Loading...
Admin Section • 1 ADMINISTRATIVE SECTION 1 Memo from League of Minnesota Cities dated February 25 1992. Letter from State of Minnesota Municipal Board dated February 26, 1992. ' Letter to Kenneth Youngberg, Kenny's Market dated March 3, 1992. 1 Letter to Bill Engelhardt dated March 10, 1992. Legislative Contact Alert from the League of Minnesota Cities dated March 9, 1992. Meeting Report from Barton - Aschman dated February 6, 1992. g Po ry 1 Letter to Thomas Todd dated March 8, 1992. ' Memo from Scott Harr dated March 3, 1992. Letter to Mike Nugent, Northwest Nursery dated March 12, 1992. • Letter from Barton - Aschman dated March 16, 1992. ' Memo from Diane Harberts, Southwest Metro Transit dated March 16, 1992. Memo from Mark Lundgren, County Auditor dated March 12, 1992. HRA Accounts Payable dated March 23, 1992. Memo from Tom Chaffee dated March 23, 1992. i 1 1 1 1 1 1 #44 _G .. 2 -.- 7 Cie Lie - .� 1 183 University Ave. East St. Paul, MN 55101.2526 1 League of Minnesota Cities (612) 227.5600 (FAX: 221-0986) II February 25, 1992 I TO: Mayors, Managers, and Clerks FROM: Donald A. Slater, Executive Director II SUBJECT: 1/2 Cent Sales Tax II The purpose of this memorandum is to alert cities to a proposal which could seriously affect municipal revenue in the future. I The Association of Minnesota Counties (AMC) has circulated a memorandum to Minnesota county commissioners proposing that counties consider revoking the 1/2 cent optional sales tax. •- 1 The memorandum reasons that counties will receive no money from the Local Government Trust Fund for calendar year 1993 and thereafter because the legislature failed to override the Governor's line item II veto of the 1991 tax act. The memorandum also states the promises of enacting legislation restoring the distribution is not a given and the.Governor and the legislature may raid the trust fund to balance I the state's budget. AMC advises counties to remind their legislators and the governor that II the counties voted the 1/2 cent sales tax. If the counties don't receive a portion of the funds from the trust fund, there is no reason for the counties to support the tax. _ I Finally, the AMC provides a sample resolution for counties to pass expressing the above sentiments to the Governor and the legislature. 1 It is obvious this move is intended to exert pressure on the legislature and the Governor to produce a replacement mechanism for the vetoed portion of the tax act. AMC also seeks to protect the integrity of the Local Government Trust Fund. LMC and AMC share I these objectives. However, the threat to revoke support for the trust fund is an 11 extremely serious matter for cities, especially. Without the trust fund, cities, in any county revoking the 1/2 cent sales tax, would have no local government aid, no housing and agriculture credit il II assistance, no disparity aid, no anything. The programs which existed before the creation of the trust fund really aren't there anymore and would not be reconstituted if a county opted out of the trust fund. II RZC IVZD FEB 2 6 1gg2 1 CITY OF CHANHASSEN I j Mayors, Managers, Clerks Page 2 February 25, 1992 It is, of course, rather unlikely the legislature won't enact . 1 legislation correcting the problem resulting from the Governor's line item veto. But it could happen. Or, more likely, the programs included in the trust fund could be shifted around so less of the trust fund money would fund county programs. What would the counties do then? Opt out, or continue their support of optional sales tax so that city property tax relief programs continue? 1 Should the Legislature fail to adopt a new trust fund distribution formula this year, we would expect many counties to rescind the local option tax and the whole trust fund concept to collapse. However, there is a danger that some counties could act to rescind the tax, even if the legislature passes a new distribution formula which is satisfactory but not ideal from the county standpoint. In view of this hazard, I encourage city officials to take these actions: 1. Urge your legislator to support a new trust fund distribution formula which maintains the integrity of the trust fund. 2. Urge your county officials to continue to support the trust fund and the 1/2 cent local option tax, provided the legislature passes any fairly reasonable trust fund distribution formula. Ask them to be careful that any resolution regarding rescinding the local option tax be applicable only in the event that no new distribution formula is passed in the 1992 session. 3. Point out to your county officials their action to rescind the local option tax could be negated by adoption of resolutions by the city councils and township boards having a majority of the county's population. This issue has such a potentially powerful impact on city finance that 1 being forewarned is being forearmed. I encourage city officials most strongly to develop a contingency plan meeting such an event. I suggest you contemplate what actions your city would take and whether you might join with city councils representing a majority of the county's population to reverse any county government decision to revoke support of the 1/2 cent local optional sales tax. • • 1 1 1 1 ASSOCIATION OF , f 04. M1N SOTA COUN ES 1 • I January 29, 1992 I TO: COUNTY COMMISSIONERS I FROM: 0 MES MULDER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR RE: • SOLUTION TO RESCIND LOCAL "OPTIONAL" SALES TAX Recent dist rbing events that occurred at the State Capitol have prompted me to encourage AMC's member counties to consider revoking I the 1/2 Beni "optional" sales tax. As you are probably aware, the legislature failed in its attempt to override the Governor'a•line item veto or January 14. By not accomplishing an override, Current law is stil in effect, which means that counties will receive no I r money from he Local Government Trust Fund for calendar year 1993 and thereof er. We have bee told that the legislature and Governor will enact legislation to adopt.new aid formulas, but it is not a given. It also is not lear as to what the distribution formula will include and if the egislature and Governor will use the Local Government I Trust Fund o balance the State's budget (a projected 340 million short fall) • AMC believe: that it is advisable to remind your legislators and the Governo. that counties voted for the 1/2 cent State sales tax increase to help create the Local Government Trust Fund. If counties ar= no longer going to be a recipient of a portion of the proceeds o; the fund, there is no reason for counties to participate in it. Therefore, it is recommended that 'counties consider pa sage of the accompanying resolution to 'accent your concerns. I is very important that all commissioners continue to contact thei legislators and the Governor to express concern about our lost aid and the effect the loss of this aid will have on local property to es. • 125 CHARLES ENUE ST. PAUL MINNESOTA 55103.2108 612- 2243344 FAX 612 - 2248540 0 1 Roger N. Knutson 1 February 26, 1992 Page Two I 1 property description at a later date, and you will be contacted if there are any problems. I Please feel free to contact this office if you have any questions. Sincerely, 1 MUNICIPAL BO 1 Patricia D. Lundy Assistant Directo x PDL:sjh 1 cc: Don Ashworth, Chanhassen City Manager Germaine Jesberg, Victoria City Clerk I I I - - 1 1 CAMPBELL, KNUTSON, SCOTT & FUCHS, P.A. Attorne at Law Thomas J. Campbell (612) 452 -5000 ' Roger N. Knutson Fax (612) 452 -5550 Thomas M Scott Gary G. Fuchs James R. Walston Elliott B. Knetsch February 25, 19 9 2 Michael A. Broback Renae D. Steiner Minnesota Municipal Board 475 McColl Building ' 366 Jackson Street Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101 RE: City of Chanhassen /City of Victoria 1 Concurrent Detachment and Annexation of Incorporated Land Dear Board Members: ' Pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 414.061, enclosed are certified copies of resolutions from the City of Victoria and the City of I } Chanhassen. The land described in the petition is being detached from Victoria and annexed to Chanhassen. Please send copies of the Board's approving order to this office at the address shown below, to the Chanhassen City Manager at Chanhassen City Hall, 690 Coulter Drive, Box 147, Chanhassen, MN 55317, and to the Victoria City Clerk at Victoria City Hall, P.O. Box 36, Victoria, MN 55386. Very truly yours, CAMPBELL, KNUTSON, SCOTT & FUCH., P.A. BY Roger N. Knutson Chanhassen City Attorney RNK:srn ' Enclosures cc: Don Ashworth, Chanhassen City Manager Germaine Jesberg, Victoria City Clerk FEB 2 3 1202 GlTY OF CHANHASSEN Suite 317 • Eagandale Office Center • 1380 Corporate Center Curve • Eagan, MN 55121 • 1 • • • r r CERTIFICATION STATE OF MIN NESOTA ) 11 ss • COUNTY OF CARVER ) • - , • • • I, Karen 3. Engelhardt, duly appointed, qualified and acting Deputy Clerk for the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota, do hereby certify that I have compared the foregoing P Resolution copy of R No 11 . 91 -113 concerning the concurrent detachment and annexation of , land. r with the original copy, now on file in my office, and have found the same to be a true and correct copy thereof and as approved by roved b the '' City Council. ' Witness.my hand and official seal at Chanhassen, Minnesota, this 12th day of FPhruary 19.q . , II • • • 1 • Kar n J. E/ elh t, Deputy Clerk 1 • r • 1 1 RESOTIUTION NO. 91 - 113 CITY OF CHANHASSEN 1 CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA ' RESOLUTION CONCERNING TEE CONCURRENT DETACHMENT AND ANNEXATION OF LAND WHEREAS, Minn. Stat. § 414.061 authorizes the concurrent detachment and annexation of land; and WHEREAS, the cities of Chanhassen and Victoria have agreed to the concurrent detachment and annexation of a parcel of property. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the 1 City of Chanhassen, Minnesota as follows: 1. The following described land shall be detached from the ' City of Victoria and annexed to the City of Chanhassen: That part of the right -of -way for County State Aid Highway l No. 15, also known as Minnewashta Parkway, embraced in the Northeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter'of Section 7, Township 1r6, Range 23, Carver County, Minnesota, and lying northerly of the northerly right -of -way line of State Highway 1 No. 5. 2. This Resolution is contingent upon the City of Victoria ' adopting a similar Resolution approving the aforementioned•detachment s and annexation and is further contingent .upon the approval of the Minnesota Municipal Board. 3. The City Manager is directed to forward a copy of this Resolution to the City of Victoria. Upon receipt of a similar Resolution from the City of Victoria he is further directed to forward a copy of this Resolution to the Minnesota Municipal Board. ' PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Chanhassen this 9TH day of DECEMBER , 1991. I • CITY OF CHANHASSEN (SEAL) BY: • _ __ 1 Do ald J. Chm e , Mayor ATTEST: / (� / ///�//�_ Q i • Don Ashworth, City Manager /Clerk • 1 1 r STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ' COUNTY OF CARVER ss. CITY OF VICTORIA ) I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified clerk of the City of Victoria, County of Carver, Minnesota, - - _ hereby attest and certify that: - (1) As such officer, I have the legal custody of the ' original record from which the attached resolution • was transcribed; (2) I have carefully compared said resolution with said ' original record; (3) I find said resolution to be a true, correct and , complete transcript from the original minutes of a meeting of the City Council of said City on the date indicated on said transcript; , (4) Said meeting was duly held pursuant to call and notice thereof, as required by law. WITNESS my hand and the seal of said City this -, th day of Fpb IT , 99 City C erk City /• Victori - 1 RESOLUTION NO. 92 - 1 CITY OF VICTORIA CARVER COUNTY, MINNESOTA 1 RESOLUTION CONCERNING THE CONCURRENT DETACHMENT AND ANNEXATION OF LAND WHEREAS, Minn. Stat. § 414.061 authorizes the concurrent 1 detachment and annexation of land; and WHEREAS, the cities of Chanhassen and Victoria have agreed to the concurrent detachment and annexation of a parcel of property. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Victoria, Minnesota as follows: ' 1. The following described land shall be detached from the City of Victoria and annexed to the City of Chanhassen: ' That part of the right -of -way for County State Aid Highway No. 15, also known as Minnewashta Parkway,.. embraced in the I Northeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 7, Township 116, Range 23, Carver County, Minnesota, and lying northerly of the northerly right -of -way line of State Highway • No. 5. 4 2. This Resolution is contingent upon the City of Chanhassen adopting a similar Resolution approving the aforementioned detachment ' and annexation and is further contingent upon the approval of the Minnesota Municipal Board. 3. The City Clerk or City Administrator is directed to ' forward a copy of this Resolution to the City of Chanhassen. Upon receipt of a similar Resolution from the City of Chanhassen the City Clerk or City Administrator is further directed to forward a copy of this Resolution to the Minnesota Municipal Board. PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Victoria this l Arh day of Jan,iary 199t. CITY OF VICTORIA (SEAL) BY: Its Mayor Its City Administrator /City Clerk #h C ITYOF CT 1 - .1 .n --7‘. CHANHASSEN . .. ,.„.„,:„,,,..,.,,,,,,,„, ,,,,, ',4 ... 7 -,.!. . 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 1 . - . (612)937-1900* FAX(612)937-5739 March 3, 1992 II Mr. Kenneth Youngberg Kenny's Market 6645 Queen South II Richfield, MN 55423 Subj: Tobacco Sales Inspection in Chanhassen II Dear Mr. Youngberg: As you are aware, more restrictive requirements for the sale of ' • tobacco products went into effective on the fit of this year. Follow up inspections have been conducted, and we wish to thank you y for complying with the ordinance. ' ' II i We will be conducting on -going inspections, and remain available to assist you in any way possible. - Again, thank you for your II voluntary compliance with the laws pertaining to the sale of io tobacco products in the City of Chanhassen. Six/1597,y , I (_._ Scott Harr Public Safety Director II SH:bk - . cc: Don Ashworth, City Manager __ 1 1 n 1 til 4: PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER 1 MR PHILLIP GOSSARD MR DALE FREEBURG MR KENNETh YOUNGBERG CHAN BAIT AND TACKLE AMERICAN LEGION POST 580 KENNY'S MARKET 440 W 79TH STREET 799 GREAT PLAINS BLVD 6645 QUEEN SOUTH 1 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CH SEN MN 55317 RICHFIELD MN 55423 I MR RICHARD LARSON MR MARLIN SCHOEP MR GARY BROWN MGM LIQUOR WAREHOUSE CHAN DINNER THEATRE BROWN'S AMOCO 8590 TIQUA CIRCLE _ 501 W 78TH STREET 1831 KOEHNEN CIRCLE CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 I MS SUSAN PAULY MR THOMAS KRUEGER MR IVAN JOHNSON II PAULY'S INC RIVIERA CLUB IVAN'S SINCLAIR 840 THIRD AVENUE 7136 UTICA LN 7910 DAKOTA AVE EXCELSIOR MN 55331 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 II ATTN SANDY HEROLD SUPERAMERICA GROUP INC MR GUY PETERSEN MS JEAN ROBERTSON P 0 BOX 14004 CHANHASSEN TACO SHOP HOLIDAY STATIONSTORE I ' LEXINGTON KY 40512 195 WEST 78TH ST 4567 W 80TH STREET CHANHASSEN MN 55317 MINNEAPOLIS MN 55437 II MR TERRANCE HELZ MR STEVE DOREK MR DOUGLAS MAST RETAIL FOODS OF MINN CHANHASSEN BOWL INC TOTAL PETROLEUM INC dba BROOKS FOOD MKT #49 II ' 581 WEST 78TH STREET 8148 PILLSBURY AVE S 5720 SMETANA DR STE 300 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 MINNEAPOLIS MN 55420 MINNETONKA MN 55343 A MR CHARLES THANG DOUGLAS PASS CHANHASSEN PHARMACY PASSBY LIQUOR II 535 W 78TH STREET 2716 WEBSTER AVE S I CHANHASSEN MN 55317 ST LOUIS PARK MN 5541 • *LETTERS WERE SENT TO ALL BUSINESSES ABOVE 1 • .1 1 1 1 1 . 1 1 CITY OF CHANHASSEN . 1 11100 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612)937-1900* FAX(612)937-5739 1 March 10, 1992 1 1 Mr. Bill Engelhardt Engelhardt & Associates 11 1107 Hazeltine Boulevard Chaska, MN 55318 Re: Update to Feasibility Study for Street, Drainage and 1 Utility Improvements to Teton Lane from Lilac Lane South to Ashton Court and Lilac Lane from Teton Lane East to County Road 17 Project No. 91 -4 Dear Bill: This letter shall serve as notice that the City has received the necessary cash escrow from the developer of the former Donovan property to secure costs in updating the feasibility study for improvements to Teton Lane from Lilac Lane south to Ashton Court and Lilac Lane from Teton Lane east to County Road 17. Therefore, authorization is hereby given to perform the study update in accordance with your proposal at an estimated cost of $5,000. • Please keep me informed as to the progress of the study update. Sincerely, 1 CITY OF CHANHASSEN * ,;0;Z ior _ a ‘ a _< Charles D. Folch, P.E. City Engineer CDF:ktm c: Dave Hempel, Sr. Engineering Technician , Don Ashworth, City Manager Jim Fenning, Hilioway Corporation Richard Bloom, Land Concept Corporation City Council Administrative Packet (3/23/92) 1 I • 1 L egislative ,.„" 1 a ? e ? n 0 f mC ontact muniapaiit� es I 11 - Al I March 9, 1992 TO: Mayors, Legislative Contacts and Managers /Administrators II FROM: Roger Peterson, Director of Legislative Affairs Vern Peterson, Executive Director II RE: . GOVERNOR'S BUDGET PROPOSAL AND STATUS OF MAJOR METROPOLITAN AREA PROPOSED LEGISLATIVE BILLS I I. GOVERNORS BUDGET HAMMERS CITIES! CtJTS TO CITIES OUTRAGEOUS! II The Governor's overall budget proposal uses accounting gimmicks for savings of $178 million for schools, reduces `rainy day fund' by $140 million, cuts state agencies and higher education by $164 million, and cities LGA by $71.6 million. II City aid cut of $71.6 million is 23% of LGA, equalization aid, and city disparity reduction aid. For cities receiving these aids, this II equals an 8% -plus cut of Revenue base (i.e. aids plus levy). Schools, Counties, Towns, Special Districts, get ZERO cuts. They II are held harmless! Not all cities are cut. Those receiving only HACA have no cut. Is this divide and conquer? Enclosed is a preliminary run showing the impact on AMM cities. The I AMM position at this point is that cuts to cities are unnecessary. Additional use of the rainy day fund may cause small short term state borrowing but that would havb► no impact on the state's bond I rating and would certainly be preferable to the major impact the cuts would have on the general public health and safety if cities are forced to make large cuts. II Cities should contact their legislators and relate how this may II -1- RECEIVED MAR 1 0 1992 I cn r ur lrnn�vnP 183 university avenue east, st paul, minnesota 55101 (612) 227 -4008 • impact locally. The AMM absolutely does not want to get into a battle among cities but pointing out that schools, counties, and towns are held harmless is appropriate. POINTS TO STRESS: I 1. Cities have already done their part. Local government, through aid cuts and support of, sales tax increase, solved 41% of the state's $1.2 billion problem in 1991 while accounting for only 10% of the state budget. Likewise, we solved over 35% of the problem in 1990. For the past 3 years, cities have taken cuts, held levies down, spent tax dollars wisely, reduced employees, II and this is our reward. 2. The administration says this is a 1.1% cut of base. This is very misleading. The cut is 1.1% of all County, City, Town, and II Special District Revenue but only cities are cut. The cut becomes 3.5% of all city revenue but 7% of operating budgets when non - cuttable special assessment revenue is eliminated. Finally, the cut becomes about 8% after non -LGA cities are removed. When one gets beyond smoke and mirrors, this is a 23% cut of all city LGA and an 8% cut of city revenue base. I 3. Cities need to communicate the impact of thee cuts to their legislators. Remind them of the cutbacks already taken. Register indignation. Think about use of city newsletters and local media to get the unfairness story out. It is about time the state stops solving its problems on the back of cities. Minnesota cities spend at about the national average, but when II all Minnesota state and local governments are added together, spending is much greater than the national average. We aren't the problem and shouldn't be the solution. NOTE 1: THE ATTACHED RUN IS BASED ON ALL $71.6 MILLION AID CUT COMING FROM CITIES AID NOT INCLUDING HACA. THE REVENUE BASE USED WAS 1991 WHICH SHOULD BE SIMILAR TO 1992. THE ACTUAL CUTS MAY VARY BY A FEW DOLLARS. NOTE 2: THE AMM HAS JUST LEARNED THAT THE ADMINISTRATION HAS DELAYED RELEASING THE ACTUAL PLAN AND BILL, THUS THEY MAY BE WORKING ON CHANGES TO THEIR PROPOSAL? II. STATUS OF KEY METRO BILLS: I A. HF 1778 (REP. ORFIELD) -SF 1656 (SEN. MONDALE) WASTEWATER TREATMENT FINANCING: I The AMM opposes this bill as noted in the AMM Legislative Contact Alert, dated February 27th. The bill was heard in II the House Local Government and Metropolitan Affairs Committee on Thursday, March 5th. and was held over. It -2- I I I 1 was scheduled fo a continuation hearing for Tuesday, 1 March 10th. and to meet the Legislative deadline, it must pass out of this committee by March 14th. No hearing has been scheduled in the Senate as yet but if HF 1778 passes ' out of Committee by the deadline, SF 1656 will be heard in a Senate Committee sometime the week of March 16 -21. AGAIN, THE MAIN REASONS FOR ANN OPPOSITION TO THIS BILL: 1. Does not provide solution to the problems that do need to be addressed in the older developed portion of the Metropolitan Area. 2. Weakens the regional approach to waste water treatment and financing of the metro sewer system on an ' equitable basis. 3. Raises legal questions because of the vast amount of money already collected through SAC fees for system expansion, current and future. 4. It is premature at this point in time, since Minnesota Laws 1991, Chapter 183 also authored by Rep. Orfield directs the Metropolitan Council to study the con and problems of the older developed communities and report back and make recommendations to the Legislature ip January 1994. .. ACTION SUGGESTED: Please continue to discuss your concerns with this bill with your Legislators particularly your Representatives. If HF 1778 passes out of the House Committee by the weekend deadline, please sign up to testify on SF 1656 when it is heard. We will do our best to let you know if a hearing gets scheduled in the Senate. B. PROPOSED EXPANSION OF MET COUNCIL AUTHORITY OVER LOCAL COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING. (no bill number as yet) _, As noted in the Legislative Contact Alert dated 'February 27th. a proposed bill has been developed by a subcommittee of the House Local Government and Metropolitan Affairs Committee which makes some changes to the Met Council's authority vis a vis comprehensive planning and the other Metro Agencies (RTB, MWCC, etc.) The bill moved out of the subcommittee and will likely be heard in full committee on Wednesday, March llth. or Thursday, March 12th. Attached is the section of the bill which expands the Council's authority with respect ' to being able to require modifications to local comprehensive plans. 1 - 3- 1 1 To our knowledge,''this bill has not been introduced as yet in the Senate but if it passes the House Local Government and Metropolitan Affairs Committee this week it will likely get a `hearing' in the Senate Metropolitan Affairs Committee sometime the week of March 16 to 21. ACTION SUGGESTED: If you share our concerns with the proposed expansion of the Council's authority, please discuss it with your local legislators as soon as possible. 1/ C. HF 1977 (Rep. Trimble) - SF 1958 (Sen. Price) LOCAL WATER SUPPLY PLANS. Both HF 1977 and SF 1958 have been heard in the respective Environment Committees and have been passed by the committees. Both bills are consistent with AMM legislative Policy IV -I. Water supply plans would not become a 1 5th. System' nor would the Net Council have approval authority over the local plans. Cities would, however, be required, to prepare local water supply plans by 1995 and these plans would be subject,to Met Council "review and comment ". The bills are consistent with AMM policy as previously noted but there are some parts which are of concern. Parts which trouble us are: 1. Existing municipal water appropriation permits would all be reviewed by January 1, 1998, by DNR. The permits would be subject to modification if the DNR Commissioner determines that the local contingency plan is not feasible. 1 2. Local Water Supply Plans for cities that use ground water for all or part of their water supply, would have to be submitted to the county in which the cities are located for review and comment if that county has adopted a ground water plan under M.S. 103B -255. 3. Increased reporting and administrative records keeping required by cities in terms of the amount of water used by the city. ACTION SUGGESTED: 1 You may want to review the provisions of these companion bills and discuss with your local legislators if they are of concern to you. ' -4- 1 1. 1 1 ZSTIMATED IMPACT OF GOVERNOR'S BUDGET PROPOSAL 1 The attached printout lists the estimated impact of Governor Carlson's budget proposal upon selected Minnesota cities. The 1992 revenue base (certified levy + LGA) for all cities is not currently available; thus, in the printout the 1991 revenue base is used. (For most cities the 1992 revenue base should not be dramatically 11 different from the 1991 revenue base.) The following is a description of each of the columns in the printout. Column 1: Payable 1991 revenue base. Column 2: The estimated reduction in state aids that would result from the Governor's proposal. 1 Column 3: The estimated reduction as a percentage of the payable 1991 revenue base. For most cities this should be about 8.2 ' percent unless the sum of the 1992 LGA, equalization, and disparity reduction aid for the city is less than 8.2% of its 1991 revenue base. II Column 4: The new revenue base after subtracting the aid cut. Column 5: The sum of LGA, equalization aid, and disparity reduction aid that was certified for 1992. (Disparity reduction aid is estimated.) Column 6: The estimated aid reduction as a percentage of the total 1992 LGA, equalization aid, and disparity reduction aid. columr.,l: Amount of LGA, equalizzation aid, and disparity reduction 1 aid after the cut. 1 1 1 1 *ii*** ASSOCIATION OF METROPGLITAN MUNICIPALITIES . ESTIMATED IMPACT OF THE GOVERNOR'S BUDGET PROPOSAL 1 PRRELIMINARY -- SEE ATTACHED MEMO FOR DETAILS Revenue Est. Percent Rev. Base Aid (LGA Percent Aid After I Base Cut Cut After Cut DRA, EA) Cut Cut ANOKA ' 3787642 309072 8.21 3478570 1044511 29.61 735439 APPLE VALLEY 8268095 346439 4.21 7921656 346439 100.01 0 li ARDEN HILLS 1508952 0 0.02 • 1508952 0 0.02 0 III BAYPORT 847897 21567 2.51 826330 , 21567 100.01 0 BLAINE 1 5963657 486634 8.22 5477023 1084851 44.9: 598217 BLOOMINGTON , 22529287 0 0.02 22529287 ., • 0.01 0 BROOKLYN CENTER 1 7298651 595570 8.21 6703081 1 164716 36.21 1051592 BROOKLYN PARK 11232077 916537 8.21 10315540 , 144288 63.51 526352 II BURNSVILLE 1 11941835 317566 2.71 11624269 1 31756 100.02 0 CHAMPLIN 2981583 243297 8.2! 2738286 43165 56.4! 188356 CHANHASSEN 3012098 0 0.02 3012098 = 0.01 0 CHASKA , 1464520 119505 8.21 1345015 ; 28068 42.6! 161175 I CIRCLE PINES 895180 73047 8.21 822133 ) 24058 30.11 167539 COLUMBIA HEIGHTS = 5029738 410427 8.22 4619311 , 192354 21.3! 1513118 COON RAPIDS 9131801 745155 8.22 8386646 ' 219127 34.01 1446117 COTTAGE GROVE I 5323839 434425 8.22 4889414 1 90646 47.91 472039 CRYSTAL 1 5405523 441091 8.21 4964432 ' 168777 26.11 1246687 • 711578 32878 4.61 678700 1 3287 100.01 0 •DEEPHAVEN 1 916060 0 0.01 916060 ' 0.01 EAGAN , 9807752 0 0.02 9807752 1 0.01 0 EDEN PRAIRIE 1 12677803 96 0 0.01 12677803 1 0.0! 0 II ED1NA , FPIDI�FY 1 6242486 509387 8.2 5733099 1 147896 34.42 969573 GOLDEN VALLEY ' 7021431 18589 0.31 7002842 ' 1858 100.01 HASTINGS 4580512 373770 8.21 4206742 1 115405 32.41 780285 I HOPKINS 5294749 432052 8.21 4862697 ' 76228 56.71 330235 INVFR GROVE HEIGHTS 4740254 386805 8.22 4353449 1 407471 94.91 20666 MAPLEMGRI E GROVE 1168027 662 122916 1.62 1072716 , 130200 100.0: 34889 MAP 0 L 1 I q MAPLEWOOD ' 7616701 621523 8.21 6995178 ' 655883 94.82 34360 , MENDOTA HEIGHTS 1 2282077 0 0.01 2282077 1 0 0.01 0 MINNEAPOLIS KA 1 179067845 14611936 0i0! 164455909 1 59926160 24.42 45314220 MOUND 1905059 155453 8.21 1749606 276184 56.31 120731 II MOUNDS VIEW 1 1983229 161831 8.21 1821398 1 561182 28.81 399351 NEW BRIGHTON 1 3549373 856392 396282 8.22 1 3259744 0110 1 652558 42.81 530375 NORTH ST PAUL ' 1741034 142068 8.22 1598966 ' 657516 21.62 515448 OAKDALE 1 3393597 276918 8.21 3116679 1 570198 48.62 293280 . ORONO ' 1711328 0 0.02 1711328 ' 0 0.01 OSSEO 1 477257 38944 8.21 438313 1 52511 74.21 13567 PLYMOUTH ' 9611837 0 0.02 9611837 ' 0 0.01 0 1 PRIOR LAKE 2636640 27043 1.01 2609647 1 27043 100.0! 0 II , RAMSEY ' 1695340 138340 8.21 1557000 ' 275897 50.12 137557 RICHFIELD 1 9500685 775256 8.21 8725429 1 3015710 25.71 2240454 ROSEMOUN IE T 1 3806306 310595 8.22 3495711 1 1444054 370551 21.5: .61 113459 . ROSEVIL.LE 1 6641658 0 0.02 6641658 ' 0 0.01 0 II SAINT ANTHONY , 1705430 127316 7.51 1578114 1 127316 .100.02 0 SAINT FRANCIS 1 488976 25136 5.12 463840 ' 25136 100.01 0 SAINT LOUIS PARK , 12695604 103596? 8.22 11659643 1 1805307 57.42 769346 SAINT PAUL ' 119961855 9788887 8.21 110172968 ' 38890877 25.22 29101990 I SAINT PAUL PARK 1 1072846 87544 8.21 985302 1 418669 20.92 331125 SAVAGE 1 2115614 50231 2.41 2065383 ' 50231 100.01 SHAKOPFE , 2605060 142925 5.51 2462135 142925 100.01 0 SH0R,EV1EW 1 4119334 0 0.02 4119334 0 0.01 SHOREWiO��D 1790051 0 0.01 1790051 0 0.01 0 I SOUTH ST PAUI 6162900 502893 8.22 5660007 2279237 22.11 1776344 SPRING LAKE PARK 1 106930 87260 8.21 982107 204964 42.61 117704 SPRING ATER 4186453 341615 0.0: 22 3844838 1 711517 48.0. 369902 WAY7ATA 1538357 0 0.02 1538357 ' 0 0.01 0 WEST ST PAUL 480e451 39220h 8.21 4414245 1 1038748 37.81 _ 646542 W IADFIIr r 4725791 0 0.01 4725791 ' 0 0 :01 0 WOiLDIAND 135647 0 0.02 135697 1 0 0.01 0 1• 1 • 1 MET COUNCIL AUTHOKITY EXPANSION. 1 02/28/92 16:12 [RESDEPT RE DD353 1 improvement programs with other adopted chapters of the 2 metropolitan development guide. The council require a local 3 governmental unit to modify any comprehensive plan or part I 4 thereof which may have a substantial impact on or contain a 5 substantial departure from metropolitan system plans. a 6 •(date), the council shall establish criteria, after 7 soliciting comments and suggestions from potentially. affected 8 local government units, for determining when a comprehensive 9 local plan or plan amendment will have a substantial impact on 10 or substantially depart from metropolitan system plans. The 11 criteria may not be limited to a metropolitan facility's 12 capacity, but must also address whether a proposed plan or plan 13 amendment will have a substantial impact on or substantially 14 depart from metropolitan system plans,.,as that phrase is used in 15 section 473.852, subdivision 8. 16 Sec. 3. Minnesota Statutes 1990, section 473.865, ' 17 subdivision 1, is amended to read: 18 Subdivision 1. Each local governmental unit shall adopt 19 official controls as described in its adopted comprehensive plan 20 and shall submit copies of the official controls to the council 21 within 30 days following adoption thereof, for information 22 purposes only. The official controls adopted shall implement • 23 the purpose, objectives, and policies of the comprehensive 24 plan. Zoning ordinances and subdivision regulations must not 25 allow land use and development that will effectively prevent the 26 planned land use as designated within specific areas of the 27 comprehensive plan. The determination of the timing of the 28 implementation of the comprehensive plan shall be at the sole 29 discretion of the governing body: 30 Sec. 4. Minnesota Statutes 1990, section 473.858, ' 31 subdivision 1, is amended to read: 32 Subdivision 1. Within three years following the receipt of ' 33 the metropolitan system statement, every local governmental unit 34 shall have prepared a comprehensive plan in accordance with ' 35 sections 462.355, subdivision 4, 473.175, and 473.851 to 473.871 36 and the applicable planning statute and shall have submitted the ' 9 • • _ /ilelt f • Project TH 5 from TH 41 to CSAH 17 - S.P. 1002 Project No. 2685 -06 -01 °IN+ n Date February 14, 1992 CC S, /4,•,.., 11 By James Unruh �4 FEB 18 1992 Xi Meeting Report a/ � ENGINEEING DEPT. 1 Meetin Location MnDOT Gol den Valley Meeting Date 2/6/92 • Conference Room 3 • Participants Copies to: ' • Mike Spielmann, MnDOT Final Design SW Transportation Coalition Board Evan Green, MnDOT Preliminary Design Roger Gustafson, Carver County Jeff Hoffstrom, MnDOT Surveys Barry Warner, Barton - Aschman Paul Krause, Chanhassen John Mullan, Barton - Aschman Chuck Folch, Chanhassen Dave Warzala, Barton - Aschman James Unruh, Barton - Aschman MMEMMIMMMOMMINSOMMEMMEMMO Summary The meeting was held to initiate the final design phase of the TH 5 reconstruction project from TH 41 to CSAH 17. The items of discussion were as follows: Evan Green noted that the geometric layout for the project was approved by ' MnDOT in March 1989, but city staff did not take the layout to the Chanhassen City Council for approval. The city did approve an earlier concept however. Evan pointed out that several of the intersections shown on TH 5 within the project limits will be new intersections. Their locations were based on an even spacing between the intersections and on the future Chanhassen street system in the area. ' Paul Krause noted that development interest along the project has been very • high, especially since the acceleration of the TH 5 reconstruction projects in Eden Prairie and near downtown Chanhassen. • Paul also noted that the 1990 census data for population and employment for Chanhassen and Chaska has been significantly higher than had been projected by , the Metropolitan Council. The traffic volume projections for TH 5 used by MnDOT were based in part on the Metropolitan Council projections. A recent traffic study projected significantly higher traffic volumes along TH 5 than were used by MnDOT. An additional change from the MnDOT layout is that the current Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan shows detached frontage roads along both sides of TH 5. ' 1 Barton - Aschman Associates, Inc. 111 Third AAe South • Minneapolis, MN 55401 • (612) 332-0421 BA will proceed in reliance on this report. Any discrepancies should be brought to our attention in writing within (7) days. 1 - 1 Project TH 5 from TH 41 to CSAH 17 - S.P. 1002 Page Two 1 Meeting Report contti 1 Paul's comments led to a lengthy discussion on how to resolve the differences between the 1989 MnDOT plan and Chanhassen's plans along the corridor. Evan agreed that one or more of the new intersections shown on MnDOT's plan could be eliminated if the capacity of the other intersections is increased and the 1 detached frontage road system incorporated. Evan will review the current traffic projections along TH 5 before any changes are made to the MnDOT plan. The revised traffic volumes will also be needed for the pavement type . 1 selection process. Chanhassen is planning to utilize the area in the southeast quadrant of the TH 5 /CSAH 19 intersection for a junior high school. Evan cautioned that 1 Chanhassen should not transfer the ownership of the land to the school district until the TH 5 right -of -way takings are completed. This could potentially constitute a 4(f) modification to the EA if ownership were 1 transferred to the school district without first dedicating the required right -of -way. It was noted that right -of -way will be required from the parcel under consideration. II With the proposed junior high school and an extensive proposed pedestrian trail system to the south of TH 5, Chanhassen would like to•have the proposed pedestrian trail cross under TN 5 via a bridge structure rather than a box II k culvert. The likely location of the trail crossing is in the vicinity of Bluff Creek. Paul will investigate the possibility of using funds designated for pedestrian improvements in the recent Federal Surface Transportation Bill. 1 Regarding the pedestrian trail along the north side of TH 5, Chuck Folch has asked Dennis Wildermuth (MnDOT construction inspector) and Schafer Contracting to extend an 8 -foot trail from CSAH 17 to the Lake Ann Park entrance as an amendment to the S.P. 1002 -51 (TH 5 from CSAH 17 to Dakota Avenue) construction contract. The preliminary and final design plans showed a short connection to the existing 4 -foot trail in the northwest quadrant of the TH 5/ II CSAH 17 intersection. Evan noted that the trail along the north side of TH 5 within Lake Ann Park 1 will have to be constructed by Chanhassen. Evan also noted that the new TH 5 lanes are proposed to be on the south side of the existing lanes to eliminate any impacts to Lake Ann Park. A special design (urban) may be required along the south side of TH 5 to minimize impacts to the mini- storage and Prince's 1 - Paisley Park Studio properties. Paul suggested that Chanhassen may want to incorporate some special median 1 treatments into the section of TH 5 from TH 41 to CSAH 17 as was done in the TH 5 median at Market Boulevard and Great Plains Boulevard. However, it was noted that a depressed median section is currently shown in the preliminary TH 5 design plan. Incorporation of dual left -turn lanes on TN 5 may require a II raised median, but the increased construction cost of the project, mainly for • an enclosed storm drainage system, would be significant. m Third Ave S outh ♦ Minnes Lc, MN 55401 612 332-0421 B arton- Aschman Associates, Inc. >" c I BA will proceed in reliance on this report. Any discrepancies should be brought to our attention in writing within (7) days. 1 • 1 Project TH 5 from TH 41 to CSAH 17 - S.P. 1002 Page Three �' 1 Meeting Report Jeff Hoffstrom updated the group on the status of survey work on the project. 1 MnDOT Central Office is compiling a set of basemapping files based on 1990 aerial photos. Field work will be necessary to verify the aerial photos and to locate underground utilities. Jeff suspected that the mapping would be complete by the middle of 1992 at the earliest. Since the first phase of the design (construction limits, cross - sections, profiles, typical sections, and mainline construction plans) needs to be done by late June 1992, Barton- Aschman will utilize the information available at present to begin the mainline design. This information includes basemapping from 1985 aerials and surveyed cross - sections; a list of the required items was submitted by Barton- Aschman to Mike Spielmann. Design of the TH 5 cross roads will not commence until the geometric layout is approved by Chanhassen. Chanhassen staff were asked to evaluate their growth potential and capacity needs with respect to the crossroads, detached frontage roads, and overall roadway network within approximately three months. This will allow Barton - Aschman to complete construction limits for the project by June 1992 so the right -of -way ' acquisition process can begin within the corridor. 1 The current letting date for the project is February 1996., • The group agreed that project meetings will be held on an as- needed basis. 1 • .1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Barton - Aschman Associates, Inc. 111 Third Ave South • Minneapolis, MN 55401 • (612) 332.0421 BA will proceed in reliance on this report. Any discrepancies should be brought to our attention in writing within (7) days. • 1 14 1 •:, /(-- • ENGINEERING TIME 0� �, ood Bridges Could Compete 1 / . ith Concrete, Steel Spans isoi A team of researchers has de- the wood member and allows the I signed and constructed a red oak, manufacture of large, long -span glue - laminated girder bridge that beams consisting of 8- to 12 -foot Chief Engineer — offers a competitive alternative to pieces of lumber, says Penn State. V. concrete and steel spans and could Glue - laminated beams for bridge Corrosion 1 f , . ( ,( ( t help pull the sluggish hardwood spans up to 90 feet long can be This person will have signifi- industry out of its economic manufactured in this manner, cant responsibilities and op- ©( slump, according to Penn State Another benefit of the lue- g portunities for professional I C • . ( 4 University. laminated • bridge, say the re- and career development and (o 1; ( ( "These hardwood bridges can searchers, is that properly treated advancement. Candidates carry maximum highway loads wood is inert to road salts. Treat= should possess a strong engi- O r ( and in some cases may last 20 ing the wood with creosote pro- neering background and I years longer than their steel or tects it from salt and other weather ( concrete counterparts," says Har- damage. cal as peas proven expertise in the techni- of corrosion control © C. L vey Manbeck, a professor of agri- An experimental bridge based in general and, in particular, cultural engineering. A timber on these studies has been con- FRP applications in environ- 1 bridge could also help reduce con- strutted in a joint effort between mentally sensitive areas. A struction and reconstruction costs Penn State and Pennsylvania's Master's degree in engineering for small communities strapped Department of Transportation. preferred. Candidate must be for finances, says the university. The incentive for the pilot project well organized, creative prob. 1 The researchers identified resin was to stimulate the use of an in- lem solver with excellent writ - systems and ways to glue together state natural resource, especially ing and verbal skills. This stacks of 1-to 1.5- inch -thick hard - red maple and yellow poplar hard- individual will also have re- wood boards. The process im- woods, which the researchers say sponsibility for business devel- ' proves the structural reliability of is at present vastly underused. opment. Send resume and references to Brian Laurance, c/o Fiberglass Structural Engi- neering, 316 E. McLeod Rd., Bellingham, WA 98226 (Lo- Manufacturing Impact on Parts cated just north of Seattle). Predicted by Computer Cod 1 Y p Codes � Computer codes that analyze imental techniques to develop a I structures are helping researchers production process. But trial and predict how parts respond to man- error can be time consuming, and ufacturing processes, says a report poorly understood variables often Engineering from Sandia National Labors- lead to costly rework. Advances in The City of Seattle Engin 1 tones. computational mechanics and engineer directs a public Using mathematical descrip- mathematical models of material lions of material response, the behavior are allowing analysts to and construction of brit codes predict stresses that can predict a part's response to manu- and solid waste facilities I • C 1 occur during production. Weld- facturing processes before any gram of over 100 proje t"; ( �( ing, forging. sheet forming, braz- thing is constructed. million. and 185 hi O ( , ing. casting, and injection molding Developers write the programs g s all subject materials to a lot of in modular form so that new fea- wiill work with City and C " 1 , ( strain that can weaken or deform a tures can be incorporated easily. munities, and client gran I ' 0 ( 4 finished part. Microscopic rocks. Visualization software is used for to Seattle's engineering c r ., < ( shrinkage, and residual stresses — graphical data presentation to help $62K to $72K with exec O '( 1 loads left inside a material after analysts interpret results. Depend- include a Professional C I L ( ( ( processing -can occur, reducing ing on the process and the material ten years ex of rofessional t a part's performance. Some parts being analyzed. current computer in P don't even survive the production modeling is able to significantly g perienee. For applic process. reduce the time for prototype de- 1 Designers commonly rely on velopment. says Sandia. Selec prototype development and caper- Seattle E ngine 903 M unic 1 Se attle, Futurists Look Forward to... A te: lzt Or phone ; I The World Future Society has 2000. Such tiny cameras could Filing Cl published forecasts made by sci- make possible the development of values uses On J anus enlists, researchers, business ex - inexpensive video telephones a Cultural Divers • CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 1 (612)937-1900* FAX(612)937-5739 March 8, 1992 Mr. Thomas Todd, Director Research Department Minnesota House of Representatives 600 State Office Building St. Paul, MN 55155 -1201 Dear Mr. Todd: I am in receipt of your correspondence of February 17, 1992, regarding RTB "opt -out" property tax funding. I endorse your position that fiscal disparities, homestead and agricultural aid, etc., represent elements to be used in calculating the 90% share of property tax distribution. I also support your decision to not include feathering and the debt : levy as a part of this calculation. This decision compliments and reinforces a position that both the RTB and opt -out cities have supported in that capital requests from opt -out cities should be considered as a part of the RTB's budgetary process and not included in individual local opt -out budgets. This proposal not only makes the calculation you are referring to easier and less complex, but also ensures that opt -out cities are not being doubly taxed for capital needs. Thank you for sharing your work efforts with me. 1 Sincerely, - Don Ashworth - City Manager pc: Representative Becky Kelso* .: =r Senator Terry Johnston Karen Baker, Legislative Analyst Steve Hinze, Legislative Analyst • Mayor and City Council - Diane Harberts Sharmin Al -Jaff Is • ' Ov PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER t % .: . Research Department - Minnesota 1 Thomas Todd, Director : ' - House of 600 State Office Building ~ '. _ Representatives 1 St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 -1201 (612) 296 -6753 [FAX 296 -9887] I February 17, 1992 TO: Members of the Fiscal Disparities Task Force 1 FROM: Karen Baker, Legislative Analyst Steve Hinze, Legislative Analyst 1 RE: Availability of fiscal disparities distribution levy to RTB "opt -out" cities through local transit levies I The Regional Transit Board (RTB) provides financial assistance for replacement service programs to cities within the metropolitan area which elect to forgo transit services provided by the MTC and I instead make their own arrangements for local transit service. Cities choosing this option are referred to as "opt -out" cities. In many cases, "opt -out" cities actually arrange for local service to be provided by the MTC, but on a contractual basis where the city specifies which services are to be provided. 1 The 12 cities which participate in the opt -out program are as follows: Carver. Hennepin . 1 Chanhassen Chaska Eden Prairie Maple Grove Plymouth I . Dakota: Chanhassen Apple Valley Burnsville Scott: ' Eagan Prior Lake ' . Rosemount Savage Shakopee 1 . • According to Minnesota Statutes, section 473.388, subdivision 4 opt -out cities may utilize the available - local transit funds in arranging for their services. It states: 1 " For purposes of this section "available local transit funds" means 90 percent of the tax revenues which would accrue to the board from the tax it levies under section 473.446 in the applicant city or town or combination thereof." I . A question was raised by members of the Fiscal Disparities Task Force as to what is included in a city's available local transit funds. This amount is important to these opt -out cities, since it is 1 generally thought of as the "budget ceiling" for providing local transit service. Unfortunately, however, the language does not specifically define the term "tax revenues." Instead it merely references section 473.466. That section contains the total property tax levy, for both operating &tut- IVED I debt, and also includes feathering, which is a state funded property tax relief program for those FEB 21 1992 I ` J CITY OF. CHANHASSE • a Research Department February 17, 1992 Minnesota House of Representatives Page 2 communities with lower levels of regular route bus service. (Copies of sections 473.388 and 473.446 1 are attached.) Staff from the Revenue Department, Regional Transit Board and House Research met to discuss this specific issue, as well as to generally discuss the interactions of fiscal disparities (FD), Homestead and Agricultural Credit Aid (HACA), etc. on the RTB's property tax levy. Revenue Department and RTB staff have interpreted the opt-out cities' 90% share as excluding both the debt portion of the property tax levy and the feathering reimbursement The 90% share has been interpreted to include the general operating levy, and that portion of HACA and the fiscal disparity distribution levy related to the non- debt levy. However, due to the complex nature of the property tax system and especially the 1989 changes, it is not clear if the calculations for all opt -out cities in all counties are being computed uniformly. The 90% share of the available local transit funds was recalculated for each of the affected cities for taxes payable in 1991 using data from the Abstract of Tax Lists, which the county auditors prepare and certify to the Department of Revenue. These amounts were then compared to the amounts which the RTB staff provided. In general, the following was discovered. Hennepin County: The non -debt levy and its proportional HACA and FD levy amounts are all included. • Dakota County: The non -debt levy and its proportional HACA amount was included. No FD levy amount was included. Scott County: The HACA amount was included, but the non -debt and the FD levy amounts could not be reconciled. 'The RTB's amounts are lower than the Revenue Department's amounts. It was discovered that for taxes payable in 1990 and 1991, the county inadvertently over - levied by the feathering amount (i.e. no subtraction was made for feathering) Although this is probably the main reason why the amounts do not agree, it also appears that the FD amounts are excluded. Carver County: In the case of Chaska, the RTB amount is slightly less than the Department's data. In the case of Chanhassen (which is in both Carver and Hennepin County) it appears that the RTB amount (including all three components) was higher than the Revenue Department's amount. • Based upon the above discussion, it appears that further examination needs to be done in reconciling 1 the data. KB /SH/fa 1 Enc. 1 • 1 1 1 1 CHANHASSEN 1 . . COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 1 c 1 ir-y—cyF . ,44,,,i- 0,,,_ 690 COU , (612) 937 - • FAX (612) 937 -5739 1 SG . 7 — Cr.( 4( rc i MEMORANDUM -- I TO: Mayor Don Chmiel -- �,("�/ �.:a . {.tee 7 n.S c-? - X11 4. City Councilmembers s '-r v ..........- ca„. /i-j I Don Ashworth, City Manager 9!- 92 a� /� , FROM: Scott Harr, Public Safety Director / /, I DATE: March 3, 1992 -, 0.I L../4, II r.`G:)'J � . FROM: BUILDING INSPECTION SURVEY BACKGROUND II x This survey came about after discussions between Councilmember Workman and myself. We were discussing the occasional concerns I expressed regarding whether Chanhassen Inspectors are 'tougher' than other communities. From experience I knew that the complaints were only occasional, and usually turned out to be a different set II of facts than were relayed initially, but it seemed an appropriate time to do a more detailed study of this concern. • The first half of 1991 provided me with an opportunity to explain I and foster a more cooperative attitude with those that we work with. I arranged for staff to attend seminars, we had inhouse meetings and discussions with facilitators, as well as taking I advantage of videos and reading material on the subject of improving the professionalism of the department. Each complaint or concern we received was reviewed and addressed so as to help us deal more effectively with those we serve.: < 7 -- This INSPECTION SURVEY that developed provided me with an opportunity to survey those we work with, - and not just those I voicing a complaint. During the six months that the survey was pursued, a survey form was distributed with each permit obtained through the City (see attached copy). Each inspector was also II given 25 survey forms and instructed to distribute_ them to anyone that voiced a concern, criticism, suggestion, or comment. Those inspectors that exhausted their supply were given additional forms. In addition, Beth randomly selected 10 permits per month, and sent l them a survey with a letter from myself (copy attached) , requesting a response. In total, 358 surveys were distributed. 1 t 4, PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER 1 1 March 3, 1992 Page 2 ANALYSIS Of the 358 surveys that were distributed, 20 were' returned. Following are the results of the portion of the survey that people were asked to rate the inspectors on: RESULTS OF SURVEY Low High Scale 1 2 3 4 5 1 Level of inspectors knowledge 0 0 1 8 9 Professional Appearance 0 0 2 6 9 1 Inspector's Courteousness 0 1 4 1 12 Cooperative Attitude 1 2 1 3 12 1 Overall Satisfaction 1 2 1 4 9 FOLLOW UP 1 • The entire department has reviewed the results of the survey. We have taken opportunities to discuss both the overall positive response, as well as having discussed some of the lower scaled scores and the comments. Some of the more negative comments were easily associated with particular projects, because of the unique nature of the circumstances. And, rather than be defensive and make excuses for these, we discussed ways to deal with the occasionally volatile' atmosphere in which inspectors work (discussing ways to diffuse the situation, and turn a negative situation into a positive one...). CONCLUSION I think the results speak for themselves. We have an Inspection 1 Division that is both knowledgeable and professional. Recognizing that most of our inspectors came into the position without previous municipal experience, we always take advantage of opportunities where people make suggestions to improve ourselves. However, we also recognize that human nature does not cause anyone to appreciate being told what to do, or have their projects delayed. , When finances are involved, requirements by the City can cause 1 1 1 March 3, 1992 Page 3 • 1 people to be frustrated. , The central theme running throughout our discussions was that we all wish to strive to continue the pursuit of professionalism. For example, all of the inspectors are becoming familiar with computers. The issue of appearance has also been discussed, ' resulting in our proposing the purchase of shirts with the city logo for a more professional appearance. ' The importance of inspections cannot be overstated. Not only are the quality of homes considered, but more importantly, the safety of houses is carefully reviewed and watched. If an unfortunate ' situation occurs and police and fire /rescue personnel are called to respond to a building, their safety has been considered in the inspection process as well. 1 As always, we continue to seek input from everyone as to how we can better carry out our duties. We maintain our invitation to you to join us on inspections to see what the Inspectors%do on the job. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 • 1 . . d. CITYOF 1 3 i 1 MI cHANHAssEN . E;f t 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 -;; ` (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 1 1 January 3, 1992 1 Dear Homeowner /Contractor, 1 You have been randomly selected as a recipient of inspection serv- ices in the City of Chanhassen to provide feedback on these serv- ices. We are in the process of critically examining how our staff provides inspection services, and are randomly selecting II people to request feedback. On the back of•this letter, you will see a number of questions to which we would like you to take a moment and respond. It is very II -* important to us that you answer honestly, and let me assure you that absolutely nothing negative will about as a result of your straightforward answers. , - II y' ' If you would like to contact me personally, please feel free to do so. You may indicate the form that you would like a follow , up call, or please feel free to call me your convenience. Sincerely, 'cot Harr - 1 - Public Safety Dir . SH:akd w - :._ e ° °° 1 1 . 1 n 1 LI4, PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER I II EVALUATION OF BUILDING INSPECTION SERVICES 11 Please respond to the following: .. 1 1. The reason I had contact with the Chanhassen Inspections Divi- sion was: 1 2. Please rate the following: Low High g 1 A. Level of knowledge of inspectors: 1 2 3 4 5 B. Professional appearance of II inspector: 1 2 3 4 5 C. Courteousness of inspector: 1 s 3 4 5 11 D. Cooperative attitude: 1 2 3 4 5 di 3. Were you satisfied with Not at all very much I your experience? 1 2 3 4 5 I 4. Did you have any problems with your inspection or inspector(s)? Yes No 1 Comments: II - 1 5. Other comments: 1 II 6. Would you like a follow-up call from the P supervisor of the Inspections Division? II Yes No 1 • 1 • • . . . • A CITYOF 1 . _A _, ,,.,",_,,,, ,,..„. ,e.. , f ;: COULTER DRIV • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN MINN ' 4 - ESOTA 55317 -'` - 690 C (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 1 CHANHASSEN BUILDING INSPECTION DIVISION FEEDBACK REQUEST You are being asked to assist us by providing honest feedback on 1 your perception of how our Inspection Staff is doing its job. We assure you that your feedback is being solicited, and absolutely no negative responses will be forthcoming as a result of your providing us with your perspective. II You are asked to return the evaluation on the reverse side of this memo, or invited to contact Public Safety Director Scott I Harr at 937 -1900 ext. 3 to discuss any comments, criticisms or concerns that you have. REMEMBER, WE ARE HERE TO BE OF ASSISTANCE TO YOU AND YOUR FEEDBACK IS IMPORTANT! 1 it Sincerely, Scott Harr • 11 Public Safety Director II 1 . 1 1 1 • 1 1 1 1 . II EVALUATION OF BUILDING INSPECTION SERVICES I Please respond to the following: 1 1. The reason I had 'contact with the Chanhassen 'Inspections Divi- sion was: . ' 11 2. Please rate the following: Low High A. Level of knowledge of 'inspectors: 1 2 3 4 5 B. Professional appearance of inspector: 1 2 3 4 5 II C. Courteousness of inspector: 1 2 3 4 5 II D. Cooperative attitude: 1 2 3 4 5 II - 3. Were you satisfied with Not at all very much your experience? 1 2 3 4 5 I - 4. Did you have any problems with your inspection or inspector(s)? Yes No II Comments: • - r ' 5. Other comments: II 6. Would you like a follow -up call from the supervisor of the Inspections Division? II Yes No II r i � r • C iTY 0 1 4 CHANHASSEN 1 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 1 F AL - aC..c r -\ \e--k--\P---r ez,ejr - -. March 12, 1992 �L 1 .,- re:e_ zi..c n-, Ccsrm k C1/4_, 0,_, (A)r-je_A 1 Mr. Mike Nugent ( y p &r Or ► C . , lv Northwest Nursery LefEU.- .CU.A.)r ca-)G 3-t 9150 Great Plains Blvd. I Chanhassen, MN 55317 Dear Mr. Nugent: I • The City of Chanhassen is implementing a t ree sale as part of an urban forestry program 1 s currently being developed by the city. The Chanhassen Park and Recreation Commission has recently assumed the responsibilities of the Chanhassen Tree Board, and in concert with the City Council will be promoting planting of trees within our community. To facilitate the tree sale, the following parameters and bid request form have been developed. 1 - The bid request is separated into two sections: ; r. . 1 1. The provision of balled and bagged trees in the four categories specified, including the loading of trees into our trucks. 1 2. The provision of balled and bagged trees in the four categories specified, including delivery and installation within the city limits. As an additional service, please I provide a price for guaranteeing a tree for one year from the date of planting. The city has selected Fridays, April 10, 17, 24, and M ay 1, 1992, as delivery dates. This will allow residents who choose to plant their trees the opportunity to do so over the weekend. The city will close orders for each week on Monday, calling the vendor on Tuesday morning with that week's orders. The supplier will be responsible for making arrangements to r deliver and install trees for the residents who choose this option. Advertisements for this program will appear in the Chanhassen Villager on March 26 and April 2, 1992.' . The I selected vendor will be featured in this ad. Bid proposals will be accepted at Chanhassen City Hall through 4:30 p.m. on Friday, March 20, 1992. For each ten trees ordered through this program, the vendor will be asked to donate one 2 -inch shade tree to the city for I planting in parks and open spaces. A planting handbook will be provided with each delivery. The city will supply these handbooks to the vendor for trees being delivered by r Le PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER • r r Mr. Mike Nugent ' March 12, 1992 Page 2 • the vendor. This ro am is modeled after the Chaska Shade Tree Program, and we would gr gram, uld like to acknowledge their contribution in assisting the City of Chanhassen in implementing a similar program. ' The City of Chanhassen is interested in providing a quality service to city residents through this program. To that end, trees which are specified in each category must be provided from quality stock at the sizes specified. If you are interested in being the vendor for this ' program, please complete the attached bid proposal and return it by the time specified. Sincerely, 9 it , 7 o ", ' Todd Hoffman Park and Recreation Coordinator TH:k ' pc: Mayor and City Council Chanhassen Tree Board Members Dale Gregory, Park Foreman 1 I • 1 1 r 1 CITY OF CHAN'HASSEN I TREE SALE BID PROPOSAL FORM SECTION 1. I Category 1. 5' Amur Maple I P e Pnce Per Tree: $ 5' Japanese Tree 6' River Birch I 11/2" Shade Trees (Ash, Linden, Hackberry) 1 " Shade Trees (Willow, Silver Maple) , 5' Spruce or Pine Tree Category 2. 1 6' Japanese Tree - Price Per Tree: $ 6' Amur Maple I 8' River Birch /Whitespire Birch 6' Spruce ,.• 2" Crab Trees 2" Shade Trees (Ash, Willow, Linden, Silver Maple) r Category 3. r 10' River Birch / Whitespire Birch Price Per Tree: $ 7' Spruce or Pine Trees 1 21" Crabapple Trees . 21/2" Shade Trees (Ash, Linden, Willow, Silver Maple) 2" Hackberry r • 2" Locust (skyline) • 2" Sugar Maple Category 4. Price Per Tree: $ I 12' River Birch 1 12' Whitespire Birch 3" Shade Trees (Ash, Linden, Willow, Silver Maple) 21 Hackberry I SECTION 2. 1 Delivery and Installation Price Per Tree: $ 1 Year Guarantee Price Per Tree: $ I Return by 4:30 p.m., Friday, March 20, 1992 • 1 1 8arton•Aschman Associates, Inc. 111 Third Avenue South, Suite 350 Phone (612 332 0421 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 Fax. (612) 332 -5180 USA I II I March 16, 1992 ' Mr. Don Ashworth City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 • ' fie: TH 5 Urban Design and Planning Dear Mr. Ashworth: II On Friday, March 13, we collectively met with members of your staff to review the TH 5 highway design and corridor planning. During that discussion, it became apparent that numerous issues exist that will require more specific I analysis to understand their policy and design implications. We determined that this analysis should be conducted in a brief but immediate manner to more fully disclose the issues merit for existing highway design work and to provide further direction for planning studies. Based upon our verbal agreement, Barton - Aschman will host a planning charette to be held in our office on Tuesday, March 17, at 8:30 A.M. The purpose of I this meeting is to gather input from Barton - Aschman's highway designers who are currently working on the TH 5 corridor along with city staff and me. Bill Morrish will be unavailable to attend, however, we will share the meeting's outcome with him at his convenience. The exercise will give us an opportunity to explore various roadway cross - sections, their impact to the roadway corridor, horizontal and vertical alignments, and intended trail crossings. The charette will also provide a I ' common opportunity for all to understand better issues that all parties are facing. Barton- Aschman will prepare for the charette by drawing cross - sections at characteristic locations within the corridor. Subsequent to the I charette, we will issue a summary memorandum that identifies conclusions or points of interest drawn from the meeting. These topics will be a component of a joint meeting to be held with MnDOT representatives on Monday, March 23. 1 I I 1 Barton- Aschman Associates, Inc. , March 16, 1992 Page 2 , The above - prescribed work tasks will be conducted immediately so as to provide , benefit to the highway design and planning process. The city will contribute compensation for Barton- Aschman's planning staff only. We believe that the week's tasks will be completed for an amount of approximately $2,000. Civil engineering time and expenses will be drawn from other resources. Barton- Aschman will bill the City of Chanhassen upon completion of the week's exercises. Compensation is due within 30 days of invoice receipt. ' We believe this approach is the most prudent manner to continue productive dialogue in resolving these and other issues. Thank you for the opportunity to participate in Chanhassen's future. Please contact me immediately if the contents of this letter do not meet with your concurrence. Sincerely yours, , BARTON - ASCHMAN ASSOCIATES, INC. Barry Warner, ASLA, AICP Act , r� II Principal Associate v EJW:dmv cc: Paul Krause, Chanhassen City Planner cl//6 ESL_ S C c. c �' der di K • 1 1 • 111 �y March 16, 1992 ; �� SOUTHWEST METRO TRANSIT \ MEMO TO ' • SMTC 7600 Executive Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 (612) 9347928 FROM: Diane Harberts Fax(612)937 - 7411 ' RE: Legislative Update Please find attached a legislative update report from George Bentley. Highlights of his report are as follow : I - 1. Senate File 2144, House File 2191 (RTB Capital Needs Bonding) SF 2144 was passed by the Senate Transportation Committee on March 9th; passed by the Senate Metropolitan Affairs Committee on March 12th; Referred to Senate Tax Committee. A hearing for HF 2191 will occur on March 18th. 2. SF 1759, HF 2605 (MVET Transfer, Gas Tax) This measure has met the Senate deadlines, it is still unscheduled in the House. 3. SF 1993, HF 2219 ( Transit ° °Polipy Bill) Passed the Senate Transportation Committee and Metropolitan Affairs Committee. Referred to Senate Tax Committee. In the House, approved by Transportation Committee and sent on to the Local Government and Metro Affairs Committee. ' 4. SF 2145, HF 2304 (LRT Bonding) The $320 million bonding request was defeated in Senate Transportation on March 9th, reconsidered by that committee at its March 10th meting. At that meeting the dollar amount I • was reduced to $94 million and was approved and forwarded to Senate Metro Affairs. At Senate Metro Affairs, the Chair refused to schedule the bill in committee, so it may be re- referred on the Senate floor to Ways and Means. In the House, this measure will be heard by Transportation Committee and then to Local Government and Metro Affairs Committee. 5. SF 1913, HF 2184 (Raising Tort Liability Limits on MTC) No committee hears have been set for this bill. 6. SF 2510, HF 2510 (LRT Governance) In the House, passed the Transportation Committee and Metro Affairs Committee. It is of interest to note that during the discussion of this bill, an amendment to eliminate the RTB by January 1993 was introduced and very intensely discussed. George commented on March 16th r that the amendment to eliminate the RTB was defeated by a close vote of 8 -7 with many representatives commenting that the RTB has "one more chance" to prove themselves. George will be in attendance at the SMTC March 26th Meeting to provide a full legislative update and answer questions. Please call me at 934 -7928 with your questions. Thank you. RECEIVE ' MAR 1 71992 CITY OF Chmrv►,,,,,,,,_,, • LEGISLATIVE UPDATE- FOR OPT -OUT TRANSIT March 14, 1992 The first committee deadline in the legislature was Friday, March 13th. By this date all bills originating in any one house must be heard by all necessary policy committees of that house and passed on to non - policy committees or to the floor. Examples of policy committees would be the Transportation Committee or the Metropolitan Affairs Committee. Examples of non - policy committees would be Finance, Appropriations or Taxes. A second committee deadline approaches on Friday, March 20th. This deadline requires bills originating in one house and passed by all of that house's policy committees by the first deadline must be cleared through the other house's policy committees by that date. If a House file did not meet the first deadline but its companion Senate file did, the House policy committees will be considering Senate files, and the Senate policy committees will be considering House files through the second committee deadline. Due to these deadlines, a flurry of activity has been occurring in both houses in policy committees including transit - oriented legislation. S.F. 2144, H.F. 2191 (RTB Capital Needs Bonding) These bills, described in the previous ' Update, include dollars to implement the opt-out capital policy with the RTB. S.F. 2144, as previously reported, was 1 passed by the Senate Transportation Committee on March 9th and sent to the Metropolitan Affairs Committee. Committee on the evening 24sb March llth, and although h but the chair, Sen. Don Frank, supported g every adjourned the meeting before a vote could t be taken due . to opposition. The bill was heard again on Thursday, March 12th, and this time Sen. Frank allowed a vote on the measure. It passed with only Sen. Frank in opposition, and was referred 1 to the Senate Tax Committee. On the House side H.F. 2191 was discussed by the House Appropriations Committee, Economic Development Division on March 11th along with general transit funding. However, this bill must first be heard by the House Transportation Committee and the House Local Government and Metropolitan Affairs Committee before being considered by Appropriations. A hearing in House Transportation (which will now consider the senate bill) will occur on March 18th. Although not yet scheduled in Local Government and Metropolitan Affairs, it may be heard there on March 19th. 1 r - r Legislative Update - Page 2 r S.F. 1750, H.F. 2605 (MVET Transfer, Gas Tax) Although this measure has met Senate deadlines, it is still unscheduled in the House. House Transportation Committee chair Rep. Henry Kalis still refuses to take this bill up in his committee until the Governor makes a statement of support. So far, no such statement has been made. If the Governor has not yet come forward in support by Wednesday, March 18th, the measure will have to be introduced ' by amendment. S.F. 1993, H.F. 2219 (Transit Policy Bill) The transit policy bill, including a travel demand r management program, was previously passed by the Senate Transportation Committee. It was heard by the Senate r Metropolitan Affairs Committee on the evening of March llth and passed on to the Senate Tax Committee. The House Transportation Committee, after adopting an amendment which conformed the measure to the Senate version, "r approved H.F. 2219 and sent on to the Local Government and Metro Affairs Committee. Although not yet scheduled in that committee, it will likely be heard on March 17th or March r 19th. S.F. 2145, H.F. 2304 (LRT Bonding) EL After this $320 million bonding measure was defeated in Senate Transportation on March 9th, it was reconsidered by that committee at its March 10th evening meeting. At that r meeting the dollar amount was reduced to $94 million, representing a 20 percent match for federal funding. The bill was approved by the committee with the lower dollar amount and forwarded to Senate Metro Affairs. Sen. Frank has refused to schedule the bill in his committee, so it may be re- referred on the Senate floor to Ways and Means, where it will be sent to Taxes, thus meeting the policy committee deadline. In the House this measure will be heard on March llth by the Transportation Committee, and will likely be heard by the Local Government and Metropolitan Affairs Committee on the 12th. S.F. 1913, H.F. 2184 (Raising Tort Liability Limits on MTC) No committee hearings have been set for this bill, and it did not meet deadline. I will continue monitoring this proposal in case it is added by amendment to another bill. r r r Legislative Update - Page 3 • S.F. 2510, H.F. 2510 (LRT Governance) ' This bill, which establishes who makes decisions on LRT construction and operation, became the hot -bed for a very interesting debate on Friday, March 13th in the House Local Government and Metropolitan Affairs Committee. The bill, which is not of immediate interest to opt -out transit, passed the House Transportation Committee on Wednesday, March llth. When it was considered in House Metro Affairs on Friday, the chair, Rep. Iry Anderson, proposed an amendment which would have eliminated the RTB by January 1, 1993. This amendment went through all laws which name the RTB, struck out the RTB, and replaced it with the Metropolitan Council and the Minnesota Department of Transportation. Most duties of the RTB would then fall under the Metropolitan Council, with LRT passing to MnDOT. After a spirited debate, the amendment failed on an ' eight to seven vote. The governance measure was.then approved. The senate companion bill has not beep heard by committee as of yet. 1 We opposed the RTB elimination because of our improved working relationship with that body and because of the uncertainty of the future of our recently enacted policies if the Met Council took over. This move to eliminate the RTB could resurface on the House floor, in Senate committees or in conference committee. I will continue to monitor this proposal throughout the rest of the legislative session. ' It has been an extremely busy week, and next week promises to be just as busy. If anyone would like further information please contact Southwest Metro Transit at 934 -7928, Minnesota Valley Transit at 431 -4311, or me at 897 -1919 (office) or at 949 -2681 (home). Thank you. ; Georg Bentley r , Legislative Liai on 11 1 1 r MAR 1 61992 • LEGISLATIVE UPDATE CITY OF Grtn:'r' ' FOR OPT -OUT TRANSIT • ' March 10, 1992 r There are numerous transit bills being considered by House and Senate committees at this time, and there are some surprises in committee actions. In this Legislative Update I ' will discuss all of the bills under consideration that do or could have an effect on opt -out transit, and give a status report as of this date. S.F. 2144, H.F. 2191 (RTB Bonding) These two companion bills involve the RTB bonding ' request MTC fleet replacement, Team Transit improvements, hub construction for the RT$'s Vision for Transit, park and ride lots. and community based and opt -out vehicles.' In general, these bills cover the cost of capital for transit from now ' through 1996. the origina. form of these bills called for $110 million in bon_.ing authority, but with the approval of the RTB of the ' opt -out capital policy on March 2nd they have had to increase This bonding authority by $6.5 million to $116.5 million. This increase was due to the belated discovery by the RTB ' staff of additional costs associated with the opt -out capital policy to cover capital costs of private providers. The entire $6.5 million in additional bonding authority ' will probably not be needed, but it covers the possibility of private providers winning opt -out contracts over the MTC. Since the MTC only charges 20 percent of their capital costs to the opt -outs (the remaining 80 percent is federally r funded), replacement of MTC service by private providers carries a potentially higher price tag for capital costs. Also, several of the opt -out systems have services that the MTC can not provide with their vehicles, such as dial -a- ride. The additional bonding authority will cover all such private provider costs. - The $6.5 million increase is being introduced by authors'.amendments during the first hearings of these bills. The author in the Senate is Sen. Gene Merriam, and in the House it is Rep. Wayne Simoneau. At the March 9th Senate Transportation Committee meeting the amendment was offered and approved without discussion. The bill, S.F. 2144, was then adopted and sent to the r Metropolitan Affairs Committee, where no hearing date has yet been set. In the House, H.F. 2191 will be heard on March 11th in the House Appropriation Committee, Economic Development ' Division for the first time. If successful there, it will r 1 Legislative Update - Page 2 likely go next to the House Transportation Committee. The RTB and the MTC have been working with us in getting the bills amended, so this is definitely a regional effort. This is the most important bill for opt -outs in the legislature, and we are working with our legislators to help with its passage. S.F. 1750, H.F. 2605 (MVET Transfer, Gas Tax) These bills are the Transportation Alliance bills calling for an MVET transfer and a five cent per gallon gasoline tax increase. Sen. Keith Langseth is the Senate author and Rep. Bernie Lieder is the House author. This legislation was explained in detail in the previous Legislative Update, so I won't detail it here. However, it should be kept in mind that these bills represent the best hope for a dedicated source of future funding for transit. ' S.F. 1750 was heard by the Senate Transportation Committee on March 5th. At that hearing the state bridge bonding bill (which includes funding for the Bloomington Ferry Bridge) and a provision for resolving disputes involving highway jurisdictional transfers were added to the measure. In addition, an amendment offered by Sen. Carol Flynn, which defines "highway" to include transit improvements, - making gas tax proceeds eligible for transit improvements in highway corridors, passed and became part of S.F. 1750. After a very positive discussion about transit funding, which included a statement from Sen. Langseth promising some form of dedicated transit funding this session, the Transportation Committee unanimously passed the bill and sent it to the Finance Committee. No hearing date has been set in Finance. On the House side the going has been more difficult. A dispute between Governor Carlson's office and Rep. Henry Kalis, House Transportation Committee chair, over who was going to come out in favor of this bill first has stalled House action. Although H.F. 2605 has been introduced, it has not as of yet been scheduled for committee hearings. If it is not heard this week it will have to be proposed by amendment to another bill. Rep. Kalis may still relent and allow this bill to be heard in his committee. If not, proponents are lining up key committee members to offer the bill as an amendment. Whatever happens, it will be interesting to watch. 1 1 1 1 ss Page Legislative Update - g P Pge3 S.F. 1993, H.F. 2219 (Transit Policy Bill) These companion bills are known as the RTB/MTC Omnibus Transit Policy bills. They contain, among other things, the travel demand management (TDM) provisions described in the 1 previous Legislative Update. S.F. 1993 was heard by the Senate Transportation Committee on March 2nd. At that meeting the penalty provisions for employer compliance with TDM requirements were eliminated, and the bill was passed on to the Metropolitan Affairs Committee. It will be heard by Metropolitan Affairs on March 10th, where passage is expected. H.F. 2219, authored by Rep. Alice Johnson, is scheduled to first be heard by the House Transportation Committee on March llth. S.F. 2145, H.F. 2304 (LRT Bonding) In a'bit of a surprise, the Senate Transportation Committee heard S.F. 2145 authored by Sen. Carl Kroening on March 9th, and on a voice vote defeated it. This bill, which calls for $320 million in bonding authority for construction of an LRT line between downtown Minneapolis and downtown St. Paul, was expected to pass, but concerns about the use of and impact on property taxes led to its defeat. Discussions are going on by the RTB staff concerning alternative strategies for this bill. H.F. 2304, authored by Rep. Carlos Mariani, is scheduled to be heard by the House Appropriations Committee, Economic Development Division, on March 11th. S.F. 1869, H.F. 2116 (Gasoline Sales Tax) This legislation would provide an extension of the sales tax to gasoline, with the proceeds dedicated legislatively to transit. S.F. 1869, authored by Sen. Sandy Pappas, was heard by the Senate Transportation Committee on March 2nd, and the sales tax portion was stripped out. The remainder of the bill was passed, but it largely duplicates language contained in S.F. 1993 and has not been scheduled in other committees. While some consider this the end of the gasoline sales tax idea, it may not be dead yet. Sen. Langseth may still consider this option later if it appears to have greater favor with the governor. No hearing has been set for H.F. 2116, authored by Rep. Harold Lasley, at this time. 11 1 1 ' Legislative Update - Page 4 S.F. 1913, H.F. 2184 (Raising Tort Liability Limits on MW) 1 These companion bills, authored by Sen. Dick Cohen and Rep. Howard Orenstein, would raise the tort liability limits for the MTC by two and one -half times. The current limit of $600,000 would be increased to $1.5 million. Apparently, these bills are the result of a claim against the MTC by a constituent of the senate author. It was considered an MTC problem and not given much attention. However, on Friday, after consultation with SWMT attorney Barbara Ross, it appears that if this bill passes there may be some rather significant exposure for any opt -out system with an MTC contract. The contracts call for the cost of additional insurance above the $600,000 level to be borne by the opt -out system. Since the MTC is self insured, this could (and I stress could) mean a sizeable additional claim against the opt -out system. Fortunately, these bills do not seem to be headed anywhere, since no hearings have been scheduled•in either house. I am keeping a close eye on them and will advise you if they show signs of life. They are bad legislation, since they represent the first time in anyone's memory that an attempt has been made to raise tort limits on just one agency or body. 1 If anyone is interested in a copy of any of these bills, please contact me or call Minnesota Valley Transit at 431 -4311 or Southwest Metro Transit at 934 -7928. If you have questions or would like more information, please call me at 897 -1919 (office) or at 949 -2681 (home). Thank you. Georg Bentley Legislative Liai =on 1 1 1 1 . - 4e fd,d.• -4 , co,] C.C. e�.c.K MARK LUNDGREN i ; t -1. ' =":!* � 1 c° - i , . - ...+e ,, CARVER COUNTY COURTHOUSE 1 ip . _ County Auditor -�—;ti A 600 EAST 4TH STREET, BOX 1 ^;; ' J CHASKA, MINNESOTA 55318-2184 LAURIE ENGELEN 'sib j.:, J � PHONE 448-1210 • Deputy County Auditor A 'N E S° 442-4468 .222 Ext. 221 1 D6/ COUNTY OF CAr2VEQ 1 f MEMORANDUM ii It _ )99r` TO: TOWNSHIP AND CITY CLERKS 1 : FROM: MARK LUNDGREN, NANCY BUCKENTINE DATE: March 12, 1992 1 RE: ELECTION INFORMATION " 1 ON TUESDAY MARCH 10, 1992, THE COUNTY BOARD VOTED TO INSTALL AN OPTICAL SCAN VOTING SYSTEM THROUGHOUT THE COUNTY. WE WILL DISCUSS THE SYSTEM WITH ANY INTERESTED PARTIES FOLLOWING THE ELECTION JUDGES TRAINING SESSIONS SCHEDULED FOR MARCH 23 & 24, 1992. 1 . WITH THE INSTALLATION OF THE OPTICAL SCAN SYSTEM, THE PUNCH CARD SYSTEM WILL NO LONGER BE USED OR AVAILABLE. THE PURCHASE BY THE I COUNTY WILL BE A CENTRAL COUNTING MACHINE. THE PRECINCT COUNTING MACHINE IS AVAILABLE FOR PURCHASE AT THE LOCAL OPTION TO ANY CITY OR TOWNSHIPS INTERESTED. THE BID PRICE FOR THESE PRECINCT COUNTERS IS $5895.00 PER COUNTER, AND IS AVAILABLE THROUGH THE 1 COMBINED BID RECEIVED BY THE COUNTY. WE LOOK FORWARD TO SEEING YOU AT THE JUDGES TRAINING AND FEEL .1 FREE TO CONTACT US WITH ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. er tw — / ) Pe. c441 1.d ai►efa..r -., C er..w Ctrs o ,, e.c.c.A 7 1 a, //. ca.J iA✓ �/ 7 00 • a ors � n.. //y a . / / . c 4-1 .f...-•-' T�1 r S r e . , � c. 4.. s 4. jJ g 0. 1 IA,./{rs '4 " I ii r %S O eeo� !. C. s,a C / A rA -1 .4..." t 1 „ Art.....: yew ) tnf ) oO+.t �w��r ) IV • t i +' .l�innat a Acis»n /Egad Op orlrr »i E mp l oyer LL Printed on Rerlrla! Paper /// 44, IN .v 0, c. a 4-... .vii 14 4. e.ii, 66,......../.- 6,......../.- 7 4.0.4/(4 f t nr - BUSINESS RECORDS CORPORATION Election Services Division I ORDER BY BE 12 BERKELEY ❑ CHICAGO ❑ DALLAS ❑ NAPA • ❑ OTHER: FILLED BY I (800) 225 -8683 (800) 621 -1181 (800) 922 -9032 (800) 331 -VOTE • ORIGINATING //�� �` SUBSIDIARY/DIVISIO K C " e� 1 - C f;A u DATE ISSUED 3 — /` 9 ' CUSTOMER NO. �T ORDER DATE REQUIRED) I ' N 15758.1 - Q V -1- % 7 / or CH4N /44sSE Ai ` 6 9a CauL,T4•p i4tiuL` t I ° N S AenI 0 C. 4 4/0 41./11 s SE � � nl cl 5 5 3/ 1 P T i CUSTOM� y �� ° CONTACT: EF v 2 f{ A.3 / i E d 1 -1 /SS E PO PHONL4 /Z - 937 -/9 /� P.O. N0. P.O. DATE SALESMAN/4 ) L- L S C /,/AJ e/ Q Et_ SALESMAN'S NO. I Z 3 5 1 S6 /- /992_ ELECTION DATE I PRODUCT NO. PRODUCT DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT PRICE SALES AMOUNT , 646- 2i'2ic - 6 o pP-rE c zzr _.,o` /� G S s 89oo 3� 6 37a. ea /6o- 291oz- ao 4TA I o,2v Att cK //VaL. `s-r6 .L /SA LLCT A a x / / G C 4.16+644) -- E GA/ /A-I -- 1 • / £' .,L-rie? A / / zt .46 4_4. — G // //a G. L. 1 r✓1 A rJ 0 A L_ — eAiL e- N 1 1 . �► �` cSPL/ Ne (-Ai &Eck -- .4cA/ /4L. /4,6- 29/6 -06 ex 4 6orrA Pl .Ato/e 41- c:< 6 3 /5 - e4 lg ga.00 1 1 .2 YEAr2 C-EcT,d4 &fiaaQT /�G LEcm -r 4 533. s 8 . `err. / iO R y 4 FT6G FI t.5-r £s_c r) I 2V C ii / dAt.J>aaE 11'IAnrrt,J•wae : cam. s - (CF-F. I sr 40,1 411 Elz__F ills-r £LL.2: 41r /dal) G 3 V4,. 72. z. 40 8c. 3Z, fiL EC'rtoils -f / /T t AGd awl G SP'r`Jttel kagMEwr / A/C L S 1 PECIAL INSTRUCTIONS: TOTAL ORDER AMT. 3p g 7,3 _ 4.44 • SHIPPING F.O.B. / FACTORY' ORDER ISSUED BY. 4e---3.-49- . ...40-4.-L-L 4 aLei-4 - CUSTOMER ACCEPTANCE: • 1 SALES APPROVAL: M. AUTHORIZATION: TOTAL AMOUNT NET 30 ❑ CONTRACT ❑ SPECIAL PAYMENT ❑ CONFIRMING PHONE ORDER ❑ 1 -- white -MANUFACTURING Green • MFG/ORDER ENTRY Cy. REGIONAL SA ES o ict - }� • iNNsM - CUSTOMER BRC -17 1 ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS FOR PURCHASE OF ELECTRONIC VOTE COUNTING SYSTEMS CARVER COUNTY, I NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT SEALED BIDS FOR THE PURCHASE OF ELECTRONIC VOTE COUNTING EQUIPMENT WILL BE RECEIVED AT THE OFFICE OF THE CARVER COUNTY AUDITOR, CARVER COUNTY COURTHOUSE, CHASKA, MINNESOTA. ALL EQUIPMENT BID MUST MEET FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION STANDARDS; BE CERTIFIED BY THE MINNESOTA SECRETARY OF STATE AND CONFORM TO SPECIFICATIONS WHICH ARE AVAILABLE AT THE CARVER COUNTY AUDITOR'S OFFICE. BIDS SHALL BE ACCOMPANIED BY EITHER CERTIFIED CHECK, CASHIER'S CHECK, MONEY ORDER.OR BIDDER'S BOND MADE PAYABLE TO CARVER COUNTY IN THE AMOUNT OF FIVE PERCENT OF THE BID PRICE. BIDDERS ARE TO BE AWARE THAT CARVER COUNTY IS ACCEPTING THESE BIDS ON A CONSORTIUM BASIS FOR THE COUNTY AND SEVERAL CITIES LOCATED IN CARVER COUNTY. CARVER COUNTY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO REJECT ANY AND ALL BIDS. BIDS MUST BE RECEIVED IN THE CARVER COUNTY AUDITOR'S OFFICE, CARVER COUNTY COURTHOUSE, 600 EAST FOURTH STREET, CHASKA, MINNESOTA NO LATER THAN 4:30 P.M., JANUARY 20, 1992. 1 MARK LUND REN CARVER COUNTY AUDITOR 1 1 1 1 • 1 G 1 B GOVERNMENTAL BUSINESS SYSTEMS, INC. 124 Tower Drive Burr Ridge, Illinois 60521 708/867 -1515 • FAX 706/897-1525 I CARVER COUNTY, MINNESOTA ES -2000 PROPOSAL Page One of Two I. Accu -Vote Pricing 1 -5 Units @ $6,750.00 6 -10 Units @ $6,500.00 11 -25 Units @ $6,250.00 26 -50 Units @ $5,950.00 (Price includes Ballot Box and Memory Card) I It is our understanding that the following ' g g municipalities are considering conversion to the ES -2000 System: Chanhassen - 7 Chaska - 4 Waconia - 2 Carver County - 2 15 Units @ $6,250.00 = $93,750.00 FOB factory II. VTS Costs (Programming /Accumulation) $15.00 per Precinct $10.00 per Office $ 5.00 per Candidate $25.00 per Ballot Style • Per election costs include "Coding" 30 Memory Cards and preparing program for the accumulation of vote totals utilizing VTS Software. It is assumed that Carver County will supply the host computer for election night processing. The host computer must meet the following requirements: . IBM -PC (compatible) 386/25 mhz 4 MB Memory - Ram j . One 1.44 MB Floppy Disk Drive . One 80 MB Hard Disk Drive . VGA Monitor . 2 Serial /2 Parallel Ports . One Report Printer (continuous form, dot - matrix -350 CPS) GBS selling price - $6,500.00/$1,750 per election lease price se. 1 GOVERNMENTAL BUSINESS SYSTEMS, INC. 1 s Page Two of Two GBS proposes to utilize individual Accu -Vote units for the purpose of centrally tabulating ballots from those precincts not equipped with a tabulation system. An Accu -Vote tabulator can process 1,200 ballots per hour in a central count environment. An Accu -Vote unit will be designated as a read station for the purpose of uploading totals to the host computer. III. Installation and Training - $2,250.00 (services referred to herein) Based on voter registration figures obtained from the County Auditors' Office, we would strongly encourage utilization of precinct count equipment in the following jurisdictions on Election Day. Chanhassen (7) • Waconia Twp. (1) Chaska (4) Waconia (2) Dahlgren Twp. (1) Watertown (1) I Laketown Twp. (1) Watertown Twp. (1) Norwood (1) Young America (1) Victoria (1) ' Total of 21 units. The following precincts would be processed centrally at the County Courthouse; Benton Twp. Hollywood Camden Twp. Mayer Carver New Germany 1 Chaska Cologne San Francisco Twp. Young America Twp. Hamburg Hancock These precincts total approximately 4,400 registered voters and could be comfortably accommodated by 4 Accu -Vote Units. Other costs and related information: 1. Accu -Vote leasing - $1,250.00 per election (80% credit applicable to purchase price if option to buy is exercised within 90 days of Election) 2. Trade -in equipment . Compact Vote Recorder with frame and template - $20.00 each ' . CES Model I Vote Recorder - $35.00 each . ELPAC System CPU - $250.00 Card Reader - $500.00 ' Printer - $100.00 . scga:ccmb2 1 CHANHASSEN H . R . A . A C C O U N T S P A Y A B L E 03-23 9' PAGE 1 CHECK # A M O U N T C L A I M A N T P U R P O E 045968 2,321.29 BARTON ASCHMAN ASSOC. FEES, SERVI ;E • 045969 , 77.00 CAMPBELL, KNUTSON FEES, SERVICE 045970 246.53 SW SUBURBAN PUBLISHING PRINTING AND PUBLISHING 3 2,644.82 CHECKS WRITTEN o • - — — — — — all NM — — —• — CITYOF 1 - CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 1 MEMORANDUM DATE: March 23, 1992 TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager �� FROM: Tom Chaffee, Data Processing Coordinator .. SUBJECT: 1991 Construction Administration Charges and Attributable Cost Allocation 1 Attached is a schedule of administrative charges and attributable cost allocations for 1991 construction.-We have used a flat 4% charge for administration to maintain continuity in reporting. Notice the display of the attributable pool allocates total costs to construction on a pro -rata share of administrative charges for same. 1 A S gg. 1. 1 1 t4: PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER 1 1 • 1991 CONSTRUCTION ADMIN. CHARGE 1 FUND FUNDNAME TB2EXP ADJUSTMENTS ADJTOT ADMINCHG ATTRIB ADJ CASH DAL 474 MARKET SQUARE 47,687.94 47,687.94 1,907.52 2,457.00 2,197.245.77 ; 614 90 -9 TH 5 E LONE CEDAR 88,788.09 802.19 87,985.90 3,519.44 4,533.25 (95,370.78) 615 LAKE DRIVE EAST 90,916.10 90,916.10 3,636.64 4,684.21 63,497.65 616 PKNG. LOT CONST. 78TH NO 57,793.61 45,961.53 11,832.08 473.28 609.61 (566,151.73) 619 90 -4 CTY. RD. 17 UPGRADE 34,630.96 1,519.29 33,111.67 1,324.47 1,706.00 (26,498.10) • 620 84- 4/88-22 LK DRIVE EAST 103,887.94 3,364.25 100,523.69 4,020.95 5,179.22 (132,305.08) 624 85-13 CHN LK BUS Pk-5TH 7,618.03 4,797.97 2,820.06 112.80 145.29 1,722.29 628 DOWNTOWN PUB IMPR PROJ 125,240.81 82,530.33 42,710.48 1,708.42 2,200.55 739,435.74 II 634 87 -2 W 78TH ST DETCHMNT 31,940.01 31,940.01 1,277.60 1,645.62 390,910.82 636 BLUFF CREEK DRIVE 2,990.95 2,327.25 663.70 26.55 34.20 (28,833.23) 637 91•-8 WEST 79TH ST. 66,183.27 1,499.15 64,684.12 2,587.36 3,332.67 (71,882.30) 639 87 -9 KERBER BLVD C & G 926.29 926.29 37.05 47.72 118,203.58 I 641 87 -18 TH101/5 REALIGN. 1,048,664.14 121,222.80 927,441.34 37,097.65 47,783.99 (1,798,149.68) 642 89 -7 AUDUBON COURT 2,107.62 2,107.62 0.00 0.00 0.00 (25,969.38) 643 89 -10 FRONTIER TRAIL 54,410.73 54,410.73 2,176.43 2,803.37 13,399.00 II 644 89 -18 AUDUBON ROAD 161,240.58 55,582.14 105,658.44 4,226.34 5,443.78 (308,934.84) 645 89 -25 COUNTRY SUITES 52,169.72 38,823.07 13,346.65 533.87 687.66 (495,036.12) . 646 85 -13B PARK PLACE PH2 19,250.63 12,972.45 6,278.18 251.13 323.47 (8,725.66) 647 90-1 LAKE DRIVE WEST 214.85 214.85 0.00 0.00 0.00 (1,677.64) 648 MINNEWASHTA PKWY. IMPR. 62,600.17 62,600.17 2,504.01 3,225.31 1,435,668.21 650 T.H. 101 TURN LANES 44,958.54 44,958.54 1,798.34 2,316.37 (5,886.53) 651 90 -20 SOUTH HWY 101 529,374.10 8,309.32 521,064.78 20,842.59 26,846.50 (553,100.57) 1 652 90 -7 DELL ROAD 2,243.57 73.71 2,169.86 86.79 111.79 (2,442.15) 654 TH 5 - MNDOT C0-OP 419,219.15 419,219.15 16,768.77 21,599.18 (457,587.10) TOTALS tt 106,918.00 137,716.76 419,900.12 1991 ATTRIBUTABLE POO' I 1 DEPT DESCRIPTION RATE TB2TOI ADJ ATTRIB 112 ADMINISTRATORS OFFICE 0.20 186,479.96 37,295.99 ' 113 FINANCE 0.20 127,761.24 25,552.25 121 POLICE ADMINISTRATION 0.05 468,341.14 23,417.06 122 FIRE & RESCUE 0.05 205,007.85 10 250.39 131 ENGINEERING 0.20 99,879.64 19,975.93 152 PLANNING ADMIN. 0.20 106,125.70 21,225.14 tt T 0 T A L tt 137,716.76 1 1 1 1