2018-01-16 Council PacketCITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
January 16, 2018 — 7:00 pm
Mendota Heights City Hall
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Pledge of Allegiance
4. Adopt Agenda
5. Consent Agenda
a. Approval of January 2, 2018 City Council Minutes
b. Acknowledge December 11, 2017 Parks and Recreation Commission Minutes
c. Approval of Meeting Date Change for February 61h City Council Meeting
d. Ratify Agreement with International Union of Operating Engineers Local 70 and Approve
Job Description Amendments
e. Approve of Police Office Hire
f. Approve Resolution 2018-06 Joint Powers Agreement for Electronic Crime Unit
g. Approve Ordinance 519 Right -of -Way Management and Collocation and Lease Agreement
and approve the Summary Publication (4/5 vote required)
h. Approve Professional Services Contract with KLJ for Par 3 Turf Management RFP
Development
i. Approve Resolution 2018-07 Calling for a Public Hearing for the Lexington Highlands,
South Plaza Drive, & Mendakota Neighborhood Improvements Project No. 201706
j. Authorization for ICMA-RC Managed Accounts
k. Approval of Building Activity Report for December 2017
I. Approval of December 2017 Treasurer's Report
m. Approval of Claims List
6. Public Comments
7. Public Hearing - none
8. New and Unfinished Business
a. Resolution 2018-04 Approve Revised Fee Schedule
b. Resolution 2018-08 Appoint Planning Commission Member
c. Approve Proposed Classification and Compensation Plan
d. Approve and Authorize the Submission of the 2018 Pay Equity Report
9. Community Announcements
10. Council Comments
11. Adjourn
page 3
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
Minutes of the Regular Meeting
Held Tuesday, January 2, 2018
Pursuant to due call and notice, 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 Duggan, Paper, Miller, and Petschel
were also present.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Council, the audience, and staff recited the Pledge of Allegiance.
AGENDA ADOPTION
Mayor Garlock presented the agenda for adoption, making note that 5f. Approve Professional Services
Contract with KLJ for RFP Development has been postponed to a future meeting and item 9f. 2018 Fee
Schedule has been added. Councilor Duggan moved adoption of the agenda as revised.
Mayor Garlock seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
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 and authorization for execution
of any necessary documents contained therein, pulling items c. Purchase Field Grader for Park
Maintenance and j. Approval of Claims List.
a. Approval of December 19, 2017 City Council Minutes
b. Approve 2018 Financial Items
• Resolution 2018-02 Establishing 2018 City Depositories of Funds
• Resolution 2018-03 Accepting Pledged Securities for 2018
• Authorize Finance Director to Execute Electronic Payments and Prepay Claims
c. Purchase Field Grader for Park Maintenance
d. Resolution 2018-05 Calling for a Public Hearing on the Lexington Highlands, South Plaza Drive,
and Mendakota Neighborhood Improvements
e. Approve Police Officer Hire
f. Postponed to a future meeting
g. Ratify Agreement with Law Enforcement Labor Services, Inc. Local #76
page 4
h. Approve 2018-2019 Teamsters Labor Agreement COLA Adjustment
i. Receive Update on 2017-2018 City Council Goals Action Plan
j. Approval of Claims List
Councilor Duggan seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
PULLED CONSENT AGENDA ITEM
C) PURCHASE FIELD GRADER FOR PARK MAINTENANCE
Councilor Duggan asked for more information about the field grader attachment. Public Works Director
Ryan Ruzek replied that the current field grader has been in service for several years, and was
previously retired from the City of Eagan. This would be a laser guided plow that would connect to a
laser level that the city owns. It would be used to upgrade the baseball fields and hockey rinks, and is
estimated to last for at about 20 years. It would be purchased through the state contract.
Councilor Duggan moved to approve the purchase of a field grading plow attachment.
Mayor Garlock seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
J) APPROVAL OF CLAIMS LIST
City Administrator Mark McNeill, referencing the Dering Pierson Group invoice, stated that staff was
still working with the contractor and asked that the approval be deferred for two weeks.
Councilor Duggan asked about the status of the road salt budget. Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek
replied that the city was stocked up at the beginning of the year with salt left over from 2017.
Councilor Duggan asked about the cost of the Friendly Hills Warming House. Mr. Ruzek replied that
this was a newly constructed warming house, and additional improvements were made to the hockey
rinks, the lighting, along with new electric and gas services. Councilor Duggan asked who would be
reporting to staff on the condition of the rink. Mr. Ruzek replied that John Boland, Parks Supervisor, has
managed the building project and Meredith Lawrence, Recreation Coordinator, monitors the rink usage.
Mayor Garlock moved to approve the Claims List with the omission of Dering Pierson Group invoice.
Councilor Miller seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
PUBLIC COMMENTS
There were no public comments.
PRESENTATIONS
No items scheduled.
PUBLIC HEARING
No items scheduled.
page 5
NEW AND UNFINISHED BUSINESS
A) RESOLUTION 2018-01 RE -AFFIRMING AND PROVIDING ADDITIONAL FINDINGS FOR
APPROVING THE MENDOTA HEIGHTS APARTMENT PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT —
MICHAEL DEVELOPMENT (REF. PLANNING CASE NO. 2017-19)
— ORDINANCE 518 REZONING TO HR -PUD (HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL — PLANNED
UNIT DEVELOPMENT) 2160 & 2180 HIGHWAY 13 MICHAEL DEVELOPMENT PUD
Community Development Director Tim Benetti explained that this resolution was to re -affirm the
previous resolution approving the Mendota Heights Apartments Planned Unit Development (PUD). Also
Ordinance 518 would officially approve the rezoning of the property.
On June 6, 2017, the City Council adopted Resolution 2017-43, amending the Comprehensive Plan from
Business to HR -PUD at 2160 and 2180 Highway 13. On September 5, 2017, the City adopted
Resolution 2017-69 which approved the rezoning of this property from B-3 General Business District to
HR -PUD High Density Residential — Planned Unit Development, a preliminary plat, conditional use
permit, and a wetlands permit. A few weeks later, on September 21, 2017 the City Council also adopted
Resolution 2017-95 which approved a final plat for the subject property.
For clarification purposes, Mr. Benetti noted that the subject parcel — that being the former Larsen
Greenhouse and Mendota Heights Motel sites, was eligible for a PUD because the project consisted of a
residential use that would not otherwise be a permitted use in the B-3 zoning district.
According to Title 12-1K of the City Code, the conditions to be met to authorize a PUD are that the
Council may reduce the ten acre requirement for a planned unit development, but to no less than five (5)
acres, and only if it finds that the planned unit development, in addition to meeting all of the standards
of section 12-1K-5, is determined by the council to be "infill type development" that would be difficult
to develop, would not require any wetlands permits, would not require any critical area variance, would
not increase traffic or parking estimates for the project area above the level reasonably estimated for a
permitted use, and provides a landscaped buffer around the perimeter of the entire project area.
Mr. Benetti explained that the resolution before the Council provided additional findings and would not
reverse Resolution 2017-69. The Council would be re -affirming and adopting additional findings for
approval. Mr. Benetti explained the additional findings that are included in Resolution 2018-01.
The City Council was also asked to consider and adopt Ordinance No. 518, amending the official zoning
map and rezoning property located at 2160 Highway 13 and 2180 Highway 13 to HR -PUD High
Density Residential -Planned Unit Development District ("HR -PUD").
Councilor Miller stated that he spent time studying the information. Mr. Benetti indicated the City has
the discretion to create PUD's on sites that are less than 10 acres in size, however, they are limited by
seven thresholds which are contained in City Code Section 12-1K. He asked if staff had been aware of
these requirements in May, 2017. Mr. Benetti confirmed that they were aware.
page 6
Councilor Miller stated that, in his opinion, this action being now requested of the Council was an
attempt to rectify issues of threshold numbers, infill development, a wetlands permit, and traffic and
parking estimates. He pointed out that if the Minnesota Department of Transportation were to call for a
traffic study, the city would have had the developer do one. Mr. Benetti confirmed this to be correct.
Councilor Miller noted that the city was told, via a letter dated June 29, 2017 from MnDOT, that
because an apartment complex of this magnitude would generate upwards of a thousand trips per day,
that they were requiring a right-hand turn lane off Highway 13, yet a traffic study was not provided. He
quoted Mr. Benetti has having said that "they [MnDOT] believed that the road could handle the uptick
in traffic" — he then asked who from MnDOT made that assurance to the city. Mr. Benetti replied that it
was stated in a memo from MnDOT. The city provides them the plans and they provide the city with any
conditions. A traffic study was never requested in that memo.
Councilor Miller explained that each time information was prepared for the Planning Commission, the
Council, and the public, it was stated that the zoning was R-3 for the PUD. Once the Council amended
the Comprehensive Plan on June 6, 2017, only projects that met the requirements for that Residential
HR -PUD or R-3 would be eligible. Councilor Miller continued by saying that going back to the May 23,
2017 public hearing at the Planning Commission meeting, Mr. Benetti referenced that again, yet when
reviewing the traffic study that was completed by WSJ, there was no mention of the R-3 zoning;
however, they referenced a B -Business district. Mr. Benetti confirmed and stated that the original zoning
was B-3 General Business and that was changed to a new district - HR -PUD High Density Residential
Planned Unit Development. The traffic comparison was based on the previous zoning of B-3.
Councilor Miller asked if the city should not be following the guidelines of the R-3 zoning. Mr. Benetti
replied that they are following the HR -PUD. Mr. Miller asked why, on the traffic study, did it use the
comparison for the B-3 — wouldn't using the HR -PUD give them a lower number. Mr. Benetti replied
that when looking at the fourth bullet point (Will not increase traffic or parking estimates for the project
area above the level reasonably estimated for a permitted use for the project area's size in the zoning
district in which it is situated), that statement refers to the original B-3 zoning.
Councilor Miller claimed that the other part of the traffic study relating to the parking comparisons were
done using a number that Mr. Benetti recommended, which was 100 units less than what the current
ordinance requires.; rather than going with the current city ordinance. He asked why that was done in
that matter. Mr. Benetti replied that there was a previous study completed for The Reserve at Mendota
Village apartments. When staff reviewed it, they noted that basically the same study was used to
equivocate or to provide for a certain allowance for this development because Mr. Swenson did not want
to put in 2.5 stalls per unit. Staff felt it was more important to leave as much open space as possible on
this site. With parking spaces underground and the surface parking, the total came to be approximately
1.9 stalls per unit.
Councilor Miller, regarding the traffic study, said that WSJ referenced the fact that they used the 9th
Edition Trip Generation Manual and yet that is not the most recent one. There is a 10th edition. Mr.
Benetti replied that he assumed they were using the most recent edition.
Councilor Duggan, referencing the Wetlands Permit area, asked if in April or May of 2017, staff had not
determined that a Wetlands Permit was needed for this apartment proposal. Mr. Benetti replied that there
was a determination made early on that a Wetlands Permit should be applied for because it was really
page 7
unknown if it would be required until they got into the full development review. Councilor Duggan then
said that this initial determination — that a Wetlands Permit was required — continued through August
and September of 2017.
Mr. Benetti replied that it was initially determined by staff that the only impact to the wetlands was
going to be for a utility connection within the 100 -foot boundary. Staff has since asked the developer if
he could revise his plan to have all of the utility work completed outside of the boundary. Mr. Swenson,
the developer, has agreed to stay outside of the 100 foot wetland boundary for the utility connection.
Councilor Duggan asked when staff received the grading plan from the developer if it confirmed staff's
initial judgment that a Wetlands Permit was necessary. Mr. Benetti replied in the affirmative. Councilor
Duggan continued by stating that as Mr. Benetti was making these recommendations he knew that,
under section 12 -1K -2b of the city's zoning ordinance, this site was disqualified from being considered
for HR -PUD zoning or HR -PUD status under the city comprehensive plan if it required a Wetlands
Permit. Mr. Benetti replied that this statement was not correct. Councilor Duggan continued by stating
that Mr. Benetti recommended that the Planning Commission and the City Council violate the Code and
both parties did so. Mr. Duggan stated that because of a lawsuit filed, the developer has provided the
city with an altered grading and utility plan so that a Wetlands Permit would not be required.
City Attorney Tom Lehmann stated that he was not following what was Councilor Duggan's question.
Councilor Duggan repeated that he was asking for agreement that the facts were being altered because of
the lawsuit. City Attorney Tom Lehmann replied that this was Councilor Duggan's opinion but was not,
in fact, accurate with regards to why this had been requested. The attorney that represents the city in this
matter would say the same thing. He said that, in his experience, this is not uncommon. This is certainly
something that the Council would decide on whether to adopt or not. From his point of view, looking at
it as the representative of the city, that it was not done just to pad the lawsuit; it was not done in contrary
to the law allowing it; it was not uncommon to come up with additional findings when there was more
information relative to this.
Councilor Duggan stated that going back, the council was in agreement and advised through September,
October, and November 2017, that a Wetlands Permit was required. The approved plat on November 21,
2017 showed a utility easement along the east edge of the property line. Unless such an easement is
vacated, there is always a right to use the easement. He asked if the developer was going to vacate the
easement and if he did, would that not require a modification of the plan. Mr. Benetti replied that at this
point there were no plans to utilize this area.
Councilor Duggan asked where the developer was going to locate whatever it was he was going to do
that would have disturbed the soil within 100 feet of Lemay Lake. City Attorney Lehmann stated that he
wanted to make sure that, as he expressed, this was not the position that the city was taking on this. He
expressed his appreciation for Councilor Duggan's opinion, but it was not the stance the city was taking.
He requested that Councilor Duggan restate his questions in the form that this was his position because
it comes across, in the record, that it is the city's. The city has not voted on this and to generalize these
opinions create an unclear record that would be part of the ongoing lawsuit.
Councilor Duggan then asked if anyone has seen a new upgraded utility and grading plan from the
developer. Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek stated that the utility plan was revised — there was a
sanitary sewer connection along the eastern property line; the City of Mendota Heights still maintains an
page 8
undeveloped right-of-way easement in that location. Within that undeveloped right-of-way that runs
between the subject parcel and Lemay Lake, the city owns a mainline sanitary sewer. The development
was going to make a new connection on that main line. Instead of where they originally showed their
connection, which was going to be within that 100 -foot wetlands buffer, they were going to be putting
the connection further north — outside of that buffer. Councilor Duggan asked if that information should
had been provided to the Council. Mr. Ruzek replied that the items being reviewed now were actually
for a plat approval. The city and staff are required to make sure developments meet their code; as far as
utility connections and those are typically not reviewed by the Council.
Councilor Duggan continued. The Planning Report of August 22, 2017 to the Planning Commission
disclosed that the south building would be located 88.1 feet from the east property line. The east
property line is less than 50 feet from the high water mark of Lemay Lake. Residents in the area are
concerned. Councilor Duggan believed that this needs to be addressed.
He then asked if the developer's revised plans showed where the on-site utilities were going to be
installed, and when would the Council get to see those plans? Councilor Duggan stated that with the
challenges that had been presented and looking at the requirements, he did not believe that those
requirements were being met.
Councilor Miller, referencing the comment made by Mr. Ruzek that typically the plans would not come
before the Council, asked for confirmation that they should have gone to the Planning Commission. Mr.
Ruzek replied that the plans were provided in the Council packet; however, they were generally not
scalable or measurable. The grading review, the stormwater review, and the utility review happens in
strong detail during the building permit phase. Building permit phases are not approved by the City
Council. That type of grading is not scrutinized by the elected officials. Where the utility connects to the
city's main line would not have a major impact on the development. Mr. Ruzek also noted that he had
not received a revised grading plan; the original grading plan had a generalized 100 -foot buffer area.
The developer added a surveyed 100 -foot buffer on the plan. All of the grading has always been outside
of that 100 -foot zone.
Councilor Miller stated that if the grading plans were altered from the original iteration, no one had seen
the evidence or assurance that the developer no longer needed a Wetlands Permit. He noted that there
had been a `commonly accepted' definition of "infill" and asked who it was commonly accepted by. It
appears to still be at odds with the definition of the city's zoning ordinance. Despite the 12-1 K- l d of the
zoning ordinance, which required certain parking and traffic estimates be made under the threshold
requirements of PUD's less than 10 acres; at no point has the council or the public been provided with
the information for consideration.
Furthermore, Councilor Miller said that in every instance, when referencing this it had been referred to
as a R-3 zoning. Tonight it had been decided to reference it back to B-3. Nearly four months after the
Council voted to approve this PUD, the Council sees the parking and traffic estimates. He said that this
seemed to be a rather retroactive manner.
Councilor Miller continued, stating that in an attempt to comply with the zoning ordinance and act in a
conservative manner regarding the creation of a PUD under 10 acres, where it is normally permitted for
46 units, the Council had been asked to vote on something that more than tripled that amount at 140
page 9
units. To him that was not conservative. None of this information in his opinion, was complete. The
public hearing was not complete because it contained incomplete information.
Councilor Miller believed that the public, the people who trusted enough to vote for the Councilors,
have not had the opportunity to support, comment on, or oppose the seemingly now revised product.
This should be the very purpose of having a public meeting. In his opinion, this had been a debacle and
the Council owed it to themselves and, more importantly, to the residents to right the ship.
City Attorney Tom Lehmann replied that Councilor Miller was absolutely right, the policy was the
Councils', and his job was to point out the law and make sure the city was following the law. In regards
to the grading plan, it was his understanding that the grading plan had never changed; the only thing that
had changed was the utility connection that Mr. Ruzek talked about.
In response to the comments made about the meaning of "infill type development," City Attorney
Lehmann stated that when the Council was asked to make decisions based upon ordinances, one of the
things that was looked at was to see if there was a definition that would define commonly used terms. In
this case, the city's code did not define an `infill type development' with respect to how it would be
applied in a PUD. As the memo pointed out, it did define `infill type development' with regards to noise
attenuation and aircraft. In that situation, he said that it would not be uncommon to look outside of that
and refer to other types of definitions that have been used in other codes or in other cities who have used
this definition. That was how staff came up with the commonly accepted meaning of "infill type
development." In his opinion, the city could feel pretty comfortable that the definition used was not out
of the ordinary, did not stretch the limits of the imagination, was not set forth to strengthen the city's
position in any way — it was a commonly referred definition in the zoning, area, or realm of people who
deal with this.
City Attorney Lehmann continued with regards to the parking and what the code referred to, was that
this site had been zoned B-3. The ordinance said that the city could not increase the parking or the traffic
greater than what it was zoned. He was unsure where this R-3 came into since it was not an R-3. It could
be rezoned to a HR -PUD and the code required that the city could not increase the traffic greater than it
was originally zoned for — and that was what the traffic study showed. As a result it fell within the
allowable things that the Council could decide if it wanted to grant this PUD.
Councilor Duggan stated that it was clear to him that in adopting the HR -PUD, the Council had to
determine what kind of zoning would be used. The underlying zoning of the land, before the adoption of
the PUD, was what prevailed.
He continued by saying that anyone could debate the argument that the traffic would be more or less
than the previous zoning would allow. However, if it were to be 140 units, and the standard age of
residents living there would be 40 to 60 years, he said that it would normally be assumed at 10 trips a
day per unit — equaling approximately 1,400 trips per day, not the 1,000 trips per day being heard. This
proposal has issued a challenge of how to make a left-hand turn onto Highway 13, which had been very
difficult. It would be much more difficult after this or any other development.
The tree planting and the grading were all to be in the perimeter. Councilor Duggan stated that he was
unsure if he had seen a clear delineation of what was proposed there.
page 10
For these, and many other reasons, he had suggested that this proposal go back to the drawing board,
which he still believed to not be unreasonable.
City Attorney Lehmann stated that it was important that it be understood exactly what the code said. In
regards to the traffic and parking, the code says 'it would not increase traffic or parking estimates for the
project area above the level reasonably estimated for a permitted use' which was B-3.
Councilor Duggan asked if there was a record of what the traffic had been before this. City Attorney
Lehmann replied that he did not know the answer to that and he did not know if it was relevant or not.
All the city had to show was that it was not more than what was allowed in the B-3 zone.
Councilor Duggan continued by stating that it seemed to be a lot of playing around with definitions of
words; the word `reasonable', the word `amended', the word `type' in the phrase infill type development
— he was unsure where `type' came into play because if it read `infill development' they would be
limited in what could be built there because of its proximity to the airline paths and noise attenuation.
City Attorney Lehmann replied that what was set forth when it said 'the commonly accepted meaning of
"infill type development" referred to a development that was proposed on a vacant or under-utilized
parcel of land that was located in an urban area that was largely developed and was already served by
public infrastructure, such as water, transportation, storm and waste water and other utilities', which was
what was had here. The definition that was in the code pertained to an `undeveloped parcel or parcels of
land proposed for development similar to or less noise sensitive than the developed parcels surrounding
the undeveloped parcels'. That definition does not apply to what is being done in this situation with the
PUD and that was why it was not uncommon or not an unaccepted practice to go out and try to find a
more common definition.
Councilor Duggan moved that the Council go back to the drawing board, start all over again with the
developer and the city working together.
Councilor Miller seconded the motion.
Ayes: 2 (Duggan, Miller)
Nays: 3 (Paper, Petschel, Garlock)
City Attorney Tom Lehmann stated that he wanted to make sure that it was clear that the code for
Mendota Heights talks about `infill type development'. That was the realm in which staff needed to
operate in to determine the definition. Staff did not add any words to that definition. The code
requirements were determined by the Council to be "the infill type development", that would be difficult
to develop.
Councilor Paper moved to adopt RESOLUTION 2018-01, REAFFIRMING AND ADOPTING
ADDITIONAL FINDINGS RELATING TO THE APPROVAL OF A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
AMENDMENT, REZONING, PRELIMINARY PLAT, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, AND FINAL
PLAT TO MICHAEL DEVELOPMENT OF MINNESOTA, LLC FOR THE NEW MENDOTA
HEIGHTS APARTMENT PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (LOCATED AT 2160 AND 2180
HIGHWAY 13).
Councilor Petschel seconded the motion.
page 11
Councilor Duggan stated that when looking at the resolution, it talked about `reaffirming and adopting
additional findings' and then asked what the `additional findings' were.
Mayor Garlock commented that he was aware that this process had been ongoing since February 2017.
He also knew that Councilor Duggan met with city staff and Michael Development and they talked
about the impervious surface. They agreed to reduce a couple of lanes of parking to increase the green
space. They talked about the setbacks and the developer agreed to shorten one of the buildings.
Councilor Duggan had worked with them and staff, and then there were revisions made to the plans.
Councilor Duggan spoke up and said that he had not seen any of the drawings or delineations showing
any of the items that were discussed, other than the parking.
Mayor Garlock continued by stating that Councilor Duggan had expressed his approval with 80 to 100
units. As far as the traffic, he believed that it had been well stated that in the B-3 zone, there could be
businesses that would generate more traffic than this apartment building. There have been many
meetings with Michael Development; he stated this has been an open process. The Council has
documented all of the meetings that have been had. Like any other project, there are always changes
made during the process. He said that the Council does not limit the number of changes that can be
made.
Mayor Garlock complimented the staff for their hours of work put into this project. Staff is paid for their
knowledge and ability to guide the City Council and the Planning Commission. He expressed respect in
their positions and in their knowledge because this was not his field of expertise. City Attorney Tom
Lehmann provided legal advice and said that we trust in his judgment. He believed this to be a good
project, however, changes could still be made down the road.
Councilor Duggan asked for permission to reveal what he and the Mayor discussed three or four months
ago; which the Mayor stated was ok. Councilor Duggan said that the Mayor was concerned for Mr.
Swenson as he had made a significant investment and Councilor Duggan replied that was his risk. He
said that the Council did not have to guarantee that someone will make money developing within the
City. Councilor Duggan believed that the standards and the principles of the city were being pushed
aside.
Councilor Duggan agreed that it was a good project — to a point. It was just too large of a project.
Councilor Paper commented that, in his opinion, what Mr. Swenson has brought to the city was 140
units of housing at market rate. In order to qualify for a market rate apartment, a person must have a
good job. He said that 25 year olds are not necessarily looking to purchase a home. It is ok for the City
to evolve, to move forward, and to progress while being measured. Mr. Swenson was bringing the city a
quality project that the city would not find any problems with in the future. He was able to finance the
project and will see it through to completion.
Councilor Paper stated that there is a beautiful apartment project being built at Dodd and Highway 110.
The roof is now on and soon residents would be moving in. Mr. Swenson is also providing a benefit to
the city by allowing more people to enjoy this community. The city needs to evolve — and not always be
looking back at 1970. He said that if the city is not evolving, it is dying.
Councilor Petschel reminded everyone that it was alright to disagree.
page 12
Mayor Garlock called for the vote.
Ayes: 3 (Paper, Petschel, Garlock)
Nays: 2 (Duggan, Miller)
Councilor Paper moved to adopt ORDINANCE NO. 518 AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP
rezoning property located as 2160 Highway 13 and 2180 Highway 13 to HR -PUD High Density
Residential -Planned Unit Development District ("HR -PUD").
Mayor Garlock seconded the motion
Ayes: 3 (Paper, Petschel, Garlock)
Nays: 2 (Duggan, Miller)
B) MENDOTA HEIGHTS 2040 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE — FROM PHIL CARLSON,
CONSULTING PLANNER — STANTEC
Consulting Planner Phil Carlson from Stantec provided an update on the Comprehensive Plan process.
He said that no decision was being asked of the Council that evening, but that comments were welcome.
This plan update was started in 2016. Stantec has worked with the Planning Commission on the Goals &
Vision stage of the plan. They are currently in the Alternatives stage. The six stages of the plan are
Project Initiation, Inventory & Analysis, Goals & Vision, Alternatives, Implementation, and Plan
Preparation.
Mr. Carlson stated that the City is currently at a population of just over 11,000 residents and is not
expected to grow dramatically. The age profile shows that Mendota Heights is an aging community.
The City now has more people over 40 than under 40 years of age. The number of households with
children has dropped by approximately 300, and households without children has increased by
approximately 300. The City has a better educational achievement than some of the surrounding
communities and the state. The median market value of homes is significantly higher than the
surrounding communities and the county. In regards to affordable housing needs, the suggestion is that
Mendota Heights should be able to have the potential to allow for 50 units by allowing areas to be zoned
at a reasonable density that could allow multi -family housing and less expensive housing. There are
4,000+ owner occupied housing units and not quite 600 renter occupied housing units. Most of the
housing was developed in the 1970's, 80's, and 90's. This does not reflect the new housing that is under
construction.
The mapping of the existing land use and future land use to be provided in the Comprehensive Plan;
may not change significantly because the area is largely developed. There are estimates of 80,000 —
90,000 cars a day that travel on I-494 and I -35E; 20,000+ on Highway 110; 8,000 — 9,000 cars per day
on Dodd Road. All of these numbers will only increase over time. The City is served by several bus
lines, however, the city is not hugely dependent on transit.
The Council should continue working with the parks commission to review improvements and
connections to park areas. A critical area along the Mississippi River exists.
page 13
Amenities in the City include stable single family neighborhoods, which are centrally located in the
metropolitan area; proximity to both downtown areas; and high quality schools. Challenges include
limited public transit and lack of retail, goods, services, and restaurants. The City is mostly developed
causing high land prices. There is a significant concentration of retail at Dodd and Highway 110; strong
retail market metro -wide influencing Mendota Heights. The City strengths include visibility from
Highway 110; far from competing retail area; high incomes; modest opportunities. The weaknesses
include limited prospects for destination retails.
The Industrial and Office Pluses include low unemployment --Mendota Heights has two jobs for every
employable resident of the community. The Industrial Park is largely buffered from the rest of the
community and takes the brunt of the airport noise. Industrial and Office minuses include that there is
not a lot of land left; no retail or restaurant options for employees; no sidewalks; airport noise; limited
transit.
Mr. Carlson reviewed the vision statement that had been developed for the City: Mendota Heights will
be recognized as a high quality, family-oriented, residential community with a vibrant business and
industrial base; highly regarded educational and religious institutions; a spacious, natural feel; and the
amenities of a city.
The mission statement for Mendota Heights that was developed was: Our mission is to preserve and
enhance the quality of life in Mendota Heights by providing quality, public safety, infrastructure, and
planning for orderly and sustainable growth.
To receive feedback and comments from the community, Stantec conducted community workshops, an
online survey, a SWOT Analysis (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats), and community open
houses.
Mr. Carlson will work in January with Community Development Director Tim Benetti to develop the
draft alternatives for the elements of the Plan to be brought to the February Planning Commission
meeting; draft implementation plans in March, and expect to have a full draft of the Plan by May in front
of the Planning Commission and City Council. It is hoped that an open house and Public Hearing on the
Plan would take place in June, 2018 so that the City Council can consider approval this summer.
In regards to the survey, Councilor Paper asked how they engaged the 120 people that responded? Mr.
Carlson replied that the survey was available on the city's Facebook page and the city's website; other
informal community Facebook pages were also utilized. Councilor Paper asked if it had been in the
Heights Highlights. Community Development Director Tim Benetti replied that it had been in the
Heights Highlights when the announcements were made about the open houses.
Councilor Paper believed that 120 responses seemed low for a community of 11,000. Mr. Carlson
replied that in his experience, this response rate was pretty good. Councilor Paper then asked how long,
on average, had it taken for an individual to complete the survey? Mr. Carlson replied that it was not a
long survey. He said that there were specific questions and an open ended question to provide additional
comments.
Councilor Paper then referenced the lack of public transportation and asked how the City could get the
Metropolitan Council, who subsidizes the bus service, to add more bus lines or more frequency to
page 14
support the businesses? Mr. Carlson replied that it would probably be a multi -pronged effort between
city staff and the owners/operators of the businesses to approach the Metropolitan Council with that
request.
Councilor Paper asked if Mendota Heights gets overlooked for additional bus service because of the
assumption that the city does not need it? Mr. Carlson replied that he did not believe so. They are
looking at ridership and numbers. Councilor Petschel noted a report that was done several years ago of a
license plate study in the Park 'n Ride for the light rail station at the Veterans Administration. They
traced the license plates to where the commuter was from and the vast majority were found to be from
Mendota Heights. This community is a big user of the light rail station at the VA, which she found
interesting.
Councilor Miller asked if anyone had collected any data on the 120 responders to the survey? Mr.
Carlson replied that those types of questions were not asked. The intent was to foster discussion and to
get ideas about what the residents thought of the community and to obtain suggestions.
Councilor Duggan praised Mr. Carlson for a job well done.
C) DESIGNATION OF OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER
City Administrator Mark McNeill noted that over the past 35 years the City has used the South-West
Review as its official newspaper. However, the Pioneer Press has also made a proposal to be the official
newspaper. He said that both papers offered advantages. The Pioneer Press is a daily newspaper and
gives staff more flexibility in publishing notices. They have 5,500 subscribers in Mendota Heights. The
South-West Review has provided the city with very good service for the past 35 years and they are
slightly less in rates. It is a weekly newspaper, and each residence of Mendota Heights is delivered a free
paper.
Councilor Paper commented that the local newspaper still has a place in the community. They are the
ones providing the residents with direct access to local happenings. He said that if we do not support
these small locals, they will be gone.
Councilor Miller echoed Councilor Paper's comments.
Councilor Duggan expressed his support of the Pioneer Press. He said that they have approximately
5,500 paid subscribers from the city, which is the majority of the houses in the community. He has yet to
see the South West Review being delivered to his door. He suggested the city try it for a year.
Councilor Petschel stated that she liked the flexibility of the Pioneer Press because it is a daily paper.
She also did not know where to pick up a South West Review. On the other hand, she had a tremendous
love and sympathy for small town newspapers.
Mayor Garlock stated that he does receive the South West Review and that he receives the Pioneer Press
as well. He understands that it would be easier for staff with the Pioneer Press. He has spoken to the
reporter with the South West Review many times and they have done a very good job.
Councilor Duggan moved to designate the Pioneer Press as the official newspaper.
page 15
Councilor Petschel seconded the motion.
Ayes: 3 (Duggan, Petschel, Garlock)
Nays: 2 (Paper, Miller)
D) DESIGNATION OF 2018 ACTING MAYOR
Councilor Petschel moved to reappoint Councilor Joel Paper to be acting Mayor for 2018.
Councilor Miller seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
E) CITY COUNCIL APPOINTMENTS TO COMMISSIONS
City Administrator Mark McNeill noted that the Park and Recreation Advisory Commission currently
has two student appointees. He recommended the students be appointed on a school year basis. He
suggested that the current appointees be extended through July 1, 2018.
Councilor Paper suggested that the process be opened up in April and appointed by June 1St
Mr. McNeill said that the information on the current Planning Commission opening is on the city's
website. He suggested that a workshop session be scheduled for January 16, prior to the next Council
meeting to interview applicants for this open position.
Councilor Petschel pointed out that the liaison appointment to the Dakota County Sheriff's Advisory
Board is made by the Sheriff, at his discretion, and is not a City appointment.
The following will represent the City in 2018:
Traffic Safety Committee
City Council—Councilor Liz Petschel
Planning Commission—Litton Field
Lower Mississippi River Watershed
Citizen Rep --Mary Jean Schneeman
Alternate --Jill Smith
Dakota County Sheriff's Advisory Board
Representative—Councilor Liz Petschel
F) 2018 FEE SCHEDULE & SANITARY SEWER RATES
City Administrator Mark McNeill explained that the fee schedule is reviewed annually. Staff would like
to review the proposed changes and then bring it back to the Council for official action in two weeks.
Councilor Duggan suggested that the amendments be discussed at the work session on January 16th. This
suggestion was approved by all.
page 16
COMMUNITY ANNOUNCEMENTS
City Administrator Mark McNeill announced that residents can now sign up for the Royal Ball to be
held on February 11th for fourth grade students or younger. The ice rinks are also open.
COUNCIL COMMENTS
Mayor Garlock noted two contributions from Mr. Joe Meisinger, one for the Scott Patrick Benevolent
Fund for $500 and another for Special Olympics for $1,250.
Councilor Miller expressed his appreciation to have an open and respectful discussion this evening. He
expressed his appreciation to everyone who participated in the 2nd Annual Greater Mendota Heights Pub
Crawl over Christmas break.
Councilor Paper expressed Happy New Year wishes to everyone. He urged everyone to get out and use
the ice rinks. He also wished the mayor continued good health in the coming year.
Councilor Duggan expressed Happy New Year to everyone. He also noted the Sibley High School Band
is accepting contributions for the Washington DC trip on July 4th to represent the State of Minnesota.
Councilor Petschel echoed Councilor Miller's comments that it is wonderful that the Council can come
together and agree to disagree.
She stated that there were a couple of statements made recently that are simply not true. She has found
the use of these statements disturbing. One is that the apartment project lacked transparency. She said
that that was a completely false statement. She had two pages of publicly noticed meetings that had
minutes and that they are able to be viewed on the City's website. All of the discussions were public,
and to imply that this group was involved in something that was not transparent was something about
which she was offended.
She was also offended by something said by a homeowners association and by an ad-hoc neighborhood
group; that being the existence of backroom deals. Again, she said that that was a lie. This statement was
said and anyone can go back and review the recorded meeting. That was something that absolutely did
not occur — she felt that that is slander. She felt that this comment slandered the developer, this Council,
the Planning Commission and city staff. She said that there were no backroom deals and there was
nothing done that was not transparent.
The other thing that bothered her was that there was a lack of acknowledgement that the City needs
housing of this sort. The council has received feedback from the residents and Dakota County. Residents
are aging in place and would like to stay here, and they have no place to go. Along with that, there are
millennials who want to move here and have no place to move into. The demographics, she believed,
was going to show millennials cycling into the city and residents who are aging in place taking
advantage of this new housing as a way of eventually cycling out of the city.
She had heard statements that the city did not need to provide this kind of housing. However, she said
that we do because we try to meet the residents' needs.
page 17
She had also heard the statement made that this would become a precedent, and how would the city ever
say "no". She said that the city has already said no. She made the motion to kill the Trammel Crow
project at The Village because it did not seem right.
With concerns about the lake, she does not believe that anyone had any idea how contaminated this
piece of property actually is. This property previously had much more impervious surface with no
drainage plan. The greenhouse property was never hooked up to the sewer. Developing this piece of
property is a huge challenge for anybody because of the contaminated soil conditions. What had to be
put in was something with underground parking that could be vented 24 hours a day. Anyone concerned
about the lake should celebrate this plan because it will finally captures and treats the stormwater, which
will only help the lake conditions. She found it distressing that there was concern about the lake but no
acknowledgement that this process would finally address many of things that were stressing the lake.
Another comment which she has heard was that the city "gave the store away" when they did the TIF
[tax increment financing] assistance. She said that the council had worked with Ehlers, a highly
respected bonding group. A public workshop was done with Ehlers about exploring TIF for this project.
They had looked at what Mr. Swenson was asking for in terms of a TIF. TIF did not mean that he would
not be paying taxes. She said that the Ehlers opinion was that "this was a very modest TIF project".
Councilor Petschel stated she would like the discussions to be polite. Her issue was with a lot of the
pejorative language that had been used, and the things that had been stated that simply were not true.
She was upset about how these pejorative terms had been used as a broad brush on this Council, on the
developer, on the staff, and on the Planning Commission. Therefore, speaking for herself, she
apologized to the staff, to Mr. Swenson, to the Planning Commission, and to this group.
ADJOURN
Mayor Garlock moved to adjourn.
Councilor Miller seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
Mayor Garlock adjourned the meeting at 9:22 p.m.
Neil Garlock
Mayor
ATTEST:
Lorri Smith
City Clerk
page 18
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS, DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
PARKS AND RECREATION MEETING
December 11, 2017
The October meeting of the Mendota Heights Parks and Recreation Commission was held on Monday,
December 11, 2017, at Mendota Heights City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve.
1. Call to Order — Chair Pat Hinderscheid called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m.
2. Roll Call —The following Commissioners were present: Chair Pat Hinderscheid, Commissioners Steve
Goldade, Bob Klepperich, David Miller, and Nissa Tupper. Absent: Ira Kipp and Stephanie Levine. Staff
present: Assistant City Administrator Cheryl Jacobson, Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek, and Recreation
Program Coordinator Meredith Lawrence.
3. Approval of Agenda
The agenda was approved as presented. Motion Klepperich/second Tupper. AYES 5: NAYS 0: ABSENT 2
4. Approval of Minutes from November 14, 2017
Motion Klepperich/Second Goldade to approve the minutes of the November 14, 2017 Parks and
Recreation Commission meeting. AYES 5: NAYS 0: ABSENT 2
5. Unfinished and New Business
5.a Presentation on Skateboard Park — Mark Rodriguez, 3rd Lair
Recreation Program Coordinator Meredith Lawrence explained that this item was on the activity list and
was recently requested. She then introduced Mr. Mark Rodriguez of 3rd Lair to talk about the skateboard
park at Roger's Lake Park. She noted that 3rd Lair partners with the City on the majority of its skateboard
camps in the summer.
Mr. Rodriguez gave a presentation on the current condition of the skateboard park and what
improvements could be made. He also shared that skateboarding has experienced a boom and that
there are skateboarding locations in almost every community throughout the Twin Cities and nationally.
Skateboarding and action sports are some of the fastest growing participant sports in the world and will
even be in the Olympics in 2020.
He described the current condition of the Roger's Lake Skateboard Park as 'falling part'. He made the
following improvement suggestions:
• Either fix the cracks in the ground or, better yet, pour a new cement floor/base
• Keep the half -pipe ramp that is there, it's in good shape and is a gem for the park
• Everything else should either be rebuilt or have maintenance work done - or completely done
away with - in lieu of brand-new equipment
• Ideally, completely rebuild the skateboard park
Commissioners asked questions regarding the best materials to make the equipment, the amount of
time park amenities should last, types of ramp that should be installed, how long the maintenance work
page 19
would take, and how the City could determine if there would be enough participants to make the
investment worthwhile.
When questioned, Mr. Rodriguez noted that the maintenance contract they have with Cottage Grove is
$10,000 per year. He also noted that the cost of the new skateboard park installed in St. Louis Park was
$230,000 [smaller footprint then in Mendota Heights] and is free to users. At a minimum, to re -do a park
in a meaningful way, would cost approximately $250,000.
The cost to just do maintenance on the Roger's Lake Skateboard Park, minus the floor since that is
outside of their expertise, would be approximately $5,000 - $10,000.
Mr. Rodriguez stated that 3rd Lair would be happy to assist the City in preparing a written assessment
with tiered options on items that could be done from the minimum that needs to be done, what would
be nice, and what would be best case scenario.
Motion Goldade/Second Miller to direct staff to work with 3' Lair to come up with a list of fixes and
improvements to the Roger's Lake Skateboard Park, including the surface repair as an item to
investigate. AYES 5: NAYS 0: ABSENT 2
5.b Bluebill Drive Right -of -Way Vacation
Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek explained that a couple of months ago the City received a request to
vacate an undeveloped right-of-way on the north side of Rogers Lake. Council did proceed with vacating
that right-of-way known as Rogers Avenue.
The homeowner to the north of this right-of-way there is a 60 -foot right-of-way known as Bluebill Drive
that goes all of the way out to the middle of the lake. This platted right-of-way is not serving any sub -
dividable parcels and is not in the best interest of the city to retain. However, the City does have a storm
sewer that goes down the center of the right-of-way, which outlets into Rogers Lake. Minor
maintenance to that outlet is done by city staff and eventually that pipe would need to be replaced.
If the Council were to go ahead with this right-of-way vacation they would require a 20 -foot easement
to be dedicated back to the city over the storm sewer. The DNR responded on the previous vacation and
stated that it was located close enough to Rogers Lake Park, and that the park has ample parking and
has a fishing pier and a boat launch that they saw no need on that north right-of-way for the city to
maintain it for any public access.
The notice has been sent to the DNR for this current vacation request and staff does not anticipate any
feedback to be received from them until early February. The public hearing is to be scheduled for
February 20, 2018; staff was seeking comments from the Commission on if they see any value to this 60 -
foot right-of-way as it exists today.
Commissioners asked questions pertaining to future needs of this right-of-way in providing additional
access to Rogers Lake, if ownership of the right-of-way would revert to the homeowners on either side,
could the city reclaim the right-of-way once it was vacated, if there would be any cost savings or
reduction in liability to the city, if the property would go back on the tax roll, how many of these right-
of-way situations exist on Rogers Lake, what situations would initiate this type of request, and why
would this be agreeable to the city.
page 20
Commissioners expressed their opinion that this vacation sounded reasonable.
5.c Ash Tree Management Policy Revisions
Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek explained that in September 2017, the Commission reviewed the
current Ash Tree Management Policy. At that time, there were suggestions made by the Commission to
include treatment in the policy. This revised policy does not go as far as the Commission had wanted in
terms of trying to get a program going to treat private trees as Council has not really expressed a desire
to offer a city-wide subsidy to treatment of private trees.
Council usually holds goal setting workshop in January and this would be a good time to poll them again
on how they would like to proceed with some of the Ash Tree Management.
5.d Grant Tracking Discussion
Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek noted for the Commissions information that the City is a member of
the Lower Mississippi Watershed Management Organization (LMRWMO). Part of that organization is to
hire a consultant that maintains a Grant Tracking Database. They are consistently combing all of the
other agencies websites and information that they come across to keep this database together.
He stated that anyone on the Commission could review the information in the database and make a
recommendation to staff and the Council on applying if they see something that would be of benefit to
the City.
5.e Fee Assistance Program Discussion
Recreation Program Coordinator Meredith Lawrence explained that recently there has been an influx of
residents seeking financial assistance in the recreation programs. Currently, the City of Mendota Heights
does not have an assistance program or policy set in place.
Upon investigation, it was discovered that cities surrounding Mendota Heights all have Fee Assistance
Programs that have a set amount or percentage that the student would receive off if they qualify.
Staff proposed a Fee Assistance Policy that they would put in place making it clear to residents what
they would qualify for. It would also make it easier for staff to have a clear policy to go by.
• This program would only be available to Mendota Heights residents who can prove their address
as part of the application.
• The maximum that a family would receive each calendar year would be $100 per child and
would include programs such as skating, gymnastics, summer playgrounds, tennis camp, and
golf camp.
• To be eligible for the programs, students must be enrolled in the district's free and reduced
lunch program or have a parent who is on active duty in the military.
• Children under the age of 18 would be eligible and they would receive a 15% reduction on each
program up to a maximum of $100 per child
page 21
Staff provided a summary of other community's policies, of which Mendota Heights would fall
somewhere in the middle, along with data from the MN Department of Education regarding Free &
Reduced Lunch for the ISD 197 District.
The commission asked questions that Ms. Lawrence answered.
Suggestions included:
• Instead of a 15% reduction, the family would pay 15%-20% of the fee and the city would pay the
rest, and the maximum per child be increased to $150-$200 per calendar year.
• Split the fee 50/50 with the family paying 50% and the city paying the other 50%.
• Follow West St. Paul's example — 50% per child for two programs
• Donation program where citizens can contribute to the scholarship programs
Motion Miller to adopt the same policy as West St. Paul — where individuals receive funding for half of
the program fee per child, which can be used twice during the same year. Motion died for lack of a
second.
Motion Hinderscheid/Second Goldade that the City establish a Fee Assistance Program where eligible
families would contribute 15% of the fee per child for one activity and 50% of the fee per child for a
second activity; limit two activities per child per calendar year. Eligible programs would include: skating,
gymnastics, summer playgrounds, tennis camp, and golf camp. AYES 5: NAYS 0: ABSENT 2
5.f Par 3 Financial Report
Recreation Program Coordinator Meredith Lawrence presented the Par 3 Financial Report to the
commission.
Par 3 had Tiger Tots Golf Camp with 24 participants, Golf Camp with 134 participants, Wednesday Night
Women's Golf League with 89 participants, and Junior Golf League with 148 participants. The estimate is
that there were 6,000 rounds of golf played this year.
Revenue budget was estimated to be $171,250; actual revenue as of November 30, 2017 was $145,211.
Expenditures were estimated to be $140,816 and the actual expenditures was $144,128. Currently there
is a $1,000 profit. However, there are recurring costs yet to be paid for December.
Notable items: there was a one-time expense of the solar panels; some of the pull carts were replaced;
and some unbudgeted marketing expenses.
Commissioners asked questions about revenue being down and what specific groups were down,
marketing expenses, and for staff to provide a comparison of 2016 to 2017.
A final close-out budget will be provided to the City Council in January and staff proposed to bring that
to the commission in January as well.
A suggestion was made that the Commission revisit the no fee increase since the revenue has been flat
over the last couple of years, especially in light of the one-time expenditures that, most likely, will
continue to occur. Since the fees will be set next week, staff suggested that if the fees were to be
changed they should be done at this meeting.
page 22
Ms. Lawrence pulled up the comparison rate chart on the screen for the Commissioners to review.
Discussion occurred over different ways of marketing to increase revenue without raising the rates. Staff
suggested that the rates be raised by $1/round.
Motion Miller/Second Klepperich to increase the current rates by $1/round, leaving the second additional
round at $6, and leaving the foot golf at the current rate of $8/round AYES 5: NAYS 0: ABSENT 2
5.g Set Meeting Dates for 2018
Recreation Program Coordinator Meredith Lawrence shared the proposed meetings dates for the Parks
and Recreation Commission in 2018.
It was noted that there may be a school referendum vote scheduled for Tuesday, May 8; however, that
may not affect the Commission. Staff will review the State Statute about whether or not the Commission
will be able to meet before 8:00 p.m.
6. Reports
6.a Parks and Recreation Commission Activity Report
Recreation Program Coordinator Meredith Lawrence noted that she had spoken with Community
Development Director Tim Benetti in the morning and he was still compiling the information regarding
goals and plans on bringing a progress summary to Council at it January 2, 2018 meeting. Both Mr.
Benetti and Mr. Phil Carlson will return to the Commission in the future to provide an update in early
Spring.
6.b Recreation Update
Recreation Program Coordinator Meredith Lawrence provided the update:
• Friendly Hills Warming House is almost completed; still on budget
• Two field trips are scheduled in December; 12/27 is bowling / movie; 12/28 is tubing. Each trip is
$25/day, registration on the Mendota Heights website or in person at City Hall
• Staff is currently planning the Royal Ball scheduled for February 11, 2018 at the Concord
Exchange Building
• Skiing lessons to begin at Friendly Hills Park on January 6, 2018 and will run through February 3,
2018. Registration is online or in person at City Hall
• The City hopes to have ice by the middle of next week [Wednesday, December 20]
• Gymnastic classes began Saturday, December 2; 48 youths registered this year, and will run
through February 11, 2018
• Certified Playground Inspection — Ms. Lawrence is currently working to compile information on
the inspections and will have that information available at the January 2018 meeting
• Ice rinks are starting to be flooded; hours for the rinks to be posted on the City's website and
there is a rink hotline that will be updated.
page 23
6.c Natural Resources Update
Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek shared that the Public Works crews attended a winter maintenance
training program through Dakota County. They are looking to improve some of their salt usage to help
improve some of the water quality.
Tips:
• Use salt and sand at home
• Use only what you need
• If it's warmer than 15 degrees use salt; if it's colder than 15 degrees use sand
• After the area is warm and dry, sweep up the leftovers for reuse
Suggestion was made to put sand down on the 5K trail.
It was noted that Sibley High School is looking to demolish their three tennis courts and maybe staff or
the commission could look into the possibility of using them for pickleball as a cost saving measure.
7. Announcements and Commission Comments
Mr. Pat Hinderscheid and Mr. Ira Kipp were reappointed to the Parks and Recreation Commission at the
last City Council meeting, for a 3 -year term.
Commissioner Nissa Tupper expressed her appreciation for the diligence staff had in preparing the
materials for the meeting and for their follow-through. She really enjoyed the presentation on the
skateboard park and learning more on the options as it is a good asset for the community.
She also appreciated the discussion on the Fee Assistance Policy in making the City's programming
successful.
She also reminded residents of the holiday lights collection box at City Hall.
Commissioner David Miller complimented Ms. Lawrence on her first full meeting and her performance,
which was as if she had been on the job for a year already. There was good discussion this evening and
he believed that the Commission came up with good recommendations.
Commissioner Bob Klepperich expressed his appreciation to Commissioners Hinderscheid and Kipp for
re -upping for another three years as they are very valuable assets. He also recognized the Commission's
student intern, Clair, for her being in attendance and for being a silent partner in everything they do.
Commissioner Steve Goldade noted that it was a great meeting, very well organized, and he enjoyed the
conversations.
Chair Pat Hinderscheid felt that a lot of ground had been covered. He expressed his appreciation for
Ryan Ruzek being in attendance, that is always helpful. He acknowledged Ms. Cheryl Jacobson for
attending; he noted that Ms. Lawrence did a nice job and provided good information.
8. Adjourn
Motion Goldade/Second Klepperich to adjourn the meeting at 8:37 PM. AYES 5: NAYS 0: ABSENT 2
CITY OF
MENDOTA HEIGHTS
MEETING DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Discussion
page 24
1101 Victoria Curve 1 Mendota Heights, MN 55118
651.452.1850 phone 1 651.452.8940 fax
www.mendota-heights.com
Request for City Council Action
January 16, 2018
Mayor and City Council, City Administrator
Lorri Smith, City Clerk
Change February 6th City Council Meeting
COMMENT:
This year, the February 6th regular Council meeting falls on Precinct Caucus Day. Per State
Statutes, no public meetings can be held after 6:00 pm on this day. Staff is recommending
that the City Council discuss changing the date or time of this meeting.
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the first regularly scheduled City Council meeting in February be
moved to Wednesday, February 7, 2018, starting at 7:00 pm.
Recommendation
If the Council concurs, it should approve a motion to change the date of the regularly
scheduled February 6, 2018 Council meeting to Wednesday, February 7, 2018, starting at
7:00 pm.
Approval of this action requires a majority vote of the City Council.
cowman'
in
CITY OF
MENDOTA HEIGHTS
page 25
1101 Victoria Curve I Mendota Heights, MN 55118
651.452.1850 phone 1 651.452.8940 fax
www.mendota-heights.com
DATE: January 16, 2018
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Mark McNeill, City Administrator
Cheryl Jacobson, Assistant City Administrator
SUBJECT: 2018-2019 IUOE Local #70 Labor Agreement
COMMENT:
INTRODUCTION.
The City Council is asked to ratify a two-year labor agreement with International Union of
Operating Engineers, Local 70, representing the Facilities Manager and approve revisions to the
job description.
BACKGROUND
Attached for review and consideration is the 2018-2019 draft contract between the City of
Mendota Heights and the International Union of Operating Engineers (IUOE) Local 70, for
which there is a tentative agreement. Changes and updates to the 2018-2019 contract include:
• Term of the Agreement—Two years, January 1, 2018 to December 31, 2019
• Article 9 Overtime Pay—change overtime definition from hours in excess of 40 hours in
a seven day period to hours in excess of 40 hours in a five day period shall be considered
overtime.
• Article 16 Wages—A 2.75% cost of living adjustment for 2018 and a 2.75% cost of
living adjustment for 2019.
Also negotiated were revisions to the Facilities Manager job description.
BUDGET IMPACT
Costs associated with the negotiated agreement are included in the 2018 city budget.
page 26
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends ratification of the agreement between the City of Mendota Heights and the
International Union of Operating Engineers Local 70 for 2018-2019 and approval of the
amended Facilities Manager job description.
ACTION REQUIRED
If the Council concurs, it should, by motion, ratify the 2018-2019 labor agreement between the
City of Mendota Heights and the International Union of Operating Engineers Local 70 and
approve the amended Facilities Manager job description.
page 27
1101 Victoria curve 1 ;.,, 55118
651.452.1850 phone I 651 452.8940 Fax
www.mendota- heights.com
CITY OF
MEN DOTA HEIGHTS
Request for City Council Action
DATE: January 16, 2018
TO: Mayor and City Council, City Administrator
FROM: Cheryl Jacobson, Assistant City Administrator
Kelly McCarthy, Chief of Police
SUBJECT: Approve Police Officer Hire
COMMENT:
Introduction
The City Council is asked to approve the hiring of Thomas Albindia for the position of Police Officer.
Background
The Police Officer hiring process began earlier this fall with a position posting. The City received
55 applications from interested candidates. The process has included two rounds of interviews, a
thorough background investigation, a psychological evaluation and physical examination to
determine qualified candidates.
Staff recommends the hiring of Thomas Albindia to the position of Police Officer. Mr.
Albindia has a Bachelor's degree from Metro State University in Criminal Justice.
Thomas' anticipated start date is January 22, dependent upon approval by the City Council and
proper notice to his current employer.
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council approve the hiring of Thomas Albindia as Police
Officer. Starting salary will be $5,080 per month based on the 2018-2019 Law Enforcement
Labor Services, Inc. Labor Agreement.
Action Required
If the Council concurs, it should, by motion, approve the hiring of Thomas Albindia to the
position of Police Officer with the Mendota Heights Police Department.
CITY OF
MENDOTA HEIGHTS
page 28
1101 Victoria Curve 1 Mendota Heights, MN 55118
651.452.1850 phone 1 651.452.8940 fax
www.mendota-heights.com
DATE: January 16, 2018
TO: Mayor, Council and City Administrator
FROM: Kelly McCarthy, Chief of Police & Emergency Manager
SUBJECT: Resolution No. 2018-06 Continued Participation in Dakota County
Electronic Crimes Unit Joint Powers Agreement (JPA)
INTRODUCTION
The City Council is asked to authorize the continued participation in the Dakota County
Electronic Crimes Task Force.
BACKGROUND
Since 2015 the City of Mendota Heights has participated in an Electronic Crimes Unit (ECU).
The purpose of the ECU is to investigate illegal activities related to the use of electronic devices,
the Internet, and materials transmitted or used in electronic form, and the prosecution of those
conducting such illegal activities.
Since its inception, the citizens of Mendota Heights have benefited from our participation. The
work of the ECU has been instrumental in bringing several high profile cases to a successful
resolution.
ATTACHED
• Joint Powers Agreement
• Resolution No. 2018-06
BUDGET IMPACT
The City of Mendota Heights will pay $18,000 in 2018 to participate in the Electronic Crimes
Unit. These expenses are included in the 2018 Police budget.
ACTION REQUIRED
If Council desires to implement the recommendation, it should, by motion, pass a motion
authorizing the Mayor to sign Resolution No. 2018-06 FORMALLY AUTHORIZING
CONTINUED PARTICIPATION IN A JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT (JPA) "DAKOTA
COUNTY ELECTRONIC CRIMES TASK FORCE."
page 29
City of Mendota Heights
Dakota County, Minnesota
RESOLUTION 2018-06
AUTHORIZING CONTINUED PARTICIPATION IN A JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT
"DAKOTA COUNTY ELECTRONIC CRIMES TASK FORCE."
WHEREAS, the City of Mendota Heights desires to have the ability to contact
neighboring communities for aid assistance; and
WHEREAS, the Minnesota State Statute requires a resolution to enter into a JPA; and
WHEREAS, the City recognizes the need to have all agreements accurately reflect the
work being done and membership; and
WHEREAS, the City recognizes that the advances in technology require a continuing
investment in training and resources; and
WHEREAS, the City wishes to provide the highest level of service to its citizens and all
victims of crime; and
WHEREAS, the City understands that the ability to investigate these cases continues to
exceed the capacity of the police department(s) individual investigative divisions and
WHEREAS, the City understands the responsibilities vested in them to provide for the
health, safety and welfare of the community; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights have duly considered this
matter and wish to enter into an agreement that would expand the resources available to them and
our neighbors to solve crimes.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED that the City Council of the City
of Mendota Heights hereby formally authorizes its continued participation in a Joint Powers
Agreement for the Dakota County Electronic Crimes Task Force.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 16th day of January 2018.
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
Neil Garlock, Mayor
ATTEST:
Lorri Smith, City Clerk
DAKOTA COUNTY ELECTRONIC CRIMES TASK FORCE
JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT
The parties to this Agreement are units of government responsible for the enforcement of
criminal laws in their respective jurisdictions. This Agreement is made pursuant to the authority
conferred upon the parties by Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59.
NOW THEREFORE, the undersigned governmental units, in the joint and mutual exercise of
their powers, agree as follows:
1. Name. The parties hereby establish the Dakota County Electronic Crimes Task Force ("Task
Force").
2. General Purpose. The purpose of this Agreement is to establish an organization to coordinate
efforts to investigate illegal activities related to the use of electronic devices, the Internet, and materials
transmitted or used in electronic form and the prosecution of those conducting such illegal activities.
3. Parties. The parties to this Agreement are the following units of government:
City of Apple Valley
City of Burnsville
City of Farmington
City of Hastings
City of Inver Grove Heights
City of Lakeville
(Individually or collectively "member(s)" or "party(ies)")
4. Administrative Board.
City of Mendota Heights
City of Rosemount
City of South St. Paul
City of West St. Paul
County of Dakota
Dakota County Drug Task Force
4.1 Creation and Composition. A joint powers board, known as the Electronic Crimes Task Force
Administrative Board ("Board"), is established for the purposes contained herein with the powers and
duties set forth in this Agreement. The Board shall consist of one member from each of the law
enforcement units of government that participates in the Task Force, appointed by their respective
police chief or sheriff. Board members appointed by police chiefs and the sheriff must be full-time
supervisory peace officers of their jurisdiction or office. The police chief or sheriff may appoint an
alternative member to attend Board meetings if the appointed member is unavailable. Alternates must
be full-time supervisory peace officers from their jurisdiction or office. Board members shall not be
deemed employees of the Task Force and shall not be compensated by it. At the discretion of the
Dakota County Attorneys, the Dakota County Attorney's Office shall serve the Board in an advisory
capacity and shall be designated legal counsel on behalf of the Board and Task Force. The fiscal
agent shall maintain a roster of current Board members and appointed alternates.
4.2 Terms. Board members and alternates shall serve at the pleasure of their respective police
chief or sheriff. In the event that any Board member shall be removed by the appointing agency, the
vacancy shall be filled by the appropriate appointing agency.
4.3 Officers. At its initial meeting in January 2018, the Board shall elect from its members (but not
alternates) a chair, a vice -chair and a secretary/treasurer, and such other officers as it deems
necessary to conduct its meetings and affairs. In January of each subsequent year the Board shall
meet and elect from its members a chair, a vice -chair, a secretary/treasurer, and such other officers as
Page 1 of 19
page 31
it deems necessary to conduct its meetings and affairs. Officers shall serve for a term of one (1) year
or until the officer ceases to be a board member, whichever is shorter.
4.4 Meetings. The Board shall meet in January of each year and shall have other regular and
special meetings at such times and places as the Board shall determine. Special meetings may be
held on three (3) days' notice by the chair or any two (2) board members; except that a special meeting
to consider adoption of or amendments to the Board's operating rules pursuant to Section 6.1 shall
require ten (10) days' notice. The presence of two-thirds (2/3) of the Board members at a meeting shall
constitute a quorum.
4.5 Voting. Each Board member shall be entitled to one vote. If a Board member is unable to
attend a meeting, the duly appointed alternative may attend and vote. Proxy voting is not permitted.
The Board shall function by a majority vote of the board members, or alternates, present.
5. Duties of the Administrative Board.
5.1 The Board shall formulate a program to carry out its purpose.
5.2 The Board shall coordinate intelligence between the members and the Task Force and
cooperate with other local, state, and federal law enforcement agencies to accomplish the purpose for
which it is organized.
5.3 The Board shall keep proper and adequate books of accounts showing all its receipts and
disbursements by date, source, and amount. It shall have prepared an independent audit of the books
and accounts of the Task Force and shall provide an audit report to its members if any member
requests a financial audit of the Task Force.
5.4 The Board shall keep proper minutes of all its proceedings.
5.5 The Sheriff's Office shall provide annually a year-end review/expenditure report of the Task
Force's activities.
5.6 The Board shall establish performance and quality control measures and periodically monitor
those measures, to include Task Force investigatory practices and policies.
6. Powers of the Administrative Board.
6.1 The Board may adopt and amend such bylaws that it may deem necessary or desirable for the
conduct of the business of the Board. Such bylaws shall be consistent with the terms of this Agreement
and any applicable laws or regulations.
6.2 The Board may enter into any contract necessary or proper for the exercise of its powers or the
fulfillment of its duties and enforce such contracts to the extent available in equity or at law. The Board
may authorize the chair of the Board to enter into and execute those contracts.
6.3 The Board may sue and be sued.
6.4 The Board may disburse funds in a manner which is consistent with this Agreement and with the
method provided by law for the disbursement of funds by the parties to this Agreement.
6.5 The Board may apply for and accept gifts, grants or loans of money or other property or
assistance from the United States Government, the State of Minnesota, or any person, association or
agency for any of its purposes; enter into any agreement in connection therewith; and hold, use and
Page 2 of 19
page 32
dispose of such money, property or assistance in accordance with the terms of the gift, grant or loan
relating thereto.
6.6 The Board may cooperate with other federal, state and local law enforcement agencies to
accomplish the purpose for which it is organized.
6.7 The Board shall purchase and maintain public liability insurance coverage, with a limit of at least
$1,500,000 per occurrence, under standard liability coverage forms, and such other bonds and
insurance as is deemed necessary for the protections of the Board, its members, representatives,
officers, agents and employees. The exercise of such authority by the Board shall not be construed as
a waiver or modification of the limitations, defenses and immunities of liability contained in Minnesota
Statutes, Chapter 466, Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59, subd. 1 a or other applicable law.
6.8 The Board may hold such other property as may be required to accomplish the purposes of this
Agreement and upon termination of this Agreement make distribution of such property as provided for
in this Agreement.
6.9 To the extent allowed by law, establish and collect fees, including user fees, for services
performed by the Task Force, the Board or its members.
6.10 The Board may create a policies and procedures manual for use by the Task Force and review
the same annually. If a policy or procedure adopted by the Board conflicts with a policy or procedure of
a member, that member's policy or procedure shall apply to any agent assigned by that member to the
Task Force.
6.11 The Board may retain legal counsel to advise the Board and provide civil legal services.
6.12 The Board may recommend changes in this Agreement to its members.
7. Budgeting and Funding.
7.1 By April 30 of each year the Board shall prepare and adopt a budget for the following year and
may amend the same from time to time.
7.2 The members intend to fund the cost of operating the Task Force through member contributions
of funds, officers and staff and by obtaining grant funds and restitution, if available. For 2018, the cities
of Hastings, Farmington, Inver Grove Heights, Mendota Heights, Rosemount, South St. Paul and West
St. Paul and the Dakota County Drug Task Force each shall pay $18,000 to the Task Force fiscal agent
to be deposited in the Task Force account. Members may also contribute the services of a licensed
peace officer(s) and staff as determined by the Board. For 2018, the cities of Apple Valley and
Burnsville shall contribute the services of one full-time licensed peace officer and the city of Lakeville
shall contribute the services of a license peace officer as determined by the Board. For 2018, Dakota
County shall contribute the services of one full-time and one part-time (50%) licensed peace officers
and two full-time staff and shall commit to housing the Task Force within a County facility.
By April 1 of each subsequent year, prior to the adoption of an annual budget for the following year, the
Board will determine the amount of financial contribution by each member so that the adopted budget
will be adequately funded. Any member may object to a proposed payment as excessive relative to the
adopted budget. If a member's objection cannot be resolved, the Board may adopt a revised budget to
accommodate the member's objection or an amendment to this Agreement approved by all members
shall be executed by each member's governing body. The Board shall determine the amount of
financial contribution and/or contribution of services by members and any new members.
Page 3of19
page 33
7.3 If the Board incurs any liability for damages arising from the services performed under this
Agreement, the amount of damages shall be assessed equally amongst the members. Nothing herein
shall be construed as a waiver or modification of the limitations, defenses and immunities as fully
described in Section 10.
7.4 The Board shall adopt a budget based upon grant funds received, member financial
contributions and money made available from other sources. The Board may amend the budget as
needed to reflect revenue and expenditure changes.
7.5 Dakota County shall serve as the fiscal agent of the Task Force and shall account for all funds
received pursuant to this Agreement according to generally accepted accounting principles. The fiscal
agent shall forward reports on Task Force receipts and disbursements to the members on a regular
basis. Fiscal agent responsibilities shall include, but not be limited to: management of all funds,
including member contributions and grant monies, payment for contracted services and relevant
bookkeeping and recordkeeping. No payment on any invoice for services performed by any person
providing services in connection with this Agreement shall be authorized unless approved by the Board
chair, vice -chair or secretary/treasurer.
7.6 The members agree to contribute their financial contributions, grant funds and dedicated
licensed peace officers required to operate the Task Force.
7.7 All funds shall be accounted for according to generally accepted accounting principles. The
secretary/treasurer shall make a quarterly financial report of all expenditures and receipts, and current
fund balances to the Board.
7.8 The Board may not incur debt.
7.9 The Board's obligation to reimburse members for any expense, furnish equipment, pay for
staffing and the like is contingent upon the receipt of grant funds for that purpose. If insufficient grant
funds are received, the Board may reduce the level of reimbursement, staffing and/or other
expenditures.
8. Agents.
8.1 Each member shall inform the Board in December of each year of the identity of the licensed
peace officers to serve as Agents for the Task Force ("Agents") for the following calendar year. The
chief law enforcement officer for that member shall have the responsibility for determining the identity of
their assigned officer(s). The number of licensed peace officer(s) per member allowed to serve as
Agents for the Task Force must be approved in advance by the Board.
8.2 Agents will be responsible for the investigation of illegal activities related to or involving the use
of electronic devices, the Internet, and materials transmitted or used in electronic form, including case
development and handling and processing of evidence. To the extent permitted by law, Agents will
work cooperatively with assisting agencies, including sharing information acquired by Agents pursuant
to this Agreement.
8.3 Agents are not employees of the Task Force. Agents shall remain employees of the member
that has assigned them to the Task Force and shall be compensated by that member. Each party to
this Agreement shall be responsible for injuries to or death of its own personnel. Each party shall
maintain workers' compensation coverage or self-insurance coverage covering its own personnel while
they are providing assistance as a member of the Task Force. Each party to this Agreement waives its
right to sue any other party for any workers' compensation benefits paid to its own employee or their
Page 4 of 19
page 34
dependents, even if the injury is caused wholly or partially by the negligence of any other party, or its
officers, employees or agents.
8.4 The member appointing the Agent shall furnish the Agent with all standard department issued
equipment necessary to perform all functions of the Agent. Agents' computers must meet Dakota
County standards. Each member shall be responsible for damages to or loss of its own equipment.
Each member waives the right to sue any other member for any damages to or loss of its equipment,
even if the damages or loss were caused wholly or partially by the negligence of any other member or
its officers, employees or agents.
8.5 The members shall maintain the officer positions hired to replace the officer assigned to the
Task Force, or maintain the full-time equivalent or half-time equivalent staffing assigned to the Task
Force as described in Sections 7.2 and 8.1.
9. Indemnification. The Task Force is a separate and distinct public entity to which the parties
have transferred all responsibility and control for actions taken pursuant to this Agreement. The Task
Force shall defend and indemnify the parties, and their officers, employees, and agents, from and
against all claims, damages, losses, and expenses, including attorney fees, arising from Task Force
activities or operations, and decisions of the Board.
Nothing in this Agreement shall constitute a waiver of the statutory limits on liability set forth in
Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 466, or a waiver of any available immunities or defenses.
To the fullest extent permitted by law, action by the parties to this Agreement are intended to be and
shall be construed as a "cooperative activity" and it is the intent of the parties that they shall be deemed
a "single governmental unit" for the purposes of liability, as set forth in Minnesota Statutes, Section
471.59, subd. 1a(a), provided further that for purposes of that statute, each party to this Agreement
expressly declines responsibility for the acts or omissions of another party.
Nothing herein shall be construed to provide insurance coverage or indemnification to an officer,
employee, or agents of any party for any act or omission for which the officer, employee, or agent is
guilty of malfeasance in office, willful neglect of duty, or bad faith.
Any excess or uninsured liability shall be borne equally by all the parties, but this does not include the
liability of any individual officer, employee, or agent which arises from his or her own malfeasance,
willful neglect of duty, or bad faith.
10. Insurance. The Board shall purchase general liability insurance for activities of the Task Force
as described in Section 2. Such insurance shall name each member as an additional insured. By
purchasing insurance, the members do not intend to waive, and this Agreement shall not be interpreted
to constitute a waiver by any member of limitations on liability or immunities provided by any applicable
Minnesota law, including Minnesota Statutes, Chs. 466 and 471. The cost of the general liability
insurance shall be paid from funds of the Task Force.
11. Task Force Supervisory Oversight. The Dakota County Sheriff's Office will provide
supervisory oversight of Task Force operations including case assignments, record keeping,
intelligence management, management of all property seized, and the execution of stings, arrests,
search warrants and similar operations performed by the Agents.
The members of this Agreement are not liable for the acts or omissions of the other members of this
Agreement except to the extent to which they have agreed in writing to be responsible for acts or
omissions of the other members.
Page 5 of 19
page 35
12. Additional Parties. Any additional unit of government may become a party to this Agreement
by adopting a resolution declaring its intention to do so and by entering into this Agreement, as it may
be amended from time to time, provided that the parties have entered into an amendment pursuant to
Section 13 approving such additional member. Such amendment shall be substantially in form of
Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated by reference.
13. Amendments. Any amendment to this Agreement must be in writing and executed by all of the
parties.
14. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in two or more counterparts, each of which
shall be deemed an original but all of which shall constitute one and the same instrument. All
counterparts and amendments shall be filed with the fiscal agent.
15. Effective Date. This Agreement shall take full effect on January 1, 2018. Members may
execute this Agreement in counterparts and need not sign the same original document. The signed
Agreement shall be filed with the Board's designated fiscal agent, who shall notify all members in
writing of its effective date. The fiscal agent shall also notify all parties of additional parties added
pursuant to Section 12 and parties withdrawing pursuant to Section 16.3.
16. Termination and Withdrawal.
16.1 Termination Date. This Agreement shall terminate upon the occurrence of any one of the
following events, whichever occurs first:
• When necessitated by operation of law or as a result of a decision by a court of competent
jurisdiction; or
• When a majority of members agree by resolution to terminate the agreement upon a date
certain; or
• On December 31, 2022, unless extended by agreement of all of the members.
16.2 Effect of Termination. Termination shall not discharge any liability incurred by the Board or by
the members during the term of this Agreement. Each member shall be liable for its own acts and for
the acts of the Board to extent provided by law. With the exclusion of technology equipment contributed
and owned by any member, upon termination of this Agreement all property of the Task Force shall be
sold or distributed to the members in proportion to their respective financial and staff contributions to
the Task Force since its inception. Parties who effectively withdraw from this Agreement will not be
entitled to any return of their financial contributions.
16.3 Withdrawal. Without the necessity of approval from the parties' governing bodies, any party
may withdraw from this Agreement upon 60 days' written notice to the Board. The Board shall notify
the members pursuant to Section 17 of the receipt of a withdrawal notice. Equipment acquired by an
Agent or member as a result of training or other activities paid or sponsored by the Task Force shall
remain the property of the Task Force upon withdrawal of that member from the Task Force.
16.4 Effect of Withdrawal. Withdrawal by any member shall not terminate this Agreement except as
provided in Section 16.1. Withdrawal shall not act to discharge any liability incurred by or chargeable to
the member prior to the effective date of withdrawal. Such liability shall continue until discharged by
law or agreement. No member shall be entitled to a refund of administrative or operating funds paid or
forgiveness of such funds owed to the Board.
Page 6 of 19
page 36
17. Notice. Notice of withdrawal shall be provided by first class mail to the following and to any
additional members added pursuant to Section 12:
Apple Valley Chief of Police
7100 147th Street West
Apple Valley, MN 55124
Burnsville Chief of Police
100 Civic Center Parkway
Burnsville, MN 55337
Farmington Chief of Police
19500 Municipal Drive
Farmington, MN 55024
Hastings Chief of Police
150 3rd Street East
Hastings, MN 55033
Inver Grove Heights Chief of Police
8150 Barbara Avenue
Inver Grove Heights, MN 55044
Lakeville Chief of Police
9237 183`d Street
Lakeville, MN 55044
Mendota Heights Chief of Police
1101 Victoria Curve
Mendota Heights, MN 55118
Rosemount Chief of Police
2875 145th Street West
Rosemount, MN 55068
South St. Paul Chief of Police
125 3`d Avenue North
South St. Paul, MN 55075
West St. Paul Chief of Police
1616 Humboldt Avenue
West St. Paul, MN 55118
Dakota County Sheriff
Law Enforcement Center
1580 Highway 55
Hastings, MN 55033
Dakota County Drug Task Force
P.O. Box 21304
Eagan, MN 55121-0304
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned governmental units, by action of their governing
bodies, have caused this Agreement to be executed in accordance with the authority of Minnesota
Statutes, Section 471.59.
Approved by the City Council
Date:
Page 7 of 19
CITY OF APPLE VALLEY
By:
Date of Signature:
Attest:
Date of Signature:
page 37
Approved by the City Council CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
Date:
By:
Date of Signature:
Attest:
Date of Signature:
Page 13 of 19
page 38
EXHIBIT A
Amendment to Dakota County
Electronic Crimes Task Force
Joint Powers Agreement
Whereas, on or about January 1, 2018, the County of Dakota, the Dakota County Drug Task
Force and the cities of Apple Valley, Burnsville, Farmington, Hastings, Inver Grove Heights, Lakeville,
Mendota Heights, Rosemount, South St. Paul and West St. Paul ("Parties") entered into a joint powers
agreement establishing the Dakota County Electronic Crimes Task Force ("Agreement"); and
Whereas, the Parties desire to amend the Agreement to add as a party to the
Agreement; and
Whereas, as a governmental unit of the State of Minnesota, through its duly
elected governing body, has adopted a resolution approving the Agreement and authorizing its
to execute the same; and
Whereas, the Agreement provides that any amendments to the Agreement must be in writing
and executed by all of the Parties.
Now, therefore, in consideration of the mutual promises contained herein, the Parties agree to
amend the Agreement as follows:
1. Section 3 Parties to include
as a party to the Agreement.
2. Section 7.2 Budgeting and Funding to provide that shall
contribute for the initial calendar year of
membership.
3. All other terms of the Agreement shall remain in force and effect unless otherwise
amended in accordance with the terms of the Agreement.
In Witness Whereof, the Parties have executed this Amendment to the Agreement on the dates
indicated below.
Page 19 of 19
CITY OF
MENDOTA HEIGHTS
page 39
1101 Victoria Curve 1 Mendota Heights, MN 55118
651.452.1850 phone 1 651.452.8940 fax
www.mendota-heights.com
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
DATE: January 16, 2018
TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator
FROM: Ryan Ruzek, P.E. — Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Ordinance 519 Right -of -Way Management and Collocation and Lease Agreement
COMMENT:
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this memo is to request that the Council approve Ordinance 519, which adds a
section for Right -of -Way Management to the City Code. The Council is also asked to approve a
collocation and lease agreement for potential small cell wireless facilities.
BACKGROUND
In May 2017, the Minnesota State Legislature adopted a state law relating to siting of small
wireless telecommunication facilities (i.e. cell phone providers such as AT&T, Sprint, and
Verizon) in public rights-of-way. Previously, wireless telecommunication providers were not
allowed to place their facilities in the right-of-way.
The new law grants these providers the ability to locate their facilities as a permitted use in the
right-of-way subject to approval of an administrative permit. The only exception to making them
a permitted use is that cities have authority to require a CUP for a new facility if the right-of-way
is adjacent to a property zoned R-1. The state law also authorizes cities to limit the height of any
new pole that the facility is located on to 50 feet in height. If the provider is installing their
facilities on an existing pole (such as a light pole or traffic signal) then a CUP would not be
required.
DISCUSSION
To comply with the new state law, the City Code must be amended. The proposed Right -of -Way
Management Ordinance addresses the small cell requirements, but also addresses general
management of other utility providers (currently accomplished through a general right-of-way
permit).
Per State Statute 237.162, small cell wireless providers may install certain equipment in public
right-of-way with the following limitations:
• Each antenna must be located inside an enclosure of no more than six cubic feet in
volume, or in the case of an antenna that has exposed elements, the antenna and all its
exposed elements could fit within an enclosure of no more than six cubic feet.
• All other wireless equipment associated with the small wireless facileaneRiding
electric meters, concealment elements, telecommunications demarcation boxes,
battery backup power systems, grounding equipment, power transfer switches, cutoff
switches, cable, conduit, vertical cable runs for the connection of power and other
services, and any other equipment concealed from public view within or behind an
existing structure or concealment, is in aggregate no more than 28 cubic feet in
volume.
A small cell wireless facility does not include a support structure or in ground wiring. The
Collocation and Lease Agreement was developed for applications that request to collocate on
city -owned facilities and outlines necessary fees and lease terms. Small cell providers
collocating on existing power and telephone poles would enter into a collocation agreement with
the respective owner of the support structure.
BUDGET IMPACT
Staff is not anticipating a major impact to current right-of-way fees or expenses. Only one small
cell provider has inquired about the process to date.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff is recommending approval of Ordinance 519 and the Collocation and Lease Agreement.
ACTION REQUIRED
If Council desires to implement the Staff recommendation, it should pass a motion adopting
Ordinance 519, "AN ORDINANCE ADDING TITLE 8, CHAPTER 7 TO THE CITY
CODE OF THE CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA, DAKOTA COUNTY,
CONCERNING RIGHT_OF_WAY MANGEMENT," and a Publication Summary of
Ordinance 519 for Posting by a super majority vote (meaning 4 affirmative votes). A motion
should also be made to Approve the Collocation and Lease Agreement by simple majority vote.
page 41
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 519
AN ORDINANCE ADDING TITLE 8, CHAPTER 7 TO THE CITY CODE OF THE
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA, DAKOTA COUNTY, CONCERNING
RIGHT OF WAY MANGEMENT
Chapter 7
RIGHT-OF-WAY MANAGEMENT
8-7-1: RIGHT OF WAY; PURPOSE AND INTENT: To provide for the health, safety, and
welfare of its citizens, and to ensure the integrity of its streets and the appropriate use of the
rights of way, the city strives to keep its rights of way in a state of good repair and free from
unnecessary encumbrances.
Accordingly, the city hereby enacts this new chapter of this code relating to right-of-way permits
and administration. This chapter imposes reasonable regulation on the placement and
maintenance of facilities and equipment currently within its rights of way or to be placed therein
at some future time. It is intended to complement the regulatory roles of state and federal
agencies. Under this chapter, persons excavating and obstructing the rights of way will bear
financial responsibility for their work. Finally, this chapter provides for recovery of out-of-
pocket and projected costs from persons using the public rights of way.
This chapter shall be interpreted consistently with 1997 Session Laws, Chapter 123, substantially
codified in Minn. Stat. §§ 237.16, 237.162, 237.163, 237.79, 237.81, and 238.086 (the "Act")
and 2017 Minn. Laws, ch. 94, art. 9, amending the Act, and the other laws governing applicable
rights of the city and right-of-way users. This chapter shall also be interpreted consistent with
Minn. R. 7819.0050-7819.9950 and Minn. R., ch. 7560 where possible. To the extent any
provision of this chapter cannot be interpreted consistently with the Minnesota Rules, that
interpretation most consistent with the Act and other applicable statutory and case law is
intended. This chapter shall not be interpreted to limit the regulatory and police powers of the
city to adopt and enforce general ordinances necessary to protect the health, safety, and welfare
of the public.
8-7-2: RIGHT OF WAY; ELECTION TO MANAGE: Pursuant to the authority granted to
the city under state and federal statutory, administrative and common law, the city hereby elects,
pursuant to Minn. Stat. 237.163 subd. 2(b), to manage rights of way within its jurisdiction.
8-7-3: RIGHT OF WAY; DEFINITIONS: The following definitions apply in this chapter of
this code. References hereafter to "sections" are, unless otherwise specified, references to
sections in this chapter. Defined terms remain defined terms, whether or not capitalized.
Subd. 1. Abandoned Facility. A facility no longer in service or physically disconnected
from a portion of the operating facility, or from any other facility, that is in use or still carries
service. A facility is not abandoned unless declared so by the right-of-way user.
page 42
Subd. 2. Applicant. Any person requesting permission to excavate or obstruct a right of
way.
Subd. 3. City. The City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota, its elected officials, officers,
employees, and/or agents.
Subd. 4. Collocate or Collocation. To install, mount, maintain, modify, operate, or
replace a small wireless facility on, under, within, or adjacent to an existing wireless support
structure or utility pole that is owned privately, or by the city or other governmental unit.
Subd. 5. Commission. The State Public Utilities Commission.
Subd. 6. Congested Right of Way. A crowded condition in the subsurface of the public
right of way that occurs when the maximum lateral spacing between existing underground
facilities does not allow for construction of new underground facilities without using hand
digging to expose the existing lateral facilities in conformance with Minn. Stat. § 216D.04, subd.
3, over a continuous length in excess of five hundred (500) feet.
Subd. 7. Construction Performance Bond. Any of the following forms of security
provided at permittee's option:
Individual project bond;
(ii) Cash deposit;
(iii) Security of a form listed or approved under Minn. Stat. § 15.73, subd. 3;
(iv) Letter of Credit, in a form acceptable to the city;
(v) Self-insurance, in a form acceptable to the city;
(vi) A blanket bond for projects within the city, or other form of construction bond,
for a time specified and in a form acceptable to the city.
Subd. 8. Degradation. A decrease in the useful life of the right of way caused by
excavation in or disturbance of the right of way, resulting in the need to reconstruct such right of
way earlier than would be required if the excavation or disturbance did not occur.
Subd. 9. Degradation Cost. Subject to Minn. R. 7819.1100, means the cost to achieve a
level of restoration, as determined by the city at the time the permit is issued, not to exceed the
maximum restoration shown in plates 1 to 13, set forth in Minn. R., parts 7819.9900 to
7819.9950.
Subd. 10. Degradation Fee. The estimated fee established at the time of permitting by
the city to recover costs associated with the decrease in the useful life of the right of way caused
by the excavation, and which equals the degradation cost.
Subd. 11. Delay Penalty. The penalty imposed as a result of unreasonable delays in
right-of-way excavation, obstruction, patching, or restoration as established by permit.
Subd. 12. Department. The department of public works of the city.
page 43
Subd. 13. Director. The Director of Public Works, or her or his designee.
Subd. 14. Emergency. A condition that (1) poses a danger to life or health, or of a
significant loss of property; or (2) requires immediate repair or replacement of facilities in order
to restore service to a customer.
Subd. 15. Equipment. Any tangible asset used to install, repair, or maintain facilities in
any right of way.
Subd. 16. Excavate. To dig into or in any way remove or physically disturb or penetrate
any part of a right of way.
Subd. 17. Excavation permit. The permit which, pursuant to this chapter, must be
obtained before a person may excavate in a right of way. An Excavation permit allows the holder
to excavate that part of the right of way described in such permit.
Subd. 18. Excavation Permit Fee. Money paid to the city by an applicant to cover the
costs as provided in Section 8-7-12.
Subd. 19. Facility or Facilities. Any tangible asset in the right of way required to
provide a service.
Subd. 20. Project Plan. Shows projects adopted by the city for construction within the
next five years.
Subd. 21. High Density Corridor. A designated portion of the public right of way within
which telecommunications right-of-way users having multiple and competing facilities may be
required to build and install facilities in a common conduit system or other common structure.
Subd. 22. Hole. An excavation in the pavement, with the excavation having a length less
than the width of the pavement.
Subd. 23. Local Representative. A local person or persons, or designee of such person or
persons, authorized by a registrant to accept service and to make decisions for that registrant
regarding all matters within the scope of this chapter.
Subd. 24. Management Costs. The actual costs the city incurs in managing its rights of
way, including such costs, if incurred, as those associated with registering applicants; issuing,
processing, and verifying right-of-way or small -wireless -facility permit applications; inspecting
job sites and restoration projects; maintaining, supporting, protecting, or moving user facilities
during right-of-way work; determining the adequacy of right-of-way restoration; restoring work
inadequately performed after providing notice and the opportunity to correct the work; and
revoking right-of-way or small -wireless -facility permits. Management costs do not include
payment by a telecommunications right-of-way user for the use of the right-of-way,
unreasonable fees of a third -party contractor used by the city including fees tied to or based on
page 44
customer counts, access lines, or revenues generated by the right of way or for the city, the fees
and cost of litigation relating to the interpretation of Minnesota Session Laws 1997, Chapter 123;
Minn. Stat. §§ 237.162 or 237.163; or any ordinance enacted under those sections, or the city
fees and costs related to appeals taken pursuant to Section 8-7-30 of this chapter.
Subd. 25. Micro wireless facility. A small wireless facility that is no longer than 24
inches long, 15 inches wide, and 12 inches high, and whose exterior antenna, if any, is no longer
than 11 inches.
Subd. 26. Obstruct. To place any tangible object in a right of way so as to hinder free
and open passage over that or any part of the right of way.
Subd. 27. Obstruction Permit. The permit which, pursuant to this chapter, must be
obtained before a person may obstruct a right of way, allowing the holder to hinder free and open
passage over the specified portion of that right of way, for the duration specified therein.
Subd. 28. Obstruction Permit Fee. Money paid to the city by a permittee to cover the
costs as provided in Section 8-7-12.
Subd. 29. Patch or Patching. A method of pavement replacement that is temporary in
nature. A patch consists of (1) the compaction of the subbase and aggregate base, and (2) the
replacement, in kind, of the existing pavement for a minimum of two feet beyond the edges of
the excavation in all directions. A patch is considered full restoration only when the pavement is
included in the city's five-year project plan.
Subd. 30. Pavement. Any type of improved surface that is within the public right of way
and that is paved or otherwise constructed with bituminous, concrete, aggregate, or gravel.
Subd. 31. Permit. Has the meaning given "right-of-way permit" in Minn. Stat. §
237.162.
Subd. 32. Permittee. Any person to whom a permit to excavate or obstruct a right of
way has been granted by the city under this chapter.
Subd. 33. Person. An individual or entity subject to the laws and rules of this state,
however organized, whether public or private, whether domestic or foreign, whether for profit or
nonprofit, and whether natural, corporate, or political.
Subd. 34. Probation. The status of a person that has not complied with the conditions of
this chapter.
Subd. 35. Probationary Period. One year from the date that a person has been notified in
writing that they have been put on probation.
Subd. 36. Registrant. Any person who (1) has or seeks to have its equipment or facilities
located in any right of way, or (2) in any way occupies or uses, or seeks to occupy or use, the
page 45
right of way or place its facilities or equipment in the right of way.
Subd. 37. Restore or Restoration. The process by which an excavated right of way and
surrounding area, including pavement and foundation, is returned to the same condition and life
expectancy that existed before excavation.
Subd. 38. Restoration Cost. The amount of money paid to the city by a permittee to
achieve the level of restoration according to plates 1 to 13 of Minnesota Public Utilities
Commission rules.
Subd. 39. Right of way or Public Right of way. The area on, below, or above a public
roadway, highway, street, cartway, bicycle lane, or public sidewalk in which the city has an
interest, including other dedicated rights of way for travel purposes and utility easements of the
city. A right of way does not include the airwaves above a right of way with regard to cellular or
other non -wire telecommunications or broadcast service.
Subd. 40. Right-of-way Permit. Either the excavation permit, obstruction permit, or
small -wireless -facilities permit, or any combination thereof, depending on the context, required
by this chapter.
Subd. 41. Right-of-way User. (1) A telecommunications right-of-way user as defined by
Minn. Stat., § 237.162, subd. 4; or (2) a person owning or controlling a facility in the right of
way that is used or intended to be used for providing a service, and who has a right under law,
franchise, or ordinance to use the public right of way.
Subd. 42. Service. Includes (1) those services provided by a public utility as defined in
Minn. Stat. 216B.02, subds. 4 and 6; (2) services of a telecommunications right-of-way user,
including transporting of voice or data information; (3) services of a cable communications
systems as defined in Minn. Stat. ch. 238; (4) natural gas or electric energy or
telecommunications services provided by the city; (5) services provided by a cooperative electric
association organized under Minn. Stat., ch. 308A; and (6) water, and sewer, including service
laterals, steam, cooling, or heating services.
Subd. 43. Service Lateral. An underground facility that is used to transmit, distribute or
furnish 'gas, electricity, communications, or water from a common source to an end-use
customer. A service lateral is also an underground facility that is used in the removal of
wastewater from a customer's premises.
Subd. 44. Small Wireless Facility. A wireless facility that meets both of the following
qualifications:
each antenna is located inside an enclosure of no more than six (6) cubic feet in
volume or could fit within such an enclosure; and
(ii) all other wireless equipment associated with the small wireless facility provided
such equipment is, in aggregate, no more than twenty-eight (28) cubic feet in volume, not
including electric meters, concealment elements, telecommunications demarcation boxes, battery
backup power systems, grounding equipment, power transfer switches, cutoff switches, cable,
page 46
conduit, vertical cable runs for the connection of power and other services, and any equipment
concealed from public view within or behind an existing structure or concealment.
Subd. 45. Small -Wireless -Facility Permit. The permit which, pursuant to this chapter,
must be obtained before a person may install, place, maintain, or operate a small wireless facility
in a public right of way to provide wireless service. A small -wireless -facility permit allows the
holder to conduct such activities in that part of the right-of-way described in such permit. A
small -wireless -facility permit does not authorize (1) providing any service other than a wireless
service, or (2) installation, placement, maintenance, or operation of a wireline backhaul facility
in the right of way.
Subd. 46. Small -Wireless -Facility Permit Fee. Money paid to the city by a permittee to
cover the costs as provided in Section 8-7-12.
Subd. 47. Supplementary Application. An application made to excavate or obstruct
more of the right of way than allowed in, or to extend or supply additional information to, a
permit that had already been submitted or issued.
Subd. 48. Telecommunications Right-of-way User. A person owning or controlling a
facility in the right of way, or seeking to own or control a facility in the right of way that is used
or is intended to be used for providing wireless service, or transporting telecommunication or
other voice or data information. For purposes of this chapter, a cable communication system
defined and regulated under Minn. Stat. ch. 238, and telecommunication activities related to
providing natural gas or electric energy services, a public utility as defined in Minn. Stat. §
216B.02, a municipality, a municipal gas or power agency organized under Minn. Stat. ch. 453
and 453A, or a cooperative electric association organized under Minn. Stat. ch. 308A, are not
telecommunications right-of-way users for purposes of this chapter except to the extent such
entity is offering wireless service.
Subd. 49. Temporary Surface. The compaction of subbase and aggregate base and
replacement, in kind, of the existing pavement only to the edges of the excavation. It is
temporary in nature except when the replacement is of pavement included in the city's current
year plan, in which case it is considered full restoration.
Subd. 50. Trench. An excavation in the pavement, with the excavation having a length
equal to or greater than the width of the pavement.
Subd. 51. Utility Pole. A pole that is used in whole or in part to facilitate
telecommunications or electric service.
Subd. 52. Wireless Facility. Equipment at a fixed location that enables the provision of
wireless services between user equipment and a wireless service network, including equipment
associated with wireless service, a radio transceiver, antenna, coaxial or fiber-optic cable, regular
and backup power supplies, and a small wireless facility, but not including wireless support
structures, wireline backhaul facilities, or cables between utility poles or wireless support
structures, that are not otherwise immediately adjacent to and directly associated with a specific
antenna.
page 47
Subd. 53. Wireless Service. Any service using licensed or unlicensed wireless spectrum,
including the use of Wi-Fi, whether at a fixed location or by means of a mobile device, that is
provided using wireless facilities. Wireless service does not include services regulated under
Title VI of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, including cable service.
Subd. 54. Wireless Support Structure. A new or existing structure in a right of way
designed to support or capable of supporting small wireless facilities, as reasonably determined
by the city.
Subd. 55. Wireline Backhaul Facility. A facility used to transport communications data
by wire from a wireless facility to a communications network.
8-7-4: RIGHT OF WAY; ADMINISTRATION: The Director of Public Works is the
principal city official responsible for the administration of the telecommunications rights-of-way,
its permits, and the ordinances related thereto. The Director of Public Works may delegate any or
all of the duties hereunder.
8-7-5: RIGHT OF WAY; REGISTRATION AND OCCUPANCY:
Subd. 1. Registration. Each Registrant must register with the city.
Subd. 2. Registration Prior to Work. No person may construct, install, repair, remove,
relocate, or perform any other work on, or use any facilities or any part thereof, in any right of
way without first being registered with the city.
Subd. 3. Exceptions. Nothing herein shall be construed to repeal or amend the
provisions of a city ordinance permitting persons to plant or maintain boulevard plantings or
gardens in the area of the right of way between their property and the street curb. Persons
planting or maintaining boulevard plantings or gardens shall not be deemed to use or occupy the
right of way, and shall not be required to obtain any permits or satisfy any other requirements for
planting or maintaining such boulevard plantings or gardens under this chapter. However,
nothing herein relieves a person from complying with the provisions of the Minn. Stat. ch. 216D,
Gopher One Call Law.
8-7-6: RIGHT OF WAY; REGISTRATION INFORMATION:
Subd. 1. Information Required. The information provided to the city at the time of
registration shall include, but not be limited to:
(i) Each registrant's name, Gopher One -Call registration certificate number, address
and email address, if applicable, and telephone and facsimile numbers.
(ii) The name, address, and email address, if applicable, and telephone and facsimile
numbers of a local representative. The local representative or designee shall be available at all
times. Current information regarding how to contact the local representative in an emergency
shall be provided at the time of registration.
(iii) A certificate of insurance or self-insurance:
page 48
(a) Verifying that an insurance policy has been issued to the Registrant by an
insurance company licensed to do business in the state of Minnesota, or a form of self-insurance
acceptable to the city;
(b) Verifying that the Registrant is insured against claims for personal injury,
including death, as well as claims for property damage arising out of the (1) use and occupancy
of the right of way by the registrant, its officers, agents, employees, and permittees, and (2)
placement and use of facilities and equipment in the right of way by the registrant, its officers,
agents, employees, and permittees, including, but not limited to, protection against liability
arising from completed operations, damage of underground facilities, and collapse of property;
(c) Naming the city as an additional insured as to whom the coverages
required herein are in force and applicable and for whom defense will be provided as to all such
coverages;
(d) Requiring that the city be notified thirty (30) days in advance of
cancellation of the policy or material modification of a coverage term; and
(e) Indicating comprehensive liability coverage, automobile liability
coverage, workers' compensation and umbrella coverage established by the city in amounts
sufficient to protect the city and the public and to carry out the purposes and policies of this
chapter.
(f) The city requires a copy of the actual insurance policies.
(g) If the person is a corporation, a copy of the certificate is required to be
filed under Minn. Stat. § 300.06 as recorded and certified to by the secretary of state.
(h) A copy of the person's order granting a certificate of authority from the
Minnesota Public Utilities Commission or other authorization or approval from the applicable
state or federal agency to lawfully operate, where the person is lawfully required to have such
authorization or approval from said commission or other state or federal agency.
Subd. 2. Notice of Changes. The Registrant shall keep all of the information listed
above current at all times by providing to the city information as to changes within fifteen (15)
days following the date on which the Registrant has knowledge of any change.
8-7-7: RIGHT OF WAY; REPORTING OBLIGATIONS:
Subd. 1. Operations. Each registrant shall, at the time of registration and by December 1
of each year, file a construction and major maintenance plan for underground facilities with the
city. Such plan shall be submitted using a format designated by the city and shall contain the
information determined by the city to be necessary to facilitate the coordination and reduction in
the frequency of excavations and obstructions of rights of way.
The plan shall include, but not be limited to, the following information:
f The locations and the estimated beginning and ending dates of all projects to be
commenced during the next calendar year (in this section, a "next -year project"); and
(ii) To the extent known, the tentative locations and estimated beginning and ending
dates for all projects contemplated for the next five years following the next calendar year (in
this section, a "Annual -year project").
The term "project" in this section shall include both next -year projects and up to five-year
page 49
projects.
By January 1 of each year, the city will have available for inspection in the city's office a
composite list of all projects of which the city has been informed of the annual plans. All
registrants are responsible for keeping themselves informed of the current status of this list.
Thereafter, by February 1, each registrant may change any project in its list of next -year projects,
and must notify the city and all other registrants of all such changes in said list. Notwithstanding
the foregoing, a registrant may at any time join in a next -year project of another registrant listed
by the other registrant.
Subd. 2. Additional Next -Year Projects. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the city will not
deny an application for a right-of-way permit for failure to include a project in a plan submitted
to the city if the registrant has used commercially reasonable efforts to anticipate and plan for the
project.
8-7-8: RIGHT OF WAY; PERMIT REQUIREMENT:
Subd. 1. Permit Required. Except as otherwise provided in this code, no person may
obstruct or excavate any right of way, or install or place facilities in the right of way, without
first having obtained the appropriate right-of-way permit from the city to do so.
Excavation Permit. An excavation permit is required by a registrant to excavate
that part of the right of way described in such permit and to hinder free and open passage over
the specified portion of the right of way by placing facilities described therein, to the extent and
for the duration specified therein.
(ii) Obstruction Permit. An obstruction permit is required by a registrant to hinder
free and open passage over the specified portion of right of way by placing equipment described
therein on the right of way, to the extent and for the duration specified therein. An obstruction
permit is not required if a person already possesses a valid excavation permit for the same
project.
(iii) Small -Wireless -Facility Permit. A small -wireless -facility permit is required by a
registrant to erect or install a wireless support structure, to collocate a small wireless facility, or
to otherwise install a small wireless facility in the specified portion or the right-of-way, to the
extent specified therein, provided that such permit shall remain in effect for the length of time
the facility is in use, unless lawfully revoked. No small -wireless -facility permit is required to
solely conduct (1) routine maintenance of a small wireless facility; (2) replacement of a small
wireless facility with a new facility that is substantially similar or smaller in size, weight, height,
and wind or structural loading than the small wireless facility being replaced; or (3) installation,
placement, maintenance, operation, or replacement of micro wireless facilities that are suspended
on cables strung between existing utility poles in compliance with national safety codes,
however, a service provider is required to make written notice of such activities to the city if the
work will obstruct a public right of way.
(iv) Special or conditional use permit. A special or conditional use permit is required
to install a new wireless support structure for the siting of a small wireless facility in a right of
way in a district or area that is zoned for single-family residential use or within a historic district
established by federal or state law or city ordinance as of the date of application for a small
page 50
wireless facility permit.
Subd. 2. Permit Extensions. No person may excavate or obstruct the right of way
beyond the date or dates specified in the permit unless (1) such person makes a supplementary
application for another right-of-way permit before the expiration of the initial permit, and (2) a
new permit or permit extension is granted.
Subd. 3. Delay Penalty. In accordance with Minn. Rule 7819.1000 subp. 3 and
notwithstanding subd. 2 of this Section, the city shall establish and impose a delay penalty for
unreasonable delays in right-of-way excavation, obstruction, patching, or restoration. The delay
penalty shall be established from time to time by City Council resolution.
Subd. 4. Permit Display. Permits issued under this chapter shall be conspicuously
displayed or otherwise available at all times at the indicated work site and shall be available for
inspection by the city.
8-7-9: RIGHT OF WAY; PERMIT APPLICATIONS: Application for a permit is made to
the city. Right-of-way permit applications shall contain, and will be considered complete only
upon compliance with the requirements of the following provisions:
(i) Registration with the city pursuant to this chapter.
(ii) Submission of a completed permit application form, including all required
attachments, and scaled drawings showing the location and area of the proposed project and the
location of all known existing and proposed facilities.
(iii) Payment of money due the city for:
(a) permit fees, estimated restoration costs, and other management costs;
(b) prior obstructions or excavations;
(c) any undisputed loss, damage, or expense suffered by the city because of
applicant's prior excavations or obstructions of the rights of way or any emergency actions taken
by the city;
(d) franchise fees or other charges, if applicable.
iv Payment of disputed amounts due the city by posting security or depositing in an
escrow account an amount equal to at least 110 percent of the amount owing.
(v) Posting an additional or larger construction performance bond for additional
facilities when applicant requests an excavation permit to install additional facilities and the city
deems the existing construction performance bond inadequate under applicable standards.
8-7-10: RIGHT OF WAY; ISSUANCE OF A PERMIT AND CONDITIONS:
Subd. 1. Permit Issuance. If the applicant has satisfied the requirements of this chapter,
the city shall issue a permit.
Subd. 2. Conditions. The city may impose reasonable conditions upon the issuance of
the permit and the performance of the applicant thereunder to protect the health, safety, and
welfare or when necessary to protect the right of way and its current use. In addition, a permittee
shall comply with all requirements of local, state, and federal laws, including but not limited to
Minn. Stat. §§ 216D.01 - .09 (Gopher One Call Excavation Notice System) and Minn. R., ch.
page 51
7560.
Subd. 3. Small Wireless Facility Conditions. In addition to subdivision 2, the erection or
installation of a wireless support structure, the collocation of a small wireless facility, or other
installation of a small wireless facility in the right of way, shall be subject to the following
conditions:
Li,) A small wireless facility shall only be collocated on the particular wireless
support structure, under those attachment specifications, and at the height indicated in the
applicable permit application.
(ii) No new wireless support structure installed within the right of way shall exceed
50 feet in height without the city's written authorization, provided that the city may impose a
lower height limit in the applicable permit to protect the public health, safety and welfare or to
protect the right of way and its current use, and further provided that a registrant may replace an
existing wireless support structure exceeding 50 feet in height with a structure of the same height
subject to such conditions or requirements as may be imposed in the applicable permit.
(iii) No wireless facility may extend more than 10 feet above its wireless support
structure.
(iv) Where an applicant proposes to install a new wireless support structure in the
right of way, the city may impose separation requirements between such structure and any
existing wireless support structure or other facilities in and around the right of way.
yy,) Where an applicant proposes collocation on a decorative wireless support
structure, sign or other structure not intended to support small wireless facilities, the city may
impose reasonable requirements to accommodate the particular design, appearance or intended
purpose of such structure.
(vi) Where an applicant proposes to replace a wireless support structure, the city may
impose reasonable restocking, replacement, or relocation requirements on the replacement of
such structure.
(vii) Where an applicant proposes to install a small wireless facility in a single-family
residential or historic zoned district, the City requires an additional special or conditional use
permit.
Subd. 4. Small -Wireless -Facility Agreement. A small -wireless -facility permit shall only
be issued after the applicant has executed a standard Small -Wireless -Facility Collocation and
Lease Agreement with the city. The standard collocation agreement may require payment of the
following:
(i) Up to $150 per year for rent to collocate on the city structure.
(ii) $25 per year for maintenance associated with the collocation;
(iii) If the provider obtains electrical service through the city, a monthly fee for
electrical service as follows:
(a) $73 per radio node less than or equal to 100 maximum watts;
(b) $182 per radio node over 100 maximum watts; or
(c) The actual costs of electricity, if the actual cost exceed the foregoing.
The standard collocation agreement shall be in addition to, and not in lieu of, the required small -
wireless -facility permit, provided, however, that the applicant shall not be additionally required
to obtain a license or franchise in order to collocate. Issuance of a small -wireless -facility permit
page 52
does not supersede, alter or affect any then -existing agreement between the city and applicant.
8-7-11: RIGHT OF WAY; ACTION ON SMALL -WIRELESS -FACILITY PERMIT
APPLICATIONS:
Subd. 1. Deadline for Action. The city shall approve or deny a small -wireless -facility
permit application within 90 days after filing of such application. The small -wireless -facility
permit, and any associated building permit application, shall be deemed approved if the city fails
to approve or deny the application within the review periods established in this section.
Subd. 2. Consolidated Applications. An applicant may file a consolidated small -
wireless -facility permit application addressing the proposed collocation of up to 15 small
wireless facilities, or a greater number if agreed to by a local government unit, provided that all
small wireless facilities in the application:
are located within a two-mile radius;
(ii) consist of substantially similar equipment; and
(iii) are to be placed on similar types of wireless support structures.
In rendering a decision on a consolidated permit application, the city may approve some small
wireless facilities and deny others, but may not use denial of one or more permits as a basis to
deny all small wireless facilities in the application.
Subd. 3. Tolling of Deadline. The 90 -day deadline for action on a small -wireless -facility
permit application may be tolled if:
The city receives applications from one or more applicants seeking approval of
permits for more than 30 small wireless facilities within a seven-day period. In such case, the
city may extend the deadline for all such applications by 30 days by informing the affected
applicants in writing of such extension.
(ii) The applicant fails to submit all required documents or information and the city
provides written notice of incompleteness, with specificity as to the missing information, to the
applicant within 30 days of receipt the application. Upon submission of additional documents or
information, the city shall have ten days to notify the applicant in writing of any still -missing
information.
(iii) The city and a small wireless facility applicant agree in writing to toll the review
period.
8-7-12: RIGHT OF WAY; PERMIT FEES:
Subd. 1. Excavation Permit Fee. The city shall impose an excavation permit fee in an
amount sufficient to recover the following costs:
f the city management costs;
(ii) degradation costs, if applicable.
Subd. 2. Obstruction Permit Fee. The city shall impose an obstruction permit fee in an
amount sufficient to recover the city management costs.
page 53
Subd 3. Small Wireless Facility Permit Fee. The city shall impose a small wireless
facility permit fee in an amount sufficient to recover:
Li) management costs, and;
(ii) city engineering, make-ready, and construction costs associated with collocation
of small wireless facilities.
(iii) Legal Fees incurred by the City.
Subd. 4. Payment of Permit Fees. No excavation permit, obstruction permit, small -
wireless -facility permit, or conditional use permit shall be issued without payment of
corresponding permit fees. The city may allow applicant to pay such fees within thirty (30) days
of billing.
Subd. 5. Non Refundable. Permit fees that were paid for a permit that the city has
revoked for a breach as stated in Section 8-7-22 are not refundable.
Subd. 6. Application to Franchises. Unless otherwise agreed to in a franchise,
management costs may be charged separately from and in addition to the franchise fees imposed
on a right-of-way user in the franchise.
8-7-13: RIGHT OF WAY; PATCHING AND RESTORATION:
Subd. 1. Timing. The work to be done under the excavation permit, and the patching
and restoration of the right of way as required herein, must be completed within the dates
specified in the permit, increased by as many days as work could not be done because of
circumstances beyond the control of the permittee or when work was prohibited as unseasonable
or unreasonable under Section 8-7-16.
Subd. 2. Patch and Restoration. Permittee shall patch its own work. The city may choose
either to have the permittee restore the right of way or to restore the right of way itself.
Li,) City Restoration. If the city restores the right of way, permittee shall pay the costs
thereof within thirty (30) days of billing. If, following such restoration, the pavement settles due
to permittee's improper backfilling, the permittee shall pay to the city, within thirty (30) days of
billing, all costs associated with correcting the defective work.
(ii) Permittee Restoration. If the permittee restores the right of way itself, it shall at
the time of application for an excavation permit post a construction performance bond in
accordance with the provisions of Minn. Rule 7819.3000.
(iii) Degradation Fee in Lieu of Restoration. In lieu of right-of-way restoration, a
right-of-way user may elect to pay a degradation fee. However, the right-of-way user shall
remain responsible for patching and the degradation fee shall not include the cost to accomplish
these responsibilities.
Subd. 3. Standards. The permittee shall perform excavation, backfilling, patching, and
restoration according to the standards and with the materials specified by the city and shall
comply with Minn. Rule 7819.1100.
page 54
Subd. 4. Duty to Correct Defects. The permittee shall correct defects in patching or
restoration performed by permittee or its agents. The permittee upon notification from the city,
shall correct all restoration work to the extent necessary, using the method required by the city.
Said work shall be completed within five (5) calendar days of the receipt of the notice from the
city, not including days during which work cannot be done because of circumstances constituting
force majeure or days when work is prohibited as unseasonable or unreasonable under Section 8-
7-16.
Subd. 5. Failure to Restore. If the permittee fails to restore the right of way in the
manner and to the condition required by the city, or fails to satisfactorily and timely complete all
restoration required by the city, the city at its option may do such work. In that event the
permittee shall pay to the city, within thirty (30) days of billing, the cost of restoring the right of
way. If permittee fails to pay as required, the city may exercise its rights under the construction
performance bond.
8-7-14: RIGHT OF WAY; JOINT APPLICATIONS:
Subd. 1. Joint application. Registrants may jointly apply for permits to excavate or
obstruct the right of way at the same place and time. Registrants may not jointly apply for small -
wireless -facility or conditional -use permits.
Subd. 2. Shared fees. Registrants who apply for permits for the same obstruction or
excavation, which the city does not perform, may share in the payment of the obstruction or
excavation permit fee. In order to obtain a joint permit, registrants must agree among themselves
as to the portion each will pay and indicate the same on their applications.
Subd. 3. With city projects. Registrants who join in a scheduled obstruction or
excavation performed by the city, whether or not it is a joint application by two or more
registrants or a single application, are not required to pay the excavation or obstruction and
degradation portions of the permit fee, but a permit would still be required.
8-7-15: RIGHT OF WAY; SUPPLEMENTARY APPLICATIONS:
Subd. 1. Limitation on Area. A right-of-way permit is valid only for the area of the right
of way specified in the permit. No permittee may do any work outside the area specified in the
permit, except as provided herein. Any permittee which determines that an area greater than that
specified in the permit must be obstructed or excavated must before working in that greater area
(1) apply for a permit extension and pay any additional fees required thereby, and (2) be granted
a new permit or permit extension.
Subd. 2. Limitation on Dates. A right-of-way permit is valid only for the dates specified
in the permit. No permittee may begin its work before the permit start date or, except as provided
herein, continue working after the end date. If a permittee does not finish the work by the permit
end date, it must apply for a new permit for the additional time it needs, and receive the new
permit or an extension of the old permit before working after the end date of the previous permit.
This supplementary application must be submitted before the permit end date.
page 55
8-7-16: RIGHT OF WAY; OTHER OBLIGATIONS:
Subd. 1. Compliance with Other Laws. Obtaining a right-of-way permit does not relieve
permittee of its duty to obtain all other necessary permits, licenses, and authority and to pay all
fees required by the city or other applicable rule, law or regulation. A permittee shall comply
with all requirements of local, state and federal laws, including but not limited to Minn. Stat. §§
216D.01-.09 (Gopher One Call Excavation Notice System) and Minn. R., ch. 7560. A permittee
shall perform all work in conformance with all applicable codes and established rules and
regulations, and is responsible for all work done in the right of way pursuant to its permit,
regardless of who does the work.
Subd. 2. Prohibited Work. Except in an emergency, and with the approval of the city, no
right-of-way obstruction or excavation may be done when seasonally prohibited or when
conditions are unreasonable for such work.
Subd. 3. Interference with Right of way. A permittee shall not so obstruct a right of way
that the natural free and clear passage of water through the gutters or other waterways shall be
interfered with. Private vehicles of those doing work in the right of way may not be parked
within or next to a permit area, unless parked in conformance with city parking regulations. The
loading or unloading of trucks must be done solely within the defined permit area unless
specifically authorized by the permit.
Subd. 4. Trenchless excavation. As a condition of all applicable permits, permittees
employing trenchless excavation methods, including but not limited to Horizontal Directional
Drilling, shall follow all requirements set forth in Minn. Stat. ch. 216D and Minn. R., ch. 7560
and shall require potholing or open cutting over existing underground utilities before excavating,
as determined by the director.
8-7-17: RIGHT OF WAY; DENIAL OF PERMIT:
Subd. 1. Reasons for Denial. The city may deny a permit for failure to meet the
requirements and conditions of this chapter or if the city determines that the denial is necessary
to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the public or when necessary to protect the right of
way and its current use.
Subd. 2. Procedural Requirements. The denial of a permit must be made in writing and
must document the basis for the denial. The city must notify the applicant or right-of-way user in
writing within three (3) business days of the decision to deny a permit. If an application is
denied, the right-of-way user may cure the deficiencies identified by the city and resubmit its
application. If the application is resubmitted within 30 days of receipt of the notice of denial, no
additional application fee shall be imposed. The city must approve or deny the resubmitted
application within 30 days after submission.
8-7-18: RIGHT OF WAY; INSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS: The excavation,
backfilling, patching and restoration, and all other work performed in the right of way shall be
page 56
done in conformance with Minn. R. 7819.1100 and 7819.5000 and other applicable local
requirements, in so far as they are not inconsistent with the Minn. Stat., §§ 237.162 and 237.163.
Installation of service laterals shall be performed in accordance with Minn. R., ch 7560 and these
ordinances. Service lateral installation is further subject to those requirements and conditions set
forth by the city in the applicable permits and/or agreements referenced in Section 8-7-23, subd.
2 of this ordinance.
8-7-19: RIGHT OF WAY; INSPECTION:
Subd. 1. Notice of Completion. When the work under any permit hereunder is
completed, the permittee shall furnish a completion certificate in accordance Minn. Rule
7819.1300.
Subd. 2. Site Inspection. Permittee shall make the work site available to the city and to
all others as authorized by law for inspection at all reasonable times during the execution of and
upon completion of the work.
Subd 3. Authority of Public Works Director.
At the time of inspection, the Public Works Director may order the immediate
cessation of any work which poses a serious threat to the life, health, safety, or well-being of the
public.
(ii) The Public Works Director may issue an order to the permittee for any work that
does not conform to the terms of the permit or other applicable standards, conditions, or codes.
The order shall state that failure to correct the violation will be cause for revocation of the
permit. Within ten (10) days after issuance of the order, the permittee shall present proof to the
director that the violation has been corrected. If such proof has not been presented within the
required time, the director may revoke the permit pursuant to Sec. 8-7-22.
8-7-20: RIGHT OF WAY; WORK DONE WITHOUT A PERMIT:
Subd. 1. Emergency Situations. Each registrant shall immediately notify the director of
any event regarding its facilities that it considers to be an emergency. The registrant may proceed
to take whatever actions are necessary to respond to the emergency. Excavators' notification to
Gopher State One Call regarding an emergency situation does not fulfill this requirement. Within
two (2) business days after the occurrence of the emergency, the registrant shall apply for the
necessary permits, pay the fees associated therewith, and fulfill the rest of the requirements
necessary to bring itself into compliance with this chapter for the actions it took in response to
the emergency.
If the city becomes aware of an emergency regarding a registrant's facilities, the city will attempt
to contact the local representative of each registrant affected, or potentially affected, by the
emergency. In any event, the city may take whatever action it deems necessary to respond to the
emergency, the cost of which shall be borne by the registrant whose facilities occasioned the
emergency.
Subd. 2. Non -Emergency Situations. Except in an emergency, any person who, without
page 57
first having obtained the necessary permit, obstructs or excavates a right of way must
subsequently obtain a permit and, as a penalty, pay double the normal fee for said permit, pay
double all the other fees required by the city code, deposit with the city the fees necessary to
correct any damage to the right of way, and comply with all of the requirements of this chapter.
8-7-21: RIGHT OF WAY; SUPPLEMENTARY NOTIFICATION: If the obstruction or
excavation of the right of way begins later or ends sooner than the date given on the permit,
permittee shall notify the city of the accurate information as soon as this information is known.
8-7-22: RIGHT OF WAY; REVOCATION OF PERMITS:
Subd. 1. Substantial Breach. The city reserves its right, as provided herein, to revoke
any right-of-way permit without a fee refund, if there is a substantial breach of the terms and
conditions of any statute, ordinance, rule or regulation, or any material condition of the permit or
relevant agreement. A substantial breach by permittee shall include, but shall not be limited to,
the following:
Li,) The violation of any material provision of the right-of-way permit.
(ii) An evasion or attempt to evade any material provision of the right-of-way permit,
or the perpetration or attempt to perpetrate any fraud or deceit upon the city or its citizens.
(iii) Any material misrepresentation of fact in the application for a right-of-way
permit.
(iv) The failure to complete the work in a timely manner, unless a permit extension is
obtained or unless the failure to complete work is due to reasons beyond the permittee's control.
(v) The failure to correct, in a timely manner, work that does not conform to a
condition indicated on an order issued pursuant to Sec. 8-7-19.
Subd. 2. Written Notice of Breach. If the city determines that the permittee has
committed a substantial breach of a term or condition of any statute, ordinance, rule, regulation,
or any condition of the permit, the city shall follow the procedural requirements of Sec. 8-7-17,
subd. 2, of this chapter. In addition, the demand shall state that continued violations may be
cause for revocation of the permit. A substantial breach, as stated above, will allow the city, at its
discretion, to place additional or revised conditions on the permit to mitigate and remedy the
breach.
Subd. 3. Response to Notice of Breach. Within twenty-four (24) hours of receiving
notification of the breach, permittee shall provide the city with a plan, acceptable to the city, that
will cure the breach. Permittee's failure to so contact the city, or permittee's failure to timely
submit an acceptable plan, or permittee's failure to reasonably implement the approved plan,
shall be cause for immediate revocation of the permit. Further, permittee's failure to so contact
the city, or permittee's failure to submit an acceptable plan, or permittee's failure to reasonably
implement the approved plan, shall automatically place the permittee on probation for one (1)
full year.
Subd. 4. Cause for Probation. From time to time, the city may establish a list of
conditions of the permit, which if breached will automatically place the permittee on probation
for one full year, such as, but not limited to, working out of the allotted time period or working
page 58
on right of way grossly outside of the permit authorization.
Subd. 5. Automatic Revocation. If a permittee, while on probation, commits a breach as
outlined above, permittee's permit will automatically be revoked and permittee will not be
allowed further permits for one full year, except for emergency repairs.
Subd. 6. Reimbursement of city costs. If a permit is revoked, the permittee shall also
reimburse the city for the city's reasonable costs, including restoration costs and the costs of
collection and reasonable attorneys' fees incurred in connection with such revocation.
8-7-23: RIGHT OF WAY; MAPPING DATA:
Subd. 1. Information Required. Each registrant and permittee shall provide mapping
information required by the city in accordance with Minn. R. 7819.4000 and 7819.4100. Within
ninety (90) days following completion of any work pursuant to a permit, the permittee shall
provide the director accurate maps and drawings certifying the "as -built" location of all
equipment installed, owned, and maintained by the permittee. Such maps and drawings shall
include the horizontal and vertical location of all facilities and equipment and shall be provided
consistent with the city's electronic mapping system, when practical or as a condition imposed
by the director. Failure to provide maps and drawings pursuant to this subsection shall be
grounds for revoking the permit holder's registration.
Subd. 2. Service Laterals. All permits issued for the installation or repair of service
laterals, other than minor repairs as defined in Minn. R. 7560.0150, subp. 2, shall require the
permittee's use of appropriate means of establishing the horizontal locations of installed service
laterals and the service lateral vertical locations in those cases where the director reasonably
requires it. Permittees or their subcontractors shall submit to the director evidence satisfactory to
the director of the installed service lateral locations. Compliance with this subdivision 2 and with
applicable Gopher State One Call law and Minnesota Rules governing service laterals installed
after Dec. 31, 2005, shall be a condition of any city approval necessary for:
01) payments to contractors working on a public improvement project, including
those under Minn. Stat. ch. 429, and
(ii) city approval under development agreements or other subdivision or site plan
approval under Minn. Stat. ch. 462. The director shall reasonably determine the appropriate
method of providing such information to the city. Failure to provide prompt and accurate
information on the service laterals installed may result in the revocation of the permit issued for
the work or future permits to the offending permittee or its subcontractors.
8-7-24: RIGHT OF WAY; LOCATION AND RELOCATION OF FACILITIES:
Subd. 1. Location. Placement, location, and relocation of facilities must comply with the
Act, with other applicable law, and with Minn. R. 7819.3100, 7819.5000, and 7819.5100, to the
extent the rules do not limit authority otherwise available to cities.
Subd. 2. Undergrounding. Unless otherwise agreed in a franchise or other agreement between
the applicable right-of-way user and the City, Facilities in the right of way must be located or relocated
and maintained underground in accordance with Section of the City Code.
page 59
Subd. 3. Corridors. The city may assign a specific area within the right of way, or any
particular segment thereof as may be necessary, for each type of facility that is or, pursuant to
current technology, the city expects will someday be located within the right of way. All
excavation, obstruction, or other permits issued by the city involving the installation or
replacement of facilities shall designate the proper corridor for the facilities at issue.
Any registrant who has facilities in the right of way in a position at variance with the corridors
established by the city shall, no later than at the time of the next reconstruction or excavation of
the area where the facilities are located, move the facilities to the assigned position within the
right of way, unless this requirement is waived by the city for good cause shown, upon
consideration of such factors as the remaining economic life of the facilities, public safety,
customer service needs, and hardship to the registrant.
Subd. 4. Nuisance. One year after the passage of this chapter, any facilities found in a
right of way that have not been registered shall be deemed to be a nuisance. The city may
exercise any remedies or rights it has at law or in equity, including, but not limited to, abating the
nuisance or taking possession of the facilities and restoring the right of way to a useable
condition.
Subd. 5. Limitation of Space. To protect the health, safety, and welfare of the public, or
when necessary to protect the right of way and its current use, the city shall have the power to
prohibit or limit the placement of new or additional facilities within the right of way. In making
such decisions, the city shall strive to the extent possible to accommodate all existing and
potential users of the right of way, but shall be guided primarily by considerations of the public
interest, the public's needs for the particular utility service, the condition of the right of way, the
time of year with respect to essential utilities, the protection of existing facilities in the right of
way, and future city plans for public improvements and development projects which have been
determined to be in the public interest.
8-7-25: RIGHT OF WAY; PRE -EVACUATION FACILITIES LOCATION: In addition to
complying with the requirements of Minn. Stat. 216D.01-.09 ("One Call Excavation Notice
System") before the start date of any right-of-way excavation, each registrant who has facilities
or equipment in the area to be excavated shall mark the horizontal and vertical placement of all
said facilities. Any registrant whose facilities are less than twenty (20) inches below a concrete
or asphalt surface shall notify and work closely with the excavation contractor to establish the
exact location of its facilities and the best procedure for excavation.
8-7-26: RIGHT OF WAY; DAMAGE TO OTHER FACILITIES: When the city does work
in the right of way and finds it necessary to maintain, support, or move a registrant's facilities to
protect it, the city shall notify the local representative as early as is reasonably possible. The
costs associated therewith will be billed to that registrant and must be paid within thirty (30) days
from the date of billing. Each registrant shall be responsible for the cost of repairing any
facilities in the right of way which it or its facilities damage. Each registrant shall be responsible
for the cost of repairing any damage to the facilities of another registrant caused during the city's
response to an emergency occasioned by that registrant's facilities.
page 60
8-7-27: RIGHT OF WAY; VACATION AND RESERVATION OF RIGHT: If the city
vacates a right of way that contains the facilities of a registrant, the registrant's rights in the
vacated right of way are governed by Minn. R. 7819.3200.
8-7-28: RIGHT OF WAY; INDEMNIFICATION AND LIABILITY: By registering with
the city, or by accepting a permit under this chapter, a registrant or permittee agrees to defend
and indemnify the city in accordance with the provisions of Minn. Rule 7819.1250.
8-7-29: RIGHT OF WAY; ABANDONED AND UNUSABLE FACILITIES:
Subd. 1. Discontinued Operations. A registrant who has determined to discontinue all or
a portion of its operations in the city must provide information satisfactory to the city that the
registrant's obligations for its facilities in the right of way under this chapter have been lawfully
assumed by another registrant.
Subd. 2. Removal. Any registrant who has abandoned facilities in any right of way shall
remove it from that right of way if required in conjunction with other right-of-way repair,
excavation, or construction, unless this requirement is waived by the city.
8-7-30: RIGHT OF WAY; APPEAL: A right-of-way user that: (1) has been denied
registration; (2) has been denied a permit; (3) has had a permit revoked; (4) believes that the fees
imposed are not in conformity with Minn. Stat. § 237.163, subd. 6; or (5) disputes a
determination of the Director of Public Works regarding Section 8-7-23, subd. 2 of this
ordinance may have the denial, revocation, fee imposition, or decision reviewed, upon written
request, by the City Council. The City Council shall act on a timely written request at its next
regularly scheduled meeting, provided the right-of-way user has submitted its appeal with
sufficient time to include the appeal as a regular agenda item. A decision by the City Council
affirming the denial, revocation, or fee imposition will be in writing and supported by written
findings establishing the reasonableness of the decision.
8-7-31: RIGHT OF WAY; RESERVATION OF REGULATORY AND POLICE
POWERS: A permittee's rights are subject to the regulatory and police powers of the city to
adopt and enforce general ordinances as necessary to protect the health, safety, and welfare of
the public.
8-7-32: RIGHT OF WAY; SEVERABILITY: If any portion of this chapter is for any reason
held invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate,
distinct, and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining
portions thereof. Nothing in this chapter precludes the city from requiring a franchise agreement
with the applicant, as allowed by law
page 61
This ordinance shall be in effect from and after the date of its passage and publication.
Adopted and ordained into an ordinance this 16th day of January, 2018.
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
Neil Garlock, Mayor
ATTEST
Lorri Smith, City Clerk
page 62
SUMMARY PUBLICATION
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS ORDINANCE NO. 519
RIGHT-OF-WAY MANAGEMENT
The City Council of the City of Mendota Heights, MN ordains:
The City of Mendota Heights Code of Ordinances hereby includes Title 8, Chapter 7.
8-7-1: RIGHT OF WAY; PURPOSE AND INTENT: To provide for the health, safety, and
welfare of its citizens, and to ensure the integrity of its streets and the appropriate use of the
rights of way, the city strives to keep its rights of way in a state of good repair and free from
unnecessary encumbrances.
Accordingly, the city hereby enacts this new chapter of this code relating to right-of-way permits
and administration. This chapter imposes reasonable regulation on the placement and
maintenance of facilities and equipment currently within its rights of way or to be placed therein
at some future time. It is intended to complement the regulatory roles of state and federal
agencies. Under this chapter, persons excavating and obstructing the rights of way will bear
financial responsibility for their work. Finally, this chapter provides for recovery of out-of-
pocket and projected costs from persons using the public rights of way.
This ordinance shall be in effect from and after the date of its passage and publication. The
complete text of Ordinance No. 519 may be obtained at city hall or from the City's website at
www.mendota-heights.com .
Adopted this 16th day of January, 2018.
CITY COUNCIL OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
/s/ Neil Garlock, Mayor
Attest:
/s/ Lorri Smith, City Clerk
page 63
SMALL-WIRELESS-FACILTY
COLLOCATION AND LEASE AGREEMENT
BETWEEN
THE
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA
AND
Dated:
This document was drafted by:
Eckberg Lammers, P.C.
1809 Northwestern Avenue
Stillwater, Minnesota 55082
page 64
SMALL -WIRELESS -FACILITY COLLOCATION AND LEASE AGREEMENT
THIS SMALL -WIRELESS -FACILITY COLLOCATION AND LEASE AGREEMENT
(the "Agreement") is made as of the day of , (the "Effective Date"), by and
between the CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA, a municipal corporation and
political subdivision organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota (the
"City"), and
(the "Registrant"). The City and the Registrant are referred to herein individually as a "Party"
and collectively as the "Parties."
RECITALS
WHEREAS, the City has elected to manage rights of way within its jurisdiction pursuant
to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 237.162 and 237.163 (collectively, the "Act") and the City Code
of Mendota Heights, Minnesota, Title 8, Chapter 7 (the "Code"); and,
WHEREAS, the Registrant is seeking permission to install its small wireless facility or
facilities (the "Facility" or "Facilities") within the City's right of way; and
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the mutual obligations of the
Parties hereto, each of them does hereby covenant and agree with the other as follows:
ARTICLE I
PURPOSE AND DEFINITIONS
Section 1.1 Purpose. The purpose of this Agreement is to set forth the terms and
conditions under which the Registrant will be able to install its Facilities in the right of way that
is within the jurisdiction of, and managed by, the City. This Agreement is in addition to, and not
in lieu of, all other requirements established by the Act and the Code.
Section 1.2 Definitions. Any term contained in this Agreement shall have the
meaning given by Section 8-7-3 of the Code. If a term is not defined by said Section, it shall
have the meaning given by the Act.
ARTICLE II
SCOPE AND TERM
Section 2.1 Scope. The Registrant shall submit to the , or the
's designee (the "Director"):
page 65
(A) Detailed specifications, construction plans, descriptions of any equipment necessary
for the use, and drawings, of each kind of Facility model/prototype the Registrant
has designed;
(B) Maps showing the area that the Registrant wants to locate Facilities within; and,
(C) The number of Facilities the Registrant wishes to install.
The Registrant and the Director shall negotiate in good faith and decide together upon the
specific models/prototypes to be used, the specific location of the Facility, whether the Facility
will be attached to existing, new, or replacement support structures, and all other necessary
details.
All plans and drawings are attached as Exhibits to this Agreement, and are incorporated
herein by reference. The scope of this Agreement is limited to the specifically agreed upon
proposed installation of, and leasing for, the Facilities in the right of way contained in the
attached Exhibits.
Section 2.2 Term. This Agreement shall be effective on the date hereof and shall
continue, unless terminated sooner in accordance with the terms of this Agreement.
(A) Start date: The Registrant shall commence installation of the Facilities on
(B) Completion date: The Registrant shall complete installation of the Facility on
(C) Lease: The lease shall commence upon the issuance of the small -wireless -facility
permit (the "Permit") and shall remain in effect for the length of time the Facility is
in use, unless lawfully revoked.
Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein, the Registrant shall have the
right to terminate Registrant's occupancy provided that 30 days prior notice is given to the City.
ARTICLE III
REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES
Section 3.1 Representations and Warranties of the City. The City makes the following
representations and warranties:
(A) The City will work with the Registrant in a nondiscriminatory, competitively
neutral, and commercially reasonable manner
(B) All requests made by the City will be based on reasonable cost, health, safety,
welfare, aesthetic, and all other concerns permitted by law.
page 66
Section 3.2 Representations and Warranties of the Registrant. The Registrant makes
the following representations and warranties:
(A) The Registrant will comply with all federal, state, and local laws and ordinances,
including all safety standards.
(B) The Registrant will be solely and completely responsible for conditions of the job
site, including the safety of all persons and property during the installation and
continued use of the Facilities.
(C) The Registrant has the requisite training, skills, and experience necessary to install
and maintain the Facilities with reasonable care and skill.
(D) The Registrant is appropriately licensed by all applicable agencies and
governmental entities.
(E) The Registrant will not install any Facilities other than those approved and
permitted by the City in this Agreement and corresponding permit application(s).
(F) The Facilities and any other equipment approved and permitted to be installed are
of the type and frequency which will not cause harmful interference to any
equipment of the City, or other registrants' facilities or equipment, whether on the
wireless support structure or near or in the surrounding premises, which existed or
have been permitted prior to the date the Permit was acquired by the Registrant. The
Registrant's Facilities or equipment shall not transmit or receive radio waves until
the evaluation required by Section 6.2 of this Agreement has been satisfactorily
completed and approved.
ARTICLE IV
INDEMNIFICATION, WAIVER, AND INSURANCE
Section 4.1 Indemnification. The Registrant shall, to the fullest extent permitted by
law, defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City, and its employees, officials, agents, and
contractors against any claim of liability or against any loss of any kind, including compliance
with administrative orders and regulations, and specifically including, without limitation, against
any claim of liability or loss from personal injury or property damage resulting from or arising
out of the presence of Registrant's Facilities, equipment or other property located within the
City's rights of way and also as to any willful misconduct of the Registrant, its' employees,
contractors or agents, except to the extent such claims or damages may be due to or caused by
the willful misconduct of the City, or its' employees, contractors or agents. The Registrant agrees
that this indemnity obligation shall survive the completion or termination of this Agreement.
page 67
The Registrant shall implement all measures at the transmission site required by Federal
Communications Commission (the "FCC") regulations. In the event the Registrant causes the
site to exceed FCC Radio Frequency radiation limits, as measured on the premises, or otherwise
violate FCC standards, the Registrant shall be liable for all such non-compliance and shall
defend, indemnify and hold the City harmless from all claims arising from non-compliance.
Section 4.2 Waiver. The Registrant waives any liability of the City to the Registrant,
or any of its respective agents, representatives, successors or employees for any lost revenue, lost
profits, loss of technology, use of rights or services, incidental, punitive, indirect, special or
consequential damages, loss of data, or interruption or loss of use of service, even if the City has
been advised of the possibility of such damages, whether under theory of contract, tort (including
negligence), strict liability or otherwise that is related to, arises out of, flows from or is, in some
part, caused by the Registrant's Facility, whether attached to the City's wireless support structure
or otherwise located in the City's right of way.
Section 4.3 Insurance. The Registrant agrees that at its own cost and expense, it will
maintain:
(A) Commercial general liability insurance with limits not less than $1,000,000 per
occurrence; $2,000,000 annual aggregate;
(B) Workers' compensation insurance for all its employees in accordance with the
statutory requirements of the State of Minnesota; and,
(C) Employers' liability insurance with limits not less than:
(1) $500,000 for bodily injury by disease per employee;
(2) $500,000 for bodily injury by disease aggregate; and,
(3) $500,000 for bodily injury by accident.
The Registrant shall provide to the City Certificates of Insurance which specifically name
The City of Mendota Heights, including its elected and appointed officials, employees, and
agents, as an additional insured.
The insurance requirements may be met through any combination of primary and
umbrella/excess insurance.
The Registrant's policies shall be primary insurance and non-contributory to any other
valid and collectible insurance available to the City with respect to any claim arising out of the
Registrant's performance under this Agreement.
The Registrant's policies and Certificate of Insurance shall contain a provision that
coverage afforded under the policies shall not be cancelled without at least thirty (30) days'
page 68
advanced written notice to the City, or ten (10) days' written notice for non-payment of
premium.
ARTICLE V
DAMANGE, REPAIR, AND MAINTENANCE
Section 5.1 Damage. Any damage to the City's infrastructure, the City's equipment
thereon, or any element of the City's right of way caused by the Registrant's installation or
operations shall be repaired or replaced at Registrant's expense and to the Director's reasonable
satisfaction.
In the event that such damage cannot be reasonably expected to be repaired within forty-
five (45) days following such event, or if such damage may reasonably be expected to disrupt the
Registrant's operations of the Facility for more than forty-five (45) days, then the Registrant
may, at any time following such casualty, provided the City has not completed the restoration
required to permit the Registrant to resume its operation in the right of way, terminate upon
fifteen (15) days prior written notice to the City as to such location. With any such notice of
termination the Parties shall make an appropriate adjustment, as of such termination date, with
respect to payments due. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the rent shall abate during the period of
repair following such casualty in proportion to the degree to which the Registrant's use of the
right of way is impaired. The City is not liable for any damage to any Facility due to an event of
damage to the wireless support structure or right of way.
Section 5.2 Repair and maintenance. The City will take those actions it determines
are reasonably necessary, to repair, maintain, alter, or improve the right of way in connection
with Registrant's Facilities.
(A) By the City. Upon request from the City, the Registrant shall disconnect the
power to the Registrant's Facility within eight (8) hours of such request to facilitate any
maintenance or repair work to the wireless support structure or the right of way. After eight (8)
hours or immediately after an emergency, the City reserves the right to disconnect the power to
the Facility.
Except in cases of emergency, prior to commencing work on a wireless support structure
or right of way where a Facility is installed, the City will provide Registrant with 24-hour prior
notice thereof. Upon receiving such notice; it shall be the sole responsibility of the Registrant to
take adequate measures to remove or otherwise protect Registrant's Facility from the
consequences of such activities. If reasonably necessary, the City may require Registrant to
remove or power down any Facility during the work.
page 69
(B) By the Registrant. Registrant shall maintain the Facility in good and safe
condition, at its own cost and expense, and in compliance with applicable fire, health, building,
and other life safety codes.
ARTICLE VI
MISCELLANEOUS
Section 6.1 Ownership. Any wireless support structure or portion of the right of way
approved by the Director to be used by the Registrant shall be the property of the City and shall
not entitle the Registrant to ownership of such wireless support structure or portion of the right of
way.
Section 6.2 Engineering Studies. If the Registrant seeks to attach a Facility to a
wireless support structure, the Registrant must obtain and submit to the Director a structural
engineering study carried out by a qualified structural engineer showing that each wireless
support structure and foundation is able to support the proposed Facility.
The Registrant shall obtain a radio frequency interference study carried out by an
independent professional radio frequency engineer ("RF Engineer") showing that the Registrant's
intended use will not interfere with the City's licensed and unlicensed communications facilities,
which are located on or near the structure.
Section 6.3 Emergency. In the event that the Facility poses an immediate threat of
substantial harm or damage to the health, safety and welfare of the public, any property, City
Employees, and/or the premises, as reasonably determined by the City, the City may take actions
the City determines are reasonably required to protect, the health, safety and welfare of the
Public, or property of the public, from such jeopardy provided that after such emergency, and in
no event later than twenty-four (24) hours afterwards, the City gives notice to Registrant of
City's emergency actions. If the City reasonably determines that these conditions would be
improved by cessation of Registrant's operations, the Registrant shall immediately cease its
operations upon notice from the Director.
Section 6.4 Permit. The Registrant shall obtain from the City, any and all permits
required for a complete installation. These permits include, but are not limited to: Obstruction,
Excavation, Small Wireless Facility, etc. Applicable fees for any permits shall be borne by the
Registrant. The Registrant shall be bound by the requirements of each permit.
ARTICLE VII
FEES AND COSTS
Section 7.1 Fees purpose. The City will recover its right-of-way management costs
from the Registrant by imposing a fee for registration, a fee for each right-of-way permit, or,
page 70
when appropriate, a fee applicable to the Registrant when that Registrant causes the City or its
affiliated agencies to incur costs as a result of any actions or inactions of the Registrant.
Fees, or other right-of-way obligations, imposed by the City on this Registrant shall be:
(A) Based on the actual costs incurred by the City and its affiliated agencies in
managing the public right of way;
(B) Based on an allocation among all Registrants and users of the public right of way,
including the City itself and its affiliated agencies, which shall reflect the
proportionate costs imposed on the City and its affiliated agencies by each of the
various types of uses of the public rights of way;
(C) Imposed on a competitively neutral basis; and
(D) Imposed in a manner so that aboveground uses of public rights of way do not bear
costs incurred by the City and its affiliated agencies to regulate underground uses of
public rights of way.
Section 7.2 Site preparation cost. Any initial engineering survey and preparatory
construction work associated with the installation of a Facility will be paid by the Registrant in
the form of a onetime, nonrecurring, commercially reasonable, nondiscriminatory, and
competitively neutral charge to recover the costs associated with the proposed Facility.
Section 7.3 Fees in compliance. Total application fees for the Permit shall comply
with Minnesota Statutes, Section 237.163, Subdivision 6 with respect to costs related to the
Permit.
Section 7.4 Rent. The Registrant will be charged a fee for each Facility installed in
the right of way:
(A) $150 per year for rent to occupy the space;
(B) $25 per year for maintenance associated with the space occupied; and
(C) a fee on a monthly basis for the electricity used to operate the Facility, if not
purchased directly from a utility, at the rate of:
(1) $73 per month per radio node less than or equal to 100 max watts;
(2) $182 per month per radio node over 100 max watts; or
(3) the actual costs of electricity as reasonably estimated by the Director, if the
actual costs exceed the amount in item (1) or (2).
page 71
This fee is in addition to other fees or charges allowed under Minnesota Statutes, Section
237.163, Subdivision 6.
ARTICLE VIII
DEFAULT AND BREACH, TERMINATION, AND REMOVAL
Section 8.1 Default and breach. The Director may immediately suspend the
permission of a Registrant to install or operate a Facility if the Registrant materially fails to
comply with the terms of its permit(s), this Agreement, or governing federal, state, local law or
ordinance, if the City provides written notice to the Registrant of such failure to comply. If the
Registrant fails to cure the default on or before the sixtieth (60) day after receipt of the notice,
the City may terminate the Registrant's permit(s).
Section 8.2 Termination. If the Registrant refuses or fails to complete the installation
in a manner satisfactory to the City, the City may, by written notice to the Registrant, give notice
of its intention to terminate this Agreement. After such notice, the Registrant shall have ten (10)
days to cure, to the satisfaction of the City. If the Registrant fails to cure, the City shall send the
Registrant a written termination letter which shall be effective upon deposit in the United States
mail to the Registrant.
The Registrant may terminate this Agreement if the City is in breach of any material
obligation contained in this Agreement, which is not remedied by the City within ten (10) days
of written notice.
The Parties may voluntarily terminate this Agreement at any time by mutual agreement.
Section 8.3 Removal. In the event the City reasonably determines that the Registrant's
Facility or other equipment causes such interference as contemplated by Section 3.2(F) of this
Agreement, the Registrant will remove the equipment. It is the Registrant's responsibility to
confirm and appropriately test that their Facility or other equipment will not cause harmful
interference before pursuing approval from the City.
The Registrant shall immediately begin the removal of its Facility and all other
equipment after termination of the Registrant's Permit for violations of the terms of the Permit.
Unless the Director grants an extension of time, the Registrant shall have sixty (60) days after the
effective date of termination to complete removal.
After termination of a Registrant's Permit, the Registrant must comply with the terms of
this Agreement until its Facility and all other equipment are removed.
page 72
ARTICLE IX
DISPUTE RESOLUTION
Section 9.1 Dispute resolution. The Parties shall cooperate and use their best efforts
to ensure that the various provisions of this Agreement are fulfilled. The Parties agree to act in
good faith to undertake resolution of disputes, in an equitable and timely manner and in
accordance with the provisions of this Agreement. If disputes cannot be resolved informally by
the Parties, the following procedures shall be used:
(A) Whenever there is a failure between the Parties to resolve a dispute on their own,
the Parties shall first attempt to mediate the dispute. The Parties shall agree upon a
mediator, or if they cannot agree, shall obtain a list of court -approved mediators
from the Dakota County District Court Administrator and select a mediator by
alternately striking names until one remains. The City shall strike the first name
followed by the Registrant, and shall continue in that order until one name remains.
(B) If the dispute is not resolved within thirty (30) days after the end of the mediation
proceedings, the Parties may pursue any legal remedy.
ARTICLE X
GENERAL TERMS
Section 10.1 Entire agreement. This Agreement, its attachments and exhibits, and its
corresponding permit application(s) and permit(s), represent the entire agreement. No other oral
representations may be considered.
Section 10.2 Assignment. The Registrant may not assign this Agreement to any other
person unless written consent is obtained from the City.
Section 10.3 Amendments. Any modification or amendment to this Agreement shall
require a written agreement signed by both Parties.
Section 10.4 Nondiscrimination. The Registrant shall not discriminate against any
person by reason of any characteristic or classification protected by federal or state law.
Section 10.5 Governing law. This Agreement shall be governed by and interpreted in
accordance with the laws of the State of Minnesota.
Section 10.6 Venue. All proceedings arising from this Agreement shall be venued in
Dakota County, Minnesota.
Section 10.7 Ownership of documents. All reports, plans, specifications, data, maps,
and other documents submitted to the City under this Agreement shall be the property of the
page 73
City. The Registrant understands that all such documents are subject to the Minnesota Data
Practices Act, Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 13, and all other applicable state or federal laws,
rules, regulations, or orders pertaining to public data, privacy and/or confidentiality.
Section 10.8 Waiver. The waiver by either Party of any breach or failure to comply
with any provision of this Agreement by the other Party shall not be construed as, or constitute a
continuing waiver of such provision or a waiver of any other breach of or failure to comply with
any other provision of this Agreement.
Section 10.9 Notice. All notices hereunder must be in writing and shall be deemed
validly given if sent by certified mail, return receipt requested or by commercial courier,
provided the courier's regular business is delivery service and provided further that it guarantees
delivery to the addressee by the end of the next business day following the courier's receipt from
the sender. Notice shall be effective upon actual receipt or refusal as shown on the receipt
obtained pursuant to the foregoing.
(A) Notices to the City will be sent by certified mail to:
1101 Victoria Curve, Mendota Heights, MN 55118
(B) Notices to the Registrant will be sent to the address given in the application or such
other address as the Registrant shall designate in writing pursuant to the notice
provisions of this paragraph.
Section 10.10 Force majeure. Except for payment of sums due, neither Party shall be
liable to the other or deemed in default under this Agreement, if and to the extent that Party's
performance is prevented by reason of force majeure. "Force majeure" includes war, an act of
terrorism, fire, earthquake, flood and other circumstances which are beyond the control and
without the fault or negligence of the Party affected and which by the exercise of reasonable
diligence the Party affected was unable to prevent.
Section 10.11 Severability. If any court finds any portion of this Agreement to be
contrary to law, invalid, or unenforceable, the remainder of the Agreement will remain in full
force and effect.
[The remainder of this page is left intentionally blank. Signature page to follow]
page 74
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have caused this Agreement to be signed by their
duly authorized representatives, and effective as of the Effective Date written above.
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS,
MINNESOTA
By:
Its: Mayor
By:
Its: City Administrator
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) SS.
COUNTY OF DAKOTA )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of ,
20, by and , the Mayor and City Administrator,
respectively, of the City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota, a municipal corporation and political
subdivision under the laws of the State of Minnesota, on behalf of said City.
Notary Public
[Signature page to the Collocation and Lease Agreement between
the City of Mendota Heights and
1
page 75
By:
Its:
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) SS.
COUNTY OF )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
20, by , the of
, on behalf of said
a
Notary Public
[Signature page to the Collocation and Lease Agreement between
the City of Mendota Heights and
1
page 76
i1o1 Victoria curve 1 55118
651.452.1850 phone I 651 452.8940 Fax
www.mendota- heights com
CITY OF
MEN DOTA HEIGHTS
Request for City Council Action
DATE: January 16, 2018
TO: Mayor, City Council and City Administrator
FROM: Cheryl Jacobson, Assistant City Administrator
Meredith Lawrence, Recreation Program Coordinator
SUBJECT: Professional Services Contract with KLJ for Development of a Par 3
Turf Maintenance Request for Proposal
COMMENT:
Introduction
The City Council is asked to approve a professional services contract for the development of a
Request for Proposal (RFP) to solicit proposals for turf and grounds maintenance at the Par 3
golf course.
Background
For several years, the City has contracted with a private company/consultant for oversight of
maintenance practices at the Par 3 golf course. Services provided by the consultant focused on
the application of chemicals/fertilizer, winterization of the course at the end of the season and
general maintenance of the irrigation system. The current contract ended with the close of the
2017 golf season.
In addition to the consultant, the city employees two seasonal employees who mow the course,
and perform general maintenance duties.
Staff has reviewed the current practices, services provided by the contractor and future
maintenance and equipment needs of the golf course and is proposing the development and
release of a RFP for turf and grounds maintenance.
Earlier this month, members of the City Council asked staff to contact area golf course
superintendents and grounds keepers to gauge their interest in assisting the City with the
writing and executing a request for proposal. Staff subsequently followed up with staff from
local courses; however, those who were asked were unable to assist with the RFP.
Given the importance of timing and with the golf season quickly approaching, staff is seeking
approval to proceed with a professional services contract for purposes of writing and executing
an RFP with KLJ.
Budget Impact
KLJ has submitted a cost proposal, in the not to exceed amount of $3,455 for services.
If approved, funds would be available from the Par 3 (Professional Services) budget.
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council award a professional services contract to Weft the
development of a RFP to solicit proposals for turf and grounds maintenance at the Par 3 golf
course.
Action Required
If the City Council concurs, the City Council should pass a motion approving the professional
services contract with KLJ for the development of a Request for Proposal for turf and grounds
maintenance at the Par 3 golf course, at a cost not to exceed $3455.
page 78
1101 Victoria Curve 1 Mendota Heights, MN 55118
651.452.1850 phone 1 651.452.8940 fax
www.mendota-heights.com
CITY OF
MENDOTA HEIGHTS
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
DATE: January 16, 2017
TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator
FROM: Ryan Ruzek, P.E., Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Resolution 2018-07 Calling for a Public Hearing for the Lexington Highlands, South
Plaza Drive, & Mendakota Neighborhood Improvements Project No. 201706
COMMENT:
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this memo is to request that the Council approve resolution 2018-07 calling for a
public hearing for the Lexington Highlands, South Plaza Drive, & Mendakota Neighborhood
Improvements.
BACKGROUND
Council adopted Resolution 2017-113 at their December 19, 2017 meeting. This resolution accepted
the feasibility report for the Lexington Highlands, South Plaza Drive, & Mendakota Neighborhood
Improvements and called for a public hearing on January 16, 2018. Resolution 2018-05 was
approved by Council at their January 2, 2018 meeting rescheduling the public hearing for February 6,
2018.
DISCUSSION
The City Council meeting scheduled for February 6, 2018 is proposed to be moved to February 7,
2018 due to State precinct caucuses.
Staff is proposing to reschedule the public hearing to February 7, 2018.
BUDGET IMPACT
Delaying the hearing should not have an effect on the project budget.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Council adopt Resolution 2018-07 scheduling the public hearing for
February 7, 2018. A neighborhood informational meeting was held on January 10, 2018 and was
well attended.
ACTION REQUIRED
If city council wishes to implement the staff recommendation, pass a motion adopting Resolution
2018-07, CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE LEXINGTON HIGHLANDS,
SOUTH PLAZA DRIVE, AND MENDAKOTA NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT #201707. This action requires a simple majority vote.
page 79
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 2018-07
CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE LEXINGTON HIGHLANDS, SOUTH PLAZA
DRIVE, AND MENDAKOTA NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution 2017-71, 2017-72, and 2017-73, the City Council, on
September 5, 2017, ordered a feasibility report to be prepared by the Public Works Director with
reference to the improvement of Avanti Drive, Bwana Court, Faro Lane, Summit Lane, Twin Circle
Drive, Vail Drive, West Circle Court, Mendakota Court, Mendakota Drive, and South Plaza Drive; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution 2017-113, the City Council, on December 19, 2017,
accepted a feasibility report prepared by the Public Works Director and called for a public hearing on
January 16, 2018; and
WHEREAS, statutory requirements were unable to be met for the public hearing date on January
16, 2018 and the hearing date is changed to February 6, 2018; and
WHEREAS, the public meeting scheduled for February 6, 2018 was moved to February 7, 2018;
and
NOW THEREFORE IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED, by the Mendota Heights City Council as
follows:
1. A Public Hearing shall be held on such proposed improvements on the 7t' day of February,
2018 at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve, City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota at 7:00 p.m.
Statutory notice and publication requirements shall be followed.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this sixteenth day of January, 2018.
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
Neil Garlock, Mayor
ATTEST
Lorri Smith, City Clerk
cowman'
in
CITY OF
MENDOTA HEIGHTS
page 80
1101 Victoria Curve I Mendota Heights, MN 55118
651.452.1850 phone 1 651.452.8940 fax
www.mendota-heights.com
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Mark McNeill, City Administrator
Subject: Authorization for ICMA-RC Managed Accounts
Date: January 16, 2018
COMMENT:
INTRODUCTION:
The City Council is asked to authorize participation in the ICMA-RC Managed Accounts
program for participating employees.
BACKGROUND:
The City offers different 457 retirement savings account programs for its employees. 457
accounts are the government -sector equivalent of a 401(k) program.
One of the City's existing providers is the International City/County Management Association
Retirement Corporation (ICMA-RC). Recently, ICMA-RC has offered a Managed Accounts
program for its participants who prefer to have the RC provide professional investment guidance,
rather than employees to do investments on their own. However, the Plan Administrator (City)
must authorize participation in this plan, by having its governing body (the City Council)
approve that authorization.
Participation in the Managed Accounts program is optional to the plan participants, as is the
overall participation in any of the City's 457 accounts.
BUDGET IMPACT:
There is no cost to the City for participation in the ICMA-RC managed accounts program. The
fees charged to the individual plan participants covers those costs.
page 81
RECOMMENDTION:
I recommend City participation in the ICMA managed accounts program. To make the
authorization, it should approve the attached Guided Pathways Managed Accounts Services
Agreement.
ACTION REQUIRED:
If the Council concurs, it should, by motion, authorize execution of the ICMA-RC Guided
Pathways Managed Accounts Services Agreement.
Mark McNeill
City Administrator
ICMA-RC GUIDED PATHWAYS® MANAGED ACCOUNTS SERVICES AGREEMENT
page 82
This Managed Accounts Services Agreement ("Agreement"), made as of the ___day of , 20___
(herein referred to as the `Inception Date'), between the ("Employer'), a
organized and existing under the laws of the State of with an office at
(Address), (City), (State),
(Zip Code), and International City County Management Association Retirement Corporation ("ICMA-RC"), a Delaware corporation, is
to add the discretionary investment advisory services program ("Managed Accounts") described in this Agreement as a discretionary asset
allocation and management service offered under your employer-sponsored retirement plan or plans ("Plan").
RECITALS
Employer acts as a public sponsor for a Plan with responsibility to obtain investment alternatives and services for employees and former
employees participating in that Plan (each a "participant");
ICMA-RC provides an array of services to public employers for the operation of employee retirement plans including, but not limited
to, investment advisory services, communications concerning investment alternatives, account maintenance, account record-keeping,
investment and tax reporting, transaction processing, benefit disbursement, and asset management.
Managed Accounts is a discretionary investment advisory service provided as part of ICMA-RC's Guided Pathways program, a suite of
investment services designed to assist participants in reaching their retirement investing objectives.
This Agreement adds Managed Accounts, a discretionary asset allocation investment advisory service, to Asset Class Guidance and
Fund Advice, already offered by ICMA-RC and available to most participants. These services, all of which are offered through the
Guided Pathways platform, are intended to assist participants in reaching their retirement investing objectives.
ICMA-RC is an investment adviser registered as such with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC") under the Investment
Advisers Act of 1940, as amended ("Advisers Act"). ICMA-RC Services, LLC (a wholly owned subsidiary of ICMA-RC) is registered as a
broker-dealer with the SEC and is a member in good standing with FINRA and the Securities Investor Protection Corporation ("SIPC").
AGREEMENTS
1. Investment Advisory Services
Each participant, beneficiary or alternate payee as permitted under the Plan (collectively, "Participants"), electing to have
investment advisory services provided by ICMA-RC must agree to the Investment Advisory Agreement ("Participant Agreement"),
which describes the features of Managed Accounts and Fund Advice as well as the rights and responsibilities of the Participants
under the program.
Participants who are subject to any imposed frequent trading restrictions are not eligible to participate in Managed Accounts.
By entering into this Agreement, you acknowledge and agree that you have received and reviewed this Agreement and the
Participant Agreement, including the terms, conditions, and details of Managed Accounts described in those Agreements and that
as Plan Fiduciary you authorize ICMA-RC to offer and make available Managed Accounts to Participants in each of your
eligible ICMA-RC administered 457, 401, and Payroll IRA plans. Vantagecare Retirement Health Savings Plans and Plans
that do not meet core investment option asset category requirements (e.g., ICMA-RC's standard 457 PTS Plan) are not
considered eligible plans.
Managed Accounts
Managed Accounts is a discretionary asset allocation and management service designed for Participants who want to delegate
their individual Plan investment decisions to a financial expert. Participants are charged an asset-based fee for Managed Accounts.
See Section 5 below for applicable fees. The Managed Accounts fee covers only our advisory fee for allocating and reallocating
assets in participants' accounts and does not cover any other fees or expenses associated with these accounts including underlying
mutual fund and plan administration fees.
Under Managed Accounts, a Participant authorizes ICMA-RC to exercise discretionary authority to allocate and reallocate the
assets in his or her Plan account or accounts among eligible Plan investments and implement individualized advice generated from
the investment methodologies and software created by Morningstar Investment Management LLC ("Morningstar Investment
Management"), a leading provider of retirement advice and asset allocation strategies. Morningstar Investment Management is a
federally registered investment adviser and a subsidiary of Morningstar Inc., a leading world-wide provider of independent research
committed to helping investors reach their financial goals. In providing such services to ICMA-RC, Morningstar Investment
Management acts as the Independent Financial Expert ("IFE") as that term is used in Advisory Opinion 2001-09A issued by the
U.S. Department of Labor (the "DOL") (see Section 3, below). Based on information provided by the Participant about his or her
1 ICMA-RC
financial condition and investment objectives, ICMA-RC allocates the Participant's account according to thoPi&'gle Morningstar
Investment Management model on a discretionary basis without seeking the Participant's approval for each transaction.
The entire account balance of any account designated for participation in Managed Accounts must be allocated to Managed
Accounts.
Participants must agree to provide financial and other information as reasonably requested by ICMA-RC and to inform ICMA-RC
promptly of any changes in their circumstances in order to assist ICMA-RC in the development and management of an investment
strategy that is suitable and appropriate. ICMA-RC will notify Participants annually to contact ICMA-RC regarding any changes
in their financial situation, employment status or investment objectives and whether Participants wish to impose any reasonable
restrictions on their accounts which are not fundamentally inconsistent with their investment objectives or the nature or operation
of Managed Accounts. ICMA-RC personnel knowledgeable about the management of the Participant's account will be reasonably
available to respond to Participant's inquiries. Participants will receive quarterly statements consisting of all activity in their accounts,
including fees and expenses as well as the beginning and ending value of the account for the relevant period, and will receive copies of
confirmations of any transactions in their accounts.
Initially and at least annually thereafter, Participants are given an opportunity to review and confirm the accuracy and
completeness of the information upon which their advice is based. When appropriate, but normally on a quarterly basis,
Morningstar Investment Management re-examines the model advice portfolio to determine if a reallocation to a different model
advice portfolio is needed. If a new model advice portfolio is needed, the Participant's Account(s) assets will be reallocated
and rebalanced to the new model's target asset allocation. Quarterly, assuming a new model advice portfolio is not needed,
Morningstar Investment Management reviews the allocation of the Participant's Account(s) to determine if any fund deviates from
the recommended model advice portfolio by more than a pre -specified minimum percentage, which would at no time be greater
than 3%. If it does, ICMA-RC will transfer assets among the currently designated funds to ensure the Participant's Account(s)
remain consistent with the target allocation of the model advice portfolio.
Because ICMA-RC has discretionary authority over the Participant's account under Managed Accounts, certain Participant -directed
account transactions otherwise available to the Participant, such as transfers of existing account balances and changes to future
contribution allocations, systematic or otherwise, will not be processed until the Participant has terminated participation in Managed
Accounts. Participants may terminate participation in Managed Accounts at any time at their discretion.
The Managed Accounts program does not provide advice for assets in self-directed brokerage accounts, certificates of deposits,
or certain other investment options. However, while only ICMA-RC administered retirement plan assets are managed, other
assets (i.e., spousal assets, brokerage accounts, etc.) can be taken into consideration for the purpose of determining the appropriate
allocation for the retirement plan account to the extent that the Participant has provided information about such assets.
Certain investment options within your Plan may charge a redemption fee on specific transactions. Transactions initiated
by ICMA-RC under Managed Accounts may result in such redemption fees being charged to Participants. Any applicable
redemption fees will be deducted directly from the Participants' accounts.
Managed Accounts may not be suitable for all investors. Participants should contact our Guided Pathways team or their ICMA-
RC Retirement Plans Specialist and fully read the ICMA-RC Guided Pathways Fund Advice and Managed Accounts Investment
Advisory Agreement prior to enrolling in Managed Accounts to determine if this service is right for them.
Asset Class Guidance and Fund Advice
Both Asset Class Guidance and Fund Advice are currently offered to most Participants. These services are offered directly
through ICMA-RC in conjunction with Morningstar Investment Management as the IFE. ICMA-RC applies methodologies
developed, maintained and overseen by Morningstar Investment Management. The Plan is not charged any additional fee for
allowing these services to be offered to Participants.
Asset Class Guidance
Asset Class Guidance provides "point -in -time" asset allocation recommendations to Participants looking for assistance in selecting
their retirement plan investments. Asset Class Guidance does not provide fund specific recommendations. These individualized
asset allocation recommendations from ICMA-RC may be provided through the internet, or by an ICMA-RC associate over the
telephone. ICMA-RC creates the asset allocation recommendations by applying methodology developed, maintained and overseen
by Morningstar Investment Management.
Asset allocation recommendations are based upon a wealth forecast that takes into account not only the Participant's Plan account
values and contribution rates, but also, to the extent provided by the Participant and relevant to the forecast, other assets held
by the Participant or the Participant's spouse or family member, and personal information of the Participant - including but
not limited to, date of birth, anticipated or actual date of retirement, etc. The wealth forecast reflects the results of Monte Carlo
simulations to determine the probable result of various account allocations, savings rates, etc.
2 ICMA-RC
The Participant may elect whether to use this service, and if so, when and how often to use it. The ParticipaliKR114 responsible
for implementing any asset allocation recommendations based on the ordinary means available under the Plan (i.e., transfer of
account balances), and for subsequent monitoring or review of the account and of the accuracy of information utilized in arriving
at the asset allocation recommendation.
Participants are not charged additional fees for using Asset Class Guidance under Guided Pathways
Fund Advice
Fund Advice provides "point -in -time" individualized investment advice to Participants seeking assistance in selecting specific
retirement plan investments. Fund specific recommendations are constructed by Morningstar Investment Management from
among the investment options available in the Plan. Fund Advice may be provided through the Internet, or by an ICMA-RC
associate over the telephone. ICMA-RC creates Fund Advice recommendations by applying methodology developed, maintained
and overseen by Morningstar Investment Management. The investment advice and fund specific recommendations are constructed
by Morningstar Investment Management from the investment options available under the Plan and as selected by you as the Plan
Sponsor, applied to the Participant's individual information and account.
Fund Advice is based upon a wealth forecast that takes into account not only the Participant's Plan account values and
contribution rates, but also, to the extent provided by the Participant and relevant to the forecast, other assets held by the
Participant or the Participant's spouse or family member, and personal information of the Participant - including but not limited
to, date of birth, anticipated or actual date of retirement, etc. The wealth forecasts reflect the results of Monte Carlo simulations to
determine the probable result of various account allocations, savings rates, etc.
The Participant may elect whether to use this service, and if so, when and how often to use it. The Participant will be responsible
for implementing any advice or fund specific recommendations using the ordinary means available under the Plan (i.e., transfer of
account balances), and for subsequent monitoring or review of the account and of the information utilized in arriving at the advice.
Participants using Fund Advice are responsible for supplying updated information when their personal circumstances or other
factors change.
ICMA-RC will charge a standard $20 annual fee to Participants using Fund Advice. However, certain Participants, such as those
in the Premier Program®, can utilize the Advice service for no charge. The fixed annual fee will be charged to the Participant's
account following enrollment and will entitle the Participant to use of the service for a twelve-month period. For each succeeding
twelve-month period for which the Advice service is initiated or continued, the Participant will be required to re -enroll and pay the
annual fee in order to continue receiving the service.
Guided Pathways' allows Participants to directly implement recommended transactions (fund transfers and contribution
reallocations) in their ICMA-RC accounts.
2. Employer Acknowledgements Designations and Determinations
By entering into this Agreement, Employer determines that the compensation paid to ICMA-RC by Participants for services
under the Guided Pathways program, including the Managed Accounts services, taking into account any other compensation to
ICMA-RC or its affiliates for investments and services provided to Plan accounts, is reasonable in light of the investment advisory
services to be rendered.
Employer designates that the individual investment options offered to Participants under the Plan will be the same investment
options available to Participants selecting Managed Accounts and Fund Advice. In making such a designation, you acknowledge
and agree to any limits on the investment options to which the advice may apply, and to any limitations imposed by the investment
option or by the Plan.
If the VT Retirement IncomeAdvantage Fund is an available option in your Plan, the following acknowledgments, representations,
and conditions are applicable:
• The IFE may recommend that a portion of a Participant's assets be invested in the VT Retirement IncomeAdvantage Fund, a
VantageTrust Fund that invests in a separate account under a group variable annuity issued by a third -party insurance company.
A Guarantee Fee of 1.00% is assessed by the third -party insurance company for the VT Retirement IncomeAdvantage Fund
guarantees and is included along with other fund fees and expenses in the VT Retirement IncomeAdvantage Funds' net
expense ratio. Guarantees are based on the claims -paying ability of the third -party insurance company. These guarantees are
also subject to certain limitations, terms, and conditions. Rights to these guarantees may be impacted if: (1) a participant
makes any transfers, exchanges or withdrawals from the Fund (other than guaranteed withdrawals after lock -in); (2) you switch
retirement plan providers or remove the VT Retirement IncomeAdvantage Fund from the plan lineup; or (3) the VT Retirement
IncomeAdvantage Fund or the group annuity contract in which it invests is terminated.
3 ICMA-RC
page 85
• You understand that the VT Retirement Income Advantage Fund is an investment option for the Plan and that the fund invests
in a separate account available through a group variable annuity contract. By entering into this Agreement, you acknowledge
that you have received and understand the following documents: 1) VT Retirement IncomeAdvantage Important Considerations;
2) Making Sound Investment Decisions - A Retirement Investment Guide; and 3) Retirement Investment Guide - Additional
Information. These documents are also available online via Account Access (www.icmarc.org) or by contacting ICMA-RC
Investor Services at 800-669-7400.
Employer acknowledges that ICMA-RC or an affiliate may be providing additional services, including investment, Plan
recordkeeping, Plan compliance, and other related Plan administrative services. However, the Employer retains its existing
responsibility for taking necessary steps to adopt, amend and maintain the qualification of the Plan.
3. Prohibited Transactions
Although your Plan, as a governmental plan, is not subject to all the requirements of ERISA, under ERISA certain types of
transactions are prohibited, including, generally, the provision of investment advice by an entity or an individual that is providing
other services to the Plan for compensation.
The DOL issued Advisory Opinion 2001-09A ("Advisory Opinion') to SunAmerica Retirement Markets. Inc. ("SunAmerica") on
December 14, 2001. The Advisory Opinion provides that investment advice based on a computer program controlled by an IFE
and delivered to a Participant by an organization or adviser that is also providing plan investments from which it receives income,
will not constitute a prohibited transaction if certain requirements are met. The DOL issued the Advisory Opinion in response
to a request for a prohibited transaction exemption ("PTE") by SunAmerica. ICMA-RC has entered into an agreement with
Morningstar Investment Management to provide the type of services described in the SunAmerica PTE request and the Advisory
Opinion. ICMA-RC is already providing services to your Plan, which may include enrollment and contribution processing, Plan
recordkeeping and compliance, education and other services, including mutual funds advised or sub -advised by ICMA-RC or an
affiliated adviser which may be included as eligible Plan investments. By executing this Agreement, you are authorizing ICMA-RC
to provide investment advisory services under Managed Accounts.
Managed Accounts may be provided through the Internet, on paper, or by an ICMA-RC associate over the telephone. ICMA-RC
associates will continue to provide many of the same Plan and investment services to the Plan or Participants that he or she would
otherwise provide, in the absence of Managed Accounts. However, pursuant to the Advisory Opinion, ICMA-RC associates
will present the advice as determined under the investment methodologies and software developed by Morningstar Investment
Management and may not alter that advice.
4. Investment Advice Process
From the investment options available to Plan Participants, Morningstar Investment Management will select the funds to be
included in the model advice portfolios under Managed Accounts.
To be eligible for Managed Accounts or Fund Advice, the Plan must at all times provide investment options which cover
the following required asset categories as determined by Morningstar Investment Management: US Fixed Income (Cash, US
Short-term Bonds or US Bonds), US Equity, and International Equity. Morningstar Investment Management, as the IFE, is
solely responsible for determining the adequacy of the Plan's exposure to the required asset categories. ICMA-RC will notify
you if available investment options under your Plan fail to include one or more asset categories required for construction of the
Morningstar Investment Management model portfolios.
On an ongoing basis, Morningstar Investment Management will monitor the asset -class portfolios and the individual investment
options included in the model portfolios, and make changes as appropriate. With certain exceptions, any recommended changes
arising from such monitoring will generally be implemented not more frequently than quarterly.
Participants with multiple ICMA-RC-administered accounts under the same Employer Plan and/or multiple ICMA-RC-
administered accounts with different Employer Plans, have the option of individually selecting the accounts to which Managed
Accounts will be applied.
Each Participant enrolling in Managed Accounts will be assigned to one of a fixed number of model advice portfolios based upon
the information provided to ICMA-RC by the Plan and the Participant. As described in the Participant Agreement, a minimum set of
data items will be required in order to assign the Participant to a model portfolio. These include gender, date of birth, marital status,
employment status, salary, retirement plan account balances, current retirement plan savings rate, desired replacement retirement
income, and desired probability of meeting or exceeding desired replacement retirement income.
Certain required information on Participant accounts is automatically pre -populated to Managed Accounts by ICMA-RC.
Participants are responsible for providing any other required or non -required information, although "default" assumptions may be
used for certain information.
4 ICMA-RC
Additional information can be provided, by the Plan or the Participant, to further assist in the selection of PAgifigpriate
model advice portfolio, including additional information about the Participant and/or the Participant's spouse and/or family, if
applicable. This additional information can include, but is not limited to:
• Outside Plan Assets: Account information on non-ICMA-RC defined contribution retirement and non -retirement accounts
(i.e., 401 and 457 plans, savings, retail brokerage), and other account information including but not limited to: account type;
account name; account balance; account holdings; etc.
• Retirement Plan Loans: Details on outstanding retirement plan loans including but not limited to: maturity date;
outstanding loan balance; repayment amount; interest rate; repayment frequency; etc.
• Cash Flow: Details on non -retirement plan cash flows including but not limited to: received inheritance or college tuition
costs; cash flow type (income or expense); amount; college cost beginning year; college cost ending year; etc.
• Other Benefits/Retirement Plan Information: Including but not limited to: Information on defined benefit pension plans or
Social Security; start age; pension monthly payment; social security monthly estimate; etc.
• Information About Your Spouse's Personal and Financial Situations: Including but not limited to: Information on your
spouse and his/her retirement and non -retirement accounts; date of birth; annual savings rate; salary; account type; account
name; account balance; account holdings; etc.
Participants will be permitted to enroll in Managed Accounts at any time. However, if a Participant previously terminated the
service with respect to a Plan, he or she must wait at least until the next calendar quarter before re -enrolling in the service for
that Plan and may not enroll more than two times in any 12 -month period.
Upon enrollment in Asset Class Guidance or Fund Advice, a Plan Participant may use these services as often as desired, in
the manner (and subject to any limitations) described in the Participant Agreement or Terms and Conditions document. A
Participant enrolling in Managed Accounts or Advice will receive a statement summarizing the data provided to ICMA-RC
that was used to formulate the advice, and if accessing the service over the Internet, will be given an opportunity to correct or
modify that data before the service is initiated. Thereafter, the Participant can revise, add, or change his or her data at any time.
Participants enrolled in Managed Accounts will be contacted at least annually regarding this information, and may speak with
an ICMA-RC associate at any time. When appropriate, but normally on a quarterly basis, Morningstar Investment Management
re-examines the model advice portfolio to determine if a reallocation to a different model advice portfolio is needed. If a new
model advice portfolio is needed, the Participant's Account(s) assets will be reallocated and rebalanced to the new model's target
asset allocation. Quarterly, assuming a new model advice portfolio is not needed, Morningstar Investment Management reviews
the allocation of the Participant's Account(s) to determine if any fund deviates from the recommended model advice portfolio by
more than a pre -specified minimum percentage, which would at no time be greater than 3%. If it does, ICMA-RC will transfer
assets among the currently designated funds to ensure the Participant's Account(s) remain consistent with the target allocation
of the model advice portfolio. Participants are responsible for contacting ICMA-RC with any new or revised information that
may warrant an additional review of the account. Allocation or reallocations may be limited by the Plan or by the underlying
investment. Such limitations will be taken into account by Morningstar Investment Management in the development and
implementation of the advice.
5. Participant Costs
Participants who enroll in Managed Accounts are assessed an asset based fee that is charged on a monthly basis based on the
month-end average daily account balance in Managed Accounts. The Managed Accounts fee will be calculated as a percentage
of the account value and applied to the account as a fixed dollar amount. The Managed Accounts fee covers only our advisory
fee for allocating and reallocating assets in participants' accounts and does not cover any other fees or expenses associated with
these accounts including underlying mutual fund and plan administration fees. The standard Managed Accounts Fee Schedule
is presented below and is also detailed in the Participant Agreement.
Account Balance
Annual Fee
First $100,000
0.40%
Next $100,000
0.35%
Next $300,000
0.25%
Over $500,000 0.00% (no additional fee charged)
The Managed Accounts Fee will be deducted pro -rata against all investments in any account included in Managed Accounts.
5 ICMA-RC
Employer hereby directs that these costs be withdrawn from Participant accounts. You will be provided at least 9P'davance written
notice of any change in the rate of fees assessed to Participant accounts. Fees will be assessed to Participant accounts on a pro -rata basis
among investments. There is no cost assessed to the Employer or the Plan for offering Managed Accounts.
ICMA-RC will charge a standard $20 annual fee to Participants using Fund Advice. However, certain participants, such as
those in the Premier Program", can utilize the Fund Advice service for no charge. The fixed annual fee will be charged to the
Participant's account following enrollment and will entitle the Participant to use of the service for a twelve-month period. For each
succeeding twelve-month period for which the Advice service is initiated or continued, the Participant will be required to re -enroll
and pay the annual fee in order to continue receiving the service.
Participants are not charged any additional fees for using Asset Class Guidance under Guided Pathways.
6. No Guarantee
Employer understands, acknowledges and accepts that the advice provided hereunder relies on historical performance and other
data, all of which have limitations. Past performance of investments is no guarantee of future results. The analysis and advice
provided depends upon a number of factors, including the information provided by the Participant, various assumptions and
estimates and other considerations. As a result, the wealth forecast developed and advice and recommendations provided are no
guarantees that a Participant will achieve his or her retirement goals or anticipated returns. You understand that there remains a
risk of loss within eligible investment options.
7. Form ADV
Part 2A ofICMA-RC's Form ADV ("Brochure"), a portion of ICMA-RC's SEC adviser registration statement, contains additional
information about ICMA-RC and our advisory services. By entering into this Agreement, you represent that you have received and
reviewed a copy of the Brochure.
8. Limitation of Liability
You understand and agree that there is no guarantee that the recommendations made by ICMA-RC pursuant to the investment
methodologies and software developed by Morningstar Investment Management will be successful. Nor can ICMA-RC ensure
that a Participant will achieve his or her retirement goals or anticipated returns. You acknowledge that the outcome of the Guided
Pathways services calculations are estimates only, and there is no guarantee of the future financial performance of Participant
investments or that Participants will meet their desired goal(s).
To the extent Employer uses ICMA-RC's EZ Link platform to initiate Participants' enrollment in Managed Accounts, Employer
represents that it is acting as agent for the Participant in the enrollment process. Employer further represents that prior to
initiating a Participant's enrollment in Managed Accounts through the EZ Link platform, Employer will confirm that the
Participant has acknowledged (1) that he or she has read and understands (i) the ICMA-RC Guided Pathways Fund Advice and
Managed Accounts Investment Advisory Agreement ("Investment Advisory Agreement"), (ii) Part 2A of ICMA-RC's Form ADV
for Guided Pathways and Retirement Readiness Reports Advisory Services, and (iii) the VT Retirement IncomeAdvantage Fund
Summary Important Considerations document, if the VT Retirement IncomeAdvantage Fund is an option in the Participant's
Plan; and (2) that Participant is deemed to have entered into the Investment Advisory Agreement as of the date of enrollment in
Managed Accounts.
You agree, understand and acknowledge that the advice is based on the responses provided and other information furnished to us
by you, the Plan and Participants through Guided Pathways and Managed Accounts and updated as necessary. ICMA-RC shall
not be liable for any misstatement or omission contained in the information furnished to us, or any loss, liability, claim damage or
expense whatsoever arising out of or attributable to such misstatement or omission. Nothing in this section shall be construed as a
waiver of any rights Employer or Participants may have under common law, the Advisers Act, or any other federal or state securities
or retirement laws.
ICMA-RC is not responsible for providing and maintaining the communications and equipment (including personal computers
and modems) and telephone or alternative services required for accessing and utilizing electronic or automated services, or for
communications service fees and charges incurred by the Participant in accessing these services.
9. Assignability
This Agreement shall not be assignable by any party without the prior written consent of the other party.
10. Term and Termination of Managed Accounts Service
This Agreement shall be in effect and commence on the date all parties have signed and executed this Agreement ("Inception Date").
This Agreement will be renewed automatically for each succeeding year unless 60 days' advance written notice of termination is
6 ICMA-RC
provided by either party to the other, provided however that some or all of the notice period may be waived u/angaed88 onstration that
only an earlier termination will comply with the independent fiduciary's fiduciary duty. P�
Employer may terminate the services at any time for all Participants, subject to a reasonable advance written notice requirement
consistent with applicable law. Such termination shall be effective as soon as reasonably practicable thereafter.
A Participant may terminate the Managed Accounts service with respect to his or her account(s) at any time.
During the term of this agreement, ICMA-RC reserves the right to replace Morningstar Investment Management as the IFE in its
sole discretion. In the event ICMA-RC is unable to contract with a suitable replacement IFE, this Agreement shall automatically
terminate upon written notice from ICMA-RC to the Employer.
11. Extraordinary Events
ICMA-RC shall not be liable for loss caused directly or indirectly by governmental restrictions, exchange or market rulings,
suspension of trading, war, strikes, or other conditions beyond our control. We shall not be responsible for loss or damages caused
by equipment failure, communications lines failure, unauthorized access, theft, systems failure and other consequences beyond
our control.
12. Privacy
Protection of Nonpublic Personal Information. ICMA-RC is subject to various privacy requirements for the protection of
its clients under the Gramm -Leach -Bliley Act ("GLBA") and regulations promulgated pursuant to GLBA.
Definition of Nonpublic Personal Information. Nonpublic personal information of customers or consumers ("NPI")
includes, but is not limited to, names, addresses, account balances, account numbers, account activity, Social Security numbers,
taxpayer identification numbers, and sensitive, financial and health information. NPI includes information on our forms or in a
database of any kind, information created by us, information collected by or on behalf of us and personally identifiable information
derived from NPI.
Disclosure and Use of NPI. All NPI that ICMA-RC obtains as a result of offering these services to your Participants shall not
be used, disclosed, reused, or redisclosed to any unaffiliated third party, except to carry out the purposes for which the information
was disclosed.
ICMA-RC shall be permitted to disclose relevant aspects of the NPI to its officers, agents, subcontractors, independent financial
expert and employees only to the extent that such disclosure is reasonably necessary for the performance of its duties and
obligations under the Agreement.
The obligations of this Section shall not restrict any disclosure by ICMA-RC pursuant to any applicable state or federal laws or
regulations, or by request or order of any court or government agency.
Security of NPI. ICMA-RC further agrees that it has established and maintains policies and procedures designed to ensure the
confidentiality and security of NPI. This shall include procedures to protect against anticipated threats or hazards to the security or
integrity of the information and unauthorized access to or use of the information.
13. Notices
All notices required to be delivered under Section 10 of this Agreement shall be delivered personally or by registered or certified
mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, to (i) Legal Department, ICMA Retirement Corporation, 777 North Capitol
Street, N.E., Suite 600, Washington, D.C., 20002-4240; (ii) Employer at the office set forth in the first paragraph hereof, or to any
other address designated by the party to receive the same by written notice similarly given.
14. Complete Agreement and Amendments
This Agreement shall constitute the complete and full understanding and sole agreement between ICMA-RC and Employer relating to
the object of this Agreement and correctly sets forth the complete rights, duties and obligations of each party to the other as of its date.
This Agreement supersedes all written and oral agreements, communications or negotiations among the parties. Any prior agreements,
promises, negotiations or representations, verbal or otherwise, not expressly set forth in this Agreement are of no force and effect. This
Agreement may only be amended in writing with the consent of both parties.
15. Titles
The headings of Sections of this Agreement and the headings for each of the attached schedules are for convenience only and do
not define or limit the contents thereof.
16 Incorporation of Schedules
7 ICMA-RC
All Schedules (and any subsequent amendments thereto), attached hereto, and referenced herein, are hereby incorporated within
this Agreement as if set forth fully herein.
page 89
icnnARC
BUILDING CTOR
RETIREMENT ICS SECURITY
ICMA-RC MANAGED ACCOUNTS SERVICES AGREEMENT SIGNATURE PAGE
RETIREMENT SECURITY
Please retain the entire copy of the Managed Accounts Services Agreement, including a copy of the signature page, for your records.
In Witness Whereof, the parties hereto certify that they have read and fully understand the complete ICMA-RC
Managed Accounts Services Agreement and have caused the ICMA-RC Managed Accounts Services Agreement to be
executed by their duly authorized officers as of the Date below. By signing this Agreement, you authorize ICMA-RC
to offer and make available Managed Accounts to Participants in each of your eligible ICMA-RC administered 457,
401, and Payroll IRA plans.
EMPLOYER
By
Employer/Plan Name
Employer Signature Date
Name and Title (Please Print)
Street Address
ICMA-RC 457 and 401 Plan Number(s)
City and State
INTERNATIONAL CITY COUNTY MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION RETIREMENT CORPORATION
Erica McFarquhar
Assistant Corporate Secretary
Please return fully executed Signature page to:
New Business Unit
ICMA-RC
777 North Capitol Street, NE
Suite 600
Washington, DC 20002-4240
BR0000.170 25546.1214-75238-879
Managed Accounts Service Agreement 8 ICMA-RC
1/5/2018
Mendota Heights Building Activity Report
Mike Andrejka, Building Official
page 90
December 1, 2017
thr.
December 31, 2017
January 1, 2017
thou
December 31, 2017
January 1, 2016
thou
December 31, 2016
January 1, 2015
thou
December 31, 2015
Building Permit
No.
Valuation
$ 18,647.53
Fee Collected
Building Permit
No.
Valuation
Fee Collected
Building Permit
No.
Valuation
Sub Total
Fee Collected
Building Permit
No.
Valuation
16
Fee Collected
SFD
1
$
382,739.00
$4,545.34
SFD
8
$
4,376,940.34
$47,366.57
SFD
10
$
4,801,562.00
$54,162.40
SFD
11
$
5,374,424.00
$ 59,311.34
APT
0
$
-
$0.00
APT
2
$
23,022,000.00
$158,402.65
APT
0
$
-
$0.00
APT
0
$
-
$ -
Townhouse
4
$
875,000.00
$8,846.24
Townhouse
16
$
3,540,000.00
$35,684.86
Townhouse
18
$
4,145,000.00
$43,118.57
Townhouse
12
$
2,845,000.00
$ 31,324.08
Condo
0
$
-
$0.00
Condo
0
$
-
$0.00
Condo
0
$
-
$0.00
Condo
0
$
-
$ -
Misc
26
$
411,179.43
$ 5,255.95
Misc
639
$
9,886,600.85
$ 131,974.81
Misc
626
$
8,005,500.43
$ 113,819.75
Misc
647
$
9,350,662.50
$ 140,040.34
Commercial
0
$
-
$0.00
Commercial
33
$
9,637,380.00
$96,379.71
Commercial
30
$
8,387,304.00
$72,870.26
Commercial
40
$
6,498,600.37
$ 77,011.08
Sub Total
31
$ 1,668,918.43
$ 18,647.53
Sub Total
698
$ 50,462,921.19
$ 469,808.60
Sub Total
684
$ 25,339,366.43
$ 283,970.98
Sub Total
710
$ 24,068,686.87
$ 307,686.84
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
16
$1,295.00
Plumbing
199
$32,734.61
Plumbing
181
$16,614.12
Plumbing
222
$ 20,361.57
Water
0
$0.00
Water
0
$0.00
Water
3
$30.00
Water
8
$ 80.00
Sewer
0
$0.00
Sewer
37
$2,788.00
Sewer
30
$2,250.00
Sewer
23
$ 1,575.00
Mechanical
34
$3,537.04
Mechanical
397
$61,861.76
Mechanical
382
$47,801.09
Mechanical
368
$ 37,250.24
Sub Total
50
$ 4,832.04
Sub Total
633
$ 97,384.37
Sub Total
596
$66,695.21
I
Sub Total
621
$ 59,266.81
License
No.
Valuation
Fee Collected
Licenses
No.
Valuation
Fee Collected
Licenses
No.
Valuation
Fee Collected
Licenses
No.
Valuation
Fee Collected
Contractor
6
$300.00
Contractor
328
$16,400.00
Contractor
310
$15,500.00
Contractor
336
$ 16,800.00
Total
87
$ 1,668,918.43
$ 23,779.57
Total
1659
$ 50,462,921.19
$ 583,592.97
Total
1590
$ 25,339,366.43
$ 366,166.19
Total
1667
$ 24,068,686.87
$ 383,753.65
NOTE: All fee amounts exclude SAC, WAC and State Surcharge. Amounts shown will reflect only permit, plan review fee and valuation totals
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
TREASURER'S REPORT DECEMBER 2017 \LO
American Bank
Checking Account .02%
Savings Account .02%
Collateral - Bonds
Gov't. Guar.
Investments
BALANCE COLLATERAL
$104,785.16
$641.12
$105,426.28
$1,200,000.00
$250,000.00
Cost PV
Saving Cert 1/26/15 @0.15% Cherokee $13,952.59 $13,952.59
FNMA 1.125% 7/27/21 $500,000.00 $492,610.00
FHLMC 2.00% 10/28/21 $500,000.00 $499,040.00
Texas Exchange Bank 2.10% 1/24/22 $245,000.00 $243,231.10
Bankunited Natl Assn 1.100% 02/20/18 $245,000.00 $245,007.35
GE Capital Retail Bank 2.00% 7/6/18 $200,000.00 $200,488.00
Mercantile Commercial Bank 1.20% 9/21/18 $245,000.00 $243,855.85
Sallie Mae Bank 2.050% 11/20/18 $245,000.00 $245,698.25
BMW Bank 2.00% 12/11/18 $245,000.00 $245,671.30
Comenity Bank 2.00% 07/15/19 $200,000.00 $199,690.00
Capital One Bank USA 2.00% 08/12/19 $245,000.00 $245,671.30
Capital One Bank 2.00% 08/12/19 $245,000.00 $245,671.30
World's Foremost Bank 2.00% 08/13/19 $200,000.00 $199,514.00
Goldman Sachs Bank 2.20% 12/17/19 $100,000.00 $100,377.00
Morgan Stanley Bank 2.10% 12/23/19 $245,000.00 $245,433.65
Discover Bank 2.050% 06/10/20 $200,000.00 $199,808.00
Orrstown Bank 2.00% 08/28/20 $245,000.00 $244,191.50
Lake City Bank 1.90% 9/8/20 $125,000.00 $124,242.50
JP Morgan Chase Bank 1.25% 7/29/21 $245,000.00 $239,632.05
Northern Bank & Trust 2.00% 8/24/21 $245,000.00 $242,944.45
HSBC Bank 1.25% 11/09/21 $245,000.00 $244,416.90
International Bank Chicago 2.10% 4/20/22 $210,000.00 $207,908.40
Thomaston Savings Bank 2.35% 12/13/22 $245,000.00 $243,287.45
Wells Fargo Bank 2.00% 6/21/24 $245,000.00 $242,723.95
Fidelity Institutional Government Portfolio (Piper) $6,795,192.57 $6,795,192.57
Gov't. Securities Fund 28% Sold 6/4 $433,187.00
MMkt Fd (WF) $785,713.99
TOTAL FUNDS AVAILABLE 12/31/2017
Funds Available 1/1/2017
Rates Money Market
Dec Bank 0.02%
5 Yr. Tr. 2.20%
10 Yr. Tr. 2.40%
$13,798,472.43
$12,237,681.64
page 91
page 92
1101 Victoria Curve Mendota Heights, MN 55118
651.452.1850 phone 1 651.452.8940 fax
www.mendota-heights.com
CITY OF
MENDOTA HEIGHTS
Request for City Council Action
MEETING DATE: January 16, 2018
TO: Mayor, City Council and City Administrator
FROM: Kristen Schabacker, Finance Director lU v L,
SUBJECT: Claims List Summary
BACKGROUND
Significant Claims
A to Z Home Inspections — December Inspections
Americom Inc. — Computer Software Fire
Aspen Mills — Fire Jackets
Bond Trust Service — Bond Issue Payments
Cargill — Street Road Salt
CNH Architects — Fire Station
Dering Pierson Group — City Hall Remodel Project
Kardmas, Lee & Jackson — Dodd Road Traffic Study
LMCIT — Property Casulty Premium
Lawman Badge Company — Police Badges
Mendota Heights Town Center — Market Square Repair
Metro Cities — 2018 Membership
Mid Northern Services — Village Monument Repairs
Northdale Construction — Storm Sewer Repairs
Vito Contractors — Plumbing Repairs
$ 4,614.38
$ 3,998.78
$ 4,465.90
$1,357,295.63
$ 9,979.94
$ 3,550.36
$ 27,368.60
$ 36,787.50
$ 123,557.00
$ 4,175.50
$ 3,313.82
$ 4,501.00
$ 5,686.18
$ 23,529.90
$ 3,556.57
Manual Checks Total $ (75,783.35)
System Checks Total $1,681,083.27
Total for the list of claims for the January 16, 2018 city council meeting $ 1,605,299.92
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Mendota Heighs City Council approve the list of claims for January 16, 2018.
The claims list contains a reimbursement of $3,313.82 to RMF Group for the repair of the fountain at Market
Square Park. There is also an invoice for $5,686.18 for an electrical repair of the Village monument sign. This is a
private electric line that was damaged during the Highway 110 construction project due to it not being located in the
field. Mendota Heights has added this facility to its right-of-way locates to prevent future damages.
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
Claims List
MANUAL CHECKS
12/31/17MAN
Account Comments DEPT Descr Amount
paglII 18 10:21 AM
Page 1
Search Name ICM A RETIREMENT 457
G 01-2072 12/29/17 PAYROLL
Search Name I C M A RETIREMENT 457
Search Name MENDOTA HEIGHTS, CITY OF
G 01-1021 REPLENISH PETTY CASH
Search Name MENDOTA HEIGHTS, CITY OF
Search Name NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT SOLUTION
G 01-2072 12/29/17 PAYROLL
Search Name NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT SOLUTION
Search Name UNITED WAY OF ST. PAUL
G 01-2070 12/29/17 PAYROLL
Search Name UNITED WAY OF ST. PAUL
$1,846.49
$1,846.49
$466.16
$466.16
$50.00
$50.00
$15.00
$15.00
$2,377.65
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
Claims List
MANUAL CHECKS
01/10/18MAN
Account Comments
DEPT Descr
Amount
page07/12/18 10:24 AM
Page 1
Search Name DERING PIERSON GROUP
G 08-2010 VOID CK# 92278
Search Name DERING PIERSON GROUP
Search Name P 0 S T BOARD
E 01-4220-020-20
E 01-4220-020-20
Search Name P 0 S T BOARD
LICENSE
LICENSE
Search Name PLUNKETTS PEST CONTROL INC
G 08-2010 PEST CONTROL - CITY HALL
Search Name PLUNKS 1 I S PEST CONTROL INC
Search Name U. S. BANK
G 01-2010
G 01-2010
G 01-2010
G 01-2010
G 01-1145
G 01-1145
Search Name U. S. BANK
Search Name US POSTAL SERVICE
E 15-4318-060-60
LUNCH & LEARN - RECYCLING
SUPPLIES - CITY COUNCIL
LEXISNEXIS OCT 2017 SERVIC
BOOKS - FIRE
REIMBURSEMENT
REIMBURSEMENT
Police
Police
4TH QTR UTIL BILLING POSTA Utility Enterprise
- $80,080.55
- $80,080.55
$90.00
$90.00
$180.00
$336.37
$336.37
$188.90
$93.76
$128.00
$152.43
-$24.99
$32.11
$570.21
$832.97
Search Name US POSTAL SERVICE $832.97
-$78,161.00
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
Claims List
SYSTEM CHECKS
01/16/18PAY
Account Comments DEPT Descr Amount
page09A2/18 10:22 AM
Page 1
Search Name A TO Z HOME INSPECTION, LLC
G 01-2010 DECEMBER 2018 INSPECTIONS
Search Name A TO Z HOME INSPECTION, LLC
Search Name ABRAMS & SCHMIDT LLC
G 01-2010 LEGAL SERVICES - PD
$4,614.38
$4,614.38
$90.00
Search Name ABRAMS & SCHMIDT LLC $90.00
Search Name ALFONSO, DOMINIC
G 15-1150
Search Name ALFONSO, DOMINIC
SEWER ACCOUNT REFUND $63.16
$63.16
Search Name ALL CITY ELEVATOR, INC.
E 08-4335-000-00 JANUARY 2106 MAINTENANCE Spec Fds $161.00
Search Name ALL CITY ELEVATOR, INC. $161.00
Search Name ALLINA HEALTH
G 01-2010 PRE-EMPLOYMENT EXAM - FIR $50.00
Search Name ALLINA HEALTH $50.00
Search Name AMERICOM, INC
G 01-2010
Search Name AMERICOM, INC
Search Name AMERIPRIDE SERVICES
COMPUTER SOFTWARE - FIRE $3,998.78
$3,998.78
E 01-4410-050-50 UNIFORMS Road & Bridges $7.34
E 15-4200-610-60 MAT SERVICE - PW Utility Enterprise $21.25
E 01-4200-610-50 MAT SERVICE - PW Road & Bridges $21.26
E 01-4200-610-70 MAT SERVICE - PW Parks & Recreation $21.26
E 01-4410-050-50 UNIFORMS Road & Bridges $734
E 15-4200-610-60 MAT SERVICE - PW Utility Enterprise $24.81
E 01-4200-610-50 MAT SERVICE - PW Road & Bridges $24.81
E 01-4200-610-70 MAT SERVICE - PW Parks & Recreation $24.81
E 08-4335-000-00 MAT SERVICE - CITY HALL Spec Fds $244.71
Search Name AMERIPRIDE SERVICES $397.59
Search Name AMMUNITION DISPOSAL OF MN
E 01-4490-020-20 AMMO DISPOSAL - PD Police $50.00
Search Name AMMUNITION DISPOSAL OF MN $50.00
Search Name ANCOM COMM INC
G 01-2010 OPERATING SUPPLIES - FIRE $468.00
Search Name ANCOM COMM INC $468.00
Search Name APACHE GROUP
G 08-2010
G 08-2010
Search Name APACHE GROUP
Search Name ASPEN MILLS
G 01-2010
SUPPLIES - CITY HALL $604.07
SUPPLIES - CITY HALL $188.11
$792.18
JACKETS - FIRE $4,465.90
Search Name ASPEN MILLS $4,465.90
Search Name ASPEN WASTE SYSTEMS INC.
E 01-4280-310-70 JANUARY 2018 RUBBISH & REC Parks & Recreation $63.04
Account
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
Claims List
SYSTEM CHECKS
01/16/18PAY
Comments
DEPT Descr
Amount
page3T2/18 10:22 AM
Page 2
E 01-4280-315-30
E 01-4280-310-50
E 15-4280-310-60
E 08-4280-000-00
Search Name ASPEN WASTE SYSTEMS
Search Name ATOM
E 01-4400-020-20
Search Name ATOM
Search Name AUTOZONE
G 01-2010
G 01-2010
E 01-4330-460-30
E 01-4330-460-30
Search Name AUTOZONE
Search Name BCA -CJI S
G 01-2010
Search Name BCA -CJI S
Search Name BGMN, INC.
E 01-4320-050-50
E 01-4320-070-70
E 15-4320-060-60
E 01-4320-030-30
Search Name BGMN, INC.
Search Name BLUE TARP FINANCIAL
E 01-4330-490-70
E 01-4330-440-20
Search Name BLUE TARP FINANCIAL
Search Name BOLAND, JOHN
E 01-4415-070-70
Search Name BOLAND, JOHN
JANUARY 2018 RUBBISH & REC
JANUARY 2018 RUBBISH & REC
JANUARY 2018 RUBBISH & REC
JANUARY 2018 RUBBISH & REC
INC.
Fire
Road & Bridges
Utility Enterprise
Spec Fds
2018 TRAINING MEMBERSHIP Police
EQUIP REPAIR - PARKS
EQUIP REPAIR - FIRE
EQUIP REPAIR - FIRE
EQUIP REPAIR - FIRE
4TH QTR 2017 CJDN ACCESS F
FUEL/OIL
FUEL/OIL
FUEL/OIL
FUEL/OIL
EQUIP REPAIR - PARKS
EQUIP REPAIR - PD
Fire
Fire
Road & Bridges
Parks & Recreation
Utility Enterprise
Fire
Parks & Recreation
Police
MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT - J. Parks & Recreation
Search Name BOND TRUST SERVICES CORP
E 43-4455-000-00
E 79-4455-000-00
E 79-4456-000-00
E 42-4455-000-00
E 42-4456-000-00
E 81-4455-000-00
E 81-4456-000-00
E 77-4456-000-00
E 44-4456-000-00
E 46-4456-000-00
E 43-4456-000-00
E 83-4456-794-00
E 81-4226-000-00
E 44-4455-000-00
E 77-4455-000-00
E 75-4455-000-00
2015 BOND ISSUE
2014 BOND ISSUE
2014 BOND ISSUE
2014 BOND ISSUE
2014 BOND ISSUE
2015 BOND ISSUE
2015 BOND ISSUE
2013 BOND ISSUE
2015 BOND ISSUE
2011 BOND ISSUE
2015 BOND ISSUE
2016 BOND ISSUE
2015 AGENT FEE
2015 BOND ISSUE
2013 BOND ISSUE
2012 BOND ISSUE
Spec Fds
Spec Fds
Spec Fds
Spec Fds
Spec Fds
Spec Fds
Spec Fds
Spec Fds
Spec Fds
Spec Fds
Spec Fds
Spec Fds
Spec Fds
Spec Fds
Spec Fds
Spec Fds
$103.05
$63.04
$63.03
$150.55
$442.71
$250.00
$250.00
$2.33
$4.66
$3.23
$4631
$56.53
$720.00
$720.00
$67.27
$67.27
$67.26
$67.26
$269.06
$139.90
$319.96
$459.86
$48.52
$48.52
$170,000.00
$85,000.00
$10,518.75
$90,000.00
$7,552.50
$70,000.00
$12,705.00
$21,275.00
$15,100.00
$9,721.25
$19,150.00
$8,612.50
$100.00
$205,000.00
$120,000.00
$90,000.00
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
Claims List
SYSTEM CHECKS
01116/18PAY
Account Comments DEPT Descr Amount
page0 Y/9 2/18 10:22 AM
Page 3
E 46-4455-000-00
E 72-4456-000-00
E 72-4455-000-00
E 70-4456-777-00
E 70-4455-777-00
E 67-4456-000-00
E 67-4455-000-00
E 12-4456-000-00
2011 BOND ISSUE
2011 BOND ISSUE
2011 BOND ISSUE
2010 BOND ISSUE
2010 BOND ISSUE
2009 BOND ISSUE
2009 BOND ISSUE
2009 BOND ISSUE
E 12-4455-000-00 2009 BOND ISSUE
E 75-4456-000-00 2012 BOND ISSUE
Search Name BOND TRUST SERVICES CORP
Spec Fds
Spec Fds
Spec Fds
Spec Fds
Spec Fds
Spec Fds
Spec Fds
Spec Fds
Spec Fds
Spec Fds
Search Name C. DARLENE OEHLKE, CAP
E 01-4220-110-10 1/2/18 CITY COUNCIL MINUTE Administration
Search Name C. DARLENE OEHLKE, CAP
Search Name CARGILL INCORPORATED
E 01-4421-050-50 ROAD SALT Road & Bridges
Search Name CARGILL INCORPORATED
Search Name CASSIDY-TRICKER
E 01-4330-490-50 EQUIP REPAIR - STREETS Road & Bridges
$125,000.00
$15,603.75
$100,000.00
$11,284.38
$60,000.00
$1,785.00
$35,000.00
$2,382.50
$45,000.00
$26,505.00
$1,357,295.63
$341.25
$341.25
$9,979.94
$9,979.94
$99.79
Search Name CASSIDY-TRICKER $99/9
Search Name CENTERLINE CHARTER CORP
G 01-2010 FIELD TRIP TRANSPORTATION
G 01-2010 FIELD TRIP TRANSPORTATION
Search Name CENTERLINE CHARTER CORP
Search Name CNH ARCHITECTS, INC
G 01-2010 ARCHITECTUAL SCHEMATIC DE
$380.00
$392.00
$772.00
$3,550.36
Search Name CNH ARCHITECTS, INC $3,550.36
Search Name COMCAST BUSINESS
E 45-4210-045-45
JANUARY 2018 SERVICE - PAR Golf Course $224.80
Search Name COMCAST BUSINESS $224.80
Search Name CONTRACTORS & SURVEYORS SUPPLY
G 01-2010 GOPHER SUPPLIES - CODE
$288.60
Search Name CONTRACTORS & SURVEYORS SUPPLY $288.60
Search Name DAKOTA COMMUNICATIONS CENTER
E 01-4275-020-20
E 01-4275-030-30
JANUARY 2018 DCC FEE - PD Police $16,156.00
JANUARY 2018 DCC FEE - FIRE Fire $675.00
Search Name DAKOTA COMMUNICATIONS CENTER $16,831.00
Search Name DAKOTA COUNTY ENVIRONMENT MGMT
E 15-4335-310-60 HAZARD WASTE LICENSE
E 01-4335-310-50 HAZARD WASTE LICENSE
E 01-4335-310-70 HAZARD WASTE LICENSE
Search Name DAKOTA COUNTY ENVIRONMENT MGMT
Search Name DERING PIERSON GROUP
G 08-2010 CITY HALL REPAIRS & REMODE
Utility Enterprise
Road & Bridges
Parks & Recreation
$20.36
$20.36
$20.36
$61.08
$27,368.60
Search Name DERING PIERSON GROUP $27,368.60
Account
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
Claims List
SYSTEM CHECKS
01/16/18PAY
Comments DEPT Descr
Amount
page0l'/'1'2/18 10:22 AM
Page 4
Search Name ECKBERG LAMMERS
G 01-2010
G 01-2010
G 01-2010
G 01-2010
G 01-2010
G 01-2010
Search Name ECKBERG LAMMERS
DECEMBER 2017 LEGAL SERVI
DECEMBER 2017 LEGAL SERVI
DECEMBER 2017 LEGAL SERVI
DECEMBER 2017 LEGAL SERVI
DECEMBER 2017 LEGAL SERVI
DECEMBER 2017 LEGAL SERVI
Search Name EMERGENCY AUTOMOTIVE TECHNOLOG
G 01-2010 EQUIP REPAIR - PD
G 01-2010 EQUIP REPAIR - PD
Search Name EMERGENCY AUTOMOTIVE TECHNOLOG
Search Name EMERGENCY RESPONSE SOLUTIONS
G 01-2010 EQUIP REPAIR - FIRE
Search Name EMERGENCY RESPONSE SOLUTIONS
Search Name FLEET SERVICES
G 01-2010 NOVEMBER 2017 SQUAD LEAS
Search Name FLEET SERVICES
Search Name FLEETPRIDE
G 01-2010
E 01-4330-490-50
E 01-4330-490-50
E 01-4330-490-70
E 01-4330-490-50
E 15-4330-490-60
G 01-2010
E 01-4330-490-50
Search Name FLEETPRIDE
Search Name FORCE AMERICA
E 01-4330-490-50
Search Name FORCE AMERICA
Search Name FORENSIC IMAGING INC
EQUIP REPAIR - STREET
EQUIP REPAIR - STREET Road & Bridges
EQUIP REPAIR - STREET Road & Bridges
EQUIP REPAIR - PARKS Parks & Recreation
EQUIP REPAIR - STREET Road & Bridges
EQUIP REPAIR - UTILITY Utility Enterprise
EQUIP REPAIR - PD
EQUIP REPAIR - STREET Road & Bridges
EQUIP REPAIR - STREET Road & Bridges
G 07-2010 OPERATING SUPPLIES - CIVIL
Search Name FORENSIC IMAGING INC
Search Name GOPHER STATE ONE CALL
G 01-2010 DECEMBER 2017 SERVICES
Search Name GOPHER STATE ONE CALL
Search Name GRAINGER
E 01-4335-315-30
E 01-4330-490-30
E 01-4330-490-30
Search Name GRAINGER
EQUIP REPAIR - FIRE
EQUIP REPAIR - FIRE
EQUIP REPAIR - FIRE
Search Name GRANNIS & HAUGE, P.A.
G 01-2010 DECEMBER 2017 SERVICES
Search Name GRANNIS & HAUGE, P.A.
Fire
Fire
Fire
$600.00
$400.00
$945.00
$150.00
$465.00
$1,500.00
$4,060.00
$275.72
$920.00
$1,195.72
$492.33
$492.33
$5,357.40
$5,357.40
$4.24
$55.04
$42.90
$56.26
$56.26
$56.27
$9.28
$14.11
$294.36
$261.75
$261.75
$263.43
$263.43
$156.60
$156.60
$188.81
$425.24
$13.44
$627.49
$5,891.00
$5,891.00
Account
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
Claims List
SYSTEM CHECKS
01/16/18PAY
Comments DEPT Descr
Amount
pagP017't'2/18 10:22 AM
Page 5
Search Name HOSE INC
E 01-4330-490-70
G 01-2010
G 01-2010
G 01-2010
Search Name HOSE INC
Search Name IIMC
E 01-4404-110-10
Search Name IIMC
EQUIP REPAIR - PARKS
EQUIP REPAIR - STREET
EQUIP REPAIR - STREET
EQUIP REPAIR - STREET
Parks & Recreation
2018 MEMBERSHIP - L. SMITH Administration
Search Name INNOVATIVE OFFICE SOLUTIONS
E 01-4300-020-20
E 01-4300-110-10
E 01-4300-110-10
E 01-4300-040-40
E 01-4300-070-70
E 01-4300-105-15
G 01-2010
OFFICE SUPPLIES - PD
OFFICE SUPPLIES - ADMIN
OFFICE SUPPLIES - ADMIN
OFFICE SUPPLIES - CODE
OFFICE SUPPLIES - PARKS
OFFICE SUPPLIES - ENGINEERI
OFFICE SUPPLIES - PD
Search Name INNOVATIVE OFFICE SOLUTIONS
Search Name IRON MOUNTAIN RECORDS MGMT
G 01-2010 DECEMBER 2017 SHREDDING
Search Name IRON MOUNTAIN RECORDS MGMT
Search Name JANI-KING OF MINNESOTA, INC.
E 15-4335-310-60
E 01-4335-310-50
E 01-4335-310-70
E 01-4335-315-30
JANUARY 2018 SERVICE - PW
JANUARY 2018 SERVICE - PW
JANUARY 2018 SERVICE - PW
JANUARY 2018 SERVICE - FIRE
Search Name JANI-KING OF MINNESOTA, INC.
Search Name JEA ARCHITECTS
G 24-2010
Search Name JEA ARCHITECTS
CITY HALL REPAIRS/REMODEL
Search Name KADRMAS, LEE & JACKSON, INC
G 01-2010 DODD ROAD TRAFFIC STUDY
Search Name KADRMAS, LEE & JACKSON, INC
Search Name KEEPRS, INC
G 01-2010
G 01-2010
G 01-2010
G 01-2010
G 01-2010
G 01-2010
G 01-2010
G 01-2010
G 01-2010
Search Name KEEPRS, INC
UNIFORM CREDIT - PD
UNIFORM - SPICER
UNIFORM - WILSON
UNIFORM - LARRIVE
UNIFORM - WILSON
UNIFORM - URMANN
UNIFORM - URMANN
UNIFORM CREDIT - PD
UNIFORM - URMANN
Search Name KIRCHNER CONTRACTING
G 01-2010 DECEMBER 2017 SNOWPLOWI
Police
Administration
Administration
Code Enforcement/Inspe
Parks & Recreation
Engineering Enterprise
Utility Enterprise
Road & Bridges
Parks & Recreation
Fire
$5.21
$8.22
$67.48
$5.31
$86.22
$185.00
$185.00
$148.00
$21.08
$45.14
$21.96
$4.44
$16.11
$27.22
$283.95
$86.64
$86.64
$66.66
$66.67
$66.67
$200.00
$400.00
$2,830.25
$2,830.25
$36,787.50
$36,787.50
-$101.23
$4.00
$144.99
$237.98
$285.98
$70.00
$139.99
-$234.85
$8.00
$554.86
$255.00
Account
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
Claims List
SYSTEM CHECKS
01/16/18PAY
Comments DEPT Descr
Amount
page 6QM2/18 10:22 AM
Page 6
Search Name KIRCHNER CONTRACTING
Search Name LM CI T3
G 45-2010
G 08-2010
G 15-2010
E 01-4250-110-10
E 08-4250-000-00
E 15-4250-060-60
E 45-4250-045-45
G 01-2010
Search Name L M C I T3
PROPERTY INSURANCE - NOV-
PROPERTY INSURANCE - NOV-
PROPERTY INSURANCE - NOV-
PROPERTY INSURANCE - JAN -
PROPERTY INSURANCE - JAN -
PROPERTY INSURANCE - JAN -
PROPERTY INSURANCE - JAN -
PROPERTY INSURANCE - NOV-
Search Name LAWMAN BADGE COMPANY
G 01-2010 BADGES - PD
Search Name LAWMAN BADGE COMPANY
Search Name LAWSON PRODUCTS, INC
G 15-2010
G 01-2010
G 01-2010
OPERATING SUPPLIES - UTILIT
OPERATING SUPPLIES - STREE
OPERATING SUPPLIES - PARKS
Search Name LAWSON PRODUCTS, INC
Search Name LEAGUE MN CITIES
G 15-2010
G 01-2010
G 01-2010
G 01-2010
Search Name LEAGUE MN CITIES
Search Name LILLIE SUBURBAN NEWS
G 01-2010
G 01-2010
G 01-2010
Search Name LILLIE SUBURBAN NEWS
REGIONAL SAFETY GROUP TRA
REGIONAL SAFETY GROUP TRA
REGIONAL SAFETY GROUP TRA
REGIONAL SAFETY GROUP TRA
DECEMBER 2017 PUBLICATION
DECEMBER 2017 PUBLICATION
DECEMBER 2017 PUBLICATION
Search Name LITTLE FALLS MACHINE, INC.
G 01-2010 EQUIP REPAIR - STREET
Search Name LITTLE FALLS MACHINE, INC.
Search Name LYNN PEAVEY COMPANY
G 01-2010 OPERATING SUPPLIES - PD
Search Name LYNN PEAVEY COMPANY
Search Name MARTIN-MCALLISTER
G 01-2010
Search Name MARTIN-MCALLISTER
Search Name MENARDS
E 15-4330-490-60
E 08-4335-000-00
E 15-4305-060-60
E 01-4330-490-70
E 01-4330-490-50
E 15-4330-490-60
PERSONNEL ASSESSMENTS - P
EQUIP REPAIR - UTILITY
BLDG MAINT - CITY HALL
OPERATING SUPPLIES - UTILIT
EQUIP REPAIR - PARKS
EQUIP REPAIR - STREET
EQUIP REPAIR - UTILITY
Administration
Spec Fds
Utility Enterprise
Golf Course
Utility Enterprise
Spec Fds
Utility Enterprise
Parks & Recreation
Road & Bridges
Utility Enterprise
$255.00
$622.18
$1,166.58
$1,361.01
$87,336.63
$5,140.64
$7,196.89
$3,290.01
$17,443.06
$123,557.00
$4,175.50
$4,175.50
$193.56
$193.56
$193.56
$580.68
$200.00
$200.00
$200.00
$200.00
$800.00
$34.00
$51.00
$34.00
$119.00
$1,365.72
$1,365.72
$59.00
$59.00
$1,000.00
$1,000.00
$131.09
$9.98
$4.67
$52.68
$52.68
$52.69
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
Claims List
SYSTEM CHECKS
01/16/18PAY
Account Comments
DEPT Descr
Amount
page dP!2/18 10:22 AM
Page 7
G 01-2010
E 15-4330-490-60
Search Name MENARDS
OPERATING SUPPLIES - STREE
EQUIP REPAIR RETURN - UTILI Utility Enterprise
Search Name MENDAKOTA COUNTRY CLUB
G 01-1145 APPRECIATION GATHERING
E 01-4490-109-09 APPRECIATION GATHERING
Search Name MENDAKOTA COUNTRY CLUB
Search Name MENDOTA HEIGHTS TOWN CENTER LL
G 01-2010 MKT SQ MAINTENANCE - PARK
Search Name MENDOTA HEIGHTS TOWN CENTER LL
Search Name METRO AREA MGMT ASSOCIATION
City Council
E 01-4404-110-10 2018 MEMBERSHIP - N. MCNEI Administration
Search Name METRO AREA MGMT ASSOCIATION
Search Name METRO CITIES
E 01-4404-110-10 2018 MEMBERSHIP
Search Name METRO CITIES
Search Name METRO SALES
G 15-2010
G 01-2010
E 01-4330-030-30
G 01-2010
Search Name METRO SALES
Administration
DECEMBER 2017 COPIER/PRIN
QUARTERLY COPIER LEASE - F
QUARTERLY COPIER LEASE - F Fire
DECEMBER 2017 COPIER/PRIN
Search Name MID NORTHERN SERVICES
G 01-2010 REPAIR MKT SQ SIGN & FOUN
Search Name MID NORTHERN SERVICES
Search Name MIKES SHOE REPAIR INC
G 01-2010 GEAR REPAIR - FIRE
Search Name MIKES SHOE REPAIR INC
Search Name MITCHELL1
E 01-4300-070-70
Search Name MITCHELL1
JANUARY 2018 SERVICE Parks & Recreation
Search Name MN DEPT OF AGRICULTURE
E 15-4490-060-60 PESTICIE LICENSE - R. BURRO Utility Enterprise
Search Name MN DEPT OF AGRICULTURE
Search Name MN DEPT OF PUBLIC SAFETY
E 15-4490-060-60
E 01-4490-050-50
E 01-4490-070-70
HAZMAT FEE
HAZMAT FEE
HAZMAT FEE
Search Name MN DEPT OF PUBLIC SAFETY
Search Name MN ST ADMIN ITG TELECOM SRVCE
G 01-2010
G 01-2010
G 01-2010
DEC 2017 WAN SERVICE - PD
DEC 2017 WAN SERVICE - ADM
NOV 2017 VOICE SERVICE - FI
Utility Enterprise
Road & Bridges
Parks & Recreation
$282.95
-$131.09
$455.65
$90.00
$1,356.56
$1,446.56
$3,313.82
$3,313.82
$45.00
$45.00
$4,501.00
$4,501.00
$32.23
$7.40
$77.00
$1,330.11
$1,446.74
$5,686.18
$5,686.18
$71.00
$71.00
$169.00
$169.00
$10.00
$10.00
$8.34
$8.33
$8.33
$25.00
$124.00
$111.00
$97.45
Search Name MN ST ADMIN ITG TELECOM SRVCE $332.45
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
Claims List
SYSTEM CHECKS
01 /16/18PAY
Account Comments DEPT Descr Amount
page 6QR2/18 10:22 AM
Page 8
Search Name MPSTMA
E 01-4404-070-70 2018 MEMBERSHIP - PARKS
Parks & Recreation $165.00
Search Name MPSTMA $165.00
Search Name NAMEPLATES
E 01-4300-110-10 TRASH HAULER TAGS Administration $289.00
Search Name NAMEPLATES $289.00
Search Name NARDINI FIRE EQ
E 01-4305-070-70 OPERATING SUPPLIES - PARKS Parks & Recreation $135.00
Search Name NARDINI FIRE EQ $135.00
Search Name NATURE CALLS, INC
G 01-2010 DEC 2017 RENTALS $238.00
Search Name NATURE CALLS, INC $238.00
Search Name NCPERS GROUP LIFE INS.
G 01-2071 JANUARY 2018 PREMIUM
$48.00
Search Name NCPERS GROUP LIFE INS. $48.00
Search Name NORTHDALE CONST CO
G 29-2010 2017 STORM SEWER
$23,529.90
Search Name NORTHDALE CONST CO $23,529.90
Search Name OXYGEN SERVICE CO
G 01-2010
G 01-2010
G 15-2010
Search Name OXYGEN SERVICE CO
QUARTERLY CYLINDER RENTA
CYLINDER RENTAL - PW
CYLINDER RENTAL
Search Name RITEWAY BUSINESS FORMS
G 01-2010
G 45-2010
G 15-2010
W2 FORMS
W2 FORMS
W2 FORMS
$129.72
$77.29
$38.65
$245.66
$149.29
$20.76
$2.94
Search Name RITEWAY BUSINESS FORMS $172.99
Search Name ROBERT W. BAIRD & CO, INC.
G 86-2010 IMPROVEMENT BOND SERIES $400.00
Search Name ROBERT W. BAIRD & CO, INC. $400.00
Search Name ROSEVILLE MIDWAY FORD
G 01-2010 EQUIP REPAIR - PD
G 01-2010 EQUIP REPAIR - PD
Search Name ROSEVILLE MIDWAY FORD
Search Name RUPP, ANDERSON, SQUIRES & WALD
G 01-2010 SEPT & OCT 2017 LEGAL SERVI
Search Name RUPP, ANDERSON, SQUIRES & WALD
Search Name SAND CREEK GROUP
E 01-4137-110-10
$28.11
$28.11
$56.22
$507.00
$507.00
2018 EMPLOYEE ASSISTANCE Administration $1,632.00
Search Name SAND CREEK GROUP $1,632.00
Search Name SECURITY RESPONSE SERVICES INC
E 45-4335-045-45 SECURITY MONITORING 2/3/1 Golf Course $128.39
Account
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
Claims List
SYSTEM CHECKS
01/16/18PAY
Comments DEPT Descr
Amount
page 6Q/42/18 10:22 AM
Page 9
Search Name SECURITY RESPONSE SERVICES INC
Search Name SELECT ACCOUNT
G 01-2010
Search Name SELECT ACCOUNT
Search Name SIGNAL SYSTEMS
E 15-4335-310-60
E 01-4335-310-50
E 01-4335-310-70
Search Name SIGNAL SYSTEMS
Search Name SNAP ON TOOLS
E 15-4330-490-60
E 01-4330-490-50
E 01-4330-490-70
E 01-4330-490-50
E 01-4330-490-50
Search Name SNAP ON TOOLS
Search Name SPRWS
E 45-4425-045-45
E 01-4425-310-70
E 01-4425-315-30
E 01-4425-310-50
G 45-2010
E 15-4425-310-60
E 08-4425-000-00
Search Name SPRWS
Search Name TAYLOR, JAY
G 01-2010
Search Name TAYLOR, JAY
DECEMBER 2017 HSA PARTICI
2018 ANNUAL MAINTENANCE C Utility Enterprise
2018 ANNUAL MAINTENANCE C Road & Bridges
2018 ANNUAL MAINTENANCE C Parks & Recreation
EQUIP REPAIRS - UTILITY
EQUIP REPAIRS - STREET
EQUIP REPAIRS - PARKS
EQUIP REPAIRS - STREET
EQUIP REPAIRS - STREET
2018 AUTOMATIC FIRE SERVIC
2018 AUTOMATIC FIRE SERVIC
2018 AUTOMATIC FIRE SERVIC
2018 AUTOMATIC FIRE SERVIC
4TH QTR 2017 SERVICE PAR 3
2018 AUTOMATIC FIRE SERVIC
2018 AUTOMATIC FIRE SERVIC
MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT - J.
Search Name TRACKER PRODUCTS LLC
E 01-4301-020-20 ANNUAL SOFTWARE FEE - PD
Search Name TRACKER PRODUCTS LLC
Search Name TUFF, SCOTT
E 01-4435-200-70
Search Name TUFF, SCOTT
Search Name TWIN CITY TELEPHONE
Utility Enterprise
Road & Bridges
Parks & Recreation
Road & Bridges
Road & Bridges
Golf Course
Parks & Recreation
Fire
Road & Bridges
Utility Enterprise
Spec Fds
Police
DJ SERVICES - 2018 ROYAL BA Parks & Recreation
E 01-4210-020-20 PHONE REPAIR - PD
Search Name TWIN CITY TELEPHONE
Search Name US HEALTHWORKS MEDICAL GRP MN
G 01-2010 PRE-EMPLOYMENT TESTS - PD
Search Name US HEALTHWORKS MEDICAL GRP MN
Search Name VERIZON WIRELESS
E 01-4490-080-80
E 01-4210-050-50
E 01-4210-070-70
E 15-4210-060-60
JAN 2018 CELL SERVICE
JAN 2018 CELL SERVICE
JAN 2018 CELL SERVICE
JAN 2018 CELL SERVICE
Police
Planning
Road & Bridges
Parks & Recreation
Utility Enterprise
$128.39
$37.26
$37.26
$32.66
$32.67
$32.67
$98.00
$56.74
$56.73
$56.73
$407.80
$16.00
$594.00
$181.69
$33.33
$100.00
$33.33
$29.77
$33.34
$100.00
$511.46
$11235
$11235
$1,500.00
$1,500.00
$200.00
$200.00
$149.25
$149.25
$784.00
$784.00
$51.50
$313.02
$85.66
$51.50
Account
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
Claims List
SYSTEM CHECKS
01/16/18PAY
Comments
DEPT Descr
Amount
page 01'/12/18 10:22 AM
Page 10
E 01-4223-020-20
E 01-4210-114-14
E 01-4210-110-10
E 01-4210-105-15
E 01-4210-030-30
E 01-4210-020-20
Search Name VERIZON WIRELESS
Search Name VILLAUME, PHILIP
G 15-1150
Search Name VILLAUME, PHILIP
JAN 2018 CELL SERVICE
JAN 2018 CELL SERVICE
JAN 2018 CELL SERVICE
JAN 2018 CELL SERVICE
JAN 2018 CELL SERVICE
JAN 2018 CELL SERVICE
SEWER ACCOUNT REFUND
Search Name VITO MECHANICAL CONTRACTORS
G 08-2010
G 01-2010
G 01-2010
BLDG REPAIRS - CITY HALL
PLUMBING SERVICES - FIRE
PLUMBING SERVICES - FIRE
G 08-2010 BLDG REPAIRS - CITY HALL
Search Name VITO MECHANICAL CONTRACTORS
Search Name ZEE MEDICAL SVC
Police
Info Tech
Administration
Engineering Enterprise
Fire
Police
E 08-4335-000-00 FIRST AID SUPPLIES - CITY HA Spec Fds
$350.10
$70.02
$103.00
$163.24
$285.31
$797.12
$2,270.47
$12.53
$12.53
$300.00
$378.00
$1,390.57
$1,488.00
$3,556.57
$270.70
Search Name ZEE MEDICAL SVC $270.70
$1,681,083.27
CITY OF
MENDOTA HEIGHTS
page 105
1101 Victoria Curve 1 Mendota Heights, MN 55118
651.452.1850 phone 1 651.452.8940 fax
www.mendota-heights.com
Request for City Council Action
MEETING DATE: January 16, 2018
TO: Mayor and City Council, City Administrator
FROM: Lorri Smith, City Clerk
SUBJECT: Resolution 2018-04 Approving Revised Fee Schedule
COMMENT:
BACKGROUND
Staff is proposing the following amendments be made to the current fee schedule:
Administration
We are proposing to delete some of the line items since they are no needed. Many of these items are
emailed out to residents when requested to do so. Also, assessment splits are handled by Dakota County.
Liquor License Penalties: For liquor license violations, we recommend reducing the penalties to
the average of what other large cities in Dakota County have in place. Below are the survey
results of other large cities in Dakota County:
Liquor License Violation Penalties
1st offense 2nd offense
rolling
time
3rd offense 4th offense period
Rosemount 500 1000 2000 3 yr
Northfield 250 500 + 3 days 2000 + 18 days revoke 3 yr
Lakeville 750 1000 + 3 1500 + 6 revoke 2 yr
Farmington 250 + 3 day 500 + 7 1000 + 21 revoke 2 yr
SSP 500 + 1 day 750 + 5-10 revoke
Eagan 500 1000 1500 + 7 2000 + 30 2 yr
IGH 750 1000 + 1 2000 + 3 2000 + 3 5
AVG
500 750 + 3 1500 + 10 revoke 3 yr
Rental Licenses: Several years ago, residential rental licenses were added in an attempt to
monitor long term rentals of single family dwellings. The fee has been $75 annually. However,
the city provided no inspection of the properties to assure compliance with codes, and compliance
was difficult to monitor—applications were, in effect, voluntary. In 2017, about $2100 was
collected; $2500 is budgeted in the FY 2018. Therefore, eliminating this requirement will not
pose a major drain on projected revenues.
page 106
Non -Compliant Sump Pumps: A $75 per quarter fee was added to the administration fee schedule
for sump pump connections which are found to be not in compliance with City Code.
Building Permits
Staff recommends deleting the storm sewer utility charges, since these are approved in a separate
resolution. The Water Permit fee is also proposed to be deleted since the water system was sold to St.
Paul Regional Water Service and this fee is no longer collected by the City.
Engineering
The Grading Permit fee is proposed to be increased and an escrow amount of $500 is proposed to be
collected. A new fee for Public Right of Way Excavation Permits is proposed to be added at a flat rate of
$200. The Public Right of Way Utility Permit fee also adds a winter surcharge fee to it of $75.
Staff is also proposing to increase the fee for a CD of Data or Maps from $5 to $10.
Parks and Recreation
For a number of the fees, a $25 application fee is proposed to be added. The Field Preparation fee has
been separated into weekend and weekday costs. As recommended by the Parks/Recreation Commission,
the Par 3 Golf fees would be increased by $1.00 in each category. Staff is proposing to delete the damage
deposit collected for use of the Picnic Area Shelter, since there has been need to collect it.
Planning
For the Critical Area Permit and the Wetlands Permit, it is proposed to add a security deposit of $500 for
each. An Administrative fee for Critical Area Permits and Wetlands Permits has also been added to the
schedule.
Public Safety
It is proposed to increase the fee for fingerprints to $15. This fee was last adjusted in 2010. The increase
would help to cover staff time.
ACTION REQUIRED
To amend the fee schedule, the City Council should approve Resolution 2018-04 Revising the Schedule
of Fees for Services, to be effective January 17, 2018. This action requires a majority vote of the city
council.
page 107
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, INNESOTA
RESOLUTION 2018 - 04
REVISING SCHEDULE OF FEES FOR SERVICES
WHEREAS, the City of Mendota Heights adopted Resolution 2017-27 "Adopting the
Schedule of Fees for Services" on March 21, 2017; and
WHEREAS, the City of Mendota Heights has established by City Code that all fee
requirements established be brought forth by resolution; and
WHEREAS, the cost of services provided escalates and new services require a fee to be set;
and
WHEREAS, it is appropriate that fees be revised to cover the escalating costs of
providing services and to cover new services.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the Mendota Heights City Council that
the attached Exhibit A, which revises the City of Mendota Heights fee schedule, is
hereby adopted and effective immediately upon passage.
Adopted by the Mendota Heights City Council this 16th day of January 2018.
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
Neil Garlock, Mayor
ATTEST
Lorri Smith, City Clerk
page 108
2018
City of
Mendota
Heights
Fee Schedule
Adopted by City
Council on
January 16, 2018
Resolution 2018 - 04
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
FEE SCHEDULE 2018
2018
page 109
2017
SCHEDULE
Agenda Mailing
Assessment Search
Assessment -Split
Annual subscription
Certification of Delinquent Sewer
Accounts
Non-compliant Sump Pump Connection
City Ordinance Book
$25/ycar
$15/search
$25 plus staff time
$50/per certification
$75 per quarter
$100 damage deposit
$75/book
$25/year
$15/search
$25 plus staff time
$50/per certification
$100 damage deposit
$75/book
Comprehensive Plan
$50/Complete; $30/One Volume $50/Complete; $30/One Volume
Critical Arca Ordinance
$4/each $4/each
Election Filing Fee
Per MN Statutes 205.13 (3) $5
$5
Friday News Mailing Annual subscription $75/ycar
Legal Description Written $5/eaeh
Actual or $1/minimum
Mailing Costs
Minutes Resident or non resident
$75/year
$5/each
Actual or $1/minimum
$ .25/page plus postage
Minutes Mailin_ Annual subscription &-50/yeaf$50/year
Notary Public
Residents, businesses, license applicants No charge No charge
only
Returned Checks
TIF / Abatement Application Fee
Wetlands -Ordinance
Zoning Ordinance
$30 /check
$7.50/each
$1,200
$2/each
$20/cath
$30 /check
$7.50/each
$1,200
$2/each
$20/each
DATA REQUESTS: Data released by the City adheres to MN Data Practices
Act, MN Statutes Chap 13
Photo Copies 1 to 100 pages $ .25/single sided page
Photo Copies
over 100 pages $ .25/ single sided page plus staff time
Request for Public Data MN Statutes, Chapter 13
$.00 to review info at city hall; $.25 per
single sided copy; staff time charged when
over 100 copies
DVD or CD with $10
Photos/Audio/Video
$ .25/single sided page
$ .25/ single sided page plus staff
time
$.00 to review info at city hall; $.25
per single sided copy; staff time
charged when over 100 copies
$10
Page 2 of 12
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
FEE SCHEDULE 2018
2018
2017
ADMINISTRATION FEE
SCHEDULE
Intoxicating Liquor Licenses
(fees set in City Code 3-1-9)
Intoxicating Liquor Off Sale
limited by State Statutes 340A.408 Subd. $150.00
3. a.(3)
$150.00
Intoxicating Liquor On -Sale Tier 1
Tier 1 license $10,000
$10,000
Intoxicating Liquor On -Sale Tier 2
Tier 2 license $7,500
$7,500
Intoxicating Liquor On -Sale Hotel
Limited Service Hotel $3,000
$3,000
Club Liquor On -Sale
limited by SS 340A.408 Subd. 2.b.
$350 (for 201-500 club members)
$300 (under 200 members)
$350 (for 201-500 club members)
$300 (under 200 members)
Sunday Liquor
limited by SS 340A.504
■
$200
$200
Wine On -Sale
limited by SS 340A.408 Subd. 2.c. $2,000
$2,000
Wine On -Sale Institutional
limited by SS 340A.408 Subd. 2.c. $250
$250
Malt Liquor Licenses (fees set in
City Code 3-1-9)
•
Malt Liquor Off Sale (3.2%)
$50
$50
Malt Liquor On Sale (3.2%)
$250
$250
Temporary On Sale Special
Event Licenses
(fee set in City Code 3-1-9)
Temporary On Sale Intoxicating
Liquor, Malt Liquor, Wine
Issued only to clubs, non -profits,
religious organizations
$50 / one to three day license
Application Investigation Fees
$50 / one to three day license
1
Intoxicating Liquor, Wine, 3.2 Malt Liq Renewal or Change
Application Investigation
$100/per establishment
$100/per establishment
Intoxicating Liquor, Wine, 3.2 Malt Liq
Application Investigation
New Licensees
Limited by SS 340A.412 Subd. 2
$ 500 / per establishment
(additional charges may be incurred if
investigation needs to go out of state, then
actual costs are charged, up to $10, 000)
$1,500/per licensee, $1,000 refunded
if no out of state investigation needed
(for out of state investigation, actual cost
charged, up to $10,000) (SS340A.412
(subd. 2))
Liquor License Violation
•
First Violation
Second Violation
Third Violation
Fourth Violation
within a 3 year rolling time period
within a 3 year rolling time period
within a 3 year rolling time period
within a 3 year rolling time period
$ 500 fine
$ 750 fme + 3 day suspension of license
$1,500 fine + 10 day suspension of license
Revocation: minimum of 1 year from
revocation date
Page 3of12
$1,000 fme + 3 day suspension of
license
$1,500 fme + 6 day suspension of
license
$2,000 fme + 9 day suspension of
license
Revocation: minimum of 1 year from
revocation date
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
FEE SCHEDULE 2018 page 111
2018 2017
ADMINISTRATION FEE
SCHEDULE
License and Permit Fees
Dog License Not neutered or Not spayed $15 $ 15
Dog License Neutered or Spayed $10 $10
Domestic Chickens New License or Renewal $25 $25
Massage Therapist License New licensee or renewal $50 $50
Massage Therapist License New licensee or renewal $50 $50
Investigation
Massage Therapy Enterprise License New licensee or renewal $100 $100
Massage Therapy Enterprise License New licensee or renewal $100 $100
Investigation
Rental License Fec - $75/annual
$75/annual
Rubbish Hauler License
City Code 4-2-3. Fee not prorated $75/annual plus $10 per truck tag $75/annual plus $10 per truck tag
Tobacco License
City Code 3-2-4. Fee not prorated. $200/ annual $200/ annual
Tobacco Investigation Fee New or Renewal $100 per establishment $100 per establishment
Page 4 of 12
Amount assessed at time of
improvement plus interest at rate
offered to other assessments at time of
improvement
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
FEE SCHEDULE 2018
2018
page 112
2017
BUILDING PERMIT FEE
SCHEDULE
Building Alterations
Residential/Commercial
Per Attachment A
Per Attachment A
Building Moving Permit
$75
$75
Building Permit Fee
Residential/Commercial
Per Attachment A
Per Attachment A
Contractor License
Annual
$50/year
$50/year
Demolition Permit
Per Attachment A
Per Attachment A
Mechanical Alteration or
Replacement (including gas piping and
gas fire place installation)
Residential or Commercial
1% of value/$ 75 minimum
1% of value/$ 75 minimum
Plan Review Fee
Residential or Commercial
Per Attachment A
Exceptions ($50 fee): Decks, Basement
Finishes, Kitchen Remodel, Bathroom
Remodel, and similar projects.
Per Attachment A
Exceptions ($50 fee): Decks,
Basement Finishes, Kitchen Remodel,
Bathroom Remodel, and similar
projects.
Plumbing Permit Fee
Residential or Commercial
1% of value/$ 75 minimum
1% of value/$ 75 minimum
Public Utility or Improved Public ROW
Connection
Residential/Commercial parcels not
assessed at time of past City
improvement when surrounding lots
were assessed (includes newly created
lots)
Amount assessed at time of improvement
plus interest at rate offered to other
assessments at time of improvement
Roof Permit
Commercial
1% of value/$100 minimum/$1,000
maximum
1% of value/$100 minimum/$1,000
maximum
Roofing and Siding Permit
Residential
1% of value/$100 minimum
1% of value/$100 minimum
Sewer Permit
Storm Sewer Utility
Charge
Stem
Charge
Water Permit
Window Replacement
Residential/Commercial
Commcrcial/Industrial
Residential
Rcsidcntial!Commcrcial
Residential
$75
$ 121.80 / > acre
$60.90/< acre
$10.00
$10
1% of value/$75 minimum
$75
$ 121.80 /acre
$7.25
$10
1% of value/$75 minimum
Page 5 of 12
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
FEE SCHEDULE 2018
page 113
2018 2017
ENGINEERING PUBLIC
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
FEE SCHEDULE
Driveway Permit Replacement $50 $50
Driveway Permit New or Expanded $100 $100
Engineering and Drafting
Services
Actual costs plus staff time Actual costs plus staff time
Feasibility Report
Credit shall be given for Actual costs plus staff time Actual costs plus staff time
information which can be used in plan
and
cnarifi ratinn nranaratinn
Field Inspection and
Staking
Actual costs plus staff time Actual costs plus staff time
Grading Permit
$200 + $500 escrow
$100/flat fee
Litigation
Actual costs plus staff time Actual costs plus staff time
Miscellaneous Charges
Actual costs plus staff time Actual costs plus staff time
Plans and Specifications
Project Construction under $100,000 Actual costs plus staff time Actual costs plus staff time
Plans and Specifications
Project Construction over $100,000 7% of final contract amount 7% of final contract amount
Preliminary Studies
Actual costs plus staff time Actual costs plus staff time
Professional Services on
Planning Cases
1st hour per case Included/ thereafter 1st hour per case Included/ thereafter
actual costs plus staff time actual costs plus staff time
Public Right of Way General $200 / flat fee
Excavation Permit
Public Right of Way Utility Permit
Public Right of Way
Permit
Commercial $200 / first 1000 feet $200 / first 1000 feet
$25 / each additional 100 feet $25 / each additional 100 feet
$75 / winter surcharge fee (11/1 - 3/31)
Residential $50 /flat fee $50 /flat fee
Right -Of -Way Usage license
$350 $350
Vacation - ROW or Easement
$250 $250
Note: Staff time is computed on the basis of 250% of the employee's
hourly rate for the above services
Page 6 of 12
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
FEE SCHEDULE 2018 page 114
2018 2017
ENGINEERING - MAPS,
PLANS AND DRAWINGS FEE
CD of Data or Maps
$10 plus map fee $5 plus map fee
Maps/Plans/Drawings: Up to 11 x 17 $3 $3
Comprehensive Plan Black and White
Critical Area
GIS
Land Use
Plats
Sanitary Sewer
Storm Sewer Street Asbuilts Wetlands
Zoning
Maps/Plans/Drawings: Up to 11 x 17 $10 $10
Comprehensive Plan Color
Critical Area
GIS
Land Use
Plats
Sanitary Sewer Storm Sewer Street
Asbuilts Wetlands Zoning
Maps/Plans/Drawings:
Comprehensive Plan
Critical Area
GIS
Land Use
Plats
Sanitary Sewer
Storm Sewer
Street Asbuilts
Wetlands
Zoning
Greater than 11 x 17
Black and White
$6 $6
Maps/Plans/Drawings:
Comprehensive Plan
Critical Area
GIS
Land Use
Plats
Sanitary Sewer
Storm Sewer
Street Asbuilts
Wetlands
Zoning
Greater than 11 x 17
Color
$20 $20
Page 7 of 12
$100 / event
PARKS AND RECREATION
FEE SCHEDULE
Concessions Building Reservation
Must provide proof of Food/Beverage
License if selling
$25/event
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
FEE SCHEDULE 2018
2018
page 115
2017
Field Reservation
Baseball/Softball/Soccer
Field Reservation Socccr
$35 for two hours + $25 application fee
(once per application)
Field Preparation
Field Preparation
Field Preparation
3 or morc fields only
Weekend
Weekday
Actual Cost or $100 minimum
Actual Cost Incurred
$35
$25/event
$35/day
$50 /day
Actual Cost or $100 minimum
Field Chalk
$10/bag
$10/bag
e d Drying Agent
$15 / bag
Ice Rink Reservation
$35/hour for two hours + $25 application
fee (once per application)
$35 / hour
Ice Rink Warming House
Key Damage Deposit
$100
$100
Par 3 Footgolf Fees
Par 3 Greens Fees
Par 3 Greens Fees
Par 3 Greens Fees
Juniors/Seniors-Weekday
Juniors/Seniors-Weekend
Weekday or Holiday
J
Par 3 Greens Fees
Weekend or Holiday
Par 3 10 -Round Pass
$8 / round
$11/round
$13/round
$12/round
$14/round
$90
$10/round
$12 / round
$11/round
$13/round
$90
Par 3 Pull Cart Rental
$3/round
$3/round
Par 3 Power Cart Rental
$10/round
$10/round
Picnic Area/Shelter
Resident- Private
$50
$25 usage fee per day + $25
application fee
Picnic Area/Shelter
Non -Resident - Private
$75
$50 usage fee per day + $25
application fee
Picnic Area/Shelter
Resident - Business
$75
$50/day + $25/application fee
Picnic Area/Shelter
Non -Resident - Business
$125
$100/day + $25/app fee
Picnic Arca Shelter Damage Dcposit
Waived for nonprofit youth service $100 / event
organizations and ncighborhood groups
reserving neighborhood park
NOTE: Mendota Heights schools, city events, and non-profit civic organizations are AO
exempt for Picnic Area/Shelter rental fees.
Picnic Area Cancellation
7 days advance notice
100% refund
100% refund
Picnic Area Cancellation
Less than 7 days notice
Not refundable
Not refundable
Picnic Area Cancellation
Due to inclement weather
Not refundable but may be rescheduled at Not refundable but may be
no additional charge rescheduled at no add'l charge
Picnic Table Additional
On-site
$15 / each table per day
$15 / each per day
Canoe Rack Rental Canoe Storage @Rogers Lake Park
during summer months
Park Bench Donation $1,000 per bench
$50 / summer + $25 application fee
Page 8 of 12
$50 for the summer
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
FEE SCHEDULE 2018
2018
page 116
2017
PARKS AND RECREATION
FEE SCHEDULE
Tournament Field Reservation
Baseball/Softball/Soccer
Tournament Field Reservation
Baseball/Softball/Soccer
Two-day tournament
One -day tournament
$400 + $25 application fee (once per
application)
$200 + $25 application fee (once per
application)
Tournament
Additional Day(s)
$45/per field
$500/weekend
$250/day
$45/per field
Tournament Fee Softball or Soccer City Recreation
N harge
No Charge
Tournament Fee Softball or Soccer
MHAA
To Be Determined
Tournament Additional
Day(s)
L
City Recreation
No Charge
No Charge
Tournament Additional
Day(s)
MHAA
To Be Determined
Tournament
Damage Deposit Fee
$300
$300
Trash Pick-up
Following Large Event, taken from $100/event
damage deposit
$100/event
Tournament
Cancellation Fee
One month notice
100 % refundable
100 % refundable
Tournament
Cancellation Fee
15 to 30 advance notice
50 % refundable
50 % refundable
Tournament
Cancellation Fee
1 to 14 advance notice Not refundable Not refundable
Tennis Courts
$25 application fee
Page 9 of 12
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
FEE SCHEDULE 2018
2018
page 117
2017
PLANNING FEE SCHEDULE
Accessory Structure Permit
For structures not requiring a building $25
permit
$25
After -the -Fact Permit
For actions undertaken without
appropriate zoning permits
Double fee, or $250, whichever is greater Double fee, or $250, whichever is
greater
Appeal to Board of Zoning Appeals
$250 + $500 escrow
$250 + $500 escrow
Comprehensive Plan
Amendment
$750 + $500 escrow
$750 + $500 escrow
Concept Plan Review for PUD/Plat
$250 + $500 escrow
$250 + $500 escrow
Conditional Use Permit / Interim Use
Permit
Residential
$350 + $500 escrow
$350 + $500 escrow
Conditional Use Permit / Interim Use
Permit
Commercial/Industrial
$500 + $500 escro�
$500 + $500 escrow
Critical Area Permit
$500 + $500 escrow +
Security deposit determined by staff
Critical Area Permit -Administrative
Per City Code 12-3-5. D.
$200 + Security deposit determined by
etaff
$100 + $500 escrow
CUP for PUD
$500 + $500 escrow
$500 + $500 escrow
Fence Permit
$25
$25
Lot Split / Lot Line Adjustment
$500 + $500 escrow
$500 + $500 escrow
Mining Permit
$350 +-$500 escrow
$350 +-$500 escrow
Park Dedication Fee
Single and Multi -Family Residential
$ 4,000/ dwelling unit
$ 4,000/ dwelling unit
Park Dedication Fee
New Commercial / Industrial Lot
10% of assessed value of unimproved land 10% of assessed value of unimproved
as determined by the County Assessor land as determined by the County
Assessor
Rezoning
$500 + $500 escrow
$500 + $500 escrow
Preliminary/Final Plat
$750 + escrow amount
Escrow Tab1
$750 + escrow amount
Residential districts - 0 to 10 units
$100/unit, $250 minimum
$100/unit, $250 minimum
Res Districts, MR -PUD, HR -PUD
districts -over 10 units
$50/unit
$50/unit
Commerical/Industrial Districts, MU-
DT TT \
$1,500
$1,500
Expenses billed to the city will be charged
against the escrow accounts. Any remaining
escrow will be returned to applicant.
Applicants will be billed for any city
incurred expenses exceeding the escrow
Sign Permit
Triple fee charged if sign is erected w/o Per Attachment A
permit
Per Attachment A
Temporary Sign Permit
$25
$25
Variance
Residential
$300 + $500 escrow
$300 + $500 escrow
Variance
Wetlands Permit
Wetlands Permit
Commercial or Industrial
Residential
Commercial or Industrial
$500 + $500 escrow
$150 + $500 escrow and/or
Security deposit determined by staff
$200 + $500 escrow and/or
Security deposit determined by staff
Wetlands Permit -Administrative
Per City Code 12-2-6. C.
$100 + Security deposit determined by
staff
$500 + $500 escrow
$150 + $500 escrow
$200 + $500 escrow
Zoning Letter
• $50
■
$50
Zoning Ordinance Amendment
$250 + $500 escrow
Page 10 of 12
$250 + $500 escrow
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
FEE SCHEDULE 2018
2018
page 118
2017
PUBLIC SAFETY FEE
SCHEDULE
Fingerprints
$15.00 per card
$10.00 per card
Car Seat Rental
Residents Only
$50 Deposit; check held for one month; $50 Deposit; check held for one
upon return, $25 refund. If seat not month; upon return, $25 refund. If
returned within one month, deposit is non- seat not returned within one month,
refundable. deposit is non-refundable.
Clearance Letter
$5
$5
DATA REQUESTS: Data released by the City adheres to IPAD guidelines and
MN Statutes Chapter 13.
Copy of Incident
Per IPAD/MSS 13.82
$.25/page up to 100 pages
$.25/page up to 100 pages
Copy of Accident
Report
In person, involved party request
$.25/page up to 100 pages
$.25/page up to 100 pages
Copy of Accident
Report
Request from insurance or attorney
Self-addressed, stamped envelope with
signed release. If over 4 pgs, contact
requestor for alternate payment.
Self-addressed, stamped envelope
with signed release. If over 4 pgs,
contact requestor for alternate
Per IPAD/MSS 13.82: Must prove involvement in/relationship to accident
and either present ID or a signed release
Request for Public Data Per IPAD/MSS 13.82
$.00 if information is only reviewed at city
hall.
$.00 if information is only reviewed
at city hall.
CD with
Photos/Audio/Video
Per IPAD/MSS 13.82
$10
$10
Page 11 of 12
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
FEE SCHEDULE 2018 page 119
2018 2017
OTHER PUBLIC SAFETY FEES
Dog Impound Fee
$ 67.00 for 1st Day $ 67.00 for 1st Day
$ 16.00 each day thereafter $ 16.00 each day thereafter
Vehicle Impound
Current Tow Rate + Tax Current Tow Rate + Tax
Vehicle Storage MHPD Indoor storage $ 35 per day $ 35 per day
Basic Property Storage Stored at or by MHPD
Small(2ftX4ft): $1/day
Medium(5ftX7ft): $3/day
Large(8ftX10ft): $5/day
Off -Site: Actual costs
Small(2ftX4ft): $1/day
Medium(5ftX7ft): $3/day
Large(8ftX10ft): $5/day
Off -Site: Actual costs
False Alarm, Police
Per calendar year First three no charge, 4th -$50; 5th -$75; First three no charge, 4th -$50; 5th -
6th -$100; ea add'1-add $25 $75; 6th -$100; ea add'1-add $25
False Alarm, Fire Per calendar year
First two no charge, third and each First two no charge, third and each
additional - $150/ea additional - $150/ea
Fire Alarm Permit Commercial Per Attachment A Per Attachment A
Removal of Underground Fuel Tanks Residential/Commercial $50 minimum $50 minimum
Plan Check Fee
Per Attachment A Per Attachment A
Fire Sprinkler Per Attachment A Per Attachment A
Alteration
Day Care Fire Inspection Per MN Statutes 299F.011 $50 $50
Page 12 of 12
riLl
CITY OF
MENDOTA HEIGHTS
page 120
1101 Victoria Curve 1 Mendota Heights, MN 55118
651.452.1850 phone 1 651.452.8940 fax
www.mendota-heights.com
Request for City Council Action
DATE: January 16, 2018
TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator
FROM: Lorri Smith, City Clerk
SUBJECT: Appointment to the Planning Commission
COMMENT:
Introduction
The Council is asked to appoint a Planning Commissioner to fill a vacancy on the commission.
Background
Per City Code 2-1-2: Members of the Planning Commission are limited to 3 consecutive full
terms. Planning Commission member Doug Hennes served three full terms and cannot be
reappointed. Staff advertised the open position and the City Council interviewed four
applicants prior to this meeting. This position is for a three year term which will expire on
January 31, 2021.
Recommendation
The Council should appoint the next Commission by means of adopting the attached
resolution, by filling in the blank for the name selected.
Action Required
If the Council concurs, it should, by motion, adopt Resolution 2018-08 Appointing a Candidate
to the Planning Commission.
page 121
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 2018 - 08
A RESOLUTION APPOINTING A CANDIDATE TO FILL
A VACANCY ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights benefits from the active
participation of citizens in representing the City on boards and commissions; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission serves as an advisory body to the City Council in
addressing general matters of planning, including zoning, new development, redevelopment
plans, transportation issues, and platting, which impact the City; and
WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes the excellent qualifications of Mendota
Heights resident to serve the City on the Planning Commission.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mendota
Heights, Minnesota, that it does hereby appoint to the Planning Commission,
for a term to expire on January 31, 2021.
Adopted by the Mendota Heights City Council this 16th day of January, 2018.
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
ATTEST: Neil Garlock, Mayor
Lorri Smith, City Clerk
page 122
1101 Victoria Curve 1 WI ;•1r. 55118
651.452.1850 phone I 651.452.8940 fax
www.mendota-heights.com
Cir' OF
MEIV DOTA HEIGHTS
Request for City Council Action
DATE: January 16, 2018
TO: Mayor, City Council and City Administrator
FROM: Cheryl Jacobson, Assistant City Administrator
SUBJECT: Approve Proposed Classification and Compensation Plan
COMMENT:
Introduction
The City Council is asked to approve a Classification and Compensation Plan for non -contract
City employees.
Background
The City's system for job evaluation has become obsolete; a new up-to-date system was
needed in order to comply with Minnesota Pay Equity laws and for compensation
administration. Staff worked with Springsted, Inc. to complete a compensation study that
included developing a sustainable system for job evaluation, a review of internal equity and
market competitiveness, and the development of a compensation plan and pay matrix.
The resulting classification and compensation plan provides a sustainable framework for the
attraction and retention of a qualified workforce, for providing fair and equitable compensation
to employees and for compliance with pay equity requirements.
Key plan elements include:
System of Job Evaluation: Every city must use a job evaluation system to determine the
comparable work value of work performed by each class of employee and to account for new
employee classes and changes in factors affecting existing classes.
Through the study process, all non-union job descriptions were reviewed and revised based on
employee feedback and reporting of essential functions and other job requirements. Job
descriptions were updated and evaluated using Springsted's Systematic Analysis and Factor
Evaluation (SAFE) system. The SAFE system is a state -approved job evaluation system for
pay equity purposes. The system evaluates positions based on necessary skill levels and work
related factors needed to perform the work. Each position was assigned a point value. Position
points were then used to establish position grades.
Salary Schedule/Pay Matrix: The process of developing a new pay plan draws from the
market data obtained through the market survey. The current play plan has 44 pay grades. The
recommended pay matrix (Attachment A) is an open range system and is a 7 -step scale with 22
pay grades. The proposed pay scale includes a 6% spread between grades and a 3.5% spread
between steps.
An open range system has a defined minimum, midpoint, and maximum wage forpwh payge.
Employees will move through the wage schedule based on years of service. An employee
hired at the minimum range rate (step 1) will move to the step 7 in approximately six years.
Implementation and Transition: Staff will continue to work with Springsted to determine any
remaining grade assignments or position adjustments. Implementation of the plan will be
carried out over the course of the year in a phased transition format. The majority of employee
salaries fall within the proposed pay matrix. Adjustments to move employees to a step within
the new matrix will generally occur on the employee's anniversary date.
Budget Impact
The impact of revised salaries will be accommodated within the adopted 2018 budget.
Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of the proposed Classification and Compensation Plan including
the use of the SAFE method for job evaluation for all job classes/positions (non-union and
union) and approval of the proposed 2018 non-union pay scale effective retroactive to
December 31, 2017.
Action Required
If the Council concurs, it should, by motion, adopt the proposed Compensation Plan including
the use of the SAFE method for job evaluation for all non-union and union job classes, and the
proposed 2018 non-union pay scale effective retroactive to December 31, 2017.
City of Mendota Heights
2018 Proposed Pay Matrix
page 124
% Between Grades: 6%
% Between Steps: 3.5%
Attachment A
Annual
Grade
Postion
1
2
3
4
5 6
7
1
$37,070
$38,367
$39,710
$41,100
$42,539
$44,027
$45,568
2
Community Service Officer
$39,294
$40,669
$42,093
$43,566
$45,091
$46,669
$48,302
3
Receptionist
$41,652
$43,109
$44,618
$46,180
$47,796
$49,469
$51,201
4
Utility Billing Clerk
$44,151
$45,696
$47,295
$48,951
$50,664
$52,437
$54,273
5
Accounting Clerk
Police Support Specialist
$46,800
$48,438
$50,133
$51,888
$53,704
$55,584
$57,529
6
Secretary -Deputy City Clerk
$49,608
$51,344
$53,141
$55,001
$56,926
$58,919
$60,981
7
$52,584
$54,425
$56,330
$58,301
$60,342
$62,454
$64,640
8
Recreation Program Coordinator
$55,739
$57,690
$59,709
$61,799
$63,962
$66,201
$68,518
9
Senior Engineering Technician
$59,084
$61,152
$63,292
$65,507
$67,800
$70,173
$72,629
10
$62,629
$64,821
$67,089
$69,438
$71,868
$74,383
$76,987
11
City Clerk
$66,386
$68,710
$71,115
$73,604
$76,180
$78,846
$81,606
12
$70,370
$72,833
$75,382
$78,020
$80,751
$83,577
$86,502
13
$74,592
$77,203
$79,905
$82,701
$85,596
$88,592
$91,692
14
Public Works Superintendent
$79,067
$81,835
$84,699
$87,663
$90,732
$93,907
$97,194
15
$83,811
$86,745
$89,781
$92,923
$96,175
$99,542
$103,026
16
Police Captain
Assistant City Administrator
Community Development Director
$88,840
$91,949
$95,168
$98,499
$101,946
$105,514
$109,207
17
Finance Director
$94,170
$97,466
$100,878
$104,408
$108,063
$111,845
$115,760
18
Public Works Director
Police Chief
$99,821
$103,314
$106,930
$110,673
$114,547
$118,556
$122,705
19
$105,810
$109,513
$113,346
$117,313
$121,419
$125,669
$130,067
20
City Administrator
$112,159
$116,084
$120,147
$124,352
$128,704
$133,209
$137,871
21
$118,888
$123,049
$127,356
$131,813
$136,427
$141,202
$146,144
22
$126,021
$130,432
$134,997
$139,722
$144,612
$149,674
$154,912
page 125
fO1 Victoria Curve 1 35118
651.452.1850 phone 1 651.452.8940 fax
www.mendota- height s.corn
CITY OF
MENDOTA HE4GHTS
Request for City Council Action
DATE: January 16, 2018
TO: Mayor, City Council and City Administrator
FROM: Cheryl Jacobson, Assistant City Administrator
SUBJECT: 2018 Pay Equity Implementation Report for 2017 Compliance
COMMENT:
Introduction
The City Council is asked to approve submittal of the City's Pay Equity Implementation
Report.
Background
The Local Government Pay Equity Act (Minnesota Statutes 471.991 to 471.999) requires local
government employers to analyze pay structures for evidence of inequities and to report this
information to the Minnesota Department of Management and Budget (MMB). Local
government employers are required to submit a pay equity report every three years. The City's
next pay equity report is due January 31, 2018.
In conjunction with the City's compensation study, in 2017 the City hired Springsted, Inc. as a
consultant to assist the City in the preparation of its Pay Equity Implementation Report. There
are four tests for compliance with the State of Minnesota Pay Equity Act. These tests include a
Completeness and Accuracy Test, Statistical Analysis Test, Salary Range Test, and an
Exceptional Service Pay Test.
The City was found by Springsted to be in compliance with pay equity based on the four tests,
assuming submittal of the report by January 31St. MMB will confirm those findings for the
State.
Pay equity rules require that the governing body of each jurisdiction review and approve the
submission of the report. Springsted will submit the report to Minnesota Management and
Budget for their consideration and final analysis, upon approval by the City Council.
Budget Impact
There are no budget implications for completion of the Pay Equity report.
If the City is found to be out of compliance, which does not appear to be the case, fines may be
assessed until the City achieves compliance.
Recommendation
Staff recommends that Council approve the Pay Equity Implementation Report, and authorize
submission of the report by the January 31, 2018 deadline.
page 126
Action Required
If Council concurs, it should, by motion, approve the Pay Equity Implementation Report and
authorize the submission of the report to the State of Minnesota by January 31, 2018.
Part A: Jurisdiction Identification
Jurisdiction: Mendota Heights
1101 Victoria Curve
Mendota Heights
Contact: Mark McNeill
Contact: Cheryl Jacobson
Pay Equity Implementation Report Print Date: 1/10/2018
page 127
* DRAFT COPY *
MN 55118
Phone: (651) 255-1153
Phone: (651) 255-1356
E -Mail:
E -Mail:
Jurisdiction Type: City
markm@mendota-heights.com
cherylj@mendota-heights.com
Part B: Official Verification
1. The job evaluation system used measured skill, effort
responsibility and working conditions and the same
system was used for all classes of employees.
The system used was:
Description:
Consultant's System
Systematic Analysis Factor Evaluation (SAFE)
2. Health Insurance benefits for male and female classes of
comparable value have been evaluated and:
There is no difference and female classes are not at a
disadvantage.
Part C: Total Payroll
$3,707,793.99
is the annual payroll for the calendar year just ended
December 31.
3. An official notice has been posted at:
City of Mendota Heights bulletin board for employee notices
(prominent location)
informing employees that the Pay Equity Implementation
Report has been filed and is available to employees upon
request. A copy of the notice has been sent to each
exclusive representative, if any, and also to the public library.
The report was approved by:
Mendota Heights City Council
(governing body)
Neil Garlock
(chief elected official)
Mayor, City of Mendota Heights
(title)
❑ Checking this box indicates the following:
- signature of chief elected official
- approval by governing body
- all information is complete and accurate, and
- all employees over which the jurisdiction has final
budgetary authority are included
Date Submitted:
Compliance Report
page 128
Jurisdiction: Mendota Heights Report Year: 2018
1101 Victoria Curve Case: 1 - 2017 DATA (Private (Jur Only))
Mendota Heights MN 55118
Contact: Mark McNeill
Phone: (651) 255-1153 E -Mail: markm@mendota-heights.com
The statistical analysis, salary range and exceptional service pay test results are shown below. Part I is general information
from your pay equity report data. Parts II, III and IV give you the test results.
For more detail on each test, refer to the Guide to Pay Equity Compliance and Computer Reports.
I. GENERAL JOB CLASS INFORMATION
Male Female Balanced All Job
Classes Classes Classes Classes
# Job Classes 12 10 1 23
# Employees 31 12 2 45
Avg. Max Monthly 6,588.88 6,623.38 6,502.81
Pay per employee
II. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS TEST
A. Underpayment Ratio = 97.22 *
Male Female
Classes Classes
a. # At or above Predicted Pay 5 4
b. # Below Predicted Pay
c. TOTAL
d. % Below Predicted Pay
(b divided by c = d)
*(Result is % of male classes below predicted pay divided by % of female classes below predicted pay.)
7 6
12 10
58.33 60.00
B. T-test Results
Degrees of Freedom (DF) = 41 Value of T = 2.223
a. Avq. diff. in pay from predicted pay for male jobs = $3
b. Avq. diff. in pay from predicted pay for female jobs = ($81)
III. SALARY RANGE TEST = 80.00 (Result is A divided by B)
A. Avg. # of years to max salary for male jobs = 4.80
B. Avq. # of years to max salary for female jobs = 6.00
IV. EXCEPTIONAL SERVICE PAY TEST = 0.00 (Result is B divided by A)
A. % of male classes receiving ESP 8.33 *
B. % of female classes receiving ESP 0.00
*(If 20% or less, test result will be 0.00)