Loading...
2020-03-17 Council PacketCITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS CITY COUNCIL AGENDA March 17, 2020 – 7:00 pm Mendota Heights City Hall 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Pledge of Allegiance 4. Adopt Agenda 5. Presentations a. Update on Fire Station Expansion/Remodel by Paul Oberhaus, CPMI 6. Consent Agenda a. Approve March 4, 2020 City Council Minutes b. Approve March 4, 2020 Council Closed Session Minutes c. Approve March 4, 2020 Council Work Session Minutes d. Approve Resolution 2020-19 Supporting Congressional Funding of Governmental Programming Costs e. Approve Resolution 2020-20 Accepting Project and Approving Final Payment for the 2018 Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Project f. Authorize Request for Proposals for Safety Consultant Services g. Ratify 2020-2021 Labor Agreement with the Minnesota Teamsters Local #320 h. Approve Purchase Order for Natural Resource Management at Oheyawahe/Pilot Knob i. Approve Resolution 2020-18 Sponsoring a Natural and Scenic Area Grant for 2085 Valencour Circle j. Acknowledge Building Activity Report k. Approve February 2020 Treasurer’s Report l. Approve Claims List m. Award a Contract for Street Sweeping n. Authorize the Purchase of a Movable Training Wall System – Fire Station o. Approve the February 11, 2020 Parks and Recreation Minutes p. Acknowledge December, 2019 Par 3 Financial Report q. Approve Amendment to Solar Garden Agreement with Northfield Solar, LLC r. Approve Resolution 2020-22 Declaring Surplus Fire Station Equipment, and Authorizing Sale or Disposal 7. Citizen Comment Period (for items not on the agenda) *See guidelines below 8. Public Hearings - none 9. New and Unfinished Business a. Resolution 2020-17 Approve Plans and Authorize Advertisement for Bids for Marie Avenue Street Improvements b. Ordinance No. 555 Amending Code Regarding False Alarm Penalties c. Resolution 2020-21 Authorize the Purchase of Real Property Located at 2085 Valencour Circle 10. Community Announcements 11. Council Comments 12. Adjourn Guidelines for Citizen Comment Period: “The Citizen Comments section of the agenda provides an opportunity for the public to address the Council on items which are not on the agenda. All are welcome to speak. Comments should be directed to the Mayor. Comments will be limited to 5 minutes per person and topic; presentations which are longer than five minutes will need to be scheduled with the City Clerk to appear on a future City Council agenda. Comments should not be repetitious. Citizen comments may not be used to air personal attacks, to air personality grievances, to make political endorsements, or for political campaign purposes. Council members will not enter into a dialogue with citizens, nor will any decisions be made at that presentation. Questions from the Council will be for clarification only. Citizen comments will not be used as a time for problem solving or reacting to the comments made, but rather for hearing the citizen for information only. If appropriate, the Mayor may assign staff for follow up to the issues raised.” CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA Minutes of the Regular Meeting Held Wednesday, March 4, 2020 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the regular meeting of the City Council, City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota was held at 7:00 p.m. at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve, Mendota Heights, Minnesota. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Garlock called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Councilors Paper, Miller, and Petschel were also present. Councilor Duggan was absent. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Council, the audience, and staff recited the Pledge of Allegiance. AGENDA ADOPTION Mayor Garlock presented the agenda for adoption. Councilor Petschel made a request to add Item 9d. Signage at Pilot Knob Historical Site. Councilor Petschel moved adoption of the agenda as amended. Councilor Miller seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 CONSENT CALENDAR Mayor Garlock presented the consent calendar and explained the procedure for discussion and approval. Councilor Petschel moved approval of the consent calendar as presented. a. Approval of February 18, 2020 City Council Minutes b. Approval of February 19, 2020 Council Work Session Minutes c. Acknowledge the January 14, 2020 Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting Minutes d. Acknowledge the January 28, 2020 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes e. Approve Purchase Order for Ash Tree Removal f. Approve Community Service Officer Hire g. Approve Police Officer Promotion to Sergeant h. Accept Firefighter Retirement i. Approve Purchase of Fire Station Fitness Equipment j. Approval of Contract for July 4th Fireworks Display k. Ratify 2020-2021 Labor Agreement with the Minnesota Public Employees Association l. Acknowledge Fire Synopsis Report – January 2020 m. Approval of Claims List page 3 Councilor Miller seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 PUBLIC COMMENTS No one from the public wished to be heard. PRESENTATIONS A) ROGERS LAKE WATER QUALITY REPORT – SAINT THOMAS ACADEMY Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek provided background information on the water quality testing conducted by Saint Thomas Academy students at Rogers Lake each year, noting that St. Thomas Academy instructor Tony Kinzley is present to provide the annual report. Mr. Kinzley stated that this past year he had three classes for a total of about 60 students that conducted the monitoring to put together the results in the report. Nick Horst, student, reported on the health and quality of Rogers Lake. He stated that with testing and work, water quality can be improved. He provided background on the different testing locations and tests completed throughout the year. He provided a table displaying the results. Teddy Lotter, student, presented data on the different tests completed including dissolved oxygen, fecal coliform, biochemical oxygen demand, change in temperature, and pH. Will Hoppy, student, presented data on the remaining tests completes including nitrate, total phosphates, turbidity, total solids, and overall rating. Joe Brennan, student, concluded the results of the study highlighting the historical overall average ratings of the lake. He stated that since the program began, the water quality has trended in a positive direction. He highlighted some of the positive outcomes from the testing this year, noting that the last four years of data are the highest results received overall throughout the program. He reviewed some areas of improvement for the future and some possible solutions that could assist with improvement of water quality. Councilor Miller referenced the readings related to the total phosphates and asked if the soil disruption on the west end of the lake due to buckthorn removal could have impacted that number. Mr. Brennan confirmed that could negatively affect the water quality. Councilor Paper asked if the depth of the water has an impact on the temperature reading. Mr. Brennan replied that the tests they complete are based on the water temperate around the shoreline and therefore depth does not impact that result. He explained that areas that receive more sun could result in higher readings than those that remain in shade. page 4 Councilor Petschel thanked the students for collecting this data. She stated that the City distributes a newsletter that often highlights best practices for preventing water pollution. She commended the students on the report. PUBLIC HEARING No items scheduled. NEW AND UNFINISHED BUSINESS A) RESOLUTION 2020-15 APPROVING A LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT FOR 1875 AND 1885 HUNTER LANE (PLANNING CASE 2020-02) Community Development Director Tim Benetti explained that the Council was being asked to adopt a resolution approving a lot line adjustment between two properties located at 1875 and 1885 Hunter Lane, owned respectively by the Cosgriff and Van families. Councilor Petschel commented that this seems a logical proposal. Councilor Petschel moved to approve RESOLUTION 2020-15 APPROVING A LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT BETWEEN THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 1875 AND 1885 HUNTER LANE. Councilor Miller seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 B) RESOLUTION 2020-16 APPROVING A VARIANCE FOR 554 JUNCTION LANE (PLANNING CASE 2020-03) Community Development Director Tim Benetti provided a brief background on this item. The Council was being asked to consider adopting a resolution, which would approve a Variance of two-feet from the ten-foot side-yard setback requirements, for a new garage addition for property located at 554 Junction Lane. Councilor Petschel stated that the hardship in this case is the pie shaped lot and the City has been consistent in acknowledging the hardship in meeting setbacks. She commented that this is a wonderful neighborhood and she likes seeing improvements made to the homes. Councilor Miller moved to adopt RESOLUTION 2020-16 APPROVING A VARIANCE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 554 JUNCTION LANE. Mayor Garlock seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 page 5 C) RESOLUTION 2020-14 APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AUTHORIZING THE AMENDMENT TO THE MENDOTA HEIGHTS TOWN CENTER PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT – THE VILLAGE AT MENDOTA HEIGHTS (PLANNING CASE 2020-01) Community Development Director Tim Benetti provided a brief background on this item. The Council was being asked to consider adopting a resolution, which would approve a conditional use permit (CUP) authorizing an amendment to a previously approved planned unit development (PUD) and its accompanying master development plan. This original PUD was created in 2002 as “The Mendota Heights Town Center” and is now retitled or locally identified as The Village at Mendota Heights. The properties are located at 725 Linden Street and 735 Maple Street. Mayor Garlock stated that the City has been involved in this process for three years, with many concepts and proposals reviewed. He commented that this proposal is the right fit for the site with the proposed density and the addition of a new restaurant. He applauded staff for their hard work on this project. Councilor Miller referenced the stormwater management summary and asked the overall percentage of impervious surface for this site. Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek replied that there would be a total 2.67 acres of impervious on the site which would equate to about 58 percent impervious coverage. Councilor Miller asked the Code requirements related to impervious surface coverage for a lot this size. Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek replied that commercial and industrial parcels are allowed to have up to 75 percent impervious surface coverage. He explained that the majority of the greenspace is found in the outlots and not in the direct commercial development area. Councilor Paper asked for additional clarification on the rate of runoff. Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek explained how the rate of runoff is calculated. He explained that the MPCA has stormwater requirements requiring one inch, while the watershed that the City belongs to is slightly more stringent than the state requirements. Councilor Paper referenced the park dedication fee and asked how the restaurant is calculated. Community Development Director Tim Benetti replied that the $4,000 per unit is being charged for the residential development and nothing for the restaurant. Councilor Paper asked why the co-working space was eliminated. Director Tim Benetti commented that after further review, the developer determined that would not be a fit in this development as it would be difficult to provide security for residents. He explained that the restaurant would have a separate entrance. Councilor Paper expressed concern for the nearby residents, as this is a change for the area. He asked what the hours of operation would be for the restaurant. Director Tim Benetti noted that a similar concern was raised by staff and the Planning Commission. He stated that a vegetative screening was discussed and the developer was open to that suggestion. Councilor Paper stated that most of the patio faces inside to the development, with the exception of the end that gets close to the neighboring homes. He commented that his concern would be the noise for the nearby residents. page 6 Councilor Petschel asked if something could be done on the southwest end that faces Dodd Road, in terms of noise control. Mr. Paul Dzubnar, restaurant operator, stated that the edge of the patio is 200 feet from the closest home with a busy state highway in between that also provides noise. He stated that the patio would be closed at 10:00 p.m. Councilor Paper stated that he hopes the business is successful but wants to do something proactive rather than reactionary. He stated that he is unsure of the exact answer but wants to try to do the best he can for the homes across the street. He commented that this project fits the needs and scale of the community. Councilor Petschel suggested that a recommendation be made for the developer and restaurateur to determine the best practical solution to the issues raised by Councilor Paper. Mr. Dzubnar confirmed that they could review the plans to propose a solution to mitigate the noise. City Attorney Andrew Pratt commented that there will also be a development agreement between the developer and the City, and those details could be addressed in that document. Councilor Paper asked for details on the snow removal and snow storage areas. Mr. Judd Fenlon, Grand Real Estate Advisors, stated that there was a fairly extensive discussion regarding snow storage and removal at the Planning Commission. He stated that he worked with their engineer to identify five areas for snow storage with appropriate landscaping under that could support that use. Councilor Paper asked if the corner identified for snow storage would impact visibility. Mr. Fenlon stated that they would monitor how much snow is stored in that area and would haul snow from the site before impacting the visibility for traffic. Councilor Paper referenced the 16.25-foot setback requested and asked for information on that location. Community Development Director Tim Benetti identified the location of that reduced setback. Councilor Miller referenced the issue of park dedication and asked if that would be revisited in the future for the restaurant. Community Development Director Tim Benetti replied that the ordinance of the City states that park dedication is based on a per unit residential fee or 10 percent of the assessed value of an unimproved commercial/industrial site. He explained that with this mixed-use project the City chose to go with the per unit price for the residential portion of the project. He stated that staff felt that this is a fair offer as to what is provided in this development plan. Councilor Miller stated that he would agree with the residential per unit charge but believed that the restaurant is a standalone project. City Attorney Andrew Pratt stated that, in his experience, park dedication is only charged on residential developments. He stated that the logic is that when new residents move into the community, that provides more users to the parks. page 7 Councilor Miller asked if the park dedication fee has not been charged to a non-residential development in the past. City Attorney Andrew Pratt confirmed that to be true. Councilor Petschel stated that she has appreciated working with this developer, as there has been a sincere desire to work with the City to find a good fit for this area. She stated that she believes that the buffer between this property and the condominiums was important and was pleased to see that maintained. She was pleased to see that the developer continues to work with the HOA to determine if there is anything that would be mutually beneficial in terms of ongoing maintenance. She noted that she also appreciated the change to the entrance of the building. She stated that this project meets a need that the City continues to hear in the community. Councilor Paper asked if the City is still on track to close on this property at the end of March. He also asked when the developer plans to break ground. Community Development Director Tim Benetti provided an update on the timing, noting that the closing would be on track for March 31st, but that date could be extended, if needed. He stated that the goal of the developer is to begin work as soon as this process is complete, and their bid documents are completed. Mayor Garlock moved to adopt RESOLUTION 2020-14 APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AUTHORIZING AN AMENDMENT TO THE 2002 THE MENDOTA HEIGHTS TOWN CENTER PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, N/K/A/ THE VILLAGE AT MENDOTA HEIGHTS, LOCATED AT 725 LINDEN STREET AND 735 MAPLE STREET. Councilor Petschel seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 D) SIGNAGE AT PILOT KNOB HISTORICAL SITE Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek provided background information on this item. He stated that the Council is being asked to consider signage for the Pilot Know Historical Site. Councilor Petschel commented that the permanent wooden sign would match the existing signs of other City parks and would help visitors to identify the location. She stated that once the wooden sign is installed, this sign would be moved to the parking area. She commented that the group is composed of highly skilled individuals that share the same commitment to this precious and sacred piece of land. Councilor Petschel moved to approve the donated sign from the Pilot Knob Preservation Society and authorize Public Works to post the regular sign once available. Councilor Miller seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 page 8 COMMUNITY ANNOUNCEMENTS City Administrator Mark McNeill announced that the ice rinks are closed for the season and City staff is looking forward to the Par 3 opening. Summer registration is open online. He extended thanks to those who attended and worked on the fire sale at the Fire Station last Saturday. COUNCIL COMMENTS Mayor Garlock thanked the City Clerk and other staff for the great job on the primary election. Councilor Paper expressed congratulations to newly appointed Sergeant Nick Gorgos. He also wished good luck to the Saint Thomas Academy hockey team at the state tournament and thanked the cadets for their presentation on Rogers Lake. ADJOURN Mayor Garlock moved to adjourn. Councilor Petschel seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Mayor Garlock adjourned the meeting at 8:16 p.m. ____________________________________ Neil Garlock Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ Lorri Smith City Clerk page 9 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA Minutes of the Council Closed Session Held Tuesday, March 4, 2020 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a workshop of the Mendota Heights City Council was held at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve, Mendota Heights, Minnesota. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Garlock called the meeting to order at 6:25 p.m. Council members Miller, Paper, and Petschel were also present. Council member Duggan was present from a remote location via Facetime. Staff in attendance included City Administrator Mark McNeill, Community Development Director Tim Benetti, Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek, Finance Director Kristen Schabacker, and City Clerk Lorri Smith. Also in attendance was Al Singer, representing Dakota County. Mayor Garlock stated that as permitted by Minnesota Statutes, Section 13D.05, Subdivision 3(c)(3), the purpose of the closed session is to discuss a potential offer for the purchase of real property at 2085 Valencour Circle. Councilor Petschel moved to adjourn the Regular Session to a Closed Session of the Council. Councilor Paper seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 At 6:43 p.m., Councilor Miller moved to return to the Regular Open Session of the City Council. Councilor Petschel seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 City Administrator McNeill stated that no official action was taken by the Council in the closed session. The Council will provide a summary of the closed session at the next regular meeting. ADJOURN Mayor Garlock adjourned the meeting at 6:43 pm. ____________________________________ Neil Garlock, Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ Lorri Smith, City Clerk page 10 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA Minutes of the Council Work Session Held Tuesday, March 4, 2020 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a workshop of the Mendota Heights City Council was held at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve, Mendota Heights, Minnesota. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Garlock called the meeting to order at 6:45 p.m. Council members Miller, Paper, and Petschel were also present. Council member Duggan was absent. Staff in attendance included City Administrator Mark McNeill, Police Captain Wayne Wegener, Community Development Director Tim Benetti, Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek, Finance Director Kristen Schabacker, and City Clerk Lorri Smith. DISCUSSION OF AMENDMENT TO CITY CODE SEC. 5-5-4 B.2 (FALSE ALARMS) Police Captain Wayne Wegener explained the amendments to City Code Section 5-5-4. B (2) are being proposed due to a couple of businesses having a substantial number of false alarm calls, and significant charges being incurred. Factors that contributed to this include the businesses not keeping the key holder information up to date with the Dakota County Communications Center, the false alarm reports were not run regularly, invoices from the false alarm reports were not sent out on a regular basis, and the current City Code does not place a cap on the amount billed per false alarm in a calendar year. The Police Department has notified the businesses and requested that they update their key holder information with Dakota County. The false alarm reports are now being run monthly and sent to the Finance Department for billing on a regular basis. It is proposed that the ordinance language include a cap on the amount billed per false alarm. After the fifth false alarm, the subsequent false alarms will be charged out at $100 each, within the same calendar year. Mr. Wegener noted that this ordinance will affect only false alarms and does not affect false fire alarms. He noted that this should correct issues in the future. Staff will place this ordinance proposal on the March 17, 2020 Council agenda for consideration. ADJOURN Mayor Garlock adjourned the meeting at 6:53 pm. ____________________________________ Neil Garlock, Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ Lorri Smith, City Clerk page 11 DATE: March 17, 2020 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark McNeill, City Administrator SUBJECT: Resolution Supporting Congressional Funding of Governmental Programming Costs Comment: Introduction: The City Council is asked to adopt Resolution 2020-19 which asks Congress to take action to pass legislation to protect local funding sources for local origination and governmental programming on cable television. Background: Mendota Heights been approached by NDC4, which is asking all seven cities of the cities which it serves takto support Congressional action to protect the funding of cable television. In August, 2019, the Federal Communications Commission issued an order allowing cable companies to begin subtracting their own computed “value” of non-cash technical requirements from the cash franchise fee payments going to cities. These non-cash items, which were negotiated as part of a franchise agreement between the City and the cable company, include providing live signal transport from schools and city halls back to the master control at NDC4 for live video events, such as City Council meetings, high school sports, and town hall meetings. They also include free cable services for schools, libraries, police and fire stations, as well as fiber institutional networks or “I-Nets” that provide critical government data connections. Because the cable companies are allowed to determine the “value” of these non-cash franchise requirements, the deductions from cash franchise fee payments cause a severe threat to the budgets of local community media stations, cities and schools. Cities across the nation have appealed the order to Federal Court, and further have filed an appeal to stay the Order during the litigation. H.R. 5659, and a companion bill S.F. 3218 have been introduced to allow a continuation of the existing arrangement. It defines “franchise fees” as “monetary payments.” If approved, this Congressional action would undo the FCC’s recent order to supersede the Federal Cable Act and change the 35-year practice of calculating franchise fee payments to cities. page 12 Budget Impact: Over the past five years, the City of Mendota Heights has received the following in cable television franchise fees: 2019 - $43,345.25 2018 - $45,215.41 2017 - $43,254.44 2016 - $41,888.82 2015 - $40,312.72 The money is deposited into the city’s cable television fund, which is used to make technology improvements for the City. Without this, the City will eventually have to levy for changes such as those which are needed in the City’s phone system, the Council Chambers, the Police Squad Room, and the large conference room. Recommendation: I recommend that the City Council adopt Resolution 2020-19. If approved, it would be sent to the City’s congressional delegation. Action Required: If the Council concurs, it should, by motion, adopt: Resolution 2020-19 A Resolution in Support of Protecting the Community Television Act. Mark McNeill City Administrator page 13 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 2020-19 RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF THE PROTECTING COMMUNITY TELEVISION ACT WHEREAS, Mendota Heights is served by the Northern Dakota County Cable Communications Commission (the "Commission"), which is a Joint Powers Commission organized pursuant to Minn. Stat. §471.59, as amended; and, WHEREAS, the Commission negotiates and manages the cable franchise agreements of Mendota Heights and six other member cities, and oversees the operation of Town Square Television, a local community public, education and government ("PEG") access facility on behalf of the seven member cities; WHEREAS, NDC4 and Town Square Television provide coverage of local community events and issues, non-profits and charities, local high school sports and academic programs, business and chamber of commerce programs, government meetings, candidate information and election coverage, local history, public health information, and many other programs that broadcast stations typically will not cover, and, in light of rapidly decreasing local print media, NDC4 and Town Square Television may soon be the sole media source providing local coverage; WHEREAS, NDC4 and Town Square Television are funded through franchise fee and PEG fee revenues negotiated in the cable franchise agreements with local cable providers; WHEREAS, the member cities require, as part of the cable franchise agreements, that cable companies meet demonstrated community needs by providing non-monetary franchise requirements such as live signal transport from schools and city halls to master control facilities and complimentary cable television services that benefit the member cities, local schools, public safety buildings, as well as NDC4 and Town Square Television; WHEREAS, in 1984 Congress defined a franchise fee as a "tax, fee, or assessment," and for the past 35 years, it has been solely a monetary fee; WHEREAS, in 2019 the FCC departed from the clear language of the Cable Act and passed an Order ruling that a franchise fee is both a monetary and non-monetary fee and permitting cable companies to unilaterally assign a value to the non-monetary franchise requirements and then subtract that amount from the franchise fees the cable operator pays to the local community; WHEREAS, the FCC Order results in substantial reductions in vital funding to page 14 the member cities and NDC4 and Town Square Television; WHEREAS, the Protecting Community Television Act (currently S. 3218 / H.R. 5659) has been introduced in Congress with the goal of maintaining the status quo by reversing the FCC Order and allowing franchise fees to be calculated as they have been for over 35 years as monetary only fees; and WHEREAS, this legislation is supported by the National League of Cities, the U.S. Conference of Mayors, the National Association of Counties, the Alliance for Community Media, the League of Minnesota Cities, NATOA and MACTA. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights calls on Congress to pass legislation, such as the Protecting Community Television Act, which would undo the FCC's action; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council urges all House members and Senators from Minnesota to cosponsor the Protecting Community Television Act. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 17th day of March, 2020. CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS ____________________________ Neil Garlock, Mayor ATTEST: ___________________________ Lorri Smith, City Clerk page 15 Request for City Council Action MEETING DATE: March 17, 2020 TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator FROM: Ryan Ruzek, Public Works Director SUBJECT: Final Payment and Acceptance of the 2018 Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Project – Project #201803 COMMENT: Introduction The Council is asked to approve Resolution 2020-20, to accept work and approve the final payment for project #201803. Background The City Council awarded the contract to Hydro-Klean LLC at their October 10, 2018, City Council meeting for their low bid of $246,886.43. The contract work for the 2018 sanitary sewer rehabilitation project has been completed, inspected, and approved. The project is ready for final payment. This will start the one-year guarantee period. All required paperwork needed before final payment has been submitted. Discussion The final payment for this contract is $11,781.99. The total cost for this project was $235,637.79, which is $11,246.64 under the original contract amount. Budget Impact There are sufficient funds in the Sanitary Sewer Utility Fund to cover the final payment. Recommendation Staff recommends that the Mendota Heights City Council approve the attached Resolution No. 2020-20 “RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK AND APPROVING FINAL PAYMENT FOR PROJECT #201803, 2018 SEWER REHABILITATION” Action Required If Council concurs with the staff recommendation, they should pass a motion adopting Resolution No. 2020-20 “RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK AND APPROVING FINAL PAYMENT FOR PROJECT #201803” SEWER REHABILITATION”, by simple majority vote. page 16 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 2020-20 RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK AND APPROVING FINAL PAYMENT FOR PROJECT #201803 2018 SEWER REHABILITATION WHEREAS, pursuant to a written contract signed with the City of Mendota Heights on October 10, 2018, with Hydro-Klean LLC of Des Moines, IA has satisfactorily completed the improvements for the 2018 Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Project #201803, in accordance with such contract. NOW THEREFORE IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights that the work completed under said contract is hereby accepted and approved; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor and City Clerk are hereby directed to issue a proper order for the final payment on such contract in the amount of $11,781.99, taking the contractor’s receipt in full. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 17th day of March 2020. CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS ___________________________ Neil Garlock, Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________ Lorri Smith, City Clerk page 17 DATE: March 17, 2020 TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator FROM: Cheryl Jacobson, Assistant City Administrator SUBJECT: Request for Proposals—Safety Consultant Services INTRODUCTION The City Council is asked to approve the release of a Request for Proposals (RFP) for Safety Consultant services. BACKGROUND Since 2010, the City has participated in a Regional Safety Group (RSG) with the cities of West St. Paul and South St. Paul for the purposes of promoting workplace safety. The RSG was sponsored by the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust and was a way to cost effectively support safety trainings and the development of policies, procedures and programs in compliance with federal OSHA and Minnesota Department of Labor standards. Due to changing needs by a member city, the RSG has dissolved. However, the City is still responsible for providing its employees with a safe and healthy work environment. To support safety goals, the City is looking to engage a safety consultant to provide safety training and other services in support of the City’s safety program. The proposed Request for Proposal (RFP) is an invitation by the City for qualified consultants to submit responses for the provision of Safety Consultant Services. The scope of services laid out in the RFP includes the development of a comprehensive safety program including safety manual(s), policies and procedures, safety training, safety inspections and general program support. RECOMMENDATION Authorize staff to release the Request for Proposal for Safety Consultant Services. ACTION REQUIRED If the Council concurs, it should, by motion, authorize the release of the Request for Proposals for Safety Consultant Services. page 18 REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP)    Safety Consultant Services            Responses Due: April 10, 2020 at 4:30 PM (CST)                          Issued By:    City of Mendota Heights  1101 Victoria Curve  Mendota Heights, MN 55118    page 19 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS  REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS      NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE City of Mendota Heights will receive proposals for:    CONSULTING SERVICES FOR SAFETY AND TRAINING    Proposals must be submitted electronically (via email) to Cheryl Jacobson, Assistant City  Administrator, at cherylj@mendota‐heights.com    Proposals are due by 4:30pm on Friday, April 10, 2020.               DATED THIS 18TH DAY OF MARCH 2020           Cheryl Jacobson       Assistant City Administrator       City of Mendota Heights                                                         page 20 GENERAL INFORMATION    The City of Mendota Heights is seeking qualified Safety Consultant services to renovate our  current Citywide and departmental safety programs, provide safety training and safety program  support.     The Safety Consultant shall perform and carry out the necessary services to complete the  requirements included in this request for proposal.  The Safety Consultant will report to the  Assistant City Administrator, who will assist the consultant in interpretations of the scope of  services.  The final scope of work will be negotiated with the selected Consultant.    Introduction    Qualified firms are invited to submit proposals for the provision of Safety Consultant Services  based on the information contained in this Request for Proposal.      General Conditions and Stipulations     The City reserves the right to accept or reject any or all proposals and to waive  formalities and select the responder that best meets the needs of the City.  The City’s  objective is to select an agent who will provide the best possible service at the best  possible cost while meeting the Request for Proposal specifications.  The City is not  obligated to award the contract based on cost alone.       The City intends to award a single individual, vendor or consulting firm the contract.     During the evaluation process, the City of Mendota Heights reserves the right, to  request additional information or clarification on information submitted.      Background    City Description    The City of Mendota Heights is a first ring suburb of the Minneapolis‐St. Paul Metropolitan  Area. The City has a population of just under 12,000.  The City of Mendota Heights is a statutory  city with a Council/Administrator form of government.  Mendota Heights is governed by a City  Council composed of a Mayor and four Council Members.    The City employs 46 full‐time and 9 part‐time employees.  City departments include:   Administration, Public Works, Police and Fire.   The City’s safety program applies to all  departments; however, Police and Fire utilize their own safety support systems for some  specific safety training needs. All departments are included in the City’s annual required  trainings, such as AWAIR and Right to Know.      SCOPE OF SERVICES  To respond to this RFP, responders shall include a detailed description of all tasks, including  those suggested in this Scope of Services and any proposed changes, additions, or  page 21 recommendations.  The detailed description of each task should include the subtasks,  deliverables, proposed meetings, schedule, and costs.  Program Description  The City’s Safety Program is intended to provide all employees with a safe and healthy work  environment, while minimizing workplace accidents affecting personnel and equipment.   The Safety Consultant will have direct responsibility to conduct an on‐site safety program as  described herein.  The safety program shall include:   Program development including the preparation of City and Department Safety  Manual(s), policies and procedures and subsequent updates to maintain current and  relevant information.   Development of a city safety committee   Review of workplace incidents and accidents   Staff safety training   Safety inspections   Record keeping and reporting in coordination with the Human Resources Department  Consultant Tasks and Responsibilities  The Safety Consultant’s minimum scope of service for conducting the Safety Program is as  follows:   Assess current state of city and department safety program(s).    Assist in the creation and development of policies, procedures, manuals and programs  necessary for the establishment of a comprehensive safety program.   Develop training program recommendations, schedule and budget   Review existing Safety Data Sheet libraries.  Assist city Staff in inventorying hazardous  substances and developing and maintaining Safety Data Sheet libraries in each facility  designated by the City.   Develop Personal Protective Equipment Policies (PPE)    Consult and participate in safety committee meetings, as needed   Review accidents, and provide recommendations for changes to mitigate or prevent  recurrences, as appropriate.  Recommend corrective action for safety violations, in  accordance with City policy.   Conduct or coordinate on‐site training that meets the needs of employees and the  requirements of OSHA and MN Department of Labor and Industry    Recommend additional OSHA and MN Department of Labor and Industry required  training, not performed by the Safety Consultant on‐site, to be performed in a cost‐ effective manner.  Recommend other training programs for those programs that the  Safety Consultant cannot perform on‐site.     Provide onsite management training for any aspect of the Safety Program that needs to  be performed by existing City staff to those required to administer it.  For example; if  Supervisors would be expected to conduct periodic safety audits, training shall be  provided to them by the Safety Consultant to enable them to perform this work.  page 22  Provide facility and job site safety audits, conduct inspections of City facilities on a semi‐ annual basis and provide recommendations to help mitigate or prevent accidents at  each facility and work site.  The recommendations shall be submitted to the Assistant  City Administrator and be discussed at safety committee meetings.   Review accident frequency and severity records to provide a basis for evaluating the  effectiveness of the safety program.  Provide an evaluation of the Safety Program by a  mutually agreed upon date with budget recommendations for the following year’s  program.   Review the City’s Standard Operating Procedures and recommend updates on safety  concerns  Contract Period  The initial term shall be 12 months, with the possibility of two additional 12‐month terms.   Renewal will, in part, be based on employee feedback of training impact, satisfactory  completion of identified tasks and responsibilities, and measurable improvements in safety  within the City.    EVALUATION CRITERIA  Proposals will be evaluated based on the following criteria not necessarily in the following  order:  1. Ability to demonstrate how the vendor will meet course objectives using adult learning  methods, interactive processes and technology for delivery, making courses  meaningful, interesting, and professional.  2. Vendor demonstrated capabilities, understanding of requirements, qualifications,  experience, and references.  3. The suitability of the proposal to fulfill the City’s requirements.  4. Ability to meet course schedules for the initial agreement period, and optional renewal  years.  5. Overall cost and value of related services with a rate cap or guarantee in years (2) two  and (3) three.  6. The degree to which the vendor has responded to the purpose and scope of the  specifications, to meet all OSHA and other mandated safety and health requirements.   7. Conformance in all material respects to this request for proposal.  8. Confirmation the vendor/agency has the capability and capacity, in all respects, to fully  exercise the contract requirements.  9. Submit three (3) references that speak to experience on similar assignments with a  public agency.   10. Include the credentials of the staff to be assigned to the City.    SUBMITTING A PROPOSAL  Vendors must provide in their proposals a total cost to meet the requirements for:  page 23  Safety training   Program development   Compliance Reporting & Records Retention    Consultation   Fee schedule for additional services  Proposals should also include a commitment by the vendor to meet the City’s scheduling  requirements. Proposals may include an option for alternative courses or program content  offered through a third party if unable to fulfill all the requirements within the scope of  responsibilities.  Vendors should detail the services they plan to deliver, including:  1. Description of vendor/agency and statement of qualifications ‐ This statement must  include:  o Company profile to include specific experience (background, history,  qualifications, etc.)  o Any associated firms that would be involved in providing services  o Resumes of key personnel  o Three to five references regarding public sector training. Include contact  name, phone number and email address    2. Training Calendar and Outline– Provide either an actual or an example of a course  outline or training calendar for a typical safety program offered, to include, but not  limited to, the approach to training; delivery method, tools and methods the  instructor will be using, etc.      3. Commitment/Flexibility – Include a statement of commitment, to include examples  of how the vendor/agency has demonstrated flexibility and willingness to  accommodate the City’s needs/requirements. At times, training and other safety  services will be needed outside the hours of a typical work day.    4. Additional information that vendor/agency wishes to share that sets vendor/agency  apart from other safety consultants.    Please send all proposals via email to:  Cheryl Jacobson  Assistant City Administrator   cherylj@mendota‐heights.com    Proposals are due by 4:30pm, Friday, April 10, 2020.      page 24 DATE: March 17, 2020 TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator FROM: Cheryl Jacobson, Assistant City Administrator SUBJECT: 2020-2021 Teamsters Local 320 Labor Agreement INTRODUCTION The City Council is asked to ratify a two-year labor agreement with the Teamsters Local 320. BACKGROUND Attached for review and consideration is the 2020-2021 labor agreement between the City of Mendota Heights and the Teamsters Local 320 representing Public Works employees, for which there is a tentative agreement. The 2020-2021 agreement is consistent with the direction that staff received from the City Council. Changes and updates to the 2020-2021 contract include: • Article 9 Work Schedules - Combined and amended language in sections 9.1 and 9.2 to reflect a normal work schedule of eight hours within in a 24- hour work period or forty hours in a five day period. • Article 21 Wages—A 3.0% cost of living adjustment for 2020 and a 3.0% cost of living adjustment for 2021. Effective 1/1/2020 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 Public Works Maintenance Worker $24.57 $27.14 $29.72 $32.29 Public Works Leadworker $33.66 Effective 1/1/2021 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 Public Works Maintenance Worker $25.31 $27.95 $30.61 $33.26 Public Works Leadworker $34.67 • Article 22 Clothing - Employee clothing allowance has been adjusted to $410 for 2020 and 2021 under section 22.1. page 25 Section 22.3 provides for an annual boot allowance of up to $130 per year, with carryover from year to year, up to a maximum of $260. Language was added providing for a boot allowance for the Mechanic in the amount of $250 per year, with carryover up to a maximum of $500. Section 22.4 adds language establishing an annual uniform allowance for employees in the amount of $190 annually for 2020 and 2021 to cover costs to purchase city logoed/city identified t-shirts, sweatshirts, jackets and hats. The $190 is not subject to carryover from year to year and is non-refundable. • Article 23 Insurance—The City will provide $1,680 per month for 2020 per employee towards health, dental, life insurance, short term disability and long term disability. Contributions for 2021 shall be adjusted by what is determined to be granted to other employee work groups. BUDGET IMPACT Costs associated with the negotiated agreement are included in the 2020 city budget. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the agreement between the City of Mendota Heights and the Teamsters Local 320, covering Public Works employees for 2020-2021. ACTION REQUIRED If the Council concurs, it should, by motion, approve the 2020-2021 labor agreement between the City of Mendota Heights and the Teamsters Local 320. page 26 LABOR AGREEMENT between THE CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS and MINNESOTA TEAMSTERS PUBLIC AND LAW ENFORCEMENT EMPLOYEES' UNION, LOCAL NO. 320 Representing PUBLIC WORKS EMPLOYEES EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 201820 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 20192021 page 27 ARTICLE TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE 1 Purpose of Agreement 1 2 Recognition 1 3 Union Security 1 4 Employer Security 2 5 Employer Authority 2 6 Employee Rights – Grievance Procedure 2 7 Definitions 4 8 Savings Clause 5 9 Work Schedules 5 10 Overtime Pay 6 11 Call Back 6 12 Standby 6 13 Legal Defense 7 14 Right to Subcontract 7 15 Discipline 7 16 Seniority 8 17 Probationary Periods 8 18 Safety 8 19 Job Posting 8 20 Waiver 9 21 Wages 9 22 Clothing 9 23 Insurance 10 24 Holidays 10 25 Personal Leave and Extended Disability Protection 11 26 Funeral Leave 11 27 Vacation 12 28 Injury on Duty 12 29 National Teamsters Drive 12 30 Educational Incentive 12 31 Duration 13 Signature Page 13 Appendix A City of Mendota Heights Drug/Alcohol Testing Policy 14 Memorandum of Understanding (Post-Retirement Health Savings Plan 16 Memorandum of Understanding (Parks Division Work Hours) 17 Memorandum of Understanding (Wages) 18 page 28 1 LABOR AGREEMENT between CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS and MINNESOTA TEAMSTERS PUBLIC AND LAW ENFORCEMENT EMPLOYEES' UNION, LOCAL NO. 320 ARTICLE 1. PURPOSE OF AGREEMENT This AGREEMENT is entered into between the City of Mendota Heights; hereinafter called EMPLOYER, and Local No. 320, Minnesota Teamsters Public and Law Enforcement Employees' Union. The intent and purpose of this AGREEMENT is to: 1.1 Establish certain hours, wages and other conditions of employment; 1.2 Establish procedures for the resolution of disputes concerning this Agreement's interpretation and/or application; 1.3 Specify the full and complete understanding of the parties; and 1.4 Place in written form the parties' agreement upon terms and conditions of employment for the duration of the Agreement. The Employer and the Union, through this Agreement, continue their dedication to the highest quality of public service. Both parties recognize this Agreement as a pledge of this dedication. ARTICLE 2. RECOGNITION 2.1 The EMPLOYER recognizes the Union as the exclusive representative under Minnesota Statutes, Section 179.71, Subd. 8 in an appropriate bargaining unit consisting of the following job classifications: Public Works Lead Worker Public Works Maintenance Worker Public Works Mechanic 2.2 In the event the Employer and the Union are unable to agree as to the inclusion or exclusion of the new or modified job class, the issue shall be submitted to the State of Minnesota Bureau of Mediation Services for determination. ARTICLE 3. UNION SECURITY In recognition of the Union as the exclusive representative, the Employer shall: 3.1 Deduct each payroll period an amount sufficient to provide the payment of dues established by the Union from the wages of all employees authorizing in writing such deduction, and page 29 2 3.2 Remit such deduction to the appropriate designated officer of the Union. 3.3 The Union may designate certain employees from the bargaining unit to act as stewards and shall inform the Employer in writing of such choice. 3.4 The Union agrees to indemnify and hold the Employer harmless against any and all claims, suits, orders, or judgments brought or issued against the City as a result of any action taken or not taken by the City under the provisions of this Article. ARTICLE 4. EMPLOYER SECURITY 4.1 The Union agrees that during the life of this Agreement, it will not cause, encourage, participate in or support any strike, slow down or other interruption of or interference with the normal functions of the Employer. 4.2 Any employee who engages in a strike may have his/her appointment terminated by the Employer effective the date the violation first occurs. Such termination shall be effective upon written notice served upon the employee. 4.3 An employee who is absent from any portion of his/her work assignment without permission, or who abstains wholly or in part from the full performance of his/her duties without permission from his/her Employer on the date or dates when a strike occurs is prima facie presumed to have engaged in a strike on such date or dates. 4.4 An employee who knowingly strikes and whose employment has been terminated for such action may, subsequent to such violation, be appointed or reappointed or employed or re-employed, but the employee shall be on probation for two (2) years with respect to such tenure of employment, or contract of employment, as he/she may have theretofore been entitled. 4.5 No employee shall be entitled to any daily pay, wages or per diem for the days on which he/she engaged in a strike. ARTICLE 5. EMPLOYER AUTHORITY 5.1 The Employer retains the full and unrestricted right to operate and manage all manpower, facilities, and equipment; to establish functions and programs; to set and amend budgets; to determine the utilization of technology; to establish and modify the organizational structure; to select, direct and determine the number of personnel; to establish work schedules, and to perform any inherent managerial function not specifically limited by this Agreement. 5.2 Any term and condition of employment not specifically established or modified by this Agreement shall remain solely within the discretion of the Employer to modify, establish, or eliminate. ARTICLE 6. EMPLOYEE RIGHTS - GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE 6.1 Definition of a Grievance A grievance is defined as a dispute or disagreement as to the interpretation or application of the specific terms and conditions of this Agreement. page 30 3 6.2 Union Representatives The Employer will recognize representatives designated by the Union as the grievance representatives of the bargaining unit having the duties and responsibilities established by this Article. The Union shall notify the Employer in writing of the names of such Union representatives and of their successors when so designated. 6.3 Processing of a Grievance It is recognized and accepted by the Union and the Employer that the processing of grievances as hereinafter provided is limited by the job duties and responsibilities of the employees and shall therefore be accomplished during normal working hours only when consistent with such employee's duties and responsibilities. The aggrieved employee and the Union Representative shall be allowed a reasonable amount of time without loss in pay when a grievance is investigated and presented to the Employer during normal working hours provided the employee and the Union Representative have notified and received the approval of the designated supervisor, who has determined that such absence is reasonable and would not be detrimental to the work programs of the Employer. 6.4 Procedure Grievances, as defined by Section 6.1, shall be resolved in conformance with the following procedure: Step 1. An employee claiming a violation concerning the interpretation or application of thisꞏ Agreement shall, within twenty-one (21) calendar days after such alleged violation has occurred, present such grievance to the employee's supervisor as designated by the Employer. The Employer's designated representative will discuss and give an answer to such Step 1 grievance within ten (10) calendar days after receipt. A grievance not resolved in Step 1 and appealed to Step 2 shall be placed in writing setting forth the nature of the grievance, the facts on which it is based, the provision or provisions of the Agreement allegedly violated, and the remedy requested and shall be appealed to Step 2 within ten (10) calendar days after the Employer designated representative's final answer to Step 1. Any grievance not appealed in writing to Step 2 by the Union within ten (10) calendar days shall be considered waived. Step 2. If appealed, the written grievance shall be presented by the Union and discussed with the Employer designated Step 2 representative. The Employer designated representative shall give the Union the Employer's Step 2 answer in writing within ten (10) calendar days following the Employer designated representative's receipt of the Step 2 appeal. Any grievance not appealed in writing to Step 3 by the Union within ten (10) calendar days shall be considered waived. Step 3. If appealed, the written grievance shall be presented by the Union and discussed with the Employer designated Step 3 representative. The Employer designated Step 3 representative shall give the Union the Employer's answer in page 31 4 writing within ten (10) calendar days following the Employer designated representative's receipt of the Step 3 appeal. Any grievance not appealed in writing to Step 4 by the Union within ten (10) calendar days shall be considered waived. Step 4. A grievance unresolved in Step 3 and appealed to Step 4 shall be submitted to arbitration subject to the provisions of the Public Employment Labor Relations Act of 1971, as amended. The selection of an arbitrator shall be made in accordance with the "Rules Governing the Arbitration of Grievances" as established by the Bureau of Mediation Services. 6.5 Arbitrator’s Authority A. The arbitrator shall have no right to amend, modify, nullify, ignore, add to, or subtract from the terms and conditions of this Agreement. The arbitrator shall consider and decide only the specific issue(s) submitted in writing by the Employer and the Union, and shall have no authority to make a decision on any other issue not so submitted. B. The arbitrator shall be without power to make decisions contrary to, or inconsistent with, or modifying or varying in any way the application of laws, rules, or regulations having the force and effect of law. The arbitrator's decision shall be submitted in writing within thirty (30) days following close of the hearing or the submission of briefs by the parties, whichever be later, unless the parties agree to an extension. The decision shall be binding on both the Employer and the Union and shall be based solely on the arbitrator's interpretation or application of the express terms of this Agreement and to the facts of the grievance presented. C. The fees and expenses for the arbitrator's services and proceedings shall be borne equally by the Employer and the Union provided that each party shall be responsible for compensating its own representatives and witnesses. If either party desires a verbatim record of the proceedings, it may cause such a record to be made, providing it pays for the record. If both parties desire a verbatim record of the proceedings, the cost shall be shared equally. 6.6 Waiver If a grievance is not presented within the time limits set forth above, it shall be considered "waived." If a grievance is not appealed to the next step within the specified time limit or any agreed extension thereof, it shall be considered settled on the basis of the Employer's last answer. If the Employer does not answer a grievance or an appeal thereof within the specified time limits, the Union may elect to treat the grievance as denied at that step and immediately appeal the grievance to the next step. The time limit in each step may be extended by mutual written agreement of the Employer and the Union. ARTICLE 7. DEFINITIONS 7.1 Union: The Minnesota Teamsters Public and Law Enforcement Employees' Union, Local 320. page 32 5 7.2 Employer: The individual municipality designated by this Agreement. 7.3 Union Member: A member of the Minnesota Teamsters Public and Law Enforcement Employees' Union, Local No. 320. 7.4 Employee: A member of the exclusively recognized bargaining unit. 7.5 Base Pay Rate: The employee's hourly pay rate exclusive of longevity or any other special allowances. 7.6 Seniority: Length of continuous service with the Employer. 7.7 Compensatory Time: Time off the employee's regularly scheduled work schedule equal in time to overtime worked. 7.8 Overtime: Work performed at the express authorization of the Employer in excess of the normal work schedule in effect, (except for shift changes). 7.9 Call Back: Return of an employee to a specified work site to perform assigned duties at the express authorization of the Employer at a time other than an assigned shift. An extension of, or early report to an assigned shift, is not a call back. 7.10 Strike: Concerted action in failing to report for duty, the willful absence from one's position, the stoppage of work, slowdown, or abstinence in whole or in part from the full, faithful and proper performance of the duties of employment for the purposes of inducing, influencing or coercing a change in the conditions, ei: compensation, or the rights, privileges or obligations of employment. ARTICLE 8. SAVINGS CLAUSE This Agreement is subject to the laws of the United States, the State of Minnesota, and the signed municipality. In the event any provision of this Agreement shall be held to be contrary to law by a court of competent jurisdiction from whose final judgment or decree no appeal has been taken within the time provided, such provision shall be voided. All other provisions of this Agreement shall continue in full force and effect. The voided provision may be renegotiated at the request of either party. ARTICLE 9. WORK SCHEDULES 9.1 The sole authority in work schedules is the Employer. Service to the public may require the establishment of, regular shifts for some employees on a daily or weekly basis other than the normal work schedule. The normal work schedule shall not exceed eightten (108) hours within a twenty-four (24) hour period, or forty (40) hours in a seven five (75) day period, (except for shift changes). The normal work schedule shall not involve a split work week. 9.29.1 Service to the public may require the establishment of, regular shifts for some employees on a daily, weekly, seasonal or annual basis other than the normal work schedule. The Employer will give advance notice to the employees affected by the establishment of work days different from the employee's normal work schedule. 9.39.2 In the event that work is required because of unusual circumstances such as (but not page 33 6 limited to) fire, flood, snow, sleet or breakdown of municipal equipment or facilities, no advance notice need be given. It is not required that an employee working other than the normal work day be scheduled to work more than the scheduled shift; however, each employee has an obligation to work overtime or call backs if requested, unless unusual circumstances prevent him/her from so working. 9.49.3 Service to the public may require the establishment of regular work weeks that schedule work on Saturdays and/or Sundays. ARTICLE 10. OVERTIME PAY 10.1 Hours worked in excess of the normal work schedule in effect within a twenty-four (24) hour period (except for shift changes) or more than forty (40) hours within a five (5) day period will be compensated at one and one-half (1½) times the employee's regular base pay rate. Pay for the seventh (7th) consecutive day will be at double (2) time the employee's regular base pay rate, ARTICLE 7 excluded. Hours worked between midnight and 7 a.m. shall be paid a differential of two dollars ($2.00) per hour for a snow or ice emergency. 10.2 Overtime will be distributed as equally as practicable. 10.3 Overtime refused by employees will, for record purposes under Article 10.2, be considered as unpaid overtime worked. 10.4 For the purpose of computing overtime compensation, overtime hours worked shall not be pyramided, compounded, or paid twice for the same hours worked. 10.5 An employee may choose to receive compensatory time as compensation for overtime hours at the rate of 1.5 hours for each hour worked. Beginning November 1, 2016, the maximum allowable balance of such hours carried into the next twelve months (i.e., November 1, to October 31) shall be one hundred fifty (150) hours. The Employer will convert to compensation an employee balance in excess of the 150 hours maximum. 10.6 An employee may request to convert to compensation any portion of their compensatory time balance the second pay period in May and November if requested in writing with the submission of the employee time sheet. 10.7 One hundred percent (100%) of the compensatory time balance converted to compensation in May and November will be contributed into the employee's State of Minnesota Post-Retirement Health Savings Plan. ARTICLE 11. CALL BACK An employee called in for work at a time other than his/her normal scheduled shift will be compensated for a minimum of two and one-half (2½) hours pay at one and one-half (1½) times the employee's base pay rate. ARTICLE 12. STANDBY Employees are expected to perform certain routine tasks on Saturdays, Sundays, and page 34 7 holidays and in conjunction therewith, must be available for servicing emergency calls also. Stand-by duty pay shall be two (2) hours at one and one-half (1½) times base rate for each twenty-four (24) hour period or major portion thereof. Compensation for performing routine tasks shall be one (1) hour at one and one-half (1½) times base rate for checking of two (2) sewer stations and any other emergency duties. This combination of holiday and weekend compensation shall be at the minimum rate of five (5) hours at one and one-half (1½) times base rate for the combination Saturday/Sunday weekend, and eleven (11) hours at one and one-half (1½) times base rate for a three (3) day weekend. ARTICLE 13. LEGAL DEFENSE 13.1 Employees involved in litigation because of negligence, ignorance of laws, nonobservance of laws, or as a result of employee judgmental decision may not receive legal defense by the municipality. 13.2 Any employee who is charged with a traffic violation, ordinance violation or criminal offense arising from acts performed within the scope of his/her employment, when such act is performed in good faith and under direct order of his/her supervisor, shall be reimbursed for reasonable attorney's fees and court costs actually incurred by such employee in defending against such charge. ARTICLE 14. RIGHT OF SUBCONTRACT Nothing in this Agreement shall prohibit or restrict the right of the Employer from subcontracting work performed by employees covered by this Agreement. ARTICLE 15. DISCIPLINE 15.1 The Employer will discipline employees for just cause only. Discipline will be in the form of: A. oral reprimand; B. written reprimand; C. suspension; D. demotion; or E. discharge 15.2 Suspensions, demotions and discharges will be in written form. 15.3 Written reprimands, notices of suspension, notices of demotion, and notices of discharge to become part of an employee's personnel file shall be read and acknowledged by signature of the employee. Employees and the Union will receive a copy of such reprimands and/or notices. 15.4 Employees may examine their own individual personnel files at reasonable times under the direct supervision of the Employer. 15.5 Employees will not be questioned concerning an investigation of disciplinary action unless the employee has been given an opportunity to have a Union representative present at such meeting. page 35 8 15.6 Grievances relating to this Article shall be initiated by the Union at Step 3 of the Grievance Procedure under Article 6. ARTICLE 16. SENIORITY Seniority will be the determining criteria for transfers, promotions and layoffs only when all other qualification factors are equal. ARTICLE 17. PROBATIONARY PERIODS 17.1 All newly hired or rehired employees will serve a twelve (12) month probationary period. 17.2 All employees will serve a six (6) months' probationary period in any job classification in which the employee has not served a probationary period. 17.3 At any time during the probationary period a newly hired or rehired employee may be terminated at the sole discretion of the Employer. 17.4 At any time during the probationary period a promoted or reassigned employee may be demoted or reassigned to the employee's previous position at the sole discretion of the Employer. ARTICLE 18. SAFETY The Employer and the Union agree to jointly promote safe and healthful working conditions, to cooperate in safety manners and to encourage employees to work in a safe manner. ARTICLE 19. JOB POSTING 19.1 The Employer and the Union agree that permanent job vacancies wit in the designated bargaining unit shall be filled based on the concept of promotion from within provided that applicants: A. have the necessary qualifications to meet the standards of the job vacancy; and B. have the ability to perform the duties and responsibilities of the job vacancy. 19.2 Employees filling a higher job class based on the provisions of this Article shall be subject to the conditions of Article 17 (Probationary Periods). 19.3 The Employer has the right of final decision in the selection of employees to fill posted jobs based on qualifications, abilities and experience. 19.4 Job vacancies within the designated bargaining unit will be posted for five (5) working days so that members of the bargaining unit can be considered for such vacancies. page 36 9 ARTICLE 20. WAIVER 20.1 Any and all prior agreements, resolutions, practices, policies, rules and regulations regarding terms and conditions of employment, to the extent inconsistent with the provisions of this Agreement, are hereby superseded. 20.2 The parties mutually acknowledge that during negotiations, which resulted in this Agreement, each had the unlimited right and opportunity to make demands and proposals with respect to any term or condition of employment not removed from law by bargaining. All are set forth in writing in this Agreement for the stipulated duration of this Agreement. The Employer and the Union each voluntarily and unqualifiedly waives the right to meet and negotiate regarding any and all terms and conditions or employment referred to or covered by this Agreement, even though such terms or conditions may not have been within the knowledge or contemplation of either or both parties at the time this contract was negotiated or executed. ARTICLE 21. WAGES 21.1 Increase wages by 2.53.0% for 2018 2020 and 2.53.0% for 20192021, and create steps as listed below. Effective 1/1/2020 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 Public Works Maintenance Worker $24.57 $27.14 $29.72 $32.29 Public Works Leadworker $33.66 Effective 1/1/2021 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 Public Works Maintenance Worker $25.31 $27.95 $30.61 $33.26 Public Works Leadworker $34.67 21.2 Work performed, as assigned by the Employer, to replace an absent mechanic shall be compensated at one-half (1/2) the difference between the employee's regular compensation and the mechanic's regular compensation. The mechanic is absent when on authorized leave or vacation. ARTICLE 22. CLOTHING 22.1 Clothing allowance for 201820 in the amount of $420.00 and for 202119 in the amount of $43010.00, annually. The City shall provide each employee with five (5) work t-shirts, a reflective vest, winter jacket, work gloves in quantities as needed and two (2) summer hats and two (2) winter hats. Employees will be responsible for wearing a City provided work t- shirt displaying the City logo as their outer layer or wear a City-provided safety vest on the outermost layer of clothing during work hours. page 37 10 22.2 In lieu of a clothing allowance, the Mechanic position will receive uniforms through an approved vendor. 22.3 Yearly allowance of one hundred dollars ($100) for purchase of protective/safety boots. Yearly boot allowance can carryover from year to year, up to a maximum of $200.00.Employees shall be reimbursed for actual costs of protective/safety boots up to $130.00 dollars per year. Yearly boot allowance can be carried over from year to year, up to a maximum of $260.00. The Mechanic shall be reimbursed for actual costs of protective/safety boots up to $250.00 per year. Yearly boot allowance can be carried over from year to year, up to a maximum of $500.00. 22.4 Employees will be responsible for wearing clothing with the City logo or city identification on the outermost layer. A uniform allowance account will be established for each employee in the amount of $190.00 annually for 2020 and 2021 to cover costs to purchase city logoed/city identified t-shirts, sweatshirts, jackets and hats. The $190.00 shall not be subject to carryover, and monies not expended shall not be refundable. 22.4 ARTICLE 23. INSURANCE The Employer will contribute up to a maximum of one thousand six hundred eighty dollars ($1,680.00) per month per employee for 2018 2020 towards health, term life, short term disability, long-term disability insurance and dental insurance. The Employer will contribute up to a maximum of one thousand six eighty hundred dollars ($1,680.00) per month per employee for 2019 2021 towards health, term life, short term disability, long-term disability and dental insurance. If any City of Mendota Heights employee group is awarded a higher amount in 2018 2020 or 201921 the Union members shall receive the higher amount. ARTICLE 24. HOLIDAYS 24.1 Twelve (12) paid 8-hour holidays are granted. Ten (10) conventional holidays are as follows: 24.2 January 1 New Year’s Day 3rd Monday of February President’s Day Friday before Easter Good Friday Last Monday in May Memorial Day July 4 Independence Day 1st Monday in September Labor Day 2nd Monday in October Columbus Day November 11 Veterans’ Day 4th Thursday of November Thanksgiving Day December 25 Christmas If January 1, New Year's Day; July 4, Independence Day; November 11, Veterans' Day; or December 25, Christmas, fall on Saturday, the preceding Friday shall be considered a holiday. If January 1, July 4, November 11, or December 25 fall on a page 38 11 Sunday, the following Monday shall be considered a holiday. 24.324.2 In recognition of Martin Luther King's birthday, an eleventh (11th) day, a floating holiday, will be granted, conditioned that scheduling arrangements must be approved by the supervisor at least two (2) days in advance of the floating holiday. One (1) additional floating holiday will be included in the schedule for a total of two (2) floating holidays. 24.424.3 An employee required to work on a scheduled holiday will be compensated at one and one-half (1½) times the employee's regular rate of pay, and will receive time off equivalent to the holiday hours worked, to a maximum of eight (8), at a time subsequently scheduled by the supervisor. Employees working on Thanksgiving holiday and Christmas holiday shall receive two (2) times the employee's regular rate of pay. ARTICLE 25. PERSONAL LEAVE and EXTENDED DISABILITY PROTECTION 25.1 Personal Leave: All permanent full-time employees shall accrue personal leave at the rate of four (4) hours per month, to a maximum of 320 hours. Personal leave shall be available for use without restriction, except prior approval of the supervisor. An employee shall not be allowed to use more than twenty (20) consecutive personal days, or a combination of twenty (20) consecutive personal and vacation days, without prior approval of the City Council. Each December 1, any employee with an accrued personal leave balance in excess of 320 hours may convert the excess hours at the rate of fifty percent (50%), to either additional cash compensation, or additional vacation time. The compensation will be made, or the extra vacation credited, with the second payroll in December. Upon separation, employees shall be compensated for any unused personal leave balance. 25.2 Extended Disability Protection: All permanent full-time employees shall accrue extended disability leave at the rate of four (4) hours per month, to a cumulative maximum of six hundred and forty (640) hours. Extended disability protection is available for use on the first (1st) consecutive day of a personal illness, and thereafter, or anytime for a work related illness or injury. Employees are to keep their supervisor informed of their condition. The supervisor may require a letter of report from the attending physician. Claiming extended disability leave when physically fit may be cause for disciplinary action, including transfer, demotion, suspension, or dismissal. In cases of extreme emergency involving employees with a record of meritorious service, who through serious or protracted illness have used up all accumulated personal leave, extended disability leave, vacation leave, and compensatory time off, an extension of extended disability leave beyond the maximum provided in this resolution may be granted by the City Council. The resultant deficit will be repaid promptly through application of future personal and extended disability leave page 39 12 accruals. 25.3 Employees will contribute twenty percent (20%) of their total accrued personal leave hours on November 1st of each year beginning in November of 2007 which will be put into the State of Minnesota's Post Retirement Health Care Savings Plan(s) in their account/name. 25.4 Upon separation from employment with the City, an employee will put all unused vacation and personal leave, hours for hours, into the State of Minnesota's Post Retirement Health Care Savings Plan(s). ARTICLE 26. FUNERAL LEAVE All permanent employees, both full-time and part-time, may attend the funeral of their spouse, mother, father, children, brother, sister, mother-in-law, father-in-law, grandparent, brother-in-law, sister-in-law, son- in-law, daughter-in-law, and grandchild as paid Funeral Leave. Such funeral leave shall not exceed twenty- four (24) hours and shall not be counted as sick leave. ARTICLE 27. VACATION 27.1 Time is accrued according to the following schedule: Eighty (80) hours after one (1) year service; and eighty (80) hours per year through four (4) years of service; One hundred twenty (120) hours per year after five (5) years of service and one hundred twenty (120) hours per year through nine (9) years of service; Eight (8) additional hours per year after ten (10) years of service with a maximum of one hundred sixty (160) after fifteen (15) years of service. 27.2 Employees may accrue vacation leave not to exceed a maximum of two hundred (200) hours. 27.3 No employees shall be permitted to waive vacation for the purpose of receiving double pay. ARTICLE 28. INJURY ON DUTY Employees injured during the performance of their duties for the EMPLOYER and thereby rendered unable to work for the EMPLOYER will be paid the difference between the employee regular pay and Worker Compensation insurance payments for a period not to exceed one hundred twenty (120) working days per injury, not charged to the employee vacation, sick leave or other accumulated paid benefits. ARTICLE 29. NATIONAL TEAMSTERS D.R.I.V.E. (Democratic/Republican//lndependentIndependent Voter Education) Upon receipt of a properly executed voluntary authorization card from an employee, the City will deduct from the employee's salary such amounts as the employee authorizes to pay page 40 13 National Teamsters D.R.I.V.E. Any start-up costs will be reimbursed by the Union. ARTICLE 30. EDUCATIONAL INCENTIVE 30.1 Certification/License are paid on a straight time basis. Monthly payments for certification shall be as follows: MPCA Underground Storage Tank Operator $20.00 Pesticide Applicator License $20.00 Roads Scholar Certification (LTAP) $20.00 Tree Inspector Certification $20.00 Waste Water Operator Certification S-C $20.00 Waste Water Operation Certification D $20.00 30.2 The City reserves the ability to limit the number of compensated certifications/ licenses covered under Article 30. ARTICLE 31. DURATION This Agreement shall be effective as of January 1, 201820 and shall remain in full force and effective until December 31, 201921. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on this day of ,20172020. CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MINNESOTA TEAMSTERS LOCAL NO. 320 Mayor Mike Horton Martin Goff, Business Agent City Administrator Steward City Clerk page 41 14 APPENDIX A CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DRUG/ALCOHOL TESTING POLICY (Adopted: ) The City of Mendota Heights (hereinafter "City" or "Mendota Heights") values its employees and citizens, and recognizes the need for a safe, productive and healthy work environment. Employees who abuse drugs and/or alcohol are less productive, less dependable, and are a critical threat to the safety, security and welfare of themselves, fellow employees, vendors, and citizens. It is the policy to the City Mendota Heights to maintain a workplace free from the use and abuse of drugs and alcohol. The City of Mendota Heights will require that all employees and applicants participate in, consent and comply with the terms of this Policy as a condition of employment and continued employment. If questions arise regarding this Policy, please direct them to the City Administrator. As part of its continuing effort to protect health, safety and security, the City of Mendota Heights has adopted a drug/alcohol testing policy in accordance with Minnesota law, as follows: 1. The use, sale, possession, or transfer of drugs or alcohol are strictly prohibited by all employees and job applicants on City property, and at all times while City property is in use. 2. All employees and job applicants are subject to urinalysis or blood testing for the presence of drugs and/or alcohol, in accordance with this Policy. 3. Job applicants will be tested after an offer of employment has been made in each case, contingent upon the applicant's successful completion of the testing, and after the applicant has reviewed and completed the Pre-Testing Acknowledgement form, which will be supplied by the City. 4. The City of Mendota Heights employees will be subject to testing when there is reasonable suspicion that:  They are under the influence of drugs or alcohol; or  They have violated the policy set forth in Paragraph 1 above; or  They have sustained a personal injury, or they have caused another employee to sustain a personal injury; or  They have caused a work-related accident, or were operating or helping to operate any machinery, equipment, or vehicle involved in a work-related accident. 5. Any employee who has been referred for chemical dependency treatment or evaluation, or is participating in treatment under an employee benefit plan, may be required to submit to testing during the course of participation in the evaluation or treatment, and for a period of two years following the completion of any prescribed chemical dependency treatment program. page 42 15 6. Any employee or job applicant may refuse to submit to testing to be conducted pursuant to this Policy, but refusal will result in the following consequences:  As to any job applicant: an immediate withdrawal of the pending job offer;  As to any employee: discipline or termination of employment, at the sole discretion of management. 7. All testing will be conducted in accordance with the following procedures:  Each person to be tested will complete, sign and date a Pre-Testing Acknowledgment form supplied by the City.  Each test will be conducted by a laboratory which is authorized by law to conduct such tests, and which confirms to the City of Mendota Heights that its procedures are in accordance with Minnesota law.  All samples which test "positive" on an initial screening test will be subjected to a confirmatory retest by the laboratory, before the results are reported to the employee or job applicant;  Results will be reported to each employee and job applicant in writing within three (3) working days of the receipt of the results by the City.  Any employee or job applicant may submit additional information for the purpose of explaining such test results, or may request a confirmatory retest at his or her own expense. Any such additional information or request for a retest must be submitted in writing to the City Administrator of Mendota Heights within five (5) working days after notice of the results of the test. A positive result on the final confirmatory retest pursuant to this Policy will result in the following consequences: a). Employee on the first incident: the requirement, as a condition of employment, that the employee successfully complete a drug or alcohol counseling or rehabilitation program selected by the City, at the employee's expense, or under an employee benefit coverage program. b). Employee on the second or subsequent such incident: discipline or termination from employment, at the sole discretion of the City. All tests employees will be entitled to receive a copy of the laboratory document which certifies the test results. page 43 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: March 17, 2020 TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator FROM: Ryan Ruzek, P.E., Public Works Director Krista Spreiter, Natural Resources Technician SUBJECT: Authorize Purchase Order for the Control of Invasive Plant Species within Oȟéyawahe/Pilot Knob Historic Site. COMMENT: INTRODUCTION The Council is asked to authorize a purchase order to Great River Greening for their 2020 work plan for the management of invasive species and prairie management within Oȟéyawahe/Pilot Knob Historic Site. BACKGROUND Mendota Heights has been working with Great River Greening on invasive species management and native species restoration in Oȟéyawahe/Pilot Knob Historic Site for several years. DISCUSSION Great River Greening has been instrumental in establishing and managing this native prairie community since the City acquired the site in 2006. Great River Greening is currently implementing Phase IV of the restoration plan for the site (2018-2022 work plan). The 2020 work plan for the Oȟéyawahe/Pilot Knob Historic Site will include soil amendments in an effort to control the invasive species Canada goldenrod, as well as conservation haying. The north unit of the site will be managed by a combination of prescribed burn and herbicide treatment. This area will then be drill seeded with native grasses species, supplemented with pollinator forb species. The City contribution for this work is $5,000 while also receiving $15,000 from the Minnesota Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund. BUDGET IMPACT Great River Greening has acquired a grant of $26,000 from the Minnesota Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund which requires a minimum of a $5,000 local match. City Council has annually included funding for management of the Oȟéyawahe/Pilot Knob Historic Site. The available amount in the 2020 City Budget in the Parks Maintenance Budget for this effort is $11,000. page 44 Great River Greening’s proposal is approximately $35,000, depending on quotes for tree removal and number of replacement trees planted, which will be covered by a combination of the state grant, and the city’s contribution. The city will only be billed on the actual work performed. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that City Council approve the purchase order for invasive species control and site restoration to Great River Greening for their 2020 work plan for the management of invasive species and prairie management within Oȟéyawahe/Pilot Knob Historic Site. ACTION REQUIRED Approve a motion authorizing the Public Works Director to issue a ‘not-to-exceed’ Purchase Order in the amount of $11,000 to Great River Greening. This action requires a simple majority vote. page 45 Pilot Knob Hill Natural Resource Management Guide Overview GRG has 26k of Minnesota and Environmental Natural Resources Trust Fund additional dollars to bring to this site by June 30, 2020. Release of these funds require 5k of non-state match. There are sufficient opportunities to spend these funds by the deadline. The current understanding is that City will provide 5K in match for these state funds for the full 2020 year. The 2020 annual plan and this guide has been developed with GRG staff review, and briefly reviewed on a few occasions with Krista Spreiter. Canada/Tall Goldenrod control The “Canada Goldenrod complex” of species consists of Tall Goldenrod (Solidago altissima), Canada goldenrod (S. Canadensis) and Giant goldenrod (S. gigantea), which are very similar species and difficult to identify from one anotherhr. These three species are commonly referred to as ‘Canada goldenrod’, but plant experts are now correcting everyone’s identification saying that the common problem species in the metro area is Tall goldenrod. Tall goldenrod is an overabundant native, crowding out other species and reducing overall plant diversity. While goldenrods play an important part in fall nectar and protein resources for polliantors, they are overabundant in the face of human caused soil disturbance and, some recent studies are demonstrating, from air pollution that raises the soil acidity slightly to the great advantage of S. altissima. While the overabundance of Tall goldenrod is throughout the metro and the state, and getting worse as time goes on, Pilot Knob has one of the earlier severe problems likely due to the severe soil disturbance history (see LiDAR photo and aerial history) which included soil borrowing, excavating for buildings, and leveling most likely for hay fields and/or pasture; and air pollution from the tens of thousands of cars passing by on Hwy 55 on a daily basis. Recommended actions include: Ag lime soil amendment We applied ag lime on small goldenrod infestation sites for the first time in late winter 2019 and then monitored the results. No significant reduction was observed, however application rates and application methods, and time lapse are major factors. We do not recommend scaling this practice up in 2020, however we agree with Krista’s recommendation that we instead continue with a second set of test plots. We are looking at a revised application design include moving the plots to a hayed area, higher application rate, review of particle size and application method and timing. Further, Greening is proposing ‘plot monitoring’ to a U of M grad student club that has expressed interest in volunteering. page 46 If proven to be effective, this practice can be scaled up and is worthy of further consideration. This would be done starting in March; monitoring would continue throughout the year • <1 ac total; • total budget 3K, 2K before June 30. Conservation Haying We recommend continuing with the late haying of goldenrod to help contain this species. This is a service that is subcontracted, with contract management and monitoring done by Greening. Like most plant species, Tall goldenrod is ‘vulnerable’ to above ground removal when it is reproducing (from flowering to seed set) as many of the stored resources are brought up from the roots to the above ground parts in order to maximize reproduction. Removal of the above ground parts at this time maximizes systemic removal of nutrient resources from the plant colony and weakens it. We started employing conservation haying in 2017 on the hill, repeated in 2018, and expanded to the south end of phase 2 (the flats) in 2019. Conservation haying appears to be most effective in the areas where competition by other plant species still exist (i.e. not a monoculture). Spot Monitoring has been conducted, revealing an increase in native grasses, and in one year severely stunted and weakened goldenrod plants via goldenrod beetle infestation, which highly preferred the hayed plants. This is a good reminder that the broken stems resulting from haying can benefit pollinators as well because many need broken stems to overwinter. Conservation haying subcontract are currently at $1000/ac, but optimism remains high to bring that cost down. Greening will continue to develop subcontractors for this method. We can also move the timed haying earlier in the year, so that the bales are ready for Halloween displays; the highest use of the hay so far has been animal bedding, and a couple years the material has simply been composted at Acacia. Bale removal is a significant line item expense that offers some opportunity. The removal of the material is important as it mimics natural disturbance (fire, grazing) much better than mowing which leaves thatch which in turn is detrimental to prairie health. • 3 ac • $4K Spraying and seeding In monoculture areas, we have sprayed several acres in 2019 which are now poised for seeding in spring 2020. Related to the overabundance of goldenrod is the under-representation by the mesic prairie grasses. Given that and the need for intense competition in these areas, these sprayed areas should be seeded and managed as (low diversity) grass stands (with the necessary high forb diversity elsewhere in the site) • 2 ac • 3K page 47 Extensive Spot spraying of Goldenrod – not recommended The goldenrod spraying above used the general herbicide glyphosate, which is a non-specific herbicide appropriate for use in mono cultures. Because it causes non target damage, it is not recommended for spot spraying Subcontractors report the use of various herbicide ‘cocktails’ in their quest to control goldenrod. While this practice can always change quickly, when I did a thorough check a year or two ago, success was limited, and the herbicides in use generally had an unknown effect on pollinators, particularly the federally endangered and state bee, the Rusty-Patched bumblebee (Bombus affinis) which has been documented at the site. Further, while herbicides are definitely in use at the site, stakeholder requests in prior years has been to minimize use of herbicides. Mowing – not recommended If funds exist for conservation haying, that is much preferred. Mowing can be used in a pinch but only on a limited scale and with clean equipment. Fall burns – not recommended In general, prairie burns are not considered an effective means of goldenrod control. In particular, the fall 2017 burn of the south end of ‘the flats’ backfired in terms of goldenrod control, taking one of the more diverse sections of the prairie and promoting goldenrod the following years. (In theory, this is also related to soil acidity) Conservation Goat browsing – not yet cost effective Goats are the one livestock that prefer broadleaves over grass. Several years of goat browsing occurred on the hill, some of it timed to setback the goldenrod. Goat browsing had many positive effects. However, it was both expensive and not-scalable. Currently, it is a provider’s market for goat browsing though that can change quickly. On the other hand, I brought Minnesota native Landscapes out to the site in 2017, a provider that has large herds, and they found the site too small, too far from any of their large sites, and therefore not interested. page 48 Woody Species: Revised Approach Pilot Knob Hill supported some woody species pre-European settlement. Traditionally, pre-European settlement has been the target for restoration, though that is changing quickly with climate change to target a functioning, resilient ecosystem that resembles a native ecosystem. The original management plan recognzied the woody element by targeting oak savanna as one of the ecosystems, partly because oak savanna is a prized ecosystem, with a great need for restoration throughout the state. Going forward, the recommendation is to broaden the acceptance of woody species at this site to include oak savanna, shrubs, and scattered mesic trees. Control invasive species From the start, we have sustained the control of non-native invasive species at this site including buckthorn and honeysuckle shrubs, and Siberian elm trees. Siberian elm has been the recent focus. • 1K Accept native volunteer specimens Native shrubs have been accepted as a natural component at the site for a number of years. Willows and plum in the ROW, red dogwood scattered throughout the prairie are examples. Native sumac is also found at the site, and can become overabundant quickly. We have sustained non-chemical containment of sumac throughout the restoration history, and included the trailhead area in 2019 as part of that containment. Other woody species are in general contained with prescribed fire. ‘let the fire decide’ is a good base for the approach in the future. Hackberries were retained at the south end, as a nurse crop for the grove of 7 oaks. Those 7 oaks are established now but given the revised management plan, the recommendation is that they stay. Black walnut has been volunteering somewhat vigorously the past few years, likely reflecting the higher than normal precip levels. During recent site visits, Krista and Greening concluded that they are best to stay, as they are demonstrating climate resilience. The box elder grove in the lower terrace does need periodic containment. Our approach has been to keep them from encroaching g the oaks that are on the lower hillside, but more intensive management has been a low priority given the past intense soil disturbance in the lower terrace area, and higher moisture and low herbaceous diversity. Remove grove of trees from former homestead The north homestead site supported ash and silver maple in a grove configuration. The first plan included retaining them until oak groves could be established on site, because this homestead grove provided the proper shade component for a diversity of herbaceous plants. This homestead grove now features dead or dying trees, and has outlived its usefulness. These trees can now be removed. • 1 ac page 49 • 10K subcontract, low confidence estimate Replacements can be considered now or in the future, but care should be taken in species selection for those that are salt tolerant. This excludes desirable bur oaks, but includes surrogate swamp white oaks which are in the ROW but are generally not fire resistant. • $300-500/tree, depending on size, initial cost • Decent establishment and maintenance cost Maintain oak groves Three planted oaks groves and two scattered memorial trees exist at the site. Various maintenance has occurred over the years. Some groves are ready to have their deer fencing removed. The grove of numerous, small trees that will one day screen the Acacia log pile need mulching and fence repair on a near annual basis. • 1k/year Pollinator shrubs The east central 3 ac portion of the site, the site of the very first Biomass for Restoration grant awarded by the DNR, has been very difficult to restore to grassland. For the first 5-10 years, it was infested with non-native invasive burdock. This has improved, but the site also is prone ot invasion by woody non-native invasive buckthorn and honeysuckle, and one Russian olive. To get this area on a trajectory for affordable maintenance, the target community has been changed to a grassland/shrubland matrix, with the primarily management goal of providing excellent pollinator habitat. The approach is to embrace woody species, and turn the focus toward determining which species. In 2018, a large volunteer event was conducted to plant 1000s of small DNR shrub stock. Unfortunately very few survived as the completion is fierce, vegetation is rank, and herbivory occurred. A second wave of pollinator shrubs were installed by a subcontract in fall 2019, this time with 100 large stock shrubs installed in thickets that will be easy to manage. Shrubs are compatible with grassland management and prescribed burning. Burning helps contain them, they can be top killed (some, like red dogwood, even prefer top removal every few years), and unlike trees do not add significantly to the cost of burning. Shrubs are widely recognized as very important early spring nectar sources for pollinators. • 100 large stock shrubs, every year for 5 years • 7K per year page 50 Prairie Management What we have learned about Pilot Knob over the years is that in order to maintain the prairie, it needs its full share of natural ‘disturbance’, in the form of burning, haying, and/or grazing. This need is largely due to the disturbed, heavy soils. It is imperative that disturbance happen in a mosaic pattern, with only portions of the site being disturbed at a time, for pollinator management. Greening has practiced these pollinators bmp’s for burning from the beginning at Pilot Knob, and given that the federally endangered state pollinator Rusty Patched Bumblebee has been documented at the site, it is of utmost importance that practicing these disturbance mosaics be continued. (Many practitioners exhibit disregard for these pollinator bmp’s because it adds to the overall expense of burning due to loss of economy of scale). Burning at Pilot Knob is challenging because of the limited wind windows, and it is not all that effective at controlling goldenrod. This makes burn alternatives – haying, grazing – attractive. Pollinator bmp’s dictate that all these forms of disturbance be accounted for in the total area disturbed; what helps mitigate the combined effect is that each disturbance has its own impact on pollinators. Prairie Burn Conduct a late spring prairie burn on the north half of phase 2 ‘flats’ to promote prairie grasses Prairie burns are a key process for prairies; timing them right is important to reach the specific resource objective of a burn. The state pollinator guidelines require that no more than a third of a prairie be burned at a given year. Both this north burn unit and the hill unit are due for burns (burn seasons have not been productive in recent years due to non-typical weather). The north unit is chosen as it will also serve to remove thatch for the Prairie Seeding; it is also the most difficult to burn as it has the most restrictive wind window. As an alternate, the hill unit can be burned instead as it has different wind windows. Both units will be prepped (burn breaks, permits) for burning and priority will be given to the north unit with the hill unit (including Hwy 55 ROW) as a backup unit. • 3.5k Spraying and Seeding • See Goldenrod Section Spring bloomers - trailside Very early prairie flowers thrive in short vegetation. Mowed trailsides provide this habitat. A modest amount of early spring prairie flowers have been planted along the trails over the years. Mowing has been a combination of hired Acacia mowers (for soil shoulders only, not gravel), and GRG crew conducting annual spot treatment of invasive species as well as general spray on the trail tread. • $500/yr to maintain page 51 More can be done with trailside habitat. It consists of spraying the turf grasses, then planting pots and plugs of very early bloomers in its place. • 5-year plan: $3-5/sq ft of mowed trail shoulder area Herbaceous Invasive Species Control Pilot Knob has its share of herbaceous non-native invasive species, including perennials, biennials, and annuals. Treatment consists of cutting, mowing, pulling and spraying, depending on the species and the severity of infestation. Non-native invasive species at Pilot Knob include leafy spurge, spotted knapweed, Queen Anne’s lace, common tansy, burdock, smooth brome, reed canary grass, Canada thistle, bull thistle*, Japanese hedge parsley, bird’s-foot trefoil, butter-and-eggs, white/yellow sweet clover, red clover, oxeye daisy, daisy fleabane, and cow/hairy vetch. The threat of new invasive species always exists. Each year brings a different palette of invasive species depending on life cycle and conditions. • $2k/year Greening has taken great care over the years to distinguish between bull thistle and highly desirable and native field/pasture thistle* at Pilot Knob. Many of the thistles seen at Pilot Knob today are native species. Sheep Grazing - potential Sheep graze on grasses. They can be used to control undesirable grasses, and can be used to work seeds of desirable species into the soil effectively. Tall warm-season prairie grasses are underrepresented in the Pilot Knob prairie, and cool season grasses are over represented. In 2016-2017, intensive sheep grazing with under-hoof seeding trials on a small test plot in the Phase II notth unit were conducted. Like goat browsing, the results and impact were quite positive, but the treatment could not be scaled and therefore was expensive. Sheep grazing is a good option to keep developing. Horses were used in the very first grazing efforts at Pilot Knob about 10 years ago, but are also not scalable. Cattle have yet to be available for hire. Native bison and elk, the most highly prized grazers and browsers, are very expensive due to the fencing and transport requirements if even available, and the site cannot support a herd of either species for an extended period. While not native, sheep are currently the most desirable grazer (desirable goats are ‘browsers’) in terms of effect, availability, and ease of handling for cool-season grass control and increasing prairie plant diversity. Infrastructure Over the years, we have worked informally with Public Works to help with medicine wheels, overlooks, trail erosion, sign maintenance, fence maintenance, gate locks. page 52 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: March 17, 2020 TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator FROM: Ryan Ruzek, P.E., Public Works Director SUBJECT: Resolution 2020-18 Sponsoring a Natural and Scenic Area Grant for 2085 Valencour Circle COMMENT: INTRODUCTION The Council is asked to approve Resolution 2020-18 authorizing staff to submit a Natural and Scenic Area Grant Application to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) for acquisition of 2085 Valencour Circle. BACKGROUND The Natural and Scenic Area Grant Program assists local governments and school districts in acquiring fee title acquisition and permanent easement acquisition to protect high quality natural and/ or scenic areas. Public access should be provided to the extent necessary to allow users to experience the natural and scenic qualities protected. High levels of development or active use are not appropriate. The grant provides matching funds for up to 50% of the cost for the acquisition. Eligible projects include: • Fee title acquisition of natural or scenic areas. • Permanent easement acquisition of natural or scenic areas. • Minimal betterment activities are eligible as part of an acquisition project including site surveying, boundary signing, and immediate measures needed to stabilize the site and ensure the safety of users. • Active restoration efforts are eligible as part of an acquisition project that would significantly improve the site’s natural resource values. DISCUSSION In general, outdoor recreation use of natural and scenic areas would be limited to passive outdoor recreation activities, such as nature observation, walking or hiking, bird watching, cross country skiing, snow shoeing, photography and similar low impact activities. In some cases, environmental education activities may be appropriate. Limited facilities to support these activities, such as trails, overlooks, interpretive displays, benches, informational and boundary signing, protective fencing, and parking, are allowable uses. In some cases, rest room facilities and limited picnic facilities may also be compatible. page 53 Development proposals will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis, taking into account the specific characteristics of the natural and scenic area. Any development should be designed to avoid damage to natural resources and features, steer activities away from sensitive areas (such as steep bluffs, erosion prone shorelines, rare plant communities, etc.), and discourage inappropriate recreational use. Facilities must meet all safety and accessibility standards. Natural and scenic areas should not be developed for more active outdoor recreational uses, such as athletic fields and courts, campgrounds, motorized sports, etc. Any use or development that could result in damage to significant natural and/or scenic resources must be avoided. BUDGET IMPACT The City of Mendota Heights has been in discussion with Dakota County on a partnership for this property acquisition. Grants are reimbursed up to 50 percent of the total eligible costs. The remaining 50 percent "local share" can consist of cash or the value of materials, labor and equipment usage provided by the local sponsor or by local donations or any combination thereof. The city proposes that proceeds from the sale of the Village lots would fund its portion of the “local share”. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council approve Resolution 2020-18 Sponsoring a Natural and Scenic Area Grant submittal to the DNR for the purchase of the property at 2085 Valencour Circle. ACTION REQUIRED If Council agrees with the staff recommendation, they should pass a motion adopting RESOLUTION 2020-15 SPONSORING A NATURAL AND SCENIC AREA GRANT FOR 2085 VALENCOUR CIRCLE. This action requires a simple majority vote. page 54 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 2020-18 RESOLUTION SPONSORING A NATURAL AND SCENIC AREA GRANT FOR 2085 VALENCOUR CIRCLE BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Mendota Heights act as legal sponsor for the project contained in the Natural and Scenic Area Grant Program Application to be submitted on March 27, 2020 and that the Public Works Director is hereby authorized to apply to the Department of Natural Resources for funding of this project on behalf of the City of Mendota Heights. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Mendota Heights has the legal authority to apply for financial assistance, and financial capability to meet the match requirement and ensure adequate management and protection. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Mendota Heights has not incurred any costs described on Item 5 and has not entered into a written purchase agreement for the property described on Item 4. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that, upon approval of its application by the state, the City of Mendota Heights may enter into an agreement with the State of Minnesota for the above- referenced project, and that the City of Mendota Heights certifies that it will comply with all applicable laws and regulations as stated in the grant agreement including dedicating the park property for natural and/or scenic uses into perpetuity. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Public Works Director is hereby authorized to execute such agreements as are necessary to implement the project on behalf of the applicant. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 17th day of March 2020. CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS ___________________________ Neil Garlock, Mayor ATTEST ____________________________ Lorri Smith, City Clerk page 55 3/6/2020 Mendota Heights Building Activity Report Mike Andrejka, Building Official February 1, 2020 thru February 29, 2020 January 1, 2020 thru February 29, 2020 January 1, 2019 thru February 28, 2019 January 1, 2018 thru February 28, 2018 Building Permit No.Valuation Fee Collected Building Permit No.Valuation Fee Collected Building Permit No.Valuation Fee Collected Building Permit No.Valuation Fee Collected SFD 1 400,000.00$ $4,713.64 SFD 1 400,000.00$ $4,713.64 SFD 1 629,742.00$ $6,776.14 SFD 3 1,717,925.00$ 18,856.62$ Apartment 0 -$ $0.00 Apartment 0 -$ $0.00 Apartment 0 -$ $0.00 Apartment 0 -$ -$ Townhouse 0 -$ $0.00 Townhouse 0 -$ $0.00 Townhouse 0 -$ $0.00 Townhouse 4 696,000.00$ 8,921.25$ Condo 0 -$ $0.00 Condo 0 -$ $0.00 Condo 0 -$ $0.00 Condo 0 -$ -$ Misc 23 302,953.28$ 4,468.17$ Misc 53 744,932.28$ 10,626.23$ Misc 54 963,294.00$ 11,821.04$ Misc 48 975,328.82$ 13,834.69$ Commercial 4 324,858.00$ $3,334.50 Commercial 5 334,858.00$ $3,526.25 Commercial 0 -$ $0.00 Commercial 1 50,960.00$ 739.25$ Sub Total 28 1,027,811.28$ 12,516.31$ Sub Total 59 1,479,790.28$ 18,866.12$ Sub Total 55 1,593,036.00$ 18,597.18$ Sub Total 56 3,440,213.82$ 42,351.81$ Trade Permit No.Valuation Fee Collected Trade Permit No.Valuation Fee Collected Trade Permit No.Valuation Fee Collected Trade Permit No.Valuation Fee Collected Plumbing 19 $1,744.85 Plumbing 44 $3,987.15 Plumbing 35 $2,881.50 Plumbing 49 4,833.65$ Water 0 $0.00 Water 0 $0.00 Water 0 $0.00 Water 0 -$ Sewer 2 $150.00 Sewer 2 $150.00 Sewer 0 $0.00 Sewer 12 900.00$ Mechanical 21 $1,692.55 Mechanical 51 397.00$ $4,197.18 Mechanical 51 $4,546.05 Mechanical 87 8,682.40$ Sub Total 42 3,587.40$ Sub Total 97 8,334.33$ Sub Total 86 $7,427.55 Sub Total 148 14,416.05$ License No.Valuation Fee Collected Licenses No.Valuation Fee Collected Licenses No.Valuation Fee Collected Licenses No.Valuation Fee Collected Contractor 0 $0.00 Contractor 0 $0.00 Contractor 158 $7,900.00 Contractor 173 8,650.00$ Total 70 1,027,811.28$ 16,103.71$ Total 156 1,479,790.28$ 27,200.45$ Total 299 1,593,036.00$ 33,924.73$ Total 377 3,440,213.82$ 65,417.86$ NOTE: All fee amounts exclude SAC, WAC and State Surcharge. Amounts shown will reflect only permit, plan review fee and valuation totals page 56 page 57 page 58 page 59 page 60 page 61 page 62 page 63 page 64 page 65 page 66 page 67 page 68 page 69 Request for City Council Action MEETING DATE: March 17, 2020 TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator FROM: John Boland, Public Works Superintendent SUBJECT: 2020 Street Sweeping COMMENT: Introduction The City Council is asked to award a contract for street sweeping for this year. Background Every spring the City goes out for bid to sweep the city’s streets. The bid price includes the sweeping of the streets in the spring and fall. Requests for bids were sent out to four contractors that have been interested in bidding in the past. We received four bids and they are as follows: Pearson Bros., Inc. $88.00 an hour Mike McPhillps, Inc. $91.45 an hour Allied Blacktop Company $95.00 an hour Reliakor Services, Inc. $110.00 an hour Discussion Pearson Bros., Inc. has swept the city streets in the past. They will be providing five sweepers a day to sweep the streets. City staff will be inspecting all of the streets in advance to determine which streets will actually be swept—with the City-wide reduction in the use of sand (and salt), some areas may not need as much sweeping, if any at all. In 2019, the cost to sweep the streets in the spring and fall was $35,177.25. This relatively high amount was due to an increased number of hours. Budget Impact There is $27,753.00 in the 2020 Budget for street sweeping and striping. Recommendation Staff recommends that the Mendota Heights City Council approve the bid from Pearson Bros., Inc., for their low bid to sweep the streets in the spring and fall of 2020. Action Required If Council concurs with the staff recommendation, they should approve the low bid from Pearson Bros., Inc., for $88.00 an hour for sweeping the streets this spring and fall. page 70 DATE: March 17, 2020 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Dave Dreelan, Fire Chief. Mark McNeill, City Administrator SUBJECT: Moveable Training Wall System Comment: INTRODUCTION The City Council is asked to approve the purchase of a movable training wall for installation in the new addition to the Fire Station. BACKGROUND The Fire Station construction budget included the purchase of a moveable wall system for the training mezzanine above apparatus bay 5, in the new addition. Fire Facilities Inc. of Madison Wisconsin worked with the fire building committee and CNH Architects during the station design phase to determine what type of system would work best for the space and meet our training needs. This is a system of 4 ft. by 9 ft. panels which are suspended from a ceiling-mounted grid, and allows the training area to be configured in a wide variety of formats—i.e., an apartment, a residential basement, and many others. MSA 471.345 Subd. 5 (Cotracts $25,000 or less) states: If the amount of the contract is estimated to be $25,000 or less, the contract may be made either upon quotation or in the open market, in the discretion of the governing body. If the contract is made upon quotation it shall be based, so far as practicable, on at least two quotations which shall be kept on file for a period of at least one year after their receipt. Alternatively, municipalities may award a contract for construction, alteration, repair, or maintenance work to the vendor or contractor offering the best value under a request for proposals as described in section 16C.28, subdivision 1, paragraph (a), clause (2), and paragraph (c). The training space above bay 5 was designed to incorporate the wall system from Fire Facilities. As a result, no other quotations were solicited, or even possible to obtain. page 71 BUDGET IMPACT The quote from Fire Facilities is $23,516.28. This expense was planned for in the construction budget, and is within budget amount. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that recommended that the City Council approve the purchase of this system described at the cost of $23,516.28. ACTION REQUIRED If the Council concurs, it should authorize the purchase of a movable training wall system from Fire Facilities, Inc., in the amount of $23,516.28 page 72 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS, DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA PARKS AND RECREATION MEETING FEBRUARY 11, 2020 The February meeting of the Mendota Heights Parks and Recreation Commission was held on Tuesday, February 11, 2020, at Mendota Heights City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve. 1. Call to Order – Chair Steve Goldade called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. 2. Roll Call – The following Commissioners were present: Chair Steve Goldade, Commissioners: Patrick Cotter, Pat Hinderscheid, Bob Klepperich, Stephanie Meyer, Dan Sherer, and Amy Smith; absent: Student Representative Matthew Boland. Staff present: Recreation Program Coordinator, Meredith Lawrence, Assistant City Administrator, Cheryl Jacobson, Public Works Director, Ryan Ruzek, and Natural Resources Technician, Krista Spreiter. 2.a Introduction of New Commissioner Recreation Program Coordinator, Meredith Lawrence, introduced Commissioner Amy Smith. Chair Goldade stated that the Commission had a chance prior to tonight’s meeting to meet the new Commissioner. Commissioner Smith introduced herself and stated that she looks forward to working with the Commission and to continue the improvements around the city. 3. Election of Chairperson and Vice-Chairperson Ms. Lawrence stated that tonight’s meeting is the annual organization for the Commission which includes electing a Chair and Vice-Chair, noting that any changes become effective this evening and the elected officers will hold the positions for a period of one year. She opened nominations for Chair. Motion Klepperich/second Cotter, to nominate Steve Goldade as Chairperson. AYES 7: NAYS 0 Chair Goldade stated that he is happy to continue as Chair and opened the nominations for Vice-Chair. Motion Meyer/second Cotter, to nominate Bob Klepperich as Vice-Chairperson. AYES 7: NAYS 0 4. Pledge of Allegiance The Pledge of Allegiance was recited. 5. Approval of Agenda Motion Klepperich/second Meyer, to approve the agenda. AYES 7: NAYS 0 6.a Approval of Minutes from January 14, 2020 Regular Meeting Motion Klepperich/second Hinderscheid to approve the minutes of the January 14, 2020 Parks and Recreation Commission Regular Meeting. AYES 7: NAYS 0 page 73 7. Citizen Comment Period (for items not on the agenda) Eddie Drieman, 2356 Swan Drive, stated that there is talk of covered dugouts at Mendakota field. He was the in-house Baseball Commissioner for Mendota Heights for the past three years. He stated that they are trying to provide as much opportunity as possible for children to play, and has noticed children being exhausted and sunburnt on the hot/sunny days. He believed that the covered dugouts would provide a solution/benefit. He stated that the shade elements should be pushed throughout the park system, with a focus on the sports fields/courts. He stated that the baseball community supports the addition of covered dugouts. Commissioner Cotter thanked the resident for coming in tonight and for sending his email as well. He asked for input on the preferred type of dugout structure. Mr. Drieman stated that he would highly recommend not having something fully enclosed, like cinderblock. He stated that the dugout at Hagstrom King would be a good example, but noted that structure is simply missing a roof covering. He stated that they need something simply to keep the sun off the kids. Sibley put in good dugout examples. Public Works Director, Ryan Ruzek, commented that the following Tuesday evening he has two purchase order requests to go forward to the City Council which include dugout covers at Hagstrom King and Friendly Hills Park, and highlighted the other proposed 2020 dugout improvements which include Mendakota field. Chair Goldade asked if there was only financing available for three fields, in addition to the purchase orders moving to the City Council the following week, would Mr. Drieman prefer those to all occur at Mendakota field or would another park receive priority as well. Mr. Dryman replied that in his opinion Mendakota would receive priority as it receives the most use from the community and from tournaments. He stated that Hagstrom King would receive his second priority. Victoria Highlands Park is also a popular location. Commissioner Smith commented that Mendakota is also used for softball and therefore that field would capture both sports groups. 8. Acknowledgement of Reports Chair Goldade read the titles of the three updates (Par 3, Recreation, Park Improvement Updates, and Natural Resources Update) and polled the Commissioners for questions. 8.a Par 3 Update There were no specific questions or concerns raised about the report. 8.b Recreation Update There were no specific questions or concerns raised about the report. Motion Klepperich/second Scherer to acknowledge the staff reports. AYES 7: NAYS 0 8.c Natural Resources Update Natural Resources Technician, Krista Spreiter, identified work that will be completed by the MN Department of Transportation which will begin this winter and continue into summer. She reported that the two outfalls from stormwater pipes conveying stormwater under I-35E from the west side of the highway to the east side will be replaced with the goal of reducing stormwater velocity and erosion. She advised that an access would need to be made within Valley Park, page 74 adjacent to the highway, in order to complete the project and noted that staff worked with MnDOT to find a plan that removes the least number of trees possible. She stated that the Valley Park Pollinator Corridor work will continue and provided details. She provided an update on the City’s Emerald Ash Borer (EAB) Management, noting that the City was awarded a grant and reviewed the activities that will be completed with that funding. She provided an update on the Oheyawahe/Pilot Knob historic site, noting that the Task Force of seven community members was created with the mission of pursuing both short and long-term goals for the site. She stated that Great River Greening will continue to partner with the City in management of the site, as well as Valley Park, Rogers Lake Park and Copperfield Ponds. She highlighted upcoming events including the Resident Tree Sale (March 11 – May 8) and events for Earth/Arbor Day (50th Anniversary Celebration). Commissioner Hinderscheid stated that it seems the City will lose a significant number of trees from EAB. He asked if the City has considered allowing residents to donate trees to the city. Mr. Ruzek stated that the City advertises Friends of the Parks, through Ramsey County, which is a program that allows trees to be purchased and planted in parks. Ms. Spreiter agreed that staff could explore the option of an adopt-a-tree type program. Chair Goldade thanked Ms. Spreiter for her update. Commissioner Hinderscheid asked if the City has done any wildlife research. Ms. Spreiter commented that the City has not done that in the past but noted that could be a part of the updating of the City’s natural resource plan. Chair Goldade asked for details on Great River Greening. Ms. Spreiter explained that is a non-profit organization that the City contracts with. She stated that the organization does accept volunteer assistance on projects. Chair Goldade asked if the outfalls would be visible from the walking trails at Valley Park. Ms. Spreiter replied that the outfalls are not necessarily visible at this time but might be once the trees are removed. Chair Goldade asked for details on the 100 trees that would be planted by the City. Ms. Spreiter stated that the City intends to plant 100 trees over two years; 50 per year, which will replace, in close proximity, some of the Ash trees that have been lost. Chair Goldade stated there is one spot vacant on the Pilot Knob task force and stated that it would be a nice connection to have a member from the Park and Recreation Commission as a part of that group. Mr. Ruzek stated that staff could investigate the option of adding one more member but noted that the intention was to have that group independent from the Park and Recreation Commission. He provided details on the updating of the Natural Resources Management Plan. Commissioner Cotter asked for details on the installation of an aerator. page 75 Ms. Spreiter stated that the City has had the aeration system since 2012 and explained that it is installed in the winters to prevent fish kill and improve water quality. Commissioner Sherer commented that he believed a consultant was hired the previous year to help determine the causes of degradation of ponds and lakes (Augusta and Lemay) and asked if there was an update on that item. Ms. Spreiter replied that she does not have the details but noted that there has been an ongoing study with Lake Augusta and some preliminary data has been received and is being reviewed. She advised that a consultant will be hired to help find solutions and best management practices that could be installed around the lake. Mr. Ruzek stated that most of the data is showing that the lake is not turning over/mixing. He stated that there is not an outlet and therefore the City needs to find a way for the water to mix. He stated that the City received funds to complete a feasibility report and hopes to begin work on that. 9. Unfinished Business 9.a Rules of Order Review Ms. Lawrence stated that the rules of order were included in the packet for Commission review. Chair Goldade asked if the Student position is a part of the rules of order. Ms. Lawrence replied that is not. She noted that the current Student Representative will be graduating, and staff will begin recruitment to fill that position. She noted that the Student Representative position could be added to the rules of order in the future. 9.b Park Re-Assignments Ms. Lawrence reviewed the parks that previous Commissioner Miller had. She stated that two new Commissioners have joined since the last allocation of parks and recommended reassigning the parks. Commissioner Meyer selected Marie Park and Victoria Highlands. Commissioner Hinderscheid selected the Dog Park and Ivy Hills. Chair Goldade selected Wentworth and Valley Park. Commissioner Klepperich selected Mendakota and Civic Center. Commissioner Sherer selected Kensington and Hagstrom King. Commissioner Smith selected Friendly Hills and Market Square Commissioner Cotter selected Rogers Lake and Valleyview Heights. 9.c Community Engagement Check-In Ms. Lawrence stated that the Commission decided to conduct community meetings to gather input from different community groups, beginning the previous year. She asked for updates on page 76 groups that have met. She asked if the Commissioners that have not conducted their meetings could provide a brief update. Commissioner Meyer reported that they originally started the idea of reaching out to Community Education but found that difficult to schedule and therefore are meeting with the Mendota Heights PTA on February 24th. She stated that a resident in the Marie Park neighborhood is also willing to hold a meeting in her home, to be scheduled. Commissioner Cotter stated they made one attempt to schedule with Mendota Heights Senior Living that was not successful, and are attempting to schedule/hold a meeting prior to the Commission’s next meeting. Chair Goldade stated that perhaps Commissioner Smith could assist with holding a meeting of middle school students. He confirmed her consensus and noted that they would work together to schedule that meeting. 9.d Pickleball Court Planning Mr. Ruzek reviewed the options that were discussed at the last meeting. He stated that late in 2019 a resurfacing and restriping was done on the tennis court at Marie Park. He noted that the City could advertise those courts more in attempt to gain additional use. Commissioner Cotter asked what it would take to receive better information on whether this pickleball setup is being used by the community. Mr. Ruzek stated that Pickleball is noisy and therefore residents in that area might let him know how often it is being used. He noted that perhaps a trail camera could be installed by the Police Department attempting to gain numbers on usage. He stated that the City should promote this more in attempt to gain more usage. Commissioner Cotter stated that there had been discussions at several meetings related to the excitement for the sport and the lack of available courts in the community. Commissioner Hinderscheid stated that he reviewed neighboring communities and received insight. He noted that Eagan restriped tennis courts and replaced a hockey rink with eight additional courts. Eagan reported that the courts are heavily used. He noted that sound barriers were installed to help buffer the noise. He stated that Inver Grove Heights also began restriping tennis courts and built four new pickleball courts. He stated that the community was excited, and that city also has indoor courts available. He stated that Pickleball has had an increase of 650 percent over the past six years (per USA Pickleball Association). Commissioner Cotter stated that it is evident that there is excitement and interest, but the question is whether a hockey rink could be used or whether dedicated courts are needed. He stated that the hockey rinks are heavily used and therefore the decision would be whether to repurpose a tennis court or construct a new court. Commissioner Hinderscheid commented that he spoke with Woodbury and that community stated that using the hockey rinks was not successful. Commissioner Sherer stated that in researching on the internet the common theme is that tennis is on decline and pickleball is on the rise. He stated that it is clear that there is interest in this sport. He referenced the proximity of Marie Park and Valley Park and stated that perhaps page 77 Valley would be a good candidate for a pickleball court. He asked for rough cost estimates for the different options for courts. Mr. Ruzek commented that the Marie tennis court improvements had a cost of about $82,000. He estimated a similar cost to convert the Valley Park court. He stated that the hockey rink improvement had a cost of about $12,000 and therefore Friendly Hills would have a similar cost. He estimated a cost of $120,000 for a standalone court. Commissioner Hinderscheid stated that Valley Park has a fair amount of freeway noise that would help to buffer noise. He commented that Hagstrom King has some residential homes in closer proximity. Mr. Ruzek stated that he spoke with one of the homeowners that was supportive of the possible improvement. Commissioner Sherer stated that he did speak with residents in that neighborhood and there was not concern with the noise but more the loss of open space that would occur. Ms. Lawrence stated that a lot of tennis court reservations come in from residents, noting that a lot of reservations have already been made this year. She agreed that while tennis is on a decline as a sport, there is a lot of interest in Mendota Heights. She stated that the courts are available at Marie Park though as well for tennis. She commented that noise can be an issue for pickleball, noting that some cities have installed noise barriers. She stated that she has received questions from residents as to what will be done to repair the other tennis courts in the community. Commissioner Cotter commented that there will not be a perfect location as each park has residential neighbors. He commented that Valley Park seems to be more ideal with the shaded screening that exists and the proximity to Marie Park for tennis users. He stated that he would support a dedicated pickleball court at Valley Park. Commissioner Sherer stated that he is hesitant to spend $125,000 on a dedicated court, or to recommend that, until the City is confident that it will receive use. He stated that he would lean towards the conversion of a tennis court at this time, noting that Valley Park would seem to be the best choice. Commissioner Klepperich commented that he’d choose to move forward with resurfacing the Friendly Hills hockey rink for the use of Pickleball for the short-term. He stated that as this topic continues to advance the discussion could continue during budgeting time with attempt to gain funding for a new court in 2021. Chair Goldade commented that he would support a standalone court. Commissioner Meyer commented that Valley Park seems to be the best option at this point. She stated that she would also be willing to delay action with advertising Marie Park more, perhaps adding programming this summer to increase use. Commissioner Hinderscheid stated that he would not want to wait to confirm interest, as the sport is exploding. He believed that dedicated courts at Valley Park would be the best option. page 78 Commissioner Smith stated that if the court is put at Valley, that it is close to the existing courts at Marie Park. She stated that she was not even aware there were pickleball courts at Marie Park and therefore additional communication to residents could increase participation. She stated that the hockey rink at Friendly Hills is very close to homes and could cause issues with noise. She stated that a standalone court would be ideal, but she was unsure of the right location. Mr. Ruzek stated that perhaps he could send a letter to the properties that border Valley Park in attempt to gather feedback. He noted that he could also post on social media to obtain additional input on converting tennis to pickleball. Motion Hinderscheid/second Scherer to recommend moving forward with a dedicated pickleball court at the Valley Park tennis courts. AYES 6: NAYS 0: ABSTAIN 1 (Klepperich) 9.e Dodd Road Trail Corridor Study Mr. Ruzek referenced an email the Commission received from a resident related to the previous month’s discussion of a potential trail along Dodd Road. He stated that a local group of citizens attended a Citizen’s Advisory Committee meeting prior to the reconstruction of Dodd Road in 2018, noting that many of those improvements were not incorporated into the project that was completed. He reported that the City received a $25,000 grant to fund the corridor study that was completed. He described the potential trail connections that were included in the study. He stated that additional traffic studies are being completed on two intersections along Dodd Road and noted that it would be the recommendation of staff that the trail segments be connected in conjunction with the intersection improvements on Dodd. He stated that the City has applied twice for grant funding but has not yet been successful to the level required. He noted that the purpose of the case tonight was simply to provide an update to the Commission. Commissioner Klepperich stated that Dodd Road is a State highway and asked if it would help for the City to communicate with State Legislators in attempt to gain attention. Mr. Ruzek stated that he was unsure if a State Legislator could assist in obtaining grant funds. He stated that the City would be eligible to use MSA funds on the project. Commissioner Klepperich stated that there is a lot of pedestrian traffic on the roadway and therefore the safety element should assist in the grant application process. Commissioner Sherer asked if the City will be submitting an application for grant funding this year. Mr. Ruzek confirmed that the City will be submitting an application for one segment this year. Commissioner Sherer asked if one of the schools could pursue Safe Route to School funding. Mr. Ruzek stated that staff could reach out to a principal of one of the elementary schools in order to start that process. Commissioner Hinderscheid stated that in the past he recalled that the City would need to have right-of-way provided from the property owners in order to have the trail extend all the way south but had trouble reaching agreements with the property owners. page 79 Mr. Ruzek confirmed that although people like trails, they usually prefer the trail on the other side of the road and not in front of their property. Chair Goldade stated that the original request was connectivity between Bachelor and Evergreen, the Commission heard a proposal for a trail on the east side of the golf course but that was found to be expensive, and therefore an idea was added for a trail on the western edge of the golf course. He stated that the Commission then determined that the western edge trail is part of a larger project for Dodd Road in the future. Mr. Ruzek stated that if there is a desire to move forward immediately, he would need to hire a consultant, which would increase the project cost by 25 percent. He stated that staff will continue to work with the County on the segment between Mendakota and Mendota Heights Road. 10. New Business 10.a Marie Park Playground Subcommittee Chair Goldade noted that a similar structure was used in the past for park improvements. He asked a Subcommittee to be named for this process and reviewed the duties of those members. Commissioner Meyer, Commissioner Smith, and Commissioner Hinderscheid volunteered to be a part of the Subcommittee. Motion Goldade/second Klepperich to appoint Commissioners Meyer, Smith and Hinderscheid to the Marie Park Playground Improvement Subcommittee. AYES 7: NAYES 0 10.b Rogers Lake Skate Park Improvements Mr. Ruzek stated that this was presented to the Commission the previous year but did not move forward due to lake of funding. He stated that he reached out to Third Lair Skate Park and confirmed the quote is still valid for 2020 and reviewed the three improvements that would be included. He stated that he attempted to research additional companies to provide additional quotes but found that most other communities use cement features and therefore Mendota Heights is unique in its use of lumber features. Commissioner Klepperich asked if the City Council has already approved the funding for this project. Mr. Ruzek confirmed that $10,000 was budgeted through the general fund for this improvement. Commissioner Hinderscheid asked about the asphalt surface and when that would be repaired. Mr. Ruzek stated that the skate park is a repurposed tennis court and therefore the asphalt is about 40 years old. He estimated about $50,000 to resurface the lot, noting that he would also remove the fencing as other communities do not fence their skate parks. Commissioner Cotter asked if the features can be removed and reinstalled when the resurfacing occurs. Mr. Ruzek confirmed that the features are easily removed and reinstalled for resurfacing. page 80 Motion Meyer/second Cotter to approve the Rogers Lake Skate Park improvements with Third Lair. AYES 7: NAYS 0 11. Staff Announcements Ms. Lawrence shared the following announcements: • Summer parks programming registration opens Monday, March 2nd on the City website and in person at City Hall. Ms. Lawrence provided an update on the free summer park programming that will be available to ensure there are opportunities for all members of the community to participate in. She also provided details on the Fee Assistance Program. 12. Student Representative Update None. 13. Commission Comments and Park Updates Commissioner Klepperich • Expressed appreciation for being named Vice-Chair. • For those walking in the evening hours, there is a new light at the crosswalk near City Hall at Lexington. • Residents have provided compliments on the condition of the ice rinks. Commissioner Sherer • Complimented Public Works for their snow removal on the roads and trails. • Friendly Hills and Hagstrom King were blanketed in snow on Sunday, but people were still out enjoying the ice. Commissioner Cotter • Expressed appreciation of the citizen comments that the Commission has received through email and in person. Commissioner Meyer • Expressed appreciation for the residents skating at Marie Park. Commissioner Hinderscheid • Residents that he spoke with at the Dog Park are enjoying the Dog Park. • The lights were not on at Marie Park on Sunday night. • Expressed appreciation for the movement towards Pickleball as he believes the residents will enjoy that amenity. Ms. Lawrence explained that the rink lights are not turned on when the rink is closed, noting that the rink was closed due to weather conditions. She reviewed the rink hours. Commissioner Smith • Thanked the Commission and stated that she looks forward to providing more input during her time on the Commission. page 81 Chair Goldade • Thanked staff for their efforts and all the work that is done in the parks to provide great services and programming in the parks. • Continued discussion on the Wentworth warming house will take place on February 19th at 4:15 p.m. • Excited about the changes at Valley Park. • The Marie Skating park was busy with lessons on Saturday morning. 14. Adjourn Motion Klepperich/Second Cotter to adjourn the meeting at 8:17 PM. AYES 7: NAYS 0 Minutes drafted by: Amanda Staple TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. page 82 DATE: March 17, 2020 TO: Mayor and City Council, City Administrator FROM: Meredith Lawrence, Recreation Program Coordinator SUBJECT: December Par 3 Financial Report INTRODUCTION The City Council is asked to acknowledge the December Par 3 Financial Report. BACKGROUND Attached is the December Par 3 Financial Report. The course officially closed for the 2019 season on October 6. The course had a 2019 revenue total of $146,350. The course had an expenditure total of $145,905 for 2019. The course’s operating revenue for the 2019 season exceeded operating expenditures by $445. As of now these are preliminary 2019 final numbers, as they are subject just to change upon the completion of the 2019 audit. Staff has prepared an annual report, which will provide more details on the 2019 golf season. This will be presented at a later date. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Mendota Heights City Council accept the December, 2019 Par 3 Financial Report. ACTION REQUIRED If the Council concurs, it should, by motion accept the December, 2019 Par 3 Financial Report. page 83 PAR 3 MONTHLY REPORT DECEMBER 2019 MENDOTA HEIGHTS PAR 3 BUDGET TO ACTUAL REPORT December 2019 (100% OF YEAR) December REVENUES December YTD YTD YTD BUDGET 2019 2019 %2018 GREENS, LEAGUE & TOURN FEES $100,000 $168 $93,078 93.08%$84,049 RECREATION PROGRAMS $38,000 $0 $33,454 88.04%$29,970 CONCESSIONS $18,000 $0 $19,538 108.54%$18,047 SUNDRY REVENUE $0 $0 $280 100.00%$454 INTEREST $250 $0 $0 0.00%$0 CAPITAL CONTRIBUTIONS $0 $0 $0 0.00%$0 PAR 3 FUND REVENUE TOTAL $156,250 $168 $146,350 93.66%$132,520 EXPENDITURES December YTD YTD YTD BUDGET 2019 2019 %2018 CLUBHOUSE SALARIES $34,300 $0 $27,146 79.14%$26,963 ADMINISTRATIVE SALARIES $22,608 $1,187 $18,442 81.57%$18,941 FICA/PERA $10,282 $162 $6,862 66.74%$6,835 MEDICAL INSURANCE $6,653 $554 $6,653 100.00%$6,336 U/E & W/C INSURANCE $2,080 $249 $3,218 154.73%$2,103 RENTALS $4,500 $0 $3,832 85.15%$2,819 UTILITIES $12,660 $1,061 $11,871 93.77%$12,553 PROFESSIONAL FEES - AUDIT $2,650 $0 $2,776 104.76%$2,725 PROF FEES - CONSULTING FEES $0 $0 $531 100.00%$0 PROF FEES - GROUNDS MGMT $5,000 $0 $0 0.00%$3,455 PROF FEES - GROUNDS WAGES $22,000 $0 $17,164 78.02%$16,351 PROF FEES - TREE MAINTENANCE $1,500 $0 $0 0.00%$0 ADVERTISING/NEWSLETTER $400 $0 $235 58.78%$284 LIABILITY/AUTO INSURANCE $4,200 $932 $4,739 112.83%$3,834 OPERATING COSTS/SUPPLIES $6,350 $79 $5,056 79.62%$6,775 FUEL $1,350 $15 $1,491 110.45%$1,614 REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE $28,250 $903 $28,851 102.13%$24,221 SUNDRY/DUES/MILEAGE/CLOTHING $4,000 $0 $3,303 82.58%$2,967 CONTINGENCY $0 $0 $0 0.00%$0 ONLINE REG & CREDIT CARD FEES $4,175 $46 $3,734 89.44%$3,832 PAR 3 EXPENDITURES TOTAL $172,958 $5,187 $145,905 84.36%$142,608 These are preliminary 2019 numbers and are subject to change upon completion of the 2019 audit. 3/12/2020 page 84 DATE: March 17, 2020 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark McNeill, City Administrator SUBJECT: Amendment to Solar Garden Agreement Comment: Introduction: The Council is asked to amend an agreement with Northfield Solar, LLC, regarding a subscription to a Community Solar Garden (CSG), located in Rice County. Background: On March 5, 2019, the City entered into an agreement with Northfield Solar, for a portion of electricity which is to be produced over the next 25 years in a CSG. From a technical and legal standpoint, there are actually five gardens to which the City has subscribed. These gardens are currently under construction, and it is expected that they will become operational by the end of April. Now that the installation of the solar arrays are nearing completion, more accurate determinations of the amount of electricity, and subsequent savings, can be made. Four of the five gardens have had no changes from what had been anticipated. However, the fifth garden will have more of its electricity produced to be allocated to Mendota Heights—14.95%, vs. what had been anticipated as 8%. In addition, there has been a slight upwards change in the retail value of the electricity, as determined by Xcel Energy. This has resulted in an increase in the value of the electricity to Mendota Heights being produced. If approved, the amendment as proposed will make the existing 2019 agreement more accurate. Budget Impact: The change in the allocation percentage, and the increase in the Kwh rate means that Mendota Heights will see an increase of $137,859 over the twenty five year term of the agreement. There is no cost to the City which results from this amendment. Recommendation: I recommend the City Council approve the proposed amendment. Action Required: If the Council concurs, it should, by motion Approve Amendment Number 1 to Subscription Agreement SRC 041087, by and between Northfield Solar LLC, and the City of Mendota Heights. Mark McNeill City Administrator page 85 AMENDMENT NUMBER 1 TO SUBSCRIPTION AGREEMENT (SRC 041087) This Amendment to Subscription Agreement (the “Amendment”) is entered into this ____ day of March, 2020, by and between Northfield Solar, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company (“Owner”) and the City of Mendota Heights, a Minnesota Municipal Corporation and Political Subdivision (“Subscriber”). RECITALS 1. Owner and Subscriber are parties to a Subscription Agreement (SRC 041087) dated March 5, 2019, pursuant to which Subscriber acquires an allocation of capacity in a community solar garden owned and operated by Owner and related rights to Bill Credits associated with the Subscriber Energy associated with that capacity (“Subscription Agreement”). 2. Owner and Subscriber wish to amend the Subscription Agreement to properly reflect the Subscriber’s Allocated Percentage based on new information now that the solar garden is approaching its operational date. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the above premises, and the mutual promises in the Subscription Agreement and this Amendment, Owner and Subscriber agree as follows. AGREEMENT 1. Definitions. Capitalized terms used in this Amendment shall have the meanings given to them in the Subscription Agreement unless otherwise expressly defined in this Amendment. 2. Amendment. Subscriber and Owner agree to amend the Subscription Agreement as follows: a. Exhibit C of the Subscription Agreement is deleted in its entirety and replaced with the new Exhibit C attached to this Amendment. b. Exhibit D of the Subscription Agreement is deleted in its entirety and replaced with the new Exhibit D attached to this Amendment. 3. Effective Date. The effective date of this Amendment shall be March ___, 2020. 4. Valid and Effective. Except as otherwise expressly amended by this Amendment, the Subscription Agreement remains in full force and effect. Subscriber and Owner each confirm that their respective representations and warranties in the Subscription Agreement are true and correct as of the date of this Amendment. [Signature page on next page] page 86 Northfield Solar LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company By: ___________________________________ __________________ Its: Manager City of Mendota Heights, a Minnesota Municipal Corporation and Political Subdivision By: ____________________________________ Neil Garlock, Mayor Attest: __________________________________ Lorri Smith, City Clerk page 87 EXHIBIT C ESTIMATE OF ENERGY PRODUCTION Year Estimated CSG Production (kWh) 1 1,900,313 2 1,890,811 3 1,881,357 4 1,871,951 5 1,862,591 6 1,853,278 7 1,844,011 8 1,834,791 9 1,825,617 10 1,816,489 11 1,807,407 12 1,798,370 13 1,789,378 14 1,780,431 15 1,771,529 16 1,762,671 17 1,753,858 18 1,745,089 19 1,736,363 20 1,727,681 21 1,719,043 22 1,710,448 23 1,701,896 24 1,693,386 25 1,684,919 Total 44,763,681 Estimated Production was determined by using PVSYST software developed by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory using publicly available historical data for solar resource at the site of the Project, the manufacturer’s specifications for production capability of the solar modules, and reductions for estimated losses for Project usage and conversion, transmission and transformation of the electricity generated by the Project. page 88 EXHIBIT D ESTIMATED SUBSCRIPTION BENEFITS Year Estimated CSG Production (kWh) Allocation (%) Estimated CSG Rate ($/kWh) Subscriber Rate ($/kWh) Cost/Benefit ($) 1 1,900,313 14.95% $0.12550 $0.1240 $426 2 1,890,811 14.95% $0.12876 $0.1240 $1,346 3 1,881,357 14.95% $0.13211 $0.1240 $2,281 4 1,871,951 14.95% $0.13555 $0.1240 $3,231 5 1,862,591 14.95% $0.13907 $0.1240 $4,196 6 1,853,278 14.95% $0.14269 $0.1240 $5,177 7 1,844,011 14.95% $0.14640 $0.1240 $6,174 8 1,834,791 14.95% $0.15020 $0.1240 $7,187 9 1,825,617 14.95% $0.15411 $0.1240 $8,217 10 1,816,489 14.95% $0.15811 $0.1240 $9,264 11 1,807,407 14.95% $0.16222 $0.1240 $10,329 12 1,798,370 14.95% $0.16644 $0.1240 $11,411 13 1,789,378 14.95% $0.17077 $0.1240 $12,512 14 1,780,431 14.95% $0.17521 $0.1240 $13,631 15 1,771,529 14.95% $0.17977 $0.1240 $14,769 16 1,762,671 14.95% $0.18444 $0.1240 $15,927 17 1,753,858 14.95% $0.18924 $0.1240 $17,105 18 1,745,089 14.95% $0.19416 $0.1240 $18,303 19 1,736,363 14.95% $0.19920 $0.1240 $19,522 20 1,727,681 14.95% $0.20438 $0.1240 $20,762 21 1,719,043 14.95% $0.20970 $0.1240 $22,024 22 1,710,448 14.95% $0.21515 $0.1240 $23,308 23 1,701,896 14.95% $0.22074 $0.1240 $24,615 24 1,693,386 14.95% $0.22648 $0.1240 $25,944 25 1,684,919 14.95% $0.23237 $0.1240 $27,298 $324,959 The initial CSG Rate is Xcel’s proposed 2020 CSG Rate for General Service customers subscribing to community solar gardens larger than 250 kW in size and which elect to sell RECs to Xcel escalated at an assumed 2.6% for 2021. For subsequent years the CSG Rate has been escalated an assumed 2.6% per year; actual changes in the CSG Rate will be set by the MPUC and may be lower or higher. Costs and benefits shown equal the expected difference each year between the Subscription Rate and CSG Rate multiplied by the estimated annual Subscriber Energy. Energy Production is calculated using the method described in Exhibit C. page 89 page 90 page 91 DATE: March 17, 2020 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark McNeill, City Administrator SUBJECT: Fire Station Generator Sale or Disposal Comment: Introduction: The Council is asked to declare the generator currently located at the Mendota Heights Fire Station to be surplus, and therefore eligible for sale or disposal. Background: As part of the updating of equipment in the station, the emergency generator which is original to the building is scheduled to be replaced. The construction contract currently provides for the City to pay the electrical contractor to disconnect the generator, so that is may be scrapped. The generator is “hard- wired” into the building. However, it has since been found that the generator could be sold for salvage to a contractor who is working on the project, and who is knowledgeable about the generator. That sale would save the City the cost of having it disconnected; the contractor is willing to pay the City what appears to be a fair market salvage value ($400) for the generator. If the sale cannot be made, the City will then proceed with the original plan, and pay to have it scrapped. Because of liability concerns that would be encountered by having a non-contractor individual inspect, disconnect, and remove the generator, it is not advisable to offer this for public sale. In order for the proposed sale to take place, the City Council would need to declare the obsolete generator to be surplus. That can be done by means of adopting the attached resolution, 2020-21. Recommendation: I recommend that the Council adopt the resolution that declares the generator to be excess, and thus eligible for disposal, either by sale or by scrapping. Action Required: If the Council concurs, it should, by motion, adopt the following resolution: RESOLUTION 2020-22 A RESOLUTION DECLARING =THE FIRE STATION GENERATOR IN TO BE SURPLUS, AND AUTHORIZING ITS SALE OR DISPOSAL page 92 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 2020-22 A RESOLUTION DECLARING CERTAIN EQUIPMENT TO BE SURPLUS, AND AUTHORIZING ITS SALE OR DISPOSAL WHEREAS, the City of Mendota Heights follows the requirements in State Law, including Minnesota Statutes Section 471.345, and City Code, for the appropriate disposition of unused or unneeded property; and WHEREAS, in preparation for the remodeling of the currentFire Station building, an inventory of existing equipment has been conducted, and the Fire Chief recommends that the generator which currently exists in the building could be sold for salvage value, or scrapped; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights has duly considered this matter and declares the generator to be surplus, and of no further need or value to the City; and NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the Mendota Heights City Council hereby declares the existing fire station generator to be surplus, and authorizes the Mendota Heights Fire Department to sell or dispose of in accordance with local and state laws. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 17th day of March, 2020. CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS ATTEST ___________________________ _______________________ Neil Garlock, Mayor Lorri Smith, City Clerk page 93 DATE: March 17, 2020 TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator FROM: Ryan Ruzek, P.E., Public Works Director SUBJECT: Resolution 2020-17 Approve Plans and Authorize Advertisement for Bids for the Marie Avenue Street Improvements COMMENT: INTRODUCTION The purpose of this memo is to request that the Council approve the plans and specifications and authorize and advertisement for bid for the Marie Avenue Street Improvements. BACKGROUND The preparation of the feasibility report for the Marie Avenue and Wesley Neighborhood Improvement Project, was authorized by the Mendota Heights City Council by adopting Resolution 2018-58 and 2018-59 at the City Council meeting held on August 7, 2019. The Minnesota Statute 429 process is required because the city intends to assess a portion of the project. The feasibility report for the Marie Avenue and Wesley Neighborhood Improvement project was accepted by the Mendota Heights City Council. The Council called for a Public Hearing on January 15, 2019 by adopting Resolution 2018-100 at the December 18, 2018, City Council meeting. The recommendation in the feasibility report was to proceed with this project. The proposed project will include improvements to Marie Avenue from Lexington Avenue to Dodd Road. Improvements include water main replacement, pond dredging, pedestrian improvements, a new trail from Victoria Road to Lilac Lane, retaining wall replacement, tunnel rehabilitation, curb bump outs, bridge repairs, and pavement replacement. Council ordered the Marie Avenue and Wesley Neighborhood Improvements at their January 15, 2019 meeting. DISCUSSION Proposed improvements for Marie Avenue will include the reclamation of the existing bituminous roadway and the placing of a 2” bituminous base course and a 4” bituminous wear course over the reclaimed pavement material, curb and gutter repair, bump outs, watermain replacement from Dodd Road to Sutton Lane, land bridge repairs, storm sewer revisions, and ADA improvements which include trail rehabilitation. page 94 BUDGET IMPACT The total estimated cost of the project is $3,600,000. PROJECT COSTS ITEM CONSTRUCTIO N INDIRECT TOTAL Total Project $3,600,000 $720,000 $4,320,000 Totals $3,600,000 $4,320,000 The Marie Avenue Street Improvement Project is proposed to be financed by special assessments, municipal state aid (MSA), municipal bonds, and utility funds. Funding sources and amounts are shown below: FUNDING SOURCES ITEM COST ESTIMATE ASSESSMENT MUNICIPAL BONDS UTILITY FUNDS* MSA Total Project $4,320,000 $313,500 $1,996,500 $510,000 1,500,000 Totals $4,320,000 $313,500 $1,996,500 $510,000 $1,500,000 *Utility Funds include projects costs for watermain (SPRWS), trails (Dakota County), and storm sewer Street improvement projects are proposed to be assessed to the benefiting property owners. Pursuant to the City’s Street Rehabilitation and Reconstruction Policy adopted by the city council on June 16, 1992, the Marie Avenue Street Improvement Project is proposed to be assessed to the benefiting property owners as follows: • All units with a driveway located on a street in the project area in the single family home portion will be assessed as a street rehabilitation per the Street Rehabilitation and Reconstruction Policy using a unit assessment. This assessment will include the properties of Victoria Highlands which accesses via a private street which would be considered a driveway extension. Additionally, seven homes in Eagle Ridge are proposed for assessment. • City cost s include bridge repair, storm sewer, pond improvements, and trails in addition to its share of the overall project. The city is also being assessed for its frontage on Marie Avenue. Saint Paul Regional Water is responsible for the costs of the watermain replacement. Minnesota law requires a minimum of 20% of the project cost to be assessed, if MSA 429 Bonds are to be sold. Staff is researching options, and will provide additional information at the March 17th meeting. Other financing options include General Obligation Utility Revenue Bonds, and Municipal State Aid Bonds. RECOMMENDATION Based on the 2019 bid prices, TKDA has been highly conservative in this estimate. It is our hope that the actual bids received will be substantially below the estimate; however, this is a fluid market. The bids received will be carefully reviewed and presented to Council after they are opened. Bids can be accepted or rejected at that time. page 95 Staff recommends that the council approve the plans and specifications for the Marie Avenue Street Improvements, and authorize the advertisement for bids. The full plan set is available for review at city hall. ACTION REQUIRED If City Council wishes to implement the staff recommendations, pass a motion adopting A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS, AND AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS FOR THE MARIE AVENUE STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT. Passage requires a simple majority vote. page 96 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 2020-17 A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS, AND AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS FOR THE MARIE AVENUE STREET IMPROVEMENTS WHEREAS, the Public Works Director reported that the proposed improvements and construction thereof were feasible, desirable, necessary, and cost effective, and further reported on the proposed costs of said improvements and construction thereof; and WHEREAS, the City Council has heretofore directed the Public Works Director to proceed with the preparation of plans and specifications thereof; and WHEREAS, the Public Works Director has prepared plans and specifications for said improvements and have presented such plans and specifications to the City Council for approval. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED; by the Mendota Heights City Council as follows: 1. That the plans and specifications for said improvements be and they are hereby in all respects approved by the City. 2. That the Clerk with the aid and assistance of the Public Works Director be and is hereby, authorized and directed to advertise for bids for said improvements all in accordance with the applicable Minnesota Statutes, such as bids to be received at the City Hall of the City of Mendota Heights by 10:00 A.M., Wednesday, April 15 , 2020, and at which time they will be publicly opened in the City Council Chambers of the City Hall by the Public Works Director, will then be tabulated, and will then be considered by the City Council at its next regular Council meeting. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this seventeenth day of March 2020. CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS Neil Garlock, Mayor ATTEST _________________________ Lorri Smith, City Clerk page 97 Request for City Council Action DATE: March 17, 2020 TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator FROM: Wayne Wegener, Police Captain SUBJECT: Ordinance 555 Amend City Code Section 5-5-4(B)(2) Concerning False Alarm Penalties Comment: Introduction: The City Council is asked to approve Ordinance 555 amending City Code Title 5, Chapter 5- 4(B)(2) concerning False Alarms Penalties. Background: The current City Code, Section 5-5-4(B)(2), provides for the penalties for false alarms other than false fire alarms. It is proposed to amend this section to cap the amount charged per false alarm in a calendar year. A concern is the penalties section of the ordinance does not place a cap on the amount billed per false alarm call in a calendar year. There are times when businesses and residences require a police response to a false alarm for reasons that are out of the owner’s control. Although the City encourages well-functioning alarm systems, the current fee structure could be updated to avoid potentially excessive fees. The false alarm fee structure in the Alarm Ordinance Penalties Section [Ordinance 5-5-4(B)(2)] in the City Code currently reads: • All Other False Alarms: A penalty shall be paid to the city by the alarm user for each false alarm, other than a false fire alarm, in excess of three (3) in any calendar year. That penalt y shall be fifty dollars ($50.00) for the fourth false alarm and shall increase by twenty five dollars ($25.00) for each succeeding false alarm within the same calendar year. (Ord. 352, 6-20-2000) page 98 The proposed change to the ordinance would read as follows: • All Other False Alarms: A penalty shall be paid to the city by the alarm user for each false alarm, other than a false fire alarm, in excess of three (3) in any calendar year. That penalty shall be fifty dollars ($50.00) for the fourth false alarm, seventy-five dollars ($75.00) for the fifth false alarm and one-hundred dollars ($100.00) for the sixth and each succeeding false alarm(s) within the same calendar year. As shown, this change would cap the 6th and subsequent false alarms at $100.00. I believe that this amount is reasonable, given the nature of the response. Budget Impact: The 2020 budget had anticipated $3000 in false alarm charges. The proposed change to the City Code does not affect any business or person with five or fewer alarms per year. The actual impact to the budget will not be known until the budgets year is over and the total number of false alarms per residence and business is finalized. Recommendation: Staff recommends that Ordinance 555 be approved which would update Section 5-5-4(B)(2) of the City Code to the cap the amount charged per alarm in a calendar year. Action Required: If the Council concurs, it should, by motion, adopt Ordinance 555 Amending Mendota Heights City Code Title 5, Chapter 5-4(B)(2) Concerning Penalties False Alarms, and also approve the publication of the ordinance. Approval of the Ordinance requires a simple majority vote of the Council. Approval of a Summary Publication of the Ordinance would require a 4/5th vote of the Council; however, because only three of the Council are expected to be in attendance at the March 17th meeting, the full ordinance would instead be published. page 99 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 555 AMENDING MENDOTA HEIGHTS CITY CODE TITLE 5, CHAPTER 5-4(B)(2) CONCERNING FALSE ALARM PENALTIES The City Council of the City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota, desires to amend the fee structure for false alarm penalties under Title 5, Chapter 5-4(B)(2) of the City Code as of March 17, 2020. The City Council of the City of Mendota Heights hereby ordains: Section 5-5-4(B)(2) is hereby amended by adding the underlined language and deleting the strikethrough language as follows: 5-5-4(B)(2): PENALTIES FOR FALSE ALARMS: B. Penalties 2. All Other False Alarms: A penalty shall be paid to the city by the alarm user for each false alarm, other than a false fire alarm, in excess of three (3) in any calendar year. That penalty shall be fifty dollars ($50.00) for the fourth false alarm and shall increase by twenty five dollars ($25.00), seventy-five dollars ($75.00) for the fifth false alarm and one-hundred dollars ($100.00) for the sixth and each succeeding false alarm(s) within the same calendar year. This Ordinance shall be in effect from and after the date of its passage and publication. Adopted and ordained into an Ordinance this 17th day of March, 2020. CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS Neil Garlock, Mayor ATTEST ___________________________ Lorri Smith, City Clerk page 100 DATE: March 17, 2020 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark McNeill, City Administrator SUBJECT: Purchase Agreement—2085 Valencour Circle Comment: Introduction: The City Council is asked to approve an agreement for the purchase of real property located at 2085 Valencour Circle. This is a residential property, and is adjacent to Historic Pilot Knob preservation area. Background: The Council has previously been made aware of the availability of this property, a .94 acre parcel which is located at the end of the cul-de-sac of Valencour Circle. It consists of a house, and several outbuildings. It is on a private well and septic system. This property is adjacent to the Historic Pilot Knob Preservation area, and would be a good addition to that property. As a result, the City has been working with Dakota County for the acquisition of the parcel. The necessary environmental and other due diligence work has been completed, and Dakota County has negotiated a tentative Purchase Agreement with the owner, Chris Snyder. The acquisition is complicated by the fact that the City is in the process of applying for a grant from the State of Minnesota’s Department of Natural Resources to help with the purchase price—that could provide up to 50% of the cost. However, the grant application period won’t close until the end of this month, and grant applications won’t begin to be reviewed until July 1. It would then be a couple of months until it is known whether the City’s application is successful. In the meantime, the current owner has purchased a replacement property, and so is making payments on two mortgages. The proposed purchase agreement has factored this in, and will provide for an increased amount of earnest money as a “bridge loan” to assist the owner until it is known as to whether the grant application is successful. Dakota County is a partner in the property’s acquisition. If the grant is unsuccessful, the County would split the cost of acquisition. The purchase price which has been negotiated is $356,300, if the state grant is unsuccessful, That closing would be by July 15, 2020. If the grant application is successful, the purchase price is $359,000, which is based on the need for a longer closing time—October 15th. Budget Impact: The maximum cost to the City is anticipated to be $200,000, with the County or grant picking up the balance of any amount in excess of that. The $200,000 includes the share of the purchase price, and also page 101 environmental testing and any necessary clean-up, closing costs, and demolition of buildings which aren’t otherwise moved or used as practice burns for the Fire Department. In the short term, the City will need to provide earnest money of $30,000, with an additional $10,000 to be paid in July. Funding will come from proceeds of the sale of other City-owned property. Recommendation: In order for the City to move ahead with this, the City will need to approve a resolution authorizing the purchase of the property. At a future meeting, the City and Dakota County will need to pass a resolution which would authorize both to enter into a Joint Powers Agreement to authorize the use of City, and County funds to purchase the property. Action Required: If the Council desires to move ahead with the purchase of the Snyder property, it should authorize payment of up to $40,000 in earnest money, and then adopt the following resolution: Resolution 2020-21 A Resolution Authorizing the Purchase of Real Property Located at 2085 Valencour Circle, Mendota Heights, Minnesota Mark McNeill City Administrator page 102 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 2020-21 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2085 VALENCOUR CIRCLE WHEREAS, the City of Mendota Heights is the site of the Historic Pilot Knob Preservation Area; and WHEREAS, it is the goal of the City to enhance the site when possible, so as to preserve the historic and natural heritage that the site has to offer; and WHEREAS, a residential property which is located within the 112 acre Historic Pilot Knob area has been offered for sale, and presents a rare opportunity to enlarge the publically- owned portion of the preservation area; and, WHEREAS, the City, in partnership with Dakota County, has negotiated the purchase of the property located at 2085 Valencour Circle, which is legally described as: Lot 6, Block 3, Pilot Knob Heights, located within SW 1 / 4of the NW 1 / 4 of Section 27, Township 28 North, Range 23 West; and WHEREAS, the City will work with the County and State of Minnesota Department of Natural Resources to pursue a grant to assist in the funding of the acquisition of this property. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights that the City, and its partner Dakota County, are hereby authorized to purchase the property located at 2085 Valencour Circle by executing a Purchase Agreement, and direct that payment be made of the negotiated purchase price and the payment of escrow in order to facilitate this purchase. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 17th day of March 2020. CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS ___________________________ Neil Garlock, Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________ Lorri Smith, City Clerk page 103 REAL ESTATE PURCHASE AGREEMENT This Real Estate Purchase Agreement, made and entered into on the ___ day of _____________, 2020, is by and between Christine M. Snyder, a single person and Trustee of the ________________________ (hereinafter called the “Seller”), and the CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS, a municipal corporation and political subdivision of the State of Minnesota (hereinafter called the “Buyer”). WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Seller is the owner of certain real property (hereinafter called the “Property”), as defined below, situated in Dakota County, Minnesota; and WHEREAS, Seller agrees to sell and Buyer agrees to buy the Property and all improvements thereon, including any mineral rights and access or other easements benefiting the Property; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises, covenants and agreements stated in this document, it is agreed by and between Seller and Buyer as follows: AGREEMENT 1. DEFINITIONS. As used in this Agreement, the following terms shall have the meaning provided herein: a. “Agreement” shall mean this Real Estate Purchase Agreement, and any addendums between Buyer and Seller as of the Effective Date. b. “Closing” shall mean the process by which Buyer, Seller and Title Company execute all necessary documents for Seller to sell and Buyer to buy the Property, together with any other documents required by Seller and the Title Company. c. “Closing Date” shall mean the date in which Buyer acquires the Property and the terms of this Agreement are fulfilled. For the purpose of this Agreement, the Closing Date shall be on or before (subject always to extension as mutually agreed to by the Parties in writing): i. July 15, 2020, if the City does not receive state Grant funds for the acquisition. ii. October 15, 2020, if the City does receive state Grant funds for the acquisition. d. “Conveyed Personal Property” shall mean the following specified personal property Seller intends to convey to Buyer, if any: ______________________ e. “Due Diligence Deadline” shall mean; i. July 15, 2020, if the City does not receive state Grant funds for the acquisition. ii. October 15, 2020, if the City does receive state Grant funds for the acquisition. f. “Effective Date” shall mean the last date of execution by either of the Parties to this Agreement. g. “Environmental Law” shall mean each and every federal, state, and local law, statute, ordinance, regulation, rule, judicial or administrative order or decree, permit, license, approval, authorization or similar requirement pertaining to the protection of human health and safety or the environment. h. “Escrow” shall mean a pre-payment by the Buyer to the Seller prior to the Buyer acquiring the Property from the Seller on the following basis: page 104 i. The sum of Thirty Thousand and No/100 Dollars ($30,000) on or before ________________. If no state Grant is received by the City, the purchase price for the Property will be reduced by this amount. ii. An additional sum of Ten Thousand and No/100 Dollars ($10,000) payable on or before July 15, 2020, if the Buyer is notified by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) that it has been awarded a state Grant to acquire the Property. If the Buyer is notified by the DNR that it has been awarded a state Grant to acquire the Property, the Seller agrees to reimburse the Buyer for the Forty Thousand and No/100 Dollars ($40,000) Escrow amount prior to or at Closing. j. “Fixtures” shall mean items that are embedded in the land or attached to the building(s) and cannot be removed without damage to the real property or building(s). Examples are found in Paragraph 3. k. “Grant” shall mean a state Natural and Scenic Area Grant, awarded by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, allowing the City to receive up to fifty (50) percent reimbursement for the cost and eligible associated expenses of acquiring the Property. l. “Hazardous Substance” shall mean any substance which is (i) defined as a hazardous substance, hazardous material, hazardous waste, pollutant or contaminant under any Environmental Law, (ii) a petroleum hydrocarbon, including crude oil or any fraction thereof, (iii) hazardous, toxic, corrosive, flammable, explosive, infectious, radioactive, carcinogenic, or reproductive toxicant, (iv) regulated pursuant to any Environmental Law(s), or (v) any pesticide regulated under state or federal law. m. “Parties” shall mean Buyer and Seller, as defined above, collectively. n. “Property” shall mean that certain real estate situated in Dakota County, Minnesota, as legally described in Exhibit A, and generally depicted in Exhibit A-1, and any improvements located thereon. o. “Purchase Price” shall mean: i. The sum of Three Hundred Fifty-Six Thousand Three Hundred and No/100 Dollars ($356,300) if the City does not receive state Grant funds to acquire the Property. ii. The sum of Three Hundred Fifty-Nine Thousand and No/100 Dollars ($359,000) if the City does receive state Grant funds to acquire the Property. p. “Title Company” shall mean DCA Title Company, located at 7373 147th St W, Suite 161, Apple Valley, Minnesota. q. “Warranty Deed” shall mean a deed warranting and conveying good and marketable title of record to the Property, subject to the following title exceptions: i. Building and zoning laws, ordinances, state and federal regulations; ii. Reservation of any mineral rights to the State of Minnesota; iii. Utility, drainage and public road easements of record; and iv. The lien of real property taxes and the lien of special assessments and interest due thereon, if any, payable in the year of Closing by which the terms of this Agreement are to be paid or assumed by Buyer. 2. FEE OWNER; WARRANTY DEED. Seller represents that Seller is the fee owner of the Property and hereby agrees to sell the Property to Buyer, free of any liens, exceptions and encumbrances and except as identified in the definition of Warranty Deed contained herein. 3. FIXTURES AND PERSONAL PROPERTY. Title to the Fixtures and Conveyed Personal Property passes to Buyer with the Warranty Deed. page 105 a. All Fixtures, except those excluded below are included in this sale, such as garden bulbs, plants, shrubs, trees, landscaping, storm windows and inserts, storm doors and inserts, screens, awnings, window shades, blinds, curtain tracers, drapery rods, mirrors, door mirrors, cabinets, counter tops, doors, door hardware, mantels, woodwork, attached lighting fixtures with bulbs, electrical wiring, electric outlets, electrical switches, electrical outlet plates and switch plates, all plumbing and piping, plumbing fixtures, sump pumps, water heating systems, heating systems, heating stoves, fireplace inserts, fireplace doors and screens, built-in humidifiers, built-in air conditioning units, built-in electronic air filters, automatic garage openers with controls, television antennas, satellite dishes, water softeners, garbage disposals, built-in trash compactors, built-in ovens and cooking stoves, hood-fans, intercoms, installed carpeting, built-in work benches, security systems, fences, retaining walls, kennels, gates, survey monuments, culverts, sheds, gazebos, trellises, underground irrigation systems, weathervanes, lightning rods, light poles and lights, outdoor statuary, pumps, mail boxes, mail box posts, and newspaper boxes. The foregoing notwithstanding, the following Fixtures are excluded from this sale and shall be removed by Seller prior to the Closing: ______________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________. b. Any damage to real property that occurs in Seller’s removal of these excluded Fixtures or Seller’s personal property will be repaired by Seller at its cost prior to the Closing. Buyer reserves the right to view the Property prior to closing to inspect the Fixtures and to ensure that the Property is in the same condition as it was on the Effective Date. If Buyer determines that the condition of the Property has changed, Buyer shall have the rights and remedies provided in this Agreement, including cancellation of this Agreement. c. If any of the foregoing excluded Fixtures or Seller’s personal property, including but not limited to appliances, remain on the Property after Closing, title to those items will be considered conveyed to the Buyer as of the Closing. 4. TITLE EXAMINATION. Within twenty (20) days after the Effective Date, Seller shall deliver to Buyer an abstract of title or registered property certificate for the Property. Buyer shall pay the entire cost for updating the abstract or registered property certificate or the full charge for a title insurance commitment/binder. Buyer shall be allowed up to twenty (20) days after receipt for examination of the title documents and to make any objections to title. Buyer shall make any such objection in writing or the objection shall be deemed to be waived. If any objections are made, Seller shall have sixty (60) days to make title marketable. Pending correction of title, the payments required by this Agreement shall be postponed, but upon correction of title, and within twenty (20) days of written notice to Buyer, the Parties shall perform this Agreement according to its terms. If title is not marketable and is not made so within sixty (60) days from the date of written objection as provided above, this Agreement shall, at Buyer’s option, be void and neither party shall be liable for damages or costs to the other party. Buyer may also continue to Closing on the sale of the Property, thereby waiving any objections previously submitted. If Buyer obtains title insurance, Buyer is not waiving the right to obtain a good and marketable title of record from Seller. In any event, Seller shall satisfy and discharge all monetary liens and encumbrances (except any statutory liens for non-delinquent real property taxes) affecting the Property and Seller shall furnish whatever documents or evidence will be required by the Title Company in order to delete the “printed form” page 106 or standard exceptions to coverage, including, without limitation, rights of parties in possession, unrecorded easements and mechanics or material men’s liens or claims of lien, on or before Closing. 5. PAYMENT TERMS. As consideration for the covenants and agreements made herein, Buyer agrees to pay the Purchase Price to Seller for the Property, including any mortgage pay-off amounts, payable in cash or equivalent upon the execution and delivery of a W arranty Deed conveying the Property from Seller to Buyer and other necessary documents on the Closing Date. 6. CLOSING COSTS. a. Seller shall be responsible for and pay the following costs: updating abstract or Torrens title records, any corrective title action needed and fees associated with clearing Seller’s title and Seller’s attorney’s fees. b. Buyer is responsible for paying the costs for a title commitment and supplements, examination fee, name search, property inspection, special assessment search, tax and judgment search, title insurance premium, property inspection, any recording fees for the Warranty Deed, and one hundred (100) percent of closing fees charged by the Title Company. 7. SELLER’S CLOSING DOCUMENTS. Seller agrees to execute and deliver the following documents to Buyer on the Closing Date: a. A Warranty Deed conveying marketable title to the Property, and any affidavits required to make the title marketable. b. Standard Seller’s Affidavit regarding parties in possession. c. Seller’s Affidavit of no improvements made to the Property within the last 120 days. d. An accounting of property taxes owed on the Property up to the Closing and proof of payment or a deduction from the Purchase Price for such taxes. e. Well disclosure forms and a completed well disclosure certificate as required by MINNESOTA STATUTES § 103I.235. f. Any other document(s) requested by Buyer or Title Company to effectuate the closing and the terms of this Agreement. 8. UTILITIES. All utilities of any nature used in or about the Property shall be read and adjusted as of the date Seller actually vacates the premises and Seller will pay for all such utility charges through the date of Seller’s vacation of the premises. 9. TAXES AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS. Seller will pay all past due property taxes and any special assessments levied against the Property, unless otherwise agreed in an attached addendum . The property taxes that are due and payable in the current year shall be prorated as of the Closing Date, with Seller obligated to pay taxes through the Closing Date and Buyer responsible for the taxes due after the Closing Date. 10. SELLER’S WARRANTIES. Seller warrants that: a. Seller has full power and authority to enter into this Agreement (and the person signing this Agreement for Seller has full power and authority to sign for Seller and to bind it to this Agreement) and to sell, transfer and convey all right, title and interest in and to the Property. page 107 b. The execution of this Agreement will not constitute a breach or default under any agreement to which Seller is bound and/or to which the Property is subject. c. There is no suit, action, arbitration, or legal, administrative or other proceeding or injury pending or threatened against the Property or any portion thereof or pending or threatened against Seller which could affect Seller’s title to the Property or any portion thereof, affect the value of the Property, or any portion thereof, or subject an owner of the Property, or any portion thereof, to liability. d. There is no lease, license, permit, option, right of first refusal or other agreement, oral or written, which affects the Property or any portion thereof. e. Buildings, if any, are entirely within the boundary lines of the Property. f. There is a right of access to the Property from a public right of way, or that such right of access shall be provided by Seller to Buyer at the time of conveyance of the Property, in a form acceptable to Buyer. g. There has been no labor or material furnished to the Property for which payment has not been made. h. There are no present violations of any restrictions relating to the use or improvement of the Property or any uncured notices which have been served upon Seller by any governmental agency notifying Seller of any violations of statute, order, ordinance, rule, requirement or regulation which would affect the Property or any portion thereof. i. The Property is not subject to a lien for Medical Assistance or other public assistance. j. Seller has no knowledge, nor does Seller have reason to know, of any condition at, on, under or related to the Property presently or potentially posing a significant hazard to human health or the environment (whether or not such condition constitutes a violation of Environmental Laws). k. Seller has no knowledge, nor does Seller have reason to know, of any production, use, treatment, storage, transportation, or disposal of any Hazardous Substance on the Property or under the Property, nor has there been any release or threatened release of any Hazardous Substance, pollutant or contaminant into, upon or over the Property or into or upon ground or surface water at the Property or within the immediate vicinity of the Property. l. Seller has no knowledge, nor does Seller have reason to know that any asbestos- containing materials incorporated into the buildings or interior improvements or equipment that are part of the Property, if any, nor is there any electrical transformer, fluorescent light fixture with ballasts or other PCB-containing item on the Property. m. Seller is in compliance with all laws and regulations in connection with any handling, use, storage or disposal of Hazardous Substances including the maintenance of all required permits and approvals. n. Seller has disclosed to Buyer in writing the location of any individual sewage treatment systems located on the Property. o. Seller has disclosed to Buyer in writing the location of any individual wells located on the Property. p. To the best of Seller’s knowledge, there is no lead paint used in the construction or maintenance of any building(s) on the Property. q. To the best of Seller’s knowledge, methamphetamine production has not occurred on the Property. Each of the above representations is material and is relied upon by Buyer. Except insofar as Seller has advised Buyer in writing to the contrary, each of the above representations shall be deemed to have page 108 been made as of the Closing and shall survive the Closing. At the Closing, if Buyer so requests, Seller shall deliver to Buyer a certificate in a form satisfactory to Buyer stating that each of the above representations is true and correct as of the Closing. If, before the Closing, Seller discovers any information or facts that would materially change these warranties and representations, Seller shall immediately give notice to Buyer of those facts and information. If any of the foregoing representations and warranties ceases to be true before the Closing, Seller will promptly remedy the problem, at Seller’s sole cost and expense, upon receipt of notice by Buyer. If the problem is not remedied before Closing, Buyer may elect to either (a) terminate this Agreement in which case Buyer shall have no obligation to purchase the Property or (b) defer the Closing until such problem has been remedied. Buyer’s election in this regard shall not constitute a waiver of Buyer’s rights in regard to any loss or liability suffered as a result of a representation or warranty not being true nor shall it constitute a waiver of any other remedies provided in this Agreement or by law or equity. 11. CONDITIONS PRECEDENT. In addition to the title examination, the purchase of the Property by Buyer is contingent upon: a. The Mendota Heights City Council adopting a resolution authorizing Buyer’s purchase of the Property from Seller and payment of the Escrow; and b. The Mendota Heights City Council and the Dakota County Board of Commissioners each adopting a resolution approving a Joint Powers Agreement authorizing the use of City and County funds to acquire the Property; and c. The Buyer being notified by the DNR as to the status of the state Grant application and if the Buyer is approved to receive a Grant, the Grant agreement between the Buyer and the DNR is fully executed prior to Closing. d. The completion of due diligence by Buyer on or before the Due Diligence Deadline and Buyer determining in its sole discretion that the condition of the Property is acceptable to it. Seller agrees that Buyer shall have the right to inspect and investigate the Property at reasonable times and to perform any tests it deems necessary, including tests to evaluate the environmental condition of the Property. Buyer shall coordinate any such inspection to accommodate the schedule of Seller, who shall not unreasonably withhold permission to inspect or investigate. If the above contingencies are not satisfied, this Agreement shall, at Buyer’s option, be void and neither party shall be liable for damages to the other party. Seller shall additionally pay back the Escrow deposited to it by Buyer. If Buyer has not terminated this Agreement under this Section 11 by the Due Diligence Deadline, the Parties may proceed to Closing. page 109 12. CLOSING. The Closing shall occur on or before the Closing Date at the Title Company’s office. The time of day will be scheduled by the Title Company so as to be mutually acceptable to Buyer and Seller. Seller and Buyer may mutually agree in writing to alter the Closing Date. 13. POSSESSION. Seller shall deliver possession of the Property no later than the time set by the Title Company for the Closing in the same condition as it was on the Effective Date, ordinary wear and tear excepted, free and clear of the rights or claims of any other party. 14. RISK OF LOSS. Until the completion of Closing and delivery of possession of the Property, all risk of loss is on Seller. If the Property is damaged prior to Closing, Seller shall give Buyer notice within five (5) business days after such damage has occurred. The notice shall include Seller’s proposal for repairing the damage. From the date that Buyer receives Seller’s notice, Buyer shall have three (3) business days to inspect the Property and an additional two (2) business days to determine if the damages and Seller’s proposal for repairs are acceptable to Buyer. If Buyer does not accept Seller’s proposal for repairs within the five (5) business day period, this Agreement shall be void and Seller shall return all Escrow money to Buyer. 15. REMEDIES UPON DEFAULT. In the event that Seller defaults in the performance of any of its obligations under this Agreement, Buyer shall, in addition to any and all other remedies provided in this Agreement or at law or in equity, have the right of specific performance against Seller. In the event that Buyer defaults in the performance of any of its obligations under this Agreement, Seller shall have, as its sole and exclusive remedy, the right to cancel this Agreement as permitted by MINNESOTA STATUTES §§ 559.21 and 559.217. 16. NO BROKER’S COMMISSION. Buyer has not used a real estate broker in connection with this Agreement or the transaction contemplated by this Agreement and the Parties agree that Buyer is not responsible for any portion of a broker’s commission or finder’s fee related to Seller. In the event that Seller has used a broker or any person asserts a claim for a broker's commission or finder's fee related to Seller, that Seller will indemnify and hold Buyer harmless from and against the claim and this indemnification shall survive Closing or any earlier termination of this Agreement. 17. WAIVER OF DISCLOSURE. Unless otherwise required herein, Buyer waives the written disclosures required under MINNESOTA STATUTES §§ 513.52 to 513.60. 18. MISCELLANEOUS. a. Performance. The Parties hereto agree that time is of the essence in the performance of this Agreement. b. Notices. Notices to be given under this Agreement shall be in writing and sent by registered or certified mail, addressed to the Parties at the following addresses: page 110 With respect to Buyer: Mark McNeill, City Administrator City of Mendota Heights 1101 Victoria Curve Mendota Heights, MN 55118 With respect to Seller: Christine M. Snyder Address c. Non-Joint Venture. The Parties agree that nothing contained herein shall be considered a partnership or joint venture undertaken by the Parties. d. Minnesota Law. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Minnesota. Venue for all legal proceedings arising out of this Agreement, or breach thereof, shall be in the state or federal court with competent jurisdiction in Dakota County, Minnesota. e. Representation by Counsel. Seller understands that Buyer and the Dakota County Attorney’s Office does not represent Seller in this matter. Seller has had an opportunity to review the terms of this Agreement with Seller’s own legal counsel, whether Seller has elected to consult with counsel or not. Seller has read and understands the terms of this Agreement and agrees to be bound by the terms of this Agreement. f. Entire Agreement. This Agreement, along with any exhibits, appendices, addendums, schedules, and written amendments hereto, encompasses the entire agreement of the Parties, and supersedes all previous understandings and agreements between the Parties, whether oral or written. g. Amendments. Any amendments or modifications to this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be executed by the same Parties who executed the original Agreement or their successors. h. Severability. Each provision of this Agreement is severable from any other provision of this Agreement. Should any provision of this Agreement for any reason be unenforceable, the balance of the Agreement shall nonetheless be of full force and effect. i. Headings. The headings used in this Agreement are for convenience of reference only and shall not operate or be construed to alter or affect the meaning of any of the provisions in this Agreement. j. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original and which together shall constitute one and the same agreement. 19. ADDENDUM(S). Addendum No. 1, providing additional terms, specifications, covenants, representations, and agreements, is attached hereto and is incorporated by reference as though fully state in this Agreement. -This space is intentionally blank- page 111 IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have caused this instrument to be executed the day and year first recited herein. SELLER: ___________________________________ Christine M. Snyder Date of Signature___________________ BUYER: _________________________________ Neil Garlock, Mayor Date of Signature___________________ _________________________________ Lorri Smith, City Clerk Date of Signature___________________ Approved as to form: ________________________________ Andrew Pratt, City Attorney Date of Signature __________________ Approved by City Council Resolution No. 2020-21 page 112 EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY LOT 6, BLOCK 3, PILOT KNOB HEIGHTS LOCATED WITHIN SW 1/4 OF THE NW 1/4 OF SECTION 27, TOWNSHIP 28 NORTH, RANGE 23 WEST page 113 EXHIBIT A-1 GENERAL DEPICTION OF THE PROPERTY page 114 City of Mendota Heights Project B2000820 February 7, 2020 Page 6 B.1. Site Location We accessed various documents and online sources to obtain Site location information. The following is a summary our findings: Address: 2085 Valencour Circle City: Mendota Heights County: Dakota State: Minnesota Property Identification Number: 27-57600-03-060 Construction Year: 1888 Owner: Martin Valencour Jr., and Christine M. Snyder Legal Description: Lot 6, Block 3, Pilot Knob Heights Latitude: 44.880 North Longitude: 93.164 West Section, Township, Range: SW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Section 27, Township 28 North, Range 23 West Elevation: 890 feet above mean sea level Size: 0.94 acres A Site location map and Site sketch are attached in Appendices A and B, respectively. Information obtained from the Dakota County Property Information web page is attached in Appendix C. B.1.a. Geology The unconsolidated sedimentary deposit in the Site vicinity are Des Moines Lobe mixed outwash deposits, which consist of sand, loamy sand and gravel (Hobbs et al., 1990). The uppermost bedrock unit in the Site vicinity is the Middle Ordovician, Decorah Shale (Mossler, 1990). The Decorah Shale is described as a green, Calcareous shale with thin interbeds of limestone. The depth to bedrock in the Site vicinity is approximately 50 feet to 100 feet below land surface (Bloomgren et al., 1990). B.1.b. Hydrogeology The depth to groundwater in the vicinity of the Site ranges from approximately 40 feet below land surface. According to published geologic information, the regional groundwater flow direction within the unconsolidated deposits in the Site vicinity is generally northwest (Palen, 1990). However, the local direction of groundwater flow may be affected by nearby streams, lakes, wells, and/or wetlands and may vary seasonally. page 115 HORSE BARN APPROXIMATE SITE BOUNDARY LP TANK DOG KENNEL DOG KENNEL SHOP GARAGE WELL (UNDER DECK) SEPTIC TANKS HOUSE STORAGE SHED PILOT KNOB PRESERVATION SITE RURAL RESIDENTIAL H I G HW A Y 5 5 VALENCOUR C IRCLE FORMER HORSE PASTURE HOLDING TANK Project No: B2000820 Drawn By: Date Drawn: Checked By: Last Modified: 1/31/20 Drawing No: F:\2020\B2000820\CAD\B2000820.dwg,Phase I,2/4/2020 6:05:44 AM B2000820 LAO 1/31/20 KJH Valencour Property 2085 Valencour Circle Mendota Heights, Minnesota Site Sketch braunintertec.com 952.995.2000 Minneapolis, MN 55438 11001 Hampshire Avenue S N 0 SCALE: 1" = 60' 60'30' page 116 page 117