the city will notify DTC, whereupon DTC will
notify the participants, of the availability through DTC of bond certificates. In such event the city
will issue, transfer and exchange bond certificates as requested by DTC and any other registered
owners in accordance with the provisions of this resolution. DTC may determine to discontinue
providing its services with respect to the bonds at any time by giving notice to the city and
discharging its responsibilities with respect thereto under applicable law. In such event, if no
successor securities depository is appointed, the city will issue and the registrar will authenticate
bond certificates in accordance with this resolution and the provisions hereof will apply to the
transfer, exchange and method of payment thereof.
7.05. Payments to Cede & Co. Notwithstanding any other provision of this resolution to
the contrary, so long as a bond is registered in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee of DTC,
payments with respect to principal of, premium, if any, and interest on the bond and all notices
with respect to the bond will be made and given, respectively in the manner provided in DTC’s
operational arrangements, as set forth in the representation letter.
Section 8. Continuing disclosure.
8.01. Execution of continuing disclosure certificate. “Continuing disclosure certificate”
means that certain continuing disclosure certificate executed by the mayor and city manager and
dated the date of issuance and delivery of the bonds, as originally executed and as it may be
amended from time to time in accordance with the terms thereof.
8.02. City compliance with provisions of continuing disclosure certificate. The city hereby
covenants and agrees that it will comply with and carry out all of the provisions of the continuing
disclosure certificate. Notwithstanding any other provision of this resolution, failure of the city to
comply with the continuing disclosure certificate is not to be considered an event of default with
respect to the bonds; however, any bondholder may take such actions as may be necessary and
appropriate, including seeking mandate or specific performance by court order, to cause the city
to comply with its obligations under this section.
Section 9. Defeasance. When all bonds and all interest thereon have been discharged
as provided in this section, all pledges, covenants and other rights granted by this resolution to the
holders of the bonds will cease, except that the pledge of the full faith and credit of the city for the
prompt and full payment of the principal of and interest on the bonds will remain in full force and
effect. The city may discharge all bonds which are due on any date by depositing with the registrar
on or before that date a sum sufficient for the payment thereof in full. If any bond should not be
paid when due, it may nevertheless be discharged by depositing with the registrar a sum sufficient
for the payment thereof in full with interest accrued to the date of such deposit.
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5b) Page 12
Title: Resolution awarding the sale of General Obligation Bonds, Series 2024A
Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the city council June 3, 2024
Kim Keller, city manager Nadia Mohamed, mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, city clerk
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5b) Page 13
Title: Resolution awarding the sale of General Obligation Bonds, Series 2024A
Exhibit A
Proposals
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5b) Page 14
Title: Resolution awarding the sale of General Obligation Bonds, Series 2024A
Exhibit B
Form of bond
No. R-__ $___________
United States of America
State of Minnesota
County of Hennepin
City of St. Louis Park
General Obligation Bond
Series 2024B
Rate
Maturity
Date of
Original Issue
CUSIP
February 1, 20__ June 25, 2024
Registered owner: Cede & Co.
The City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, a duly organized and existing municipal
corporation in Hennepin County, Minnesota (the “city”), acknowledges itself to be indebted
and for value received hereby promises to pay to the registered owner specified above or
registered assigns, the principal sum of $__________ on the maturity date specified above,
with interest thereon from the date hereof at the annual rate specified above (calculated on the
basis of a 360 day year of twelve 30 day months), payable February 1 and August 1 in each year,
commencing August 1, 2025, to the person in whose name this bond is registered at the close
of business on the fifteenth day (whether or not a business day) of the immediately preceding
month. The interest hereon and, upon presentation and surrender hereof, the principal hereof
are payable in lawful money of the United States of America by check or draft by Bond Trust
Services Corporation, Roseville, Minnesota, as bond registrar, paying agent, transfer agent and
authenticating agent, or its designated successor under the resolution described herein. For the
prompt and full payment of such principal and interest as the same respectively become due,
the full faith and credit and taxing powers of the city have been and are hereby irrevocably
pledged.
The city may elect on February 1, 2034, and on any day thereafter to prepay bonds due
on or after February 1, 2035. Redemption may be in whole or in part and if in part, at the
option of the city and in such manner as the city will determine. If less than all bonds of a
maturity are called for redemption, the city will notify The Depository Trust Company (“DTC”) of
the particular amount of such maturity to be prepaid. DTC will determine by lot the amount of
each participant’s interest in such maturity to be redeemed and each participant will then
select by lot the beneficial ownership interests in such maturity to be redeemed. Prepayments
will be at a price of par plus accrued interest.
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5b) Page 15
Title: Resolution awarding the sale of General Obligation Bonds, Series 2024A
This bond is one of an issue in the aggregate principal amount of $3,265,000 all of like
original issue date and tenor, except as to number, maturity date, redemption privilege, and
interest rate, all issued pursuant to a resolution adopted by the city council on June 3, 2024 (the
“resolution”), for the purpose of providing money to aid in financing certain capital projects,
pursuant to and in full conformity with the home rule charter of the city and the constitution
and laws of the State of Minnesota, including Minnesota Statutes, chapter 475, as amended,
and the principal hereof and interest hereon are payable from ad valorem taxes, as set forth in
the resolution to which reference is made for a full statement of rights and powers thereby
conferred. The full faith and credit of the city are irrevocably pledged for payment of this bond
and the city council has obligated itself to levy additional ad valorem taxes on all taxable
property in the city in the event of any deficiency in taxes pledged, which taxes may be levied
without limitation as to rate or amount. The bonds of this series are issued only as fully
registered bonds in denominations of $5,000 or any integral multiple thereof of single
maturities.
The city council has designated this issue of bonds as “qualified tax-exempt obligations”
within the meaning of section 265(b)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the
“code”), relating to disallowance of interest expense for financial institutions and within the
$10 million limit allowed by the code for the calendar year of issue.
As provided in the resolution and subject to certain limitations set forth therein, this
bond is transferable upon the books of the city at the principal office of the bond registrar, by
the registered owner hereof in person or by the owner’s attorney duly authorized in writing
upon surrender hereof together with a written instrument of transfer satisfactory to the bond
registrar, duly executed by the registered owner or the owner’s attorney; and may also be
surrendered in exchange for bonds of other authorized denominations. Upon such transfer or
exchange the city will cause a new bond or bonds to be issued in the name of the transferee or
registered owner, of the same aggregate principal amount, bearing interest at the same rate
and maturing on the same date, subject to reimbursement for any tax, fee or governmental
charge required to be paid with respect to such transfer or exchange.
The city and the bond registrar may deem and treat the person in whose name this
bond is registered as the absolute owner hereof, whether this bond is overdue or not, for the
purpose of receiving payment and for all other purposes, and neither the city nor the bond
registrar will be affected by any notice to the contrary.
IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED, RECITED, COVENANTED AND AGREED that all acts, conditions
and things required by the home rule charter of the city and the constitution and laws of the
State of Minnesota to be done, to exist, to happen and to be performed preliminary to and in
the issuance of this bond in order to make it a valid and binding general obligation of the city in
accordance with its terms, have been done, do exist, have happened and have been performed
as so required, and that the issuance of this bond does not cause the indebtedness of the city
to exceed any constitutional, charter, or statutory limitation of indebtedness.
This bond is not valid or obligatory for any purpose or entitled to any security or benefit
under the resolution until the certificate of authentication hereon has been executed by the
bond registrar by manual signature of one of its authorized representatives.
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5b) Page 16
Title: Resolution awarding the sale of General Obligation Bonds, Series 2024A
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of St. Louis Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota, by its
city council, has caused this bond to be executed on its behalf by the facsimile or manual
signatures of the mayor and city manager and has caused this bond to be dated as of the date
set forth below.
Dated: June 25, 2024
City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota
(Facsimile) (Facsimile)
Mayor City Manager
_________________________________
Certificate of authentication
This is one of the bonds delivered pursuant to the resolution mentioned within.
Bond Trust Services Corporation
By
Authorized representative
_________________________________
Abbreviations
The following abbreviations, when used in the inscription on the face of this bond, will be
construed as though they were written out in full according to applicable laws or regulations:
TEN COM -- as tenants in common UNIF GIFT MIN ACT
_________ Custodian _________
(Cust) (Minor)
TEN ENT -- as tenants by entireties under uniform gifts or transfers to minors
act, State of _______________
JT TEN -- as joint tenants with right of
survivorship and not as tenants in
common
Additional abbreviations may also be used though not in the above list.
________________________________________
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5b) Page 17
Title: Resolution awarding the sale of General Obligation Bonds, Series 2024A
Assignment
For value received, the undersigned hereby sells, assigns and transfers unto
________________________________________ the within bond and all rights thereunder, and
does hereby irrevocably constitute and appoint _________________________ attorney to
transfer the said bond on the books kept for registration of the within bond, with full power of
substitution in the premises.
Dated:
Notice: The assignor’s signature to this assignment must correspond with the name
as it appears upon the face of the within bond in every particular, without
alteration or any change whatever.
Signature guaranteed:
NOTICE: Signature(s) must be guaranteed by a financial institution that is a member of the
Securities Transfer Agent Medallion Program (“STAMP”), the Stock Exchange Medallion Program
(“SEMP”), the New York Stock Exchange, Inc. Medallion Signatures Program (“MSP”) or other such
“signature guarantee program” as may be determined by the registrar in addition to, or in
substitution for, STAMP, SEMP or MSP, all in accordance with the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
as amended.
The registrar will not effect transfer of this bond unless the information concerning the
assignee requested below is provided.
Name and address:
(Include information for all joint owners if this bond
is held by joint account.)
Please insert social security or other
identifying number of assignee
_________________________________
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5b) Page 18
Title: Resolution awarding the sale of General Obligation Bonds, Series 2024A
Provisions as to registration
The ownership of the principal of and interest on the within bond has been registered on
the books of the registrar in the name of the person last noted below.
Date of registration
Registered owner
Signature of
Officer of registrar
Cede & Co.
Federal ID #13-2555119
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5b) Page 19
Title: Resolution awarding the sale of General Obligation Bonds, Series 2024A
Exhibit C
Tax levy schedule
YEAR * TAX LEVY
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
__________________________________
* Year tax levy collected.
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5b) Page 20
Title: Resolution awarding the sale of General Obligation Bonds, Series 2024A
State of Minnesota )
)
County of Hennepin ) SS.
)
City of St. Louis Park )
I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting city clerk of the City of St. Louis Park,
Hennepin County, Minnesota (the “city”), do hereby certify that I have carefully compared the
attached and foregoing extract of minutes of a regular meeting of the city council of the city held
on June 3, 2024, with the original minutes on file in my office and the extract is a full, true and
correct copy of the minutes insofar as they relate to the issuance and sale of the city’s General
Obligation Bonds, Series 2024A, in the original aggregate principal amount of $3,265,000.
WITNESS my hand officially as such city clerk and the corporate seal of the city this ______
day of _______________, 2024.
City Clerk
City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota
(SEAL)
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: June 3, 2024
Consent agenda item: 5c
Executive summary
Title: Park Plaza 2nd Addition final plat at 5775 Wayzata Boulevard – Ward 4
Recommended action: Motion to adopt resolution approving the final plat of Park Plaza 2nd
Addition.
Policy consideration: Is the final plat consistent with the preliminary plat and does it meet the
subdivision code?
Summary: GW Properties submitted a final plat for Park Plaza 2nd Addition at 5775 Wayzata
Boulevard that would subdivide the property into two parcels and create one new lot. The plat
also dedicates land for road right of way on 16th Street West and perimeter drainage and utility
easements.
The planning commission and city staff find the final plat meets city code and is consistent with
the approved preliminary plat.
Financial or budget considerations: None.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a broad range of
housing and neighborhood oriented development.
Supporting documents: Final plat resolution, final exhibits
Prepared by: Laura Chamberlain, senior planner
Katelyn Champoux, associate planner
Reviewed by: Sean Walther, planning manager/deputy community development director
Karen Barton, community development director
Approved by: Kim Keller, city manager
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5c) Page 2
Title: Park Plaza 2nd Addition final plat at 5775 Wayzata Boulevard – Ward 4
Discussion
Site information:
Site area (acres): 11.43
Background: The site currently contains a nine-story office building and two surface parking
lots. The eastern portion of the site contains a pond and trail.
Previous approvals: Planning commission held a public hearing on the proposed project and
recommended approval to city council on November 15, 2023. City council approved the
following applications on December 18, 2023:
1. A preliminary plat subdividing the lot into two parcels, creating one new lot.
2. A special permit amendment to amend and restate the previous approvals on the site
and allow the new restaurant uses.
3. A conditional use permit to allow:
a. In-vehicle service; and
b. Two principal buildings on one parcel.
Current use: Surrounding land uses:
Office, seasonal garden market North: restaurant, Interstate 394
East: hotel, restaurant, conference center
South: wholesale and retail shopping center
West: hotel, multi-family housing
Current 2040 land use guidance Current zoning
OFC- office O office
5775 Wayzata Blvd.
Project
site
Interstate 394
16th Street W
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5c) Page 3
Title: Park Plaza 2nd Addition final plat at 5775 Wayzata Boulevard – Ward 4
Present considerations: GW Properties proposes two new one-story buildings in the southeast
corner of the existing parking lot. No changes are proposed to the existing office building nor
the pond on the eastern portion of the site.
When the final plat is approved, construction is planned to begin in summer 2024 and the
restaurants are tentatively scheduled to be open fall 2024.
Final plat analysis: The applicant seeks final plat approval for Park Plaza 2nd Addition at 5775
Wayzata Boulevard, subdividing the property into two new parcels.
Lots: The plat would subdivide the existing 497,753 square foot lot into two parcels. Lot 1
would be 431,701 square feet and contain the existing office building and pond. Lot 2 would be
45,168 square feet and contain two new one-story buildings along with new parking spaces,
landscaping and a sidewalk access to 16th Street West.
Right of way: The plat dedicates 28,495 square feet of right of way to Zarthan Avenue South
and 16th Street West.
Easements: The plat dedicates ten feet wide drainage and utility easements along property
lines adjacent to right-of-way, and five feet wide easements along all interior lot lines of both
lots.
Sidewalks: City code requires all new plats, and all commercial developments, to include
sidewalks along all street frontages. 16th Street West has an existing sidewalk that meets this
requirement. There is currently no sidewalk along the east side of Zarthan Avenue South
adjacent to the proposed plat; in lieu of constructing new sidewalk, the applicant will pay the
city’s sidewalk fee of $13 per square foot to the city. The sidewalk is not being required because
of the existing grades and to preserve mature trees that are present along Zarthan Avenue
South.
Staff finds the final plat is consistent with the approved preliminary plat and meets city
requirements with the conditions recommended by staff.
Next steps: Once the final plat is approved by the council, the city and developer will enter into
a development agreement, the developer will pay park dedication fees to the city, and the plat
recorded with Hennepin County. Then the city may issue construction permits and work may
begin.
Recommendation: Motion to adopt resolution approving the final plat of Park Plaza 2nd
Addition.
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5c) Page 4
Title: Park Plaza 2nd Addition final plat at 5775 Wayzata Boulevard – Ward 4
Resolution No. 24-____
Approving final plat of Park Plaza 2nd Addition,
5775 Wayzata Boulevard
Whereas, GW Properties applied for approval of final plat in the manner required for
platting land under the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code, and all proceedings have been duly
thereunder; and
Whereas, the City of St. Louis Park city council approved the preliminary plat for Park
Plaza 2nd Addition on December 18, 2023 via Resolution No. 23-171; and
Whereas, the proposed final plat has been found to be in all respects consistent with the
preliminary plat, comprehensive plan and the regulations and requirements of the laws of the
State of Minnesota and the ordinances of the City of St. Louis Park; and
Whereas, the proposed plat is situated upon lands in Hennepin County, Minnesota, legally
described in “Exhibit A” attached hereto; and
Whereas, the City of St. Louis Park planning commission recommended approval of the
final plat with conditions on May 22, 2024; and
Whereas, the city council has considered the advice and recommendation of the planning
commission; and
Whereas, the contents of Case No. 24-13-S are hereby entered into and made part of the
record of decision for this case,
Now therefore be it resolved the proposed final plat of Park Plaza 2nd Addition is hereby
approved and accepted by the city council as being in accord and conformity with all
ordinances, city plans and regulations of the City of St. Louis Park and the laws of the State of
Minnesota, provided, however, that this approval is made subject to the opinion of the city
attorney and Certification by the city clerk and subject to the following conditions:
1. The site shall be developed, used and maintained in accordance with the conditions of
this ordinance, approved official exhibits and city code.
2. All utility service structures shall be buried. If any utility service structure cannot be
buried (i.e. electric transformer), it shall be integrated into the building design and 100%
screened from off-site with materials consistent with the primary façade materials.
3. Prior to the city signing and releasing the final plat to the developer for filing with
Hennepin County:
a. A financial security in the form of a cash escrow or letter of credit in the amount
of $1,000 shall be submitted to the city to ensure that a signed Mylar copy of the
final plat is provided to the city.
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5c) Page 5
Title: Park Plaza 2nd Addition final plat at 5775 Wayzata Boulevard – Ward 4
b. A planning development contract shall be executed between the city and
developer that addresses, at a minimum:
i. The installation of all public improvements including, but not limited to:
sidewalks, boulevards, and the execution of necessary easements related
to such improvements.
ii. A performance guarantee in the form of cash escrow or irrevocable letter
of credit shall be provided to the City of St. Louis Park in the amount of
1.25 times the estimated costs for the installation of all public
improvements (sidewalks and boulevards), placement of iron
monuments at property corners, and the private site stormwater
management system and landscaping.
iii. Shared parking agreement exhibits and documents.
iv. Park dedication fee
v. The applicant shall reimburse city attorney’s fees in drafting/reviewing
such documents as required in the final plat approval.
vi. The mayor and city manager are authorized to execute the planning
development contract.
4. Prior to starting any land disturbing activities, the following conditions shall be met:
a. Proof of recording the final plat shall be submitted to the city.
b. A preconstruction meeting shall be held with the appropriate development,
construction, private utility, and city representatives.
c. All necessary permits shall be obtained.
d. A performance guarantee in the form of cash escrow or irrevocable letter of
credit shall be provided to the City of St. Louis Park in the amount of 125% of the
cost for all public improvements (street, sidewalks, boulevards, utility, etc.) and
landscaping.
e. The applicant shall pay the park dedication fee to the city.
It is further resolved the city clerk is hereby directed to supply two certified copies of this
resolution to the above-named owner and subdivider, who is the applicant herein.
The mayor and city manager are hereby authorized to execute all contracts required herein,
and the city clerk is hereby directed to execute the certificate of approval on behalf of the city
council upon the said plat when all of the conditions set forth have been fulfilled.
Such execution of the certificate upon said plat by the city clerk, as required under Section 26-
123(1)j of the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code, shall be conclusive showing of proper compliance
therewith by the subdivider and city officials charged with duties above described and shall
entitle such plat to be placed on record forthwith without further formality.
The city clerk is instructed to record certified copies of this resolution in the Office of the
Hennepin County Register of Deeds or Registrar of Titles as the case may be.
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5c) Page 6
Title: Park Plaza 2nd Addition final plat at 5775 Wayzata Boulevard – Ward 4
Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the city council June 3, 2024
Kim Keller, city manager Nadia Mohamed, mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, city clerk
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5c) Page 7
Title: Park Plaza 2nd Addition final plat at 5775 Wayzata Boulevard – Ward 4
Exhibit A
Legal Description:
Lot 4, Block 2, Park Plaza, except that part lying Northerly and Westerly of the following
described line:
Commencing at the most Northerly corner of said Lot 4; thence on o plot bearing of South
47 degrees 01 minutes 08 seconds West along the Northwesterly line of said Lot 4, a
distance of 140.50 feet; thence South 01 degree 39 minutes 00 seconds West, along the
West line of said Lot 4, a distance of 85.62 feet to the point of beginning of a line to be
described; thence South 89 degrees 40 minutes 35 seconds East a distance of 168.50 feet;
thence North 00 degrees 02 minutes 16 seconds East a distance of 179.69 feet to the
North line of said Lot 4 and there terminating, Hennepin County, Minnesota.
Hennepin County, Minnesota
Torrens Property
PARK PLAZA 2ND ADDITION R.T. DOC. NO.
KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS: That Middleton Park Place Investors LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, owner of the following described property:
That part of Lot 4, Block 2, PARK PLAZA, which lies southerly of a line run parallel with and distant 25 southerly of the following described Line 1, except that part thereof which lies northerly and westerly of the following described line:
Commencing at the most northerly corner of said Lot 4; thence South 47 degrees 01 minutes 08 seconds West along the northwesterly line of said Lot 4 a distance of 140.50 feet; thence South 01 degrees 39 minutes 00 seconds West, along the west line of said Lot 4 a distance of 85.62 feet to the point of the beginning of the line to be described; thence South 89 degrees 40 minutes 35 seconds East 168.50 feet; thence North 00 degrees 02 minutes 16 seconds East 179.69 feet to the North line af said Lot 4 and said line there terminating.
Line 1 is described as follows; Beginning at a point on the west line of Section 4, Township 117, Range 21, distant 178.68 feet south of the west quarter comer thereof; thence run easterly at on angle
of 101 degrees 53 minutes 14 seconds from said west section line (measured from north to east) for 244.62 feet; thence deflect to the left on a tangential curve having o radius of 3274.04 feet and a delta angle of 6 degrees 34 minutes 40 seconds for 375.87 feet; thence easterly tangent to said curve for 344.23 feet; thence deflect to the left on a tangential curve having a radius of 716.2 feet and a delta angle of 12 degrees 22 minutes 19 seconds for 154.65 feet; thence easterly tangent to said curve for 50.68 feet; thence deflect to the right on a tangential curve having a radius of 954.93 feet and a delta angle of 10 degrees 06 minutes 28 seconds for 168.46 feet; thence easterly tangent to said curve for 449.66 feet; thence deflect to the right on a tangential curve having a radius of 3819.72 feet and a delta angle of 04 degrees 36 minutes 09 seconds for 306.84 feet and said Line 1 there terminating.
Has caused the same to be surveyed and plotted as PARK PLAZA 2ND ADDITION, and does hereby dedicate to the public for public use the public ways and the drainage and utility easements created by this plat.
In witness whereof said Middleton Park Place Investors LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, has caused these presents ta be signed by its proper officer this
___ day of ______ 20 ___ .
Signed; Middleton Pork Place Investors LLC, a Delaware limited liability company,
BY ______________________ of Middleton Park Place Investors LLC, a Delaware limited liability companyy.
STAlE OF _____ _
COUNTY OF ____ _
This instrument was acknowledged before me on this ____ day of _______ , 20 _ __, by ____________ _
_________ of Middleton Park Place Investors LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, on behalf of the company.
Signature of Notary
Printed Name of Notary
Notary Public _____ County, ____ _
My commission expires _________ _
I Eric A. Roeser do hereby certify that this plat was prepared by me or under my direct supervision; that I om a duly Licensed Land Surveyor in the State of Minnesota; that this plat is a correct representation of the boundary survey; that all mathematical data and labels are correctly designated on this plat; that all monuments depicted on this plat hove been, or will be correctly set within one year; that all water boundaries and wet lands, as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 505.01, Subd. 3, as of the dote of this certificate ore shown and labeled on this plot; and all public ways are shown and labeled on this plat.
Dated this ___ , day of _______ 20 __ .
Eric A. Roeser, Licensed Land Surveyor
Minnesota License No. 47476
STAlE OF ____ _
COUNTY OF ____ _
This instrument was acknowledged before me on this ____ day of ______ , 20 ___ , by Eric A. Roeser.
Signature of Notary
Printed Name of Notary
Notary Public _____ County, ____ _
My commission expires _________ _
CITY COUNCIL. CITY OF SAINT LOUIS PARK. MINNESOTA
This plot of PARK PLAZA 2ND ADDITION, was approved and accepted by the City Council of the City of Saint Louis Park, Minnesota at a regular meeting thereof held
this ___ day of _____ • 20 __ , and said plat is in compliance with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 505.03, Subd. 2.
City Council, City of SAINT LOUIS PARK, Minnesota
By _________ , Mayor By _________ , Clerk
COUNTY AUDITOR
Hennepin County, Minnesota
I hereby certify that taxes poyoble in 20_ and prior years hove been paid for land described on this plat, dated this ____ doy of _____ 20_
Daniel Rogan, County Auditor By _________ , Deputy
SURVEY DMSION
Hennepin County, Minnesota
Pursuant to MN. STAT. Sec. 383B.565 (1969), this plat has been opproved this ______ day of _____ 20 __ .
Chris F. Mavis, County Surveyor
REGISTRAR OF 111LES
Hennepin County, Minnesota
By---------
I hereby certify that the within plat of PARK PLAZA 2ND ADDITION was filed in this office this ____ day of _____ 20 __ _, at o'clock�M.
Amber Bougie, Registrar of ntles By _________ , Deputy
MFN
Egan. Field f, Nowak, Inc.
land surveyors since 1872
SHEET 1 OF 2 SHEETS
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5c)
Title: Park Plaza 2nd Addition final plat at 5775 Wayzata Boulevard - Ward 4
Page 8
•
®
0 50 �--
SCALE IN
100 150
FEET
THE WEST LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 4, TOWNSHIP 117 NORTH, RANGE 21 WEST, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA IS ASSUMED TO BEAR SOUTH 02 DEGREES 08 MINUTES 52 SECONDS WEST
DENOTES FOUND HENNPIN COUNTY CAST IRON MONUMENT
DENOTES FOUND MONUMENT AS NOTED
DENOTES FOUND PK NAIL. UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED
DENOTES SET 5/8-INCH BY 14-INCH REBAR MARKED 'MTH LICENSE NUMBER 47476
t
t
SECTION 04, T 117 N, R 21 W
GLENWOOD AVE
VICINITY MAP
NO SCALE
DETAIL "A" NO SCALE
PARK PLAZA 2ND ADDITION
II\ /TC-L)C"'T/\ Tc_
/1 \JI L_/ \0 /;-\IL
I I I("\ I I I A I I\\/ 171\J/l v vr, I ',n /\JV.
R.T. DOC. NO.
7
DETAIL "B" NO SCALE
E LINE OF LOT 4--
"' '"'
S74"59'05"E ,-f::.-,_ 1-j_ 45.00"', ....... J.r--j"""
STORM SEWER-i'--/ EASEMENT PER DOC. NO. T2113794
SHEET 2 OF 2 SHEETS
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5c)
Title: Park Plaza 2nd Addition final plat at 5775
Wayzata Boulevard - Ward 4
Page 9
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: June 3, 2024
Consent agenda item: 5d
Executive summary
Title: Resolution amending the city council rules of procedure
Recommended action: Motion to adopt resolution amending the city council rules of
procedure.
Policy consideration: Does the city council want to amend the official rules of procedure
related to the conduct of public business?
Summary: On May 6, 2024, the council discussed various meeting protocols. Following
discussion, the council directed updates to the rules of procedure to reflect a change in meeting
start times. Meeting start times are set by the council as per section 2-31 of the city code.
• Regular meetings of the city council will be scheduled to start at 6:15 p.m. This will allow for
meetings of the Economic Development Authority to continue to occur , as needed, prior to
regular city council meetings on the 1st and 3rd Mondays of every month. An amendment to
section 2f of the city council rules of procedure is required to implement this change.
Defining a start time for regular meetings of the city council is necessary to meet the
requirements related to legal notices for official proceedings of the council, such as public
hearings.
• Study sessions occurring on the 2nd and/or 4th Monday of the month will be scheduled to
start at 6:00 p.m. No changes to the city council rules of procedure are required to
implement this change because the language of section 2g currently provides that city
council study sessions are scheduled as needed and start times are noted on the meeting
agenda. The intent of this language is to reflect that city council study sessions can
technically be held on any Monday, depending on business need, and occur at various times.
The city council adopts their calendar annually and typically reserves the 2nd and/or 4th
Mondays for study sessions. Meeting start times are noted on every meeting agenda and on
the annual calendar adopted by council.
The city council rules of procedure provide guidelines for the conduct of public business by the
council. If approved, staff will communicate the change to the public and update all resources,
print and digital. The changes will be in effect for the June 10, 2024 city council study session. A
schedule of all city council meetings and recognized holidays is available at city hall and on the
city website.
Financial or budget considerations: None at this time. Costs associated with the conduct of city
council meetings are included in the 2024 budget
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to creating opportunities to build
social capital through community engagement.
Supporting documents: Resolution
City council rules of procedure
Prepared by: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk
Approved by: Cindy Walsh, deputy city manager
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5d) Page 2
Title: Resolution amending the city council rules of procedure
Resolution No. 24-___
Amending the city council rules of procedure
Whereas St. Louis Park City Code Section 2-31 states that the city council shall adopt
rules of procedure from time to time by resolution; and
Whereas by Resolution No. 00-108, the city council adopted the rules of procedure and
shall adhere to the rules as stated therein unless revised by a majority vote of the city council;
and
Whereas the city council desires to amend its rules of procedure to enhance
accessibility and transparency related to the conduct of council business and better reflect the
city’s strategic priorities related to community and civic engagement.
Now therefore be it resolved that section 2f of the city council rules of procedure is
hereby amended as reflected in Exhibit A by deleting stricken language and adding underlined
language.
Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the city council June 3, 2024
Kim Keller, city manager Nadia Mohamed, mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, city clerk
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5d) Page 3
Title: Resolution amending the city council rules of procedure
Exhibit A – Draft city council rules of procedure
2. Meetings.
f. Regular meetings.
The city council conducts business and acts on items on the agenda at regular meetings held on
the first and third Mondays of each month at 6:30 6:15 p.m. Regular meetings can be cancelled
or rescheduled at any time, provided council meets at least once per month.
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: June 3, 2024
Consent agenda item: 5e
Executive summary
Title: Temporary on-sale intoxicating liquor license – Southern Anoka Community Assistance
(SACA Food Shelf & Thrift Store) - Ward 2
Recommended action: Motion to approve a temporary on-sale intoxicating liquor license for
Southern Anoka Community Assistance (SACA Food Shelf & Thrift Store) at 6413 Cambridge
Street (Haggard Barrel Brewing) on June 29, 2024.
Policy consideration: Does the applicant meet the requirements for issuance of a temporary
on-sale intoxicating liquor license?
Summary: SACA Food Shelf & Thrift Store applied for a temporary on-sale intoxicating liquor
license for a fundraising event taking place on June 29, 2024. The fundraiser will be held at
Haggard Barrel Brewing’s location and adjacent parking area. A selection of craft beer produced
by Haggard Barrel Brewing is the exclusive offering and will be served from 2:00 – 6:00 p.m. The
alcohol-by-volume (ABV) content of craft beer necessitates the application of a temporary
intoxicating liquor license instead of a temporary 3.2 malt liquor license application.
SACA Food Shelf & Thrift Store is located at 627 398th Ave NE in Columbia Heights, Minnesota.
Their mission is to provide food and resources to those in need while empowering dignity and
independence to those they serve – about 55,000 individuals annually.
The police department completed a background investigation on the principals and found no
reason to deny the temporary license. The applicant meets all requirements for the issuance of
the license and has secured the appropriate insurance liability coverage. Staff recommend
approval of the temporary license.
Financial or budget considerations: The fee for a temporary liquor license is $100 per day of
the event.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to creating opportunities to build
social capital through community engagement.
Supporting documents: None.
Prepared by: Amanda Scott-Lerdal, deputy city clerk
Reviewed by: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk
Approved by: Cindy Walsh, deputy city manager
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: June 3, 2024
Consent agenda item: 5f
Executive summary
Title: Resolution authorizing special assessment to abate unsafe conditions of hazardous
building – Ward 4
Recommended action: Motion to adopt resolution establishing a special assessment for the
abatement of unsafe conditions for human occupancy of the hazardous building located at
4530 Cedar Lake Rd #2 St. Louis Park, MN 55416
Policy consideration: Does the council support the city hiring a contractor to abate the interior
conditions creating unsafe conditions and specially assess the incurred costs consistent with the
special assessment policy previously adopted by city council.
Summary: The city has received complaints regarding the property at 4530 Cedar Lake Rd, Unit
#2. Recent inspection discovered the interior has an excessive amount of garbage creating
unsanitary conditions that restrict egress throughout the home and severely limiting the use of
the cooking and bathroom facilities as well as the sleeping areas. The residential property was
determined to be in violation of IPMC section 108.1.3 as adopted by city code sec. 6-142 and
posted as being unfit for human occupancy.
Staff has on numerous occasions attempted to encourage the property owner to correct the
property’s interior condition. Attempts were made by city staff to find available resources to
assist the owner in gaining compliance with city ordinances. Although contacts were made with
representatives from Hennepin County, no resources were available to manage the volume of
removal needed to bring the home into compliance.
Staff received two written quotes from professional businesses specializing in the removal of
excessive storage which were provided to the property owner. The owner has reviewed the
estimates and agreed to a city coordinated property cleanup, with the costs assessed to the
property over ten years at 5.5%.
Financial or budget considerations: The city has funds available in the permanent improvement
revolving fund to finance the cost of this special assessment.
Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable.
Supporting documents: Resolution
Petition
Prepared by: Michael Pivec, property maintenance & licensing manager
Reviewed by: Brian Hoffman, building & energy director
Approved by: Cindy Walsh, deputy city manager
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5f) Page 2
Title: Resolution authorizing special assessment to abate unsafe conditions of hazardous building – Ward 4
Resolution No. 24-___
Authorizing special assessment of maintenance work
at 4530 Cedar Lake Rd #2, St. Louis Park, MN 55416
PID No. 30-029-24-43-0635
Whereas, Mary Ellen Albrecht, the property owner at 4530 Cedar Lake Rd #2, shall
permit the city and its agents to enter the subject property and perform the maintenance work
to bring the property into compliance with city code; and
Whereas, the property owner has agreed to waive their right to a public hearing, right
of notice and right of appeal pursuant to Minnesota Statute, Chapter 429; and
Whereas, the city council of the City of St. Louis Park has received a report from the
property maintenance inspector related to conditions of the property,
Now therefore be it resolved by the city council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota,
that:
1. The property owner shall permit the city and its agents to enter the subject property
and perform the maintenance work to bring the property into compliance with city
code. The property owner agrees that the city may, at its sole discretion, discard any
refuse or debris as necessary to complete the maintenance work.
2. The property owner and their successors and assigns hereby consent to the entry onto
the subject property by the city and its successors and assigns, including any contractor
hired for the purpose of completing the maintenance work. The property owner
further consents to the city and its successors and assigns discarding any refuse or
debris as necessary to complete the maintenance work, and hereby waive any and all
right to such property.
3. The total estimated cost for the Maintenance work is accepted at $6,500.
4. An administrative fee of $150.00 for processing shall be added to the special
assessment funds.
5. The total special assessment against the property will be $6,650.
6. The property owner has agreed to waive their rights to a public hearing, notice and
appeal from the special assessment, whether provided by Minnesota Statutes,
Chapter 429, or by other statutes, or by ordinance, city charter, the constitution, or
common law.
7. The property owner agrees to pay the city for the cost of the above improvements
through a special assessment over a ten (10) year period at the interest rate of 5.5%
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5f) Page 3
Title: Resolution authorizing special assessment to abate unsafe conditions of hazardous building – Ward 4
8. The property owner agrees to execute an agreement with the city and any other
documents necessary to implement the maintenance work and the special
assessment of all costs associated therewith.
Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the city council June 3, 2024
Kim Keller, city manager Nadia Mohamed, mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, city clerk
Reserved/or Recording lnjormalion
RIGHT OF ENTRY,
MAINTENANCE WORK
AND
SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT
AGREEMENT made thisJ.2 �_,day of fl�'-/ , 2024, by and between the CITY OF ST.LOUIS PARK, a Minnesota municipal corporation ("City") and MARY ELLEN ALBRECHT,
("Property Owner").
RECITALS
A.Property Owner is the owner of the property ("Subject Property") having a
street address of 4530 Cedar Lake Rd #2, St. Louis Park, MN 55416, with PID No.
30-029-24-43-0635, legally described as:
CIC NO. 0157 Cedar Trails Condominium, Hennepin County, Minnesota.
B.The City has requested that Property Owners remove accumulated rubbish,
trash, and
obstructions within the Subject Property as required by City Code and as further described on
Exhibit A ("Maintenance Work").
C.Property Owner has failed to undertake the Maintenance Work and have
requested that the City or its agents enter the property and perform the Maintenance Work
and assess all costs associated with the Maintenance Work (collectively the "Fees") against the
Subject Property, as a service charge as authorized by Minnesota Statutes§ 429.101.
NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THEIR MUTUAL COVENANTS THE PARTIES AGREE
AS FOLLOWS:
224874v3
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5f)
Title: Resolution authorizing special assessment to abate unsafe conditions of hazardous building - Ward 4 Page 4
1.MAINTENANCE WORK. Property Owner shall permit the City and its agents to
enter the Subject Property and perform the Maintenance Work to bring the Property into
Compliance with City Code. Property Owner agrees that the City may, at its sole discretion,
discard any refuse or debris as necessary to complete the Maintenance Work.
2.CONSENT AND AGREEMENT TO ENTRY. Property Owner and their successors and
assigns hereby consent to the entry onto the Subject Property by the City and its successors and
assigns, including any contractor hired to complete the Maintenance Work, for the purpose of
completing the Maintenance Work. Property Owner further consents to the City and its successors
and assigns discarding any refuse or debris as necessary to complete the Maintenance Work, and
hereby waive any and all right to such property.
3.SPECIAL ASSESSMENT. The Property Owner shall be immediately responsible for
paying all Fees. The City will assess the Fees against the Subject Property. The special assessment
shall be deemed adopted on the date this Agreement has been signed by all parties. The cost shall
be payable with ten ( 10) yearly installments and assessed with an interest rate of 5.5%. The
amount assessed under this Agreement shall include the cost of the Maintenance Work, six
thousand, five hundred dollars ($6,500). and a City Administrative Fee of one hundred fifty dollars
($150.00), for a total of six thousand, six hundred fifty dollars ($6,650).
4.WAIVER. Property Owner, and their successors and assigns, waive any and all
procedural and substantive objections to the Maintenance Work and special assessment, including
but not limited to hearing requirements and any claim that the assessment exceeds the benefit to
the Subject Property. Property Owner waives any appeal rights otherwise available pursuant to
Minn. Stat. § 429.081.
5.RELEASE. Property Owner and their successors and assigns, hereby unconditionally
release and forever discharge the City, its elected officials, employees, agents, and insurers from
any and all claims and causes of action of whatever kind or nature that is in any way connected
with or related to the Maintenance Work. The Property Owner shall indemnify and hold harmless
the City and its officers, agents, and employees from and against all claims, damages, and
losses, or expenses, including attorney fees, which 1 may be suffered or for which they may be held
224874v3
liable, rising out or resulting from the assertion against them of any claims, debts, or obligations in
consequence of the performance of this Agreement by the City, its employees, agents, or
subcontractors, to the extent allowed by law.
6.BINDING EFFECT; RECORDING. This Agreement shall be binding upon Property
Owner and their successors and assigns. This Agreement shall run with the land and
may be recorded against the title to the Subject Property.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have entered into this Agreement as of the date
written above.
[Remainder of page intentionally left blank]
{Signature page to follow}
2
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5f)
Title: Resolution authorizing special assessment to abate unsafe conditions of hazardous building - Ward 4 Page 5
ST ATE OF MINNESOTA )
)ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
BY:-Nadia Mohamed, Mayor
AND:
Kim Keller, City Manager
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ___ day of
����� 2024, by Nadia Mohamed and by Kim Keller, respectively the Mayor and City
Manager of the City of St. Louis Park, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the
corporation pursuant to the authority granted by its City Council.
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
)ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
Notary Public
PROPERTY OWNERS:
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this J) � day of gli( 2024, by Mary Ellen Albrecht
DRAFTED BY:
CAMPBELL KNUTSON, P.A. Grand
Oak Office Center I
860 Blue Gentian Road, Suite 290
Eagan, MN 55121
612-452-5000
224874v3
4
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5f)
Title: Resolution authorizing special assessment to abate unsafe conditions of hazardous building - Ward 4 Page 6
224874v3
EXHIBIT A
[Description of Maintenance Work]
3
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 5f)
Title: Resolution authorizing special assessment to abate unsafe conditions of hazardous building - Ward 4 Page 7
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: June 3, 2024
Action agenda item: 7a
Executive summary
Title: Support Three Rivers Park District CP Rail Regional Trail route recommendation
Recommended action: Motion to support the recommended route, SLP4, for inclusion in the
Three Rivers Park District Canadian Pacific rail regional rail long-range plan.
Policy consideration: Does the council support route SLP4, recommended by Three Rivers Park
District, as the preferred north-south regional trail route through St. Louis Park?
Summary: Three Rivers Park District has a long-range plan to create a 21-mile north-south
regional trail that extends from Crystal to Bloomington called the Canadian Pacific rail regional
trail. Three Rivers Park District staff began identifying preliminary routes through St. Louis Park
in May of 2023 and has identified route SLP4 as their preferred route.
Three Rivers brought this recommendation to the council in November of 2023 to seek council
support for their preferred route. The questions from the community and council at that
meeting indicated additional time and analysis were needed. A written report was provided in
December 2023, and a study session was held on April 24, 2024, to discuss the long-range plan
in greater detail and the recommended north-south regional trail route through the
community.
Three Rivers presentation at the April 24, 2024 study session included the history of the long-
range planning study for the CP Rail Regional trail, provided an overview of the process and
study completed in the St. Louis Park segment and the findings that support their
recommendation of route SLP4 (referred to as the Dakota Avenue route). The majority of the
city council expressed support for Three Rivers Park District's recommendation of route SLP4
through St. Louis Park.
Three Rivers Park District is returning to council for a short presentation that summarizes the
discussion during the April study session. They will be asking for formal support for their
recommended route SLP4. This will allow them to complete their long-range plan for this
segment of the CP rail regional trail.
Financial or budget considerations: There are no budget considerations for the city for the
recommended route. Three Rivers Park District is funding the long-range plan and would fully
fund the construction of the recommended route.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a variety of options for
people to make their way around the city comfortably, safely and reliably.
Supporting documents: Discussion
April 24, 2024 study session
Route map
Postcard notification
Summary of public engagement
Prepared by: Jack Sullivan, engineering project manager
Reviewed by: Debra Heiser, engineering director
Approved by: Kim Keller, city manager
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 7a) Page 2
Title: Support Three Rivers Park District CP Rail Regional Trail route recommendation
Discussion
Background: Three Rivers Park District's Canadian Pacific rail regional trail is a planned 21-mile
regional trail corridor that traverses six communities in Hennepin County – Bloomington, Edina,
St. Louis Park, Golden Valley, New Hope and Crystal.
Three Rivers Park District is completing a long-range planning study for the CP Rail Regional
Trail Segment C in St. Louis Park and Golden Valley. This segment will connect the Cedar Lake
Trail in St. Louis Park to the Luce Line Trail in Golden Valley.
The trail fills a critical north-south gap in the regional trail system and provides a highly
desirable recreation amenity to adjacent communities and the greater region. The regional trail
corridor was originally centered along the CP rail line; however, this is not feasible for much of
the corridor.
A north-south regional trail through St. Louis Park is identified in the city's 2040 Comprehensive
Plan, the Active Living Sidewalk and Trail Plan, and complements the Connect the Park
implementation plan.
Three Rivers Park District staff began identifying preliminary routes through St. Louis Park in
May 2023. Through public engagement and analysis efforts, Three Rivers determined that route
SLP4 (referred to as the Dakota Avenue route) best meets their goal of providing the safest and
most comfortable trail facility to serve people throughout the community.
Route SLP4 starts at the trail bridge over Highway 394 (near Hampshire Avenue) and runs along
Wayzata Boulevard, Dakota Avenue, 18th Street, Edgewood Avenue, Dakota Avenue and
Wooddale Avenue to connect to the Cedar Lake Regional Trail at the Wooddale Light Rail
station. More information on this route can be found on the attached route identification map.
Route SLP4 was brought to the council on Nov. 13, 2023, for public comment. The intent of the
meeting was to gain council support for the preferred route through St. Louis Park so Three
Rivers could:
• Begin to prepare a long-range plan document focused on a recommended route
through St. Louis Park.
• Complete a federal solicitation funding application for possible construction of the
recommended route in 2029.
Three Rivers did not move forward with either of these items due to the questions from the
community and council. Instead, Three Rivers and city staff provided a written report on Dec.
12, 2023 that addressed many of the questions. Three Rivers Park District staff continued
discussion with the city council during the April 24, 2024 connected infrastructure study session
series for a more in-depth policy discussion and to provide additional information on the
various routes.
Study session summary: Three Rivers presentation at the April 24, 2024 study session included
the history of the long-range planning study for the CP Rail Regional trail, provided an overview
of the process and study completed in the St. Louis Park segment and the findings that support
their recommendation of route SLP4.
Their presentation focused on the following:
• CP Rail Regional Trail history and current planning efforts
• Preliminary route identification
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 7a) Page 3
Title: Support Three Rivers Park District CP Rail Regional Trail route recommendation
• Community engagement efforts
• Summary of community feedback
• Route selection criteria
• matrix of selection criteria
• cross sections
• address public feedback for each route
• Three Rivers recommended route
Three Rivers compared the two primary routes SLP1 (referred to as Louisiana Avenue) and SLP4
(referred to as Dakota Avenue), discussed during the council meeting on Nov. 13, 2023. They
provided a matrix that included three main evaluation areas: Impacts, Opportunities and
Administrative.
At the study session, the majority of the city council expressed support for Three Rivers Park
District's recommendation of route SLP4 through St. Louis Park.
Present considerations: Three Rivers Park District is requesting the council formally support
route SLP4 through St. Louis Park. The selection of the preferred route will allow Three Rivers
Park District to complete the long-range plan. This will be a long-range, high-level plan, not a
detailed engineered design.
At the council meeting, Three Rivers Park District will provide a presentation that includes their
vision, public engagement, route analysis and route recommendation for the CP Rail Regional
Trail long-range plan.
Due to the duration of time between the meeting in November and the upcoming meeting,
Three Rivers sent the attached postcard to over 4,000 residents near routes SLP1 and SLP4. In
addition, they have sent emails to over 3,400 individuals on their email list, notifying them of
the upcoming council action and directing them to their website to find more detailed
information. Three Rivers has indicated that they have received feedback from only one
resident in St. Louis Park. City staff have also received feedback from only one resident.
Next steps: Three Rivers will prepare a long-range plan document, which the city will be asked
to formally support via resolution in late 2024. The completed and approved document will
allow Three Rivers to apply for funding opportunities for trail construction. Construction of the
trail is dependent on Three Rivers securing funding, and the anticipated timeline for
construction is 7-12 years.
Since the trail is located on city right of way, Three Rivers will be seeking city approval for the
detailed engineered design when it is scheduled for construction.
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Support Three Rivers Park District CP Rail Regional Trail route recommendation Page 4
To learn more about Three Rivers’ long-range plan for a segment of the CP Rail Regional
Trail through Golden Valley and St. Louis Park between the Cedar Lake and Luce Line
Regional Trails scan the QR code below or visit the website:
LetsTalkThreeRivers.org/CPRail_RT_GV_SLP
Recommended Trail Route Presentation
As a follow up to November 13, 2023’s council discussion, Three Rivers Park District staff
will be returning to the St. Louis Park City Council on:
Monday, June 3, 2024 | 6:30 p.m.
City Hall Council Chambers (3rd floor)
5005 Minnetonka Boulevard
St. Louis Park, MN 55416
At the meeting staff will present additional route information, along with the recommendation
of a preferred route (SLP4) for the CP Rail Regional Trail through St. Louis Park.
St. Louis Park City Council will be asked to formally support the route at the council meeting.
The selection of a preferred route will allow us to complete the long-range plan. There is no
scheduled date for construction at this time.
CP Rail Regional Trail Long-Range Plan Golden Valley / St. Louis Park
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 7a) Title: Support Three Rivers Park District CP Rail Regional Trail route recommendation Page 5
PRESORTFIRST-CLASS MAIL
U.S. POSTAGE
PAID
MINNEAPOLIS, MN
PERMIT NO. 931973000 Xenium Lane North
Plymouth, MN 55441-1299
The CP Regional Trail is envisioned as a
north-south, multi-use, non-motorized
recreational corridor that will extend from
the Minnesota Valley State Trail in
Bloomington to Crystal Lake Regional
Trail in Crystal at Becker Park. The
regional trail is being planned in segments
to allow for more thoughtful community
engagement and detailed route analysis.
Segment C focuses on Golden Valley and
St. Louis Park between Cedar Lake and
Luce Line Regional Trails.
Alternative route options were identified
and studied with input from the
community and a preferred route that best
balances feasibility, cost, private property
impacts, user experience and safety is
being recommended to the St. Louis Park
City Council.
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 7a) Title: Support Three Rivers Park District CP Rail Regional Trail route recommendation Page 6
CP Rail Regional Trail: Golden Valley/St. Louis Park
Luce Line RT to Cedar Lake RT Segment
Engagement Summary for St. Louis Park
Community members could provide feedback through a variety of ways including in-person at a community event or open
house, on-line through an interactive webmap, survey or message board, or simply by sending an email or having a phone
conversation with Three Rivers staff. In addition to sharing their comments on the trail route options, community members
had an opportunity to indicate their preferred route for the regional trail.
The following table summarizes the engagement offerings, route preferences for St. Louis Park and prominent feedback
themes for those that participated in reviewing route options.
Engagement Offering
Number
of people
engaged*
SLP Route
Preference** SLP Route Comment Themes
Community Events
•Bike to Work Day
•Eco-tacular @ Wolfe Park
•Juneteenth @ ROC
•GV Fire Dept Open House
•GV Farmers Market (3)
•Concert in the park - Brookview
•Summer Concert Series-Wolf Park
•St. Louis Park Fireworks
•St. Louis Park Walk in the Park
•Ice Cream Social/Concert in the Park
•Penny Carnival
429 SLP1
SLP2
SLP3
SLP4
14%
7%
5%
74%
•Strong preference for Dakota Ave corridor.
Viewed as safer, less busy
•Louisiana viewed as too busy, dangerous
•Support for off-road trails
•Desire to connect to natural areas
•Desire to connect to destinations such as
schools, parks, retail centers other trails
•Leverage existing infrastructure such as
Dakota-Edgewood Bridge and trails in parks
•Save trees wherever possible
Open House
•Dakota Park
•Brookview Park
•Virtual (2)
•Dakota Ave Neighborhood Meeting
70 SLP1
SLP2
SLP3
SLP4
19%
4%
13%
65%
•Concern over the potential loss of trees and
parking along Dakota Ave north of
Minnetonka Blvd
•Dakota Ave corridor viewed as quieter, safer,
able to utilize new ped bridge and connect
to the high school.
•Concern over congestion at Hobart School
•Louisiana Ave viewed as too busy, dangerous
•Louisiana Ave has more space, thus better
opportunity to create nicer streetscape
•Desire to connect to retail centers
Poster Boards
•Brookview Community Center
•SLP Recreation Outdoor Center
•Golden Valley City Hall
238 SLP1
SLP2
SLP3
SLP4
29%
9%
20%
43%
•More space on Louisiana to add a trail and
improve the streetscape
•Like a connection to SLP High School
Focus Groups
•Senior Resource Event @ Lenox
Community Center
•Pedal Pushers Ride - Golden Valley
•Hennepin County Active
Transportation Committee
38 SLP1
SLP2
SLP3
SLP4
0%
0%
0%
100%
•Seniors preferred routes that are quieter,
safer, connect to nature and are less steep
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Support Three Rivers Park District CP Rail Regional Trail route recommendation Page 7
Pop-ups
•Lions Park
•Dakota Park
•North Cedar Regional Trail
•Northside Park
15 SLP1
SLP2
SLP3
SLP4
0%
27%
9%
64%
•Preference for SLP2 because it connects to
area of denser population, especially under-
served populations
•Concern over potential loss of trees and
parking along Dakota
On-line Survey 105 SLP1
SLP2
SLP3
SLP4
25%
9%
15%
51%
•Desire to connect to destinations such as
schools, parks, retail centers other trails
•Leverage existing infrastructure such as
Dakota-Edgewood Bridge and trails in parks
•Preference for Dakota Ave corridor; viewed
as safer, less busy, more scenic
•Opportunity to improve Louisiana Ave
corridor, Dakota already has improvements
On-line Interactive Map
Route preference comments
149 Dakota Ave
corridor-69%
Louisiana Ave
Corridor-31%
•Leverage existing infrastructure such as
Dakota-Edgewood Bridge and trails in parks
•Strong preference for Dakota Ave corridor;
viewed as safer, less busy, more scenic
•Opportunity to improve Louisiana Ave
corridor, Dakota already has improvements
On-line General Comments
Route preference comments
24 SLP1
SLP2
SLP3
SLP4
33%
0%
13%
53%
•Strong preference for Dakota Ave corridor;
viewed as safer, less busy, more scenic
•Respect Dakota Ave neighborhood concerns,
but support trail along Dakota Ave
•Strong preference to avoid Louisiana Ave
•Opportunity to improve Louisiana Ave
corridor
•Save and plant trees wherever possible
•Preference for the most direct N/S route
*Total number of people engaged, regardless of their city of residence or location of the event.
** Not everyone who was engaged offered a route preference. Preference percentages were based on those who did offer
a route preference, regardless of their city of residence or location of the event.
Note: Upon request, staff can provide a breakdown of route preference by age for each engagement offering.
In summary, there is strong community support for a north/south off-road trail through St. Louis Park that is a safe and
pleasant experience, connects to destinations where people want to go and protects trees. A route that utilizes the Dakota
Avenue corridor was preferred by a majority of participants in all public engagement offerings.
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Support Three Rivers Park District CP Rail Regional Trail route recommendation Page 8
CP Rail Regional Trail: Golden Valley/St. Louis Park
Luce Line RT to Cedar Lake RT Segment
Online Survey Summary for St. Louis Park
Survey Details
The survey was available online from June 16 to September 24, 2023, on the project website
(https://www.letstalkthreerivers.org/cprail_rt_gv_slp). The survey opportunity was shared via email, social media,
community events, newsletters and available for any interested party to complete.
Survey Results
Survey Participation and Demographic Breakdown
The survey was completed by 105 people – of which:
-76 respondents reported being St. Louis Park residents.
-The majority of the respondents identified as male (63%).
-The majority of the respondents identified as white (86%).
-Over three-fourths of the respondents were 25 to 54 years old.
-About 6% of respondents identified as Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish.
-Over half of respondents reported annual household incomes before taxes between $100,000 and
$249,999.
Route Preference Summary for St. Louis Park routes
Route
Number (%)
of
Respondents
Why it that your preferred route?*
SLP 1 26 (25%) -Connects to Lamplighter, parks, SLP middle school, Westwood Nature
Center (close by), retail/restaurants
-More direct route/connects to desired destinations of respondent and
closer to where respondents lives
-Dakota Ave. already has a bike lane and Woodale/Hwy 7 area is
challenging
-Opportunity to improve Louisiana Ave.
SLP 2 9 (9%) -Connects to Dakota Bridge, SLP High School, existing walkways, and
Westwood Nature Center (close by)
-Uses existing trails
SLP 3 16 (15%) -Connects to parks and businesses
-Less disruptive to homes, traffic, driveways, and tress – uses existing
trails
-Improves biking on Louisiana Ave. and connects to several areas of low
income housing
-Dakota Ave. already has a lot going on – including school traffic
SLP 4 54 (51%) -Connects to Dakota Park and Bridge, SLP High School, and North Cedar
Lake Regional Trail
-More direct route/connects to desired destinations of respondent and
closer to where respondents lives
-More scenic, less traffic, easier to develop, less disruptive and feels safer
*Answers summarized
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Support Three Rivers Park District CP Rail Regional Trail route recommendation Page 9
Additional Findings
How will you primarily use the trail?
-94 respondents indicating using the trail for recreation/fitness
-74 respondents indicating using the trail to access local destinations (parks, nature, work, restaurants,
friends/family, etc.)
-63 respondents indicating using the trail to access destinations in other communities (parks, nature, work,
restaurants, friends/family, etc.)
How did you hear about the project?
-56 respondents reported learning about the project from a mailing/postcard, flyer, or yard sign.
-32 respondents reported learning about the project from an email, website, newspaper, or social media.
-22 respondents reported learning about the project from a neighbor/friend, community event or other
means.
If you are looking forward to a regional trail or have concerns about it, please share why.
Supporting comments (comments listed are verbatim from the survey responses, hence may have grammar or
spelling errors):
-At age 77, I want the trail soon, while I am still active.
-Love having more north south connections that are off roads. There is some good east /west options, but
often need to go out of your way to go north south or just go on the road.
-I'm excited about any expansion of bike trails! I ride every day for commuting and leisure.
-Looking forward to more non-car transportation options
-I’ve been trying to find better north-south routes. This plan is great, no matter which route.
-Looking forward to connecting this entire way -- very fun riding once this is complete
-Very much looking forward to it. I’ve tried finding an easy off-road bike route to connect to the Luce Line
trail but havent found one.
-Looking forward. The more safe routes making the community accessible for bikers is great.
-We badly need north south options
-Looking forward to better biking options in golden valley
-Super excited for this!
- Love it, let’s make it happen!
-Looking forward—no good N-S routes in area
-Yes, looking forward to it! The North South connection is badly needed!
-looking forward to it! we need North / South non car infrastructure desperately in this area.
-No concerns. More excitement.
-Looking forward to bikeing and walking on teail.
-Looking forward to better access
-I’d love to have increased bike infrastructure. I’m looking forward to it
-need this connection! it may even run down my street in lions park and i'm ok with that
-this is a connection I'm excited to be able to utilize. It is hard to bike north/south west of theodore wirth
currently
-We need off street paths in this area so young families can safely bike with their children.
-This will be such a delight. I often end up travel along roadways when heading north/south. This will allow
for safer more comfortable passage.
-This is GR8 to connect north/south between LRT and Hwy 55.
-I am looking forward to this. It is a missing link in this area.
-I am looking forward to this regional trail! There are so few North-South trail connectors at this time.
-Looking forward to it I just want to see the trail go through non urban spaces when it can such as in GV.
-Looking forward to it!
-I would very much like to see this connection. North-south routes are a bit harder to navigate in this area.
I bike to work from SLP to GV occasionally, and this could help with that connection.
-I can’t wait for more good trails near me for longer, uninterrupted rides. And to be able to go N-S.
-Yeah, I'm looking forward to the regional trail, which is for biking, right? That's how I like to bike, on trails.
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Support Three Rivers Park District CP Rail Regional Trail route recommendation Page 10
-SLP desperately needs more North-South biking options and especially ones that can be totally separated
or at least grade-separated!
-Excited for regional trail access. Wary of routes that require new pavement where a current road or
walkway does not exist (e.g. impact to private property or tree cover along Hampshire Park).
-I have been commuting 6-15 miles one way to work for three years. I also ride for fitness and enjoyment.
We really need a North/South bike route like this one. Very happy it is in the works. Thanks!
-Ride the Luce line frequently. Like another route.
-Very excited for this option! A safe and easy way to cross 394 to access the great trail networks around
SLP is much needed. Lack of Luce Line to Minnetonka Blvd or Cedar Lake trail connection is a challenge to
my transit and exercise routes
-As a runner and biker, I’d be very excited about additional protection and options for us that run
north/south rather than most being east/west today. The connection to the LRT eventually would be a
nice addition too.
-Would love to have a safe bike route for our family to get to the Middle School and nature center.
-I work from home and spend a ton of time on the trails around SLP!
-If SLP1 or SLP2 were used then I would be very excited for the trail. Otherwise I’m not sure I would use it.
-Definitely looking forward to the regional trail. There seems to be a limited amounts of pedestrian/bike
routes in the North-South direction in the SLP area.
-I think this is a great idea! I'm excited for any new biking opportunities we can get!
-Trails are great bc they encourage people to move!
-Definitely looking forward to this amenity. Our community has long been underserved by Three Rivers
Park District.
-Looking forward to it. The other day I took the scenic 9 mile creek trail to Centennial Lakes in Edina and
took France back to SLP. It would be nice to have a less busy trail option to go back north.
-I would be excited to have more and easier connections to Golden Valley, the light rail, and various
schools and restaurants and parks and other destinations.
-This will be spectacular. I've hiked all around and my least favorite place to walk is where GV 1 & 2 are
located.
-My family are all avid bikers. We are a one-car household and use bicycling as a form of transportation as
much as possible, including with our young child. Therefore, we are excited to see more designated bike
routes, ESPECIALLY north-south routes, as those are lacking in this area. We prefer to use bike trails,
separated bike paths or grade-separated bike lanes whenever possible, because it's so much safer to not
share the road with drivers and hope drivers are paying attention.
-Anytime we can make safe bike lanes and connect to established routes that bring areas together it is a
big win. I use Theodore Worth trails currently for north / south routes from Golden Valley but love that
there would be a west of 100 option that would connect to other routes.
-This area of the west metro is in need of a north-south bike trail to connect with other trails. Cedar Lake
Trail going west-east is already great and this would be another key highlight to make bike and walk
transportation easier for Golden Valley and St Louis Park residents
-As a year-round bike commuter, I know there is a need for a safe, direct, north - south route in the SLP
and GV area. Appreciate the work being done to make this happen.
-I would love a connection between the Luce Line and North Cedar. I have tried going in between the
routes now and there is not a great way to make that connection. I think this could open up significantly
more north/south opportunities in this area.
-Use the trails all year and I love them. Great for people to get outside and rely less on autos. A
connection between the Cedar Lake Trails and Luce Line would be great and is appropriate.
-Would love to have a north/south connector trail! We live in West SLP off Cedar Lake Trail & often ride up
to the Luce Line. Would absolutely love a safe non car route to take.
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Support Three Rivers Park District CP Rail Regional Trail route recommendation Page 11
Comments with some concern/support unclear (comments listed are verbatim from the survey responses,
hence may have grammar or spelling errors):
-I’m very much looking forward to it! My biggest concern is the traffic and noise that construction will
cause, but I’ll be very happy once it is done as I love biking and running.
-i currently have an 11mile 1 way commute from home in SLP to work in PLY. currently default to driving as
there isn't a safe and straight forward way to cross 394 and 55 by bike, but would try to bike the route
about once a week if there was a dedicated trail.
-Would just hope that there's adequate safety between the trail and motorists if it follows Louisiana Ave,
as parts of that road get quite congested as is.
-I live in western St. Louis Park and am an avid biker. I would love to see a new trail, however I would also
like to TRPD to also prioritize maintaining its existing trails and creating effective alternate facilities during
periods of construction. I am disappointed to see the Southwest LRT project remove so many of the trails
I used to love to bike. This project feels like a consolation prize after what will likely be 6 or 7 years of
construction, perhaps more
-Too choppy. Needs to be further west where there is more land and less compact residential interference.
-Excited for regional trail access. Wary of routes that require new pavement where a current road or
walkway does not exist (e.g. impact to private property or tree cover along Hampshire Park).
-I enjoy having additional trails as I am both a hiker biker and runner, however I want to make sure it's
done safely and that the homes along the route are not screwed over by losing parking and safe access to
their properties.
-please enforce no electric motorcycles (Class 3 ebikes), please enforce no extendable dog leashes, and
increase signage and education for how pedestrians should safely use the trail
-Since I live on Louisiana, I am slightly concerned about how the trail will be added. I am hopeful that the
driving lanes will be reduced to house the new trail rather than residential property being disrupted.
-As an avid biker, I would like a regional trail, but the safety of users and daily quality of life of residents
should be the first priority.
Comments with clear concern (comments listed are verbatim from the survey responses, hence may have
grammar or spelling errors):
-Have concerns that they will take out too many trees and hurt the wild life.
-Certain routes would run across the yard for our building and would destroy habitat for wildlife & birds.
The increase in traffic will change the character of our neighborhood perhaps requiring increased security
and maintenance measures like cleaning up litter.
-I have concerns with why in a state that has such different weather seasons we are investing so much
public money into something that can only be used 4-5 months a year? I am not against biking but we are
not in a region where most people can use it as a mode of transportation. Reality is you don't see 20, 30
or 50 bikes outside of Target, the grocery store or places of work.
-Concerned with where and how we are investing as many recent changes are not seen as impactful - such
as lack of use of the new bridge in Dakota park, etc.
-Trail should minimize impact to our neighbors who already have too much development on trail routes
that impact them. It is nice to have options rather than routing everything through mega-corridors. Trails
are very lightly used during snow and ice months, so let's keep the impact to people's homes and access
to roads, work, and shopping area to a minimum.
-As a resident on Dakota Ave s this simply makes no sense for what is already used and in place.
-Concerned about increased traffic in our quiet neighborhood
-Looking forward to it but concerns on running through Dakota park where there is already a lot of
residential traffic and week night traffic due to sports fields. Don’t feel adding a bike path would be ideal
for the community. I am also worried a bike path on Dakota would mean making the street narrower and
that street needs to be wide enough for 2 cars to drive even with parked cars due to how crowded the
area gets.
-SLP2, SLP3 and SLP4 would go through my back yard and we do not want a currently quiet neighborhood
to become busy.
-Dakota too busy it wouldn’t work. Someone going to get hurt
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Support Three Rivers Park District CP Rail Regional Trail route recommendation Page 12
-I have concerns about it. Forcing a trail in a space not designed for one creates strain on the residents.
-Please don't put the trail on the same road as cars and bus routes. It makes me feel more unsafe and
other options should be considered.
-I do think it’s a good idea to connect the trails. I am very concerned about it taking away trees and
parking. I would like to see the trail use Louisiana Ave rather than Dakota because it is a wider road, but
unless the trail could go OVER Cedar Lake Road I don’t think that’s best because of the round about going
in at that intersection.
-Anytime there is cars and bikes on the same surface I get nervous as I have had too many close calls
where either a driver was not paying attention or purposely trying to get close to me even with a bike
lane.
-Would love to have dedicated trail ROW. separates from roadway traffic. Louisiana is awful.because it is 4
lanes in most areas an roadway traffic is always higher speeds than posted. Feels like a freeway. Drives
like a freeway.
-I am concerned about the possibility of adding bike lanes to Louisiana Ave. In Minneapolis, bike lanes have
been added to some streets, and those little metal poles have been put up. These are a major pain in the
wintertime and cause excessive damage to the street when the plow goes through. 26th street in
Minneapolis is a disaster. Why would they even consider having bikes cross the tracks on the Louisiana
bridge, which is already crowded and has no easy access to the trail below. The Dakota route is so much
safer and an accessible bridge has already been built there.
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Support Three Rivers Park District CP Rail Regional Trail route recommendation Page 13
Meeting: Special study session
Meeting date: June 3, 2024
Discussion item: 1
Executive summary
Title: Future infrastructure project planning
Recommended action: None. The purpose of this discussion is to provide the city council with
an overview of engineering staff's approach to modifying the 10-year Capital Improvement Plan
(CIP) for 2027-2036.
Policy consideration: Does the city council support the criteria identified for updating the 10-
year CIP?
Summary: Capital planning is a system that relies heavily on identifying all the needs,
prioritizing improvements and making decisions based on infrastructure condition. This ensures
that the city will maximize our investment and make public dollars go further.
This is the last of four discussions surrounding engineering infrastructure projects. Topics
included in this discussion series are:
Infrastructure project
development process
An in-depth overview of the engineering portion of the existing 10 -
year CIP, how it was developed, what is included and who it serves.
Engineering projects not
in the 10-year capital
plan
An overview of engineering infrastructure projects and project types
not currently included in the 10-year CIP.
Utility risk assessment
study review
The findings of the recently completed Utility risk assessment
study.
Future infrastructure
project planning
Discussion of engineering staff's approach to modifying the 10-year
CIP based on the following:
• Infrastructure projects not currently in the CIP
• The utility risk assessment study
Financial or budget considerations: The city's overall 10-year CIP includes almost $287 million
in improvements. The engineering department is responsible for the delivery of almost $200
million in projects, which is about 70% of the total CIP. The forecast for the overall property tax
levy assumes funding for the projects already included in the CIP and will require levy increases
of an average of 5.5 percent each year without any new projects. Modifying the engineering
department CIP will require an extensive review of available funding to identify if additional
funding is needed and a review of staff workload to determine if these projects can be
delivered.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a variety of options for
people to make their way around the city comfortably, safely and reliably.
Supporting documents: Discussion
Prepared by: Debra Heiser, engineering director
Reviewed by: Jack Sullivan, engineering project manager
Approved by: Kim Keller, city manager
Special study session meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 1) Page 2
Title: Future infrastructure project planning
Discussion
Background: Proactively planning for the replacement of infrastructure is essential for our city
to thrive and grow. To support this, the city has a Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) that describes
the capital improvements and expenditures planned over the next ten (10) years. It is a
statement of the city's policies and financial ability to manage infrastructure investment in the
community.
Engineering oversees the CIP for construction, maintenance and replacement of public
infrastructure, including bridges, bikeways, sidewalks, streets, alleys, sanitary sewer, storm
sewer, watermain and signal systems. The CIP is reviewed and revised annuall y with input from
public works and community development staff.
To plan and coordinate work with other government jurisdictions, the city identifies the years
when improvements will be initiated and what funding sources will be used to pay for them. An
updated proposed CIP is presented to the city council as part of the budget development
process every year. A final CIP for the following year is adopted, along with the annual budget
each December.
At the April 24, 2024 study session, the council provided direction to incorporate the following
projects into the 10-year CIP:
Partnership infrastructure projects
• MCWD: Minnehaha Greenway – Cedar Lake regional trail connection
• MnDOT signal replacements
• Hennepin County: Minnetonka Boulevard reconstruction (Phase 2 and 3)
City infrastructure projects
• Delamination mitigation
These projects will be incorporated into the 2025-2034 CIP, which will be brought to the council
later this year for approval.
At the May 6, 2024 study session, staff provided an overview of the recently completed utility
risk assessment study. This information will be used to inform the 10-year CIP starting in the
2026 budget process next year for the 2027-2036 CIP. Over the coming year, planning level cost
information for renewal or rehabilitation for each asset type will be developed to assist the city
with capital improvement planning.
Incorporating this information into the engineering department CIP will require an extensive
review of available funding, potential needed additional funding, and staff workload to
determine how it can be delivered.
Present considerations: Below is a set of criteria that will be tested for the 2027-2036 CIP
process and considered as part of the decision-making process. Staff thinks these criteria
capture what council has shared as being important in selecting capital projects, but we know
the criteria will continue to evolve and we therefore welcome feedback. The criteria also
provide a guide to what is most important in a capital project, to help the city develop the most
impactful projects.
Special study session meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 1) Page 3
Title: Future infrastructure project planning
There are six criteria that staff have identified to evaluate projects. The first is a baseline criteria
- a simple "yes or no" question. The remaining five would be used to evaluate projects that are
not required by law or contractual obligation.
Baseline criterion (yes/ no)
1. Legal mandate: In some cases, capital projects must be completed because of a legal
mandate or agency agreement.
o Is this project required by state, federal or local law?
o Is the project required by an existing agency agreement?
Evaluation criteria
2. Equity: The goal is to consider equity as it relates to all criteria, but for now, we are
looking at this as a separate criterion, as we work to develop this evaluation process.
o Does the project address a gap in outcomes based on race, religion, gender,
sexual orientation or income?
o Are similar projects equitably distributed in the community?
3. Asset condition: Ideally, we would replace or rehabilitate all assets before they have
reached the end of their useful life. A review of available funding, potential needed
additional funding, and staff workload will be needed to develop a plan that will work
for the community. To do this, it is critical to strategically time improvements to
minimize cost (e.g., replace watermain when the street requires reconstructing, line
sanitary sewer to extend the service life)
o What is the risk score of the watermain?
o What is the risk score of the sanitary sewer?
o What is the road condition?
o What is the condition of other assets? (e.g., bridge, signal system, water
treatment plant, lift station)
4. Environmental impact: This criterion considers environmental impact when developing
the scope of a project (e.g., replacing a signal with a roundabout, building a new
sidewalk or bikeway, regional stormwater treatment).
o Will the project improve air quality or reduce greenhouse gas emissions?
o Are there water quality improvements needed in the watershed?
5. Safety: Assess the existing conditions and potential safety improvements. (e.g., closing a
gap in the sidewalk or bikeway network, addressing high crash locations, reducing
potential flooding)
o Is there an immediate or long-term safety benefit?
o Are there water quantity reduction needs in the watershed that can be
addressed through this capital investment?
6. Return on investment: With limited capital funds available, it is important to understand
if some projects can reduce operation and maintenance costs, leverage opportunities
provided by other agency-led projects and serve members of the community.
o Will the project reduce city operation and maintenance costs (short-term and/or
long-term)?
o Will this project leverage other funds?
o Is the project led by another agency that provides the city with an opportunity to
partner on costs?
Special study session meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 1) Page 4
Title: Future infrastructure project planning
o Will this project create new development opportunities that address other city
priorities?
o Is this the most cost-effective solution?
o Is there an extraordinary investment compared to other potential investments
that may serve more people?
Connection to city priorities: Staff has worked to review the above criteria through the lens of
all our adopted city priorities, not just the one related to public infrastructure , and note the
following connections. There may be additional connections as well.
• Being a leader in racial equity and inclusion in order to create a more just and inclusive
community for all: As discussed above, the long-term vision is to incorporate this
priority into all criteria. For now, it is called out as a standalone criterion.
• Continue to lead in environmental stewardship: This too is called out in a standalone
criterion.
• Providing a broad range of housing and neighborhood-oriented development: This
priority is addressed through the safety and return on investment criteria. Asset
condition (and the subsequent replacement schedule) also have property tax impacts.
• Providing a variety of options for people to make their way around the city comfortably,
safely and reliably: The equity, environmental impact and safety criteria all will lead to
projects that create greater access to biking, walking and transit.
• Creating opportunities to build social capital through community engagement : The
equity, environmental impact and safety criteria also all contribute to social
connectedness and capital.
Next steps: Over the coming year, staff plan to use these criteria to work on updating the 10-
year CIP for the 2027-2036 CIP.
Incorporating this information into the engineering department CIP will require an extensive
review of available funding, potential needed additional funding, and staff workload to
determine how it can be delivered.
Meeting: Special study session
Meeting date: June 3, 2024
Discussion item: 2
Executive summary
Title: Proposed agenda topic
Recommended action: City council and city manager review the proposed agenda topic and
determine next steps.
Policy consideration: Does the city council want to move forward with the proposed topic?
Summary: A proposed agenda topic related to the sound quality at The ROC was submitted for
consideration. City staff support the request and have provided a high-level analysis, including
information on associated costs. The next step in the process is for the council to decide, as a
group, if they want to move forward with hiring a consultant to evaluate the acoustics at the
ROC and consider potential upgrades during the 2025 budget process.
Topic Proposed by Councilmember(s)
ROC Sound Quality Margaret Rog
Financial or budget considerations: If the council wants to pursue this, staff will proceed with
an RFP for acoustics consultants to evaluate the ROC and provide an estimate for improving
sound. The cost of a consultant (estimated to be $7,000) to provide recommendations can be
absorbed by the Park Improvement Fund CIP in 2024. Additional costs to perform any acoustic
upgrades would need to be included as a future Park Improvement Fund CIP budget request.
Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable.
Supporting documents: Topic proposal and staff analysis
Prepared by: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk
Approved by: Cindy Walsh, deputy city manager
City Council
Study Session Topic Proposal
Date:
Prepared by:
Proposed agenda topic:
Brief Description of topic (no more than 200 words):
How does this topic align with the council strategic priorities? If not, why should the council
consider the topic:
** Please email completed forms to Kim Keller and Melissa Kennedy.
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 2)
Title: Proposed agenda topic Page 2
City Council
Study Session Topic Proposal
Staff Analysis
Date: May 22, 2024
Prepared by: Cindy Walsh
Proposed agenda topic: Sound Quality at the ROC
Staff analysis of request: (Please provide a high-level review of the proposed topic.
Focus on key points, facts, impact, legal and/or future considerations .)
Staff met on site with a consultant to review the opportunities for improving sound at
the ROC. To further this, we would need to contract with a company who specializes in
acoustics. The scope of work would include performing measurements of the existing
acoustic conditions, analyzing the data, preparing acoustic calculations for the existing
conditions, developing recommendations to meet an established design goal, preparing
a summary report, and participating in a meeting (virtual or in-person) to review the
findings. The fee for these services would be approximately $7,000.
Staff supports this request.
Resources required: (Include relevant information such as cost, staffing, capacity)
If the council wants to pursue this, staff would proceed with an RFP for acoustics
consultants to evaluate the ROC and give us a price for improving sound. The cost of a
consultant (estimated to be $7,000) to provide recommendations can be absorbed by
the Park Improvement Fund CIP in 2024.
Additional costs to perform any acoustic upgrades would need to be included as a
future Park Improvement Fund CIP budget request.
Other dependencies: (Include relevant information that could impact this proposal,
such as: other agencies/jurisdictions, a pending policy discussion or action by council on
related item, additional research that may be required to answer pending questions )
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 2)
Title: Proposed agenda topic Page 3
Projected timeline: (Given current business levels and capacity, what is the projected
timeline for staff to be able to work on and implement? If this was to be done now,
what would the impact be on other projects and/or standard line of business?)
Timeline to be determined based on council direction on next steps.
Recommended disposition: (select one)
Study session discussion
Council action at regular meeting
Written report
Include with another item already planned/scheduled
Meeting with requesting councilmember(s)
✓Handle offline (include as part of the CIP budget process)
Staff is in support of this request. If the council agrees that further sound improvements
are necessary, staff will prepare an RFP and proceed with getting recommendations.
Reasonable recommendations and cost estimates for improvements will be brought
forward for council consideration during the CIP portion of the budget process.
City council meeting of June 3, 2024 (Item No. 2)
Title: Proposed agenda topic Page 4