01-19-10 CC Agenda Packet (entire)
AGENDA
Regular Meeting
of the
City Council
Golden Valley City Hall
7800 Golden Valley Road
Council Chamber
January 19, 2010
6:30 p.m.
The Council may consider item numbers 1, 2, 3, 5 and 6
prior to the public hearings scheduled at 7:00 p.m.
1. CALL TO ORDER
A. Roll Call
B. Fire Department Retirement - Firefighter Tom Warzetha
C. Firefighter Oath of Office - Sarah Auel, John Bean, Marc Berris, Eric Boe, Andrew
Gerling and Brent Hadoff
2. ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS TO AGENDA
3. CONSENT AGENDA
Approval of Consent Agenda - All items listed under this heading are considered to be
routine by the City Council and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no
discussion of these items unless a Council Member or citizen so requests in which
event the item will be removed from the general order of business and considered in its
normal sequence on the agenda.
A. Approval of Minutes - Special City Council Meeting - December 8, 2009 and
Council/Manager Meeting - January 12, 2010
B. Approval of Check Registers:
1. City
2. Housing and Redevelopment Authority
C. Licenses:
1. Gambling License Exemption and Waiver of Notice Requirement - Tuberous
Sclerosis Alliance
D. Minutes of Boards and Commissions:
1. Joint Planning Commission/City Council Meeting - November 9, 2009
2. Planning Commission - November 23, 2009
3. Human Services Foundation - October 12, 2009
4. Basset Creek Watershed Management Commission - November 18, 2009
E. Bids and Quotes:
1. Golf Carts - Bids
2. City Newsletter Printing/Mail Handling - Quotes
F. Authorization to Sign Consulting Agreement Amendment Three with Center for
Energy and Environment Consulting for Housing Rehabilitation Program
G. Support for Administrative Fee Increase for Deputy Registrars 10-8
H. Authorization for Submittal of Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant
Program Application Process 10-9
I. Authorization to Sign Agreement with WSB & Associates, Inc. for Country Club Pond
Excavation and Stream Bank Stabilization
J. Authorization to Sign Contract Renewal with Embedded Systems, Inc. for Tornado
Siren Maintenance
K. Authorization to Sign Patrol Officer (LELS Local 27) Agreement
L. Council Liaisons and Other Assignments
4. PUBLIC HEARINGS 7:00 PM
5. OLD BUSINESS
6. NEW BUSINESS
A. Authorization to Sign Request and Termination Letters for Dispatch Services
B. Announcements of Meetings
C. Mayor and Council Communications
7. ADJOURNMENT
J\
c:g
"{joi
alley
M randu
Fire Department
763-593-8079 I 763-593-8098 (fax)
Executive Summary for Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
January 19, 2010
Agenda Item
1. B. Fire Department Retirement: Firefighter Tom Warzetha
Prepared By
Mark Kuhnly, Chief of Fire & Inspections
Summary
On March 22, 2009, Firefighter Tom Warzetha retired from the Fire Department with 20 years
of service.
Recommended Action
Recognize retired Firefighter Tom Warzetha for 20 years of dedicated service to the
community.
alley
Memoran urn
Fire Department
763-593-8079 I 763-593-8098 (fax)
Executive Summary for Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
January 19, 2010
Agenda Item
1. C. Oath of Office: Firefighters Sarah Auel, John Bean, Marc Berris, Eric Boe, Andrew
Gerling and Brent Hadoff
Prepared By
Mark Kuhnly, Chief of Fire & Inspections
Summary
Firefighters Sarah Auel, John Bean, Marc Berris, Eric Boe, Andrew Gerling and Brent Hadoff
will be present to take their Oath of Office as a Golden Valley Firefighter.
Recommended Action
Mayor Loomis administer the Oath of Office to Firefighters Auel, Bean, Berris, Boe, Gerling
and Hadoff.
I
alley
M m n m
Finance
763-593-8013/763-593-8109 (fax)
Executive Summary For Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
January 19, 2010
Agenda Item
3. B. 1. Approval of City Check Register
Prepared By
Sue Virnig, Finance Director
Summary
Approval of check register for various vendor claims against the City of Golden Valley.
Attachments
Loose in agenda packet.
Recommended Action
Motion to authorize the payment of the bills as submitted.
alley
Memorandu
Finance
763-593-8013/763-593-8109 (fax)
Executive Summary For Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
January 19, 2010
Agenda Item
3. B. 2. Approval of Housing and Redevelopment Authority Check Register
Prepared By
Sue Virnig, Finance Director
Summary
Approval of check register for various vendor claims against the Housing and Redevelopment
Authority .
Attachments
Loose in agenda packet.
Recommended Action
Motion to authorize the payment of the bills as submitted.
01
Valley
morandu
City Administration/Council
763-593-8006 I 763-593-8109 (fax)
Executive Summary For Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
January 19, 2010
Agenda Item
3. C. 1. Gambling License Exemption and Waiver of Notice Requirement - Tuberous
Sclerosis Alliance
Prepared By
Judy Nally, Administrative Assistant
Summary
As per State Statute organizations that conduct gambling within the City limits have to submit
an application for a lawful gambling permit to the State after the permit has been approved or
denied by the City. Depending upon the timing of the permit the applicants may request the
City to waive the 3D-day waiting period.
Attachments
Application for Exempt Permit (2 pages)
Letter from Tuberous Sclerosis Alliance requesting waiver of 30 day waiting period (1 page)
Recommended Action
Motion to receive and file the gambling license exemption and approve the waiver of notice
requirement for Tuberous Sclerosis Alliance.
Minnesota LaWful Gambling
LG220 Application for Exempt Permit
An exempt pennJt may be issued to a nonpro1it organization that:
- conducts fawfuJ gambling on five or fewer days. and
. awards less than $50.000 in prizes during a calendar year.
App
I 11
less than 30 days
before the event
$100
.
more than 30 days
before the event
$60
~~~~~~~~~i~$;%~tt~~~~:1t$f~mi1i4Ygln~;~~~~~it~!~X~~~~~~~r~\rF~t\f
OrQanlzatlon name
'lv..~OUS ~\e.'f05\5 N.l \QP.tf:-
Type of nonprofit organization. Cheok one.
D Fraternal 0 Religious DVeterans Other nonprofit organization
Matling address City State ZIp Code ' County
60 \ f\o ( N. k'c lSD ~ih\ei S rl(\ ,;lOq,O
Name of chief executive officer (CEO) Daytime phone num r Email address
~f\ Lu....w.er ~r\SOV'\ - C(flO
Previous gambling permit number
.
. ore
Do not attach a ~'tax exempt status or federal 10 employer numbers as they are not proof of nonprofit status.
D Nonprofit A~Qles of 1ncorporatlon OR a current Certificate of Good Standing.
Don't have a copy? This certificate must be obtained each year from; ,
Secretary of S.. BusIness Servlces Div.. 180 State OffIce Building, st. Paul. MN 55155 Phone: 651-296-2803
o IRS IncOlbe tax exemption [&01(cl) letter in your organization's name.
Don't have a copy? TO obtain S' copy of your federal income tex exempt letter. have an organization officer
contact the IRS at 877-829-5500.
o IRS. Affiliate of national, statewtde, or international parent nonptofit organization (charter)
If ~r organization falls under a patent organization, attach copies of l:Wb..of the following:
a. IRS letter showing your parent organlzatlon'is a nonprofit 501(c} organl28ti.1n with a group ruBng, and
b. the charte~ or letter from your pare~ organization recognizing your organization as a subordinate.
1iJ. IRS ~ proof prevlous'y submitted to Gambling Control Board ,
If you previously submitted proof of nonprofit status from the IRS. no attachment is required.
County
\-\e..nn
..
\0
... Gambling ~ipment for pull-tabs, bingo paper, tipboards, and
paddlewheels must be obtained from a distributor Dcensed by the
Gambling Conb'ol Board. EXCEPnON: BIngo hard cards arid bingo
number selection devices may be borrowed from another organization
authorized to conduct bingo.
To find' a licensed distributor, go to www.QCb.state.mn.us and dick on list
of Ucensed Qlsb1butors, or caD 651-639-4076.
Also complete
Page 2 of this form.
-
LG220 Application for Exempt Permit Page20f2 7109
:\~: ' ..~11Q : .,:~~~Wl1;~-N_:"~l!in~~t::::~~!;~.::~~{:~~:;t;;;:t~\:;;~~i:'~~:(::';:?;':;U;:;':~:.:;:~:.:.
If the gamb ing pram Is' within city lilrii'bi. If the gambling premises is located in a township, a
a cfIy official must check the action that the city Is county offlc!al must check the action that the county is 1ak1ng
taking on 1his application and stgn the application. on this application and sign the application.
, A township official is not required to sign the appncation.
~ application is admowledged with no waiting period. _The appDcation is acknOWledged with no wailing period.
_The application is acknowledged with a 30 day waiting _The appRcatlon Is acknowledged wi'lh a 30 day waiting
perJocl. and sHows the Board to iSsue a permit after 30 period. and allows the Board to issue a permit after 30
days (GO days fOr a 1-st class city). days.
_The appl1cation i$ denied. _The application is denied.
Prinl city name C>> Ide I) 1/ tl /Ie t1 Print county name
011 behalf of the C,u." I ac",.,....uJ-'"e this fJIIIPblion. On behalf of the county. I aCknowledge this application.
''3' RI'V"W......,.,' -1"'1 Signature of county official receiving app6catlon
Title
O8te----1--1_
. \
(Optional) TOWNSHIP: on behlllf of the IOWl\shlp, 1
acknow1edgtl that the organl2atIon Is applying for exempted gambling
actIvI1y wltliln township IlmIts. [A township has no sIatuIory aulhorlty
10 approve or dany'an appDcal10n l~ Statule 349.166)]
PrinttoiNnshlp name ','
. ..,
Signature of township official aeknowtedglng app1lcation
Title
. Oate~_I_
~. '.~"',,,
::. . e~
.. . IP~
.. ..........
.. :':: ~'." ..' ....:~:~:.:m~.~~??~.}:;::t:~i~}~~:J.::H;~:?~I:~~!:::;~::~?'~~:\%f:~~{:}~;W;;~~::;:~:~~t:..~.::::.
The Infonriatlon provld~p inlhlB appUcatJon /$ complete and
financial report wHJ be completed alld ref#med
Chief executive offlcer'&",ignatufi
Complete a separate appUcation for each gamblng activity:
- bne day of gambling IlICtMty. .... .
. two or mote eonsecqtlVe days of gambling actJvlty,
- eaQh day ~. Fa.me d~h~ Is held .' . ,
Send appl1eation with: .
. a tOPy'of YOUr"j::irOof of'm>nprotlt'statlJS', and
. application fe8. for eacti ~nl . .
Make check.payable to ".State of.Minnesota. n
To: GambDng Control Board. . . .
1711 West County Road B, Suite 300 South
RO&eVIIIe, MN 55113
best of my l(J)ow/edge. I acknowledge that the
s .of the d,ate of ou( gamblinp, ec;tj '.' .
. . '.D..f~~o'
FlnancJal report and recordkeeplng required
. .o. ..
'A financial report fonn and instructions will be sent with
your permit, or use the on6ne flU-in form .avaitable at
www.gcb.state.mn.tJ8. < Within 30 days of.the activity date,
complete and retum the fl.nanclal report form to the
Gambling Control 'Board.
Q~o~'? .............. ..... .... :":""
CaD the Licensing Section 'otthe. Ga~Jjng .Control
Board 8t651-639-407$.. .
.~',
Data privacy. This form wm be made available the Board win be able to J)I'OCe58 your Board statfwl10ae WOrk requires acCess to the
In aIteI'I)8lIve fo~ (Le. Iaige (l!'Int, Btallle) apptk:atlon. ~our nama and and your. . information: MInnesota's..D8partnlent of PubRc
upon request. The'lnfomaatkln tequSsted on . organJzallon s name and address will be public Safety; AltOmey General; CommJssloneJS of
this fonn (and any &1lachme.nts).wII1 be used by information when recelvecl by the BoaRi. All AdmJnistta1lon, Rnance. and Revenl1e;
the Gambling COntrol Board (Board) to the ofher IrIfottn9IIon you plOvlde wltl be private Legislafive Audltot, national and IntematIooal
clatetmlne your qualllicatlons to be Involved In data until the Board Issues your permit. INhen garrib\Ing reguJatary agencfea; anyone pursuant
IaWlW gambIlng acIIvities In Mfnneaofa. You the BoaftI issues your permit, all of the fa court Older; other Individuals and agem:/es
have the rfghl to I"efuse to suppJy.the. . information pRlVlded to Ih.e Board wID become that are sJjeC/JjcaBy authorized by state or
Infonnatlon requested. howeIret..lfyou.retlJse.to. pu\)TlC.. "'the BQanI d.oes not issuE! a ~ all fedetallawto haVaaccess to the Informallon;
sumw1hls Illfi:>Jnlallon.. the ~ may not ~ inIOrmat/on provided remains PriVate. wJth ~ IndlvJ(fuais an~ .~ for.WI'lIcb law or legal
able to defer.mlne yOur quaIIf1c8fions and. as a exceptIoft of your name and your orgsnIzallons order authOrIzes a new use or &haring of
consequence. may refUse to ~you a pem1/I:.. name and address which wm remain publlc. lnforma1lon after thls.Notk:e was given; and
If you supply the information ~ested. Private data are avaIlabI& to: Board ~~mbenl. any* w\th,YOl.t1' conse~, .". . .
: '. ~. :. . :.; .
. ..:.. .'
~., . . II :
. " ..'" . ,
'./7 :j', to
. ,...
, .':
.1 t:. .
,,'.:'.:.
.' ;', ~.
JAN-14-2010 16:12 From:
To: 17635938109
Page:2/2
mn Roeder Road, Suite 750
Silver Sprin~, MD 2l'rllII
Tuberous Sclerosis Amante
Toll free: (800) 225-6872
Phone: (.3!11) 562-()890
Fax: pm) 562-9870
www.lsIlUian(..C.org
F.-llIllil: info@lsaIliancc.org
January 12,2010
Judy Nally
City of Golden V(uley
7HOO Golden Valley Rd.
Golden Valley, MN 55427
VIA F ACSIM 11.1-0: # 763-593-8109
Dear Ms. Nally,
The Tuberou!\ Sclerosis Alliance of lhe Upper Midwest would like to request a waiver on the thirty
(30) day waiting period for our Gambling Permit to be processed.
We wish to hold a raffle for our fund raising cvcnl, TiM. oJth.e Twin Cities Food tmd Wine
1i1stin8. Thifi cvent is scheduled for February 4, 2010 at the Metropolitan in Golden Valley and all
proceeds will go to the Tubcrous Sclerosis Alliance.
We appreciate your support in expediting the application. Ifl can be of assistance in any way,
please contact me.
Thank you for your consideration.
Jennifer L. Smiley
Director, Community Outreach
A naliooal nOft-flfllfil organil'.3lilln dedicalcd In n:!ICllrch, educalion And iUlJ1IlOrt.
Mi'tw,m SIa1f>.11lP.IIt: Tuhcrnw; Sclcm!iifi ^lIiAnco is dediCAled In findine. A C11rl! for IlIbIVOI.I$ $CL::r(""... wbile illlpruvlDg Ibe Iivcsul' lhusc BIlix.'too.
Joint Meeting of the
Golden Valley Planning Commission and City Council
November 9,2009
A joint meeting of the Planning Commission and City Council was held at the Golden Valley
City Hall, Council Conference Room, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota,
on Monday, November 9,2009. Mayor Loomis called the meeting to order at 7:40 pm.
Those present were Mayor Loomis, City Council Members Freiberg, Scanlon and Shaffer,
Planning Commissioners Cera, Eck, Kluchka, McCarty, Schmidgall and Waldhauser, City
Manager Tom Burt, Director of Planning and Development Mark Grimes, Director of
Public Works Jeannine Clancy, City Planner Joe Hogeboom and Administrative Assistant
Lisa Wittman. Also present were Consultants Michael Schroeder from LHB and Jupe Hale
from WSB and Associates.
1. Presentation of Douglas Drive Corridor Study
Hogeboom introduced consultants Michael Schroeder and Jupe Hale. He stated that this
presentation is to review the final draft of the Douglas Drive Corridor study before it goes
forward in the public hearing process.
Schroeder referred to a PowerPoint presentation. He discussed the study area and the
purpose of the study which includes: studying current and future land uses, offering
options for roadway design and finding ways to accommodate existing users, especially
pedestrians and bicyclists.
Schroeder next discussed the principles of the study and the various ways the public and
stakeholders were included in the study process. He talked about the character of the
corridor, the potential for change and how to accommodate long term change. He also
discussed the limiting conditions and the priority issues in the corridor such as: narrow
right-of-way, unlinked transit facilities, little accommodation of modes other than vehicles,
discontinuous pedestrian ways, increasing traffic congestion and unsafe pedestrian
facilities.
Schroeder explained the potential land use evolution and discussed the various concepts
proposed throughout the corridor. The concepts include five zones: the North Gateway
Zone, the Central Mixed Zone, the Residential Core Zone, the Luce Line Zone and the
Highway 55 Zone.
Schroeder talked about the roadway evolution and explained that expected growth,
number of trips and consideration of the road's ability to accommodate new traffic were all
taken into consideration when considering a three-lane or four-lane roadway. He showed
several conceptual roadway drawings and discussed permanent improvements with
amenity zones for sidewalks and planting easements. He also showed several
intersection concepts including roundabouts and configurations with enhanced signals.
Minutes of the Joint Planning Commission and City Council Meeting
November 9, 2009
Page 2
Hogeboom discussed the next steps in the study process. He stated that within the next
couple of months the study will go to the Planning Commission for a public hearing to
recommend incorporation of the study into the Comprehensive Plan. After the Planning
Commission reviews the study it will go the City Council for formal adoption. He added
that the General Land Use Plan Map and Zoning Map are not being amended at this point
in the study process.
Waldhauser asked about the drawbacks of not amending the Land Use Plan Map and
Zoning Map. Hogeboom explained that adopting the study into the Comprehensive Plan
allows the City an opportunity to be better prepared without being bound to the Land Use
Plan Map and Zoning Map. He added that property designations will most likely be
amended when the area is better defined.
Scanlon asked about the communication efforts and suggested that a letter with a brief
explanation and more information might get a better response than a postcard.
Hogeboom explained that letters have been sent to property owners in the study area and
that the goal is to drive people to the City's website and/or have them call staff with any
questions because there is a great deal of information.
Loomis noted that the daily traffic figures discussed in the study are different than the
County's traffic figures. Hale stated the figures in the study include potential
redevelopment. Grimes suggested that language be put in the study explaining that the
traffic figures noted are a forecast.
Loomis noted that stormwater issues need to be addressed either in this study or through
city ordinances and it should be made clear that stormwater needs to be dealt with before
redevelopment occurs.
The meeting was adjourned at 8:30 pm.
Lester Eck, Secretary
Regular Meeting of the
Golden Valley Planning Commission
November 23, 2009
A regular meeting of the Planning Commission was held at the Golden Valley City Hall,
Council Chambers, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota, on Monday,
November 23,2009. Chair Keysser called the meeting to order at 7 pm.
Those present were Planning Commissioners Cera, Eck, Keysser, Kluchka, McCarty,
Schmidgall and Waldhauser. Also present was Director of Planning and Development
Mark Grimes, City Planner Joe Hogeboom, Finance Director Sue Virnig, Director of Public
Works Jeannine Clancy, City Engineer Jeff Oliver, LHB Consultant Michael Schroeder and
Administrative Assistant Lisa Wittman.
1. Approval of Minutes
November 9, 2009 Regular Planning Commission Meeting
MOVED by Eck, seconded by Schmidgall and motion carried unanimously to approve the
November 9,2009 minutes as submitted.
2. Presentation of Capital Improvement Program 2010-2014 - Sue Virnig, City
Finance Director
Virnig explained that the Capital Improvement Program is a five year fiscal planning
document to identify capital projects over $10,000 and financing sources. She stated that
this document has financing services made up of general obligation bonds, equipment
certificates, municipal state aid allotments, tax increment, general fund transfers, special
assessments and user fees from the enterprise funds. She added that this year the City
Council decertified the Valley Square Tax Increment District which will help ease the
property taxes in 2010. She explained that the Planning Commission's role is to review the
Capital Improvement Program because it is part of the City's Comprehensive Plan. After
the Planning Commission approves the document it will go to the City Council on
December 8 for review and again for final approval on December 15.
Eck referred to Page 9, exhibit 3 and asked about the golf course projections. Virnig stated
that the weather, along with the economy this past year caused significantly less revenue
for the golf course.
Eck referred to Page 11, exhibit 5 and asked why the carryover doesn't match when the
year changes from 2013 to 2014. Virnig stated that was done in error and she would
correct it.
Eck referred to Page 14, exhibit 8 and asked about the three million dollars being spent
this year for Douglas Drive improvements. Virnig stated that it is part of the Transit for
Livable Communities (TLC) grant and as a part of that grant the City would have to match
the grant funding. Clancy added that the TLC grant application is to do some interim
improvements on Douglas Drive by adding a sidewalk on the east side between Golden
Valley Road and Duluth Street. She explained that TLC also feels it is important to restripe
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
November 23, 2009
Page 2
the roadway to a three lane design and to make traffic improvements to accommodate
bicycle lanes on both sides of the roadway. She stated that the project is in the very
preliminary stage and has not been approved by Hennepin County or by MnDOT. She
stated that the placeholder was put in the Capital Improvement Program and reiterated
that if the City desires to use the funds from the TLC grant then it needs to set aside
money to match the grant.
Waldhauser asked Virnig to highlight some of the biggest changes in the Capital
Improvement Plan since last year's plan. Virnig explained that the vehicle equipment
replacement level has stayed the same, there were some delays in the building fund and
the golf course has also considered delaying some of their equipment replacing as well.
MOVED by Eck, seconded by Kluchka and motion carried unanimously to recommend
approval of the 2010-2014 Capital Improvement Program with Commissioner Eck's above
noted correction, as it is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
3. Continued Informal Public Hearing - Zoning Code Amendment - Regarding
the Number of Street Curb Cut Access Points
Applicant: City of Golden Valley
Purpose: To limit the number of street curb cut access points to one per parcel in
the Single Family Zoning District (R-1)
Hogeboom reminded the Commission that this item was tabled at their September 29
meeting. He explained that the proposed ordinance language would restrict curb cuts in
the Residential Zoning District to one with a few exceptions. He added that by putting the
language in the Zoning Code residents could ask for a variance if there is a hardship
present.
Oliver stated that prior to 1999 Public Works staff had the practice of replacing existing
driveways as they were. He explained that during the 1999-2000 Pavement Management
Program the City Council received several complaints about driveway widths and
secondary driveways. The Council at that time asked staff to gather information regarding
the codes and policies in place. That discussion led to the City's current policy which limits
driveway widths to 25 feet maximum, eliminates all boulevard parking areas and
eliminates second driveways where no hardships exists. He stated that since 2000-2001
there have been approximately 50 properties where these types of issues have been
addressed and there have been several people each year who have appealed the
decisions. Based on recent appeals from residents to the City Council staff has been
directed to codify the existing policies and practices.
He reviewed the proposed new language regarding second driveways and explained that
lots containing two legally constructed garages, lots with a person residing on the property
with a physical disability that would require additional driveway access, and lots that
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
November 23, 2009
Page 3
contain an existing horseshoe driveway would be allowed to have up to two curb cuts with
the costs assessed to the property owner.
He stated that discussions regarding this issue have included reduction of impervious
surface area and the associated storm water runoff, the costs of installing driveway aprons
which varies from $500 to $1500 per driveway apron and the ongoing maintenance costs
of driveway aprons, safety issues particularly on arterial roads and the desire to treat all
residential properties the same.
Keysser asked about permitting new horseshoe driveways. Oliver stated that the proposed
code does not allow for new horseshoe driveways.
Cera asked if the hardship standards used in the Zoning Code when considering
variances are the same standards used when evaluating curb cut requests and appeals.
Oliver stated that when evaluating requests for second driveways they consider the actual
need for the second driveway including handicap access, legally built second garages, etc.
Hogeboom added that if the conditions in the proposed new driveway language were met,
residents wouldn't have to go the Board of Zoning Appeals for a variance. Oliver explained
that each case would be looked at individually but the intent is to remove secondary
driveways.
McCarty asked about the procedure when a second driveway is removed. Oliver stated
that typically these issues happen during a pavement management program and in all
cases the secondary driveway or auxiliary boulevard parking space has been removed
and the yard restored.
Keysser asked what the argument is against allowing horseshoe driveways for new
construction since they are safer. Oliver reiterated that the number of driveways
particularly on an arterial road is a safety concern and allowing horseshoe driveways for
new construction is an issue of equity. He suggested the Planning Commission forward
their concerns onto the City Council. Clancy added that another concern regarding
secondary driveways is the City's need to reduce long term infrastructure costs.
Keysser opened the public hearing.
Don Lundquist, 1338 Edgewood, asked the Planning Commission to understand that the
City isn't absorbing the cost for secondary driveways, the taxpayers are.
Bruce Johnson, 6842 Olympia Street, said the issue hasn't been addressed regarding a
person who wants extra driveways and is willing to pay for them. He said this is a
nonsense issue and he doesn't see what the issue is if a resident is willing to pay for extra
driveways. Grimes stated that a typical lot in Golden Valley is only 80 feet wide so there
isn't always room for a second driveway and sometimes having more than one driveway
can cause other issues in terms of traffic and safety. Kluchka reviewed the proposed new
language and reiterated that some property owners will be allowed to have second curb
cuts. Johnson questioned the safety concerns that have been discussed. Oliver explained
that on high volume roads the more driveway points entering and exiting the flow of traffic
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
November 23, 2009
Page 4
presents a safety concern. He added that most developing communities do not permit
driveways onto high volume roadways.
Stacy Hoschka, 6400 Golden Valley Road, noted that there is an increase in impervious
surface with horseshoe driveways and thinks the Bassett Creek Watershed Commission
might have concerns. She added that horseshoe driveways might be safer for the driver
coming out of the driveway, but not necessarily for other people driving or walking by. She
also questioned if more curb cuts are easier or safer for pedestrians or people in
wheelchairs.
David Comb, 200 Jersey Avenue North, stated that he has a horseshoe driveway and he
just spent $6,000 repaving it. He is concerned about being forced to remove it if the City
deems it necessary. Oliver stated that Jersey Avenue between Laurel and Glenwood was
reconstructed in 1995 and he anticipates a long life for that roadway. Grimes reiterated
that the language in the Code allows existing horseshoe driveways to remain.
Seeing and hearing no one else wishing to comment, Keysser closed the public hearing.
Waldhauser agreed that part of the safety issue is not just for drivers but also for
pedestrians.
McCarty noted that the proposed new language affects the remaining properties in the
Pavement Management Program and questioned if it is too late in the process now to
codify these requirements. He asked how many properties would be affected by these
proposed new requirements. Oliver stated that some years have seen no second driveway
issues and other years there have been 10 or 12 issues. He stated that these proposed
requirements would apply to approximately 3 to 8 percent of properties.
Kluchka said he supports this proposal because it gives people a process to appeal.
MOVED by Schmidgall, seconded by Kluchka and motion carried unanimously to
recommend approval of limiting the number of street curb cut access points to one per
parcel in the Single Family Zoning District (R-1).
4. Informal Public Hearing - General land Use Comprehensive Plan Amendment -
adopting the Douglas Drive Corridor Study
Applicant: City of Golden Valley
Purpose: To recommend the adoption of the Douglas Drive Corridor study as a
part of the Special Planning Districts chapter of the Comprehensive Plan
Hogeboom stated that the Douglas Drive Corridor Study began in July of 2008. He
explained that the study was overseen by the Douglas Drive Corridor Study Advisory
Committee which was comprised of three Planning Commissioners, three City Council
Members and three staff members. He stated that the study looked at long term solutions
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
November 23, 2009
Page 5
to some of the issues along Douglas Drive and tried to predict what the future traffic and
land use patterns might be and how to best address them. He stated that the study will be
added to the Comprehensive Plan as a planning study so in the future, if funds become
available for possible projects along Douglas Drive, the study or vision will already be in
place. He added that there are no proposals to amend the General Land Use Plan Map or
the Zoning Map at this point.
Michael Schroeder, LHB, referred to a PowerPoint presentation. He stated that the
content of his presentation is substantially the same as what was presented at the open
house held several months ago. He discussed the study area and the parameters of the
study which includes: studying current and future land uses, offering options for roadway
design and finding ways to accommodate existing users, especially pedestrians and
bicyclists.
Schroeder next discussed the principles of the study and the various ways the public and
stakeholders were included in the study process. He talked about the character of the
corridor, the potential for change and how to accommodate long term change. He also
discussed the limiting conditions and the priority issues in the corridor such as: narrow
right-of-way, unlinked transit facilities, little accommodation of modes other than vehicles,
discontinuous pedestrian ways, increasing traffic congestion and unsafe pedestrian
facilities.
Schroeder explained the potential long term land use evolution and discussed the various
concepts proposed throughout the corridor in the next 20 years including: the TH 55
Campus Concept, Douglas Drive Residential (south) Concept, Mixed Use Node Concept,
Douglas Drive Residential (north) Concept and the Mixed Use Village Concept.
Schroeder talked about the roadway evolution and explained that expected growth,
number of trips and consideration of the road's ability to accommodate new traffic were all
taken into consideration when considering a three-lane or four-lane roadway. He showed
several conceptual roadway drawings and discussed permanent improvements with
amenity zones for sidewalks and planting easements. He also showed several
intersection concepts including roundabouts and configurations with enhanced signals.
Kluchka asked Hogeboom to describe the value of incorporating this study into the
Comprehensive Plan. Hogeboom explained that there is a chapter in the Comprehensive
Plan devoted to planning studies and this study is a guiding document but doesn't hold
the City to any specific design, it just recognizes that the study was done. Schroeder
added that it also won't put the City in the position of having adopted a plan that creates
non-conforming uses along Douglas Drive and it won't take away existing property
owner's rights.
Kluchka asked what the study will make easier for developers and the City in the future.
Hogeboom stated part of the process includes the HRA creating a redevelopment area
and this study would give an overall vision should the City decide to focus development in
a particular area. Schroeder added that the development community is looking for some
amount of certainty that their investment will be following a vision or a pattern laid out by
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
November 23, 2009
Page 6
the City. So this study offers a guide for the evolution of Douglas Drive without having a
specific timeframe for that evolution. Grimes noted that the City has done several
planning studies over the last 30 years in areas like Valley Square, Golden Hills, etc. He
added that planning is incremental and helps guide what happens in the future. He said
another issue that needs to be considered is how much development can go in this area
without changing the character of the community and having a study or a plan gives the
City a baseline to start from.
Kluchka asked about feedback the City has received so far. Hogeboom stated that the
study information has been on the City's website since July of 2008 and as of November
11,2009 there have been 2,761 views of the website. He stated that there has also been
approximately 50 written comments submitted which will become part of the study
documents. He stated that many of the comments were in regard to streets being closed
off to Douglas Drive and keeping Olympia Street open. He said this option was looked at
on a very preliminary basis and has since been taken out of the study. Schroeder added
that there was also concern expressed about the impact to the railroad crossing and the
traffic on a 3-lane road design which is still being analyzed.
Keysser opened the public hearing.
Michael Hunegs, 6621 Olympia Street, said he doesn't believe anyone would have an
objection to pedestrian safety considering there have been two fatalities. He said the
Douglas Drive system needs to be judged by the maximum stress that is put on the
system especially during winter days with southbound traffic backed up trying to turn onto
TH 55 which causes a spillover effect across the entire area. He suggested that the traffic
be studied during the worst possible times in order to gauge what is going on. He said the
pictures shown in the study are beautiful but they represent an ideal situation and there
will not be 10,000 to 15,000 pedestrians using this system no matter how beautiful it is.
The fact is most people have to use the system and don't have a choice. He said he
thinks there is gross underestimation of the volume of change that will be brought to this
area and he wants to make sure that there is a realistic assessment of the likely traffic
because he feels the system is stretched to its maximum amount now. He said he is also
concerned about the possibility of a 6-story building on Douglas Drive and wants to know
what shadows will be cast and how people's gardens will be affected. He said this study
looks good on paper but there are many questions he hasn't heard answered yet.
John Paulson, 1370 Douglas Drive, asked if Douglas Drive is a city road or a county road.
He said that one of the considerations in determining if this study is advisable are the
costs involved. He wants to know if the residents will be assessed for these changes.
Keysser stated that Douglas Drive is a county road and Golden Valley Road is a city road.
Paulson said we need to get back to common sense and do things that are practical when
we've got the money.
Gary Anderson, 1100 Douglas Drive, asked what this study cost. He questioned who
would be interested in what is going to happen to the Douglas Drive Corridor 20 years
from now. He said he's interested in what is going to happen a year or five years from
now and he is not interested in roundabouts that don't work.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
November 23, 2009
Page 7
Stacy Hoschka, 6400 Golden Valley Road, said she is glad the study incorporated
existing land uses in the corridor. She said her concern is the right turn lane going west
bound from Douglas Drive onto Golden Valley Road which is a very dangerous
intersection. She said she has three small children and every time they go for a bike ride
or a walk they have to stop twice as they cross Golden Valley Road or Douglas Drive
because of the turn lane island. She said she lived in England for a year and knows that
roundabouts work great and could beautify the corridor so she would be in support of that
decision.
Lowell Hammer, 6800 Olympia Street, questioned the density and the amount of houses
and condos being proposed for the corridor because where there is high density there are
high problems. He asked how many people are expected to be living in the corridor. He
added that more traffic is not needed on Olympia Street because it is practically a
highway now with stop signs that aren't obeyed.
Linda Johnson, 2417 Douglas Drive, said she appreciates planning so far ahead because
that is the only way things will get done in less than a haphazard way. She questioned if
those who own property in the corridor should go forward with home improvement plans
and how the study will affect property values.
Mark Schulte, 6336 Phoenix Street, said he noticed there was a lot of talk about mixed
use in the long term projection. He said a lot of people on the west side of Douglas Drive
like to live in a residential neighborhood and he is concerned about people putting more
money into remodeling their houses only to have property values drop because of high
density developments. He said he is concerned about the character of the neighborhood
and doesn't necessarily want a mixed use environment in his back yard.
Bruce Johnson, 6842 Olympia Street, said he thinks long range planning is terrific. He
said he agrees that high density isn't always good. He asked how long the planning took
for the 1-394 corridor and what has changed as a result because he hasn't seen much
change in the last 10 to 15 years. He added that a lot of planning was done in the 1-394
corridor and he's not sure that has worked out so well because he has not seen things get
any better.
Shep Harris, 2425 Zane Avenue North, said he is concerned about the cost and he would
like to know the cost estimates and who is paying for the things being proposed. He said
he is also concerned about the safety issues, the beautification and image of the city and
Bassett Creek. He expressed concerned about the impact downstream in the Bassett
Creek Park neighborhood and the impact of the run-off from mixed use types of
developments.
Emily Delaney, 1618 Kelly Drive, said she waits for the bus every morning at the corner of
Olympia Street and Kelly Drive and that 7 out of 10 cars don't stop at the stop sign on that
corner. She said it is really dangerous with all the traffic so she would like to see less
traffic go through that area.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
November 23, 2009
Page 8
David Comb, 1300 Douglas Drive, said he is concerned about the 3-lane roadway being
proposed because there will be one lane of continuous traffic at all times. He said that
proposing high density with fewer traffic lanes concerns him.
Charles Ostrov, 1788 Maryland Avenue North, said the traffic patterns getting from
Olympia and all the side streets onto Douglas are a problem. He said he has observed
that the traffic problems on Olympia started when Plymouth Avenue was closed.
Chip Johnson, 2417 Douglas Drive, said he is concerned about converting four lanes to
three lanes especially when it rains or snows and suggested traffic be diverted to other
areas.
Michelle Jorgenson, 1035 Sumter Avenue North, said she is also concerned about traffic.
She said that it is really hard to get to TH 55 on Douglas from Golden Valley Road
already and more traffic would make it worse.
Seeing and hearing no one else wishing to speak Keysser closed the public hearing.
Kluchka asked staff to address the three lane road configuration, the impact to traffic and
the railroad crossing issue. Clancy stated that the three lane design is being considered
for a number of reasons. One is because Transit for Livable Communities (TLC) is
potentially providing the City funding for some improvements. She explained that the City
and the County are trying to collaborate to find a design that will work for Douglas Drive
and will intrude the least on the neighborhood so when the improvements are made the
City won't have to purchase right-of-way to build a larger roadway than what would be
necessary. Another reason for looking at the three lane design is that four lane, undivided
roadways tend to cause speeds to increase and are harder for police to manage in terms
of traffic control. They also tend to have higher speed limits placed on them than three
lane roads have. She stated that the City is trying to accommodate the existing traffic,
encourage the users of the roadway to drive the speed limit, accommodate pedestrians
and accommodate the turning movements that are needed. She discussed other four lane
roadways that were converted to three lane roads and the positive feedback the changes
in striping has had. She explained that Golden Valley does not want to build an
improvement that causes traffic to divert onto neighborhood streets or onto other county
roads. She explained that Douglas Drive is considered to be a minor arterial and is
considered by the Metropolitan Council to be a reliever to traffic problems on Highway
100. She added that Hennepin County is comfortable with the three lane road design
given the volume of 11,000 to 12,000 vehicles per day. She stated that the issue of the
railroad crossing is still being studied.
Keysser asked about a three lane roadway accommodating 15,000 vehicles per day as
suggested in the study. Clancy stated that Hennepin County's comfort level is probably
conservative and the three lane roadway could accommodate 15,000 vehicles per day.
Waldhauser asked if am and pm traffic has been considered. Clancy said it is considered
on a traffic distribution basis and there will be peak periods of congestion. Grimes noted
that Douglas Drive south of Golden Valley Road will remain a four lane roadway.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
November 23, 2009
Page 9
Clancy referred to the intersection of Douglas Drive and Golden Valley Road and said she
is also concerned about the free right turn lane. She said the safety issue at that
intersection will be addressed as part of a long term project. She referred to the question
asked about the costs of the project and the assessments to the property owners. She
stated that a very preliminary estimate for the construction costs for the project from TH
55 to Medicine Lake Road will be approximately 18 to 20 million dollars. She explained
that Hennepin County will pay for most of the roadway construction costs, the City will pay
a portion of the sidewalk improvements and the City is responsible for extending and
upgrading the utility systems. She explained that the City is working with the County
regarding funding and is looking at several different funding opportunities including TLC
funds and federal funds. She discussed the City's assessing policy and stated that
assessment values have not yet been determined.
Grimes asked Clancy about the County's schedule to reconstruct Douglas Drive. Clancy
explained that it is on the County's schedule for 2016-2017.
Clancy referred to the questions regarding Bassett Creek water quality and stated that all
property owners during redevelopment will have to follow the Watershed's requirements
will be responsible for water quality treatment.
Kluchka asked about limiting traffic overflow and the concerns about traffic. Clancy
explained that Olympia Street is a state aid street and carries approximately 1,500
vehicles per day which is considered to be a reasonable volume for a state aid or
collector street. She said she doesn't see anything in the study that would divert traffic
into any neighborhoods.
Keysser asked Grimes to address the questions regarding high density. Grimes stated
that study shows the Douglas Drive Apartment properties at about the same density. The
other side of Douglas Drive is all single family homes could double in density which would
mean there could be 40 units of housing instead of 20 single family homes. Waldhauser
stated that the Douglas Drive Study Committee wants any development to be an
enhancement to the adjacent residential areas and they want higher density to be a good
thing for the neighborhood, not a detriment. .
Kluchka asked why higher density is a good idea. Schroeder said the City won't get
redevelopment opportunities if it redevelops with the same amount of density that is there
today. He stated that the term "high density" in this case means higher density than what
currently exists today. Kluchka asked about what developer's interest might be in the
properties in the corridor if the density were to remain the same. Schroeder stated there
would be no interest from developers if the density stays the same. Kluchka asked about
the Metropolitan Council expectations for density in Golden Valley. Grimes stated that the
Metropolitan Council is projecting growth of approximately 3,000 to 4,000 more people
which equates to approximately 1,500 to 2,000 new households which will most likely be
accommodated in multi-family housing. Some of which is designated along the 1-394
Corridor and some of which is in the Douglas Drive Corridor. Schroeder added that
people also want a variety of housing choices. Kluchka asked if the City should be
worried about the perceived problems related to high density housing. Grimes stated that
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
November 23, 2009
Page 10
in his experience, owner occupied housing units have not been a problem and in fact offer
people an opportunity to stay in Golden Valley. Schroeder added that the problems
typically associated with multi-family housing tend to be connected to bad management.
Kluchka asked about the cost of this study. Grimes stated that the study cost
approximately $100,000 and approximately $50,000 was received in grant money.
Kluchka asked how much implementation will cost and who will pay for it. Schroeder
explained that the primary source of funding for redevelopment is tax increment financing
or tax abatement. He stated that there is usually some combination of grant money and
developer capital tied with city resources. Grimes added that much of the upgrading of
Douglas Drive will be paid for by Hennepin County. Kluchka asked about the costs for
developing the land, not the road. Grimes stated at this point in time the City is not going
to acquire property and sell it back to developers. Tax increment is most likely what would
be used for any redevelopment. He added that the plan is just a way to show developers
the City's vision for the corridor.
Kluchka referred to the questions asked by residents regarding remodeling their homes
and planning for any future redevelopment. Schroeder stated that properties, as they are
acquired, would be acquired based on fair market value through an appraisal or through
the uniform relocation act which is a mandated process used to define what the
acquisition price will be. He suggests to people in redevelopment areas not let their
properties decline, particularly in an area that looks out over 20 years for redevelopment
and doesn't predict when redevelopment will happen. The value of the property is based
on the condition of the property when it is acquired so it is worth it for property owners to
maintain and improve their property. He discussed the federally mandated process for
property acquisition when a city is involved in purchasing properties and suggested
residents talk to real estate professionals or appraisal acquisition experts to help with
improvement decisions.
Grimes discussed the changes that have occurred since the mid-1980s in the 1-394
corridor. He stated that no property in that corridor has been devalued and in fact property
values have been enhanced.
Kluchka said he is interested in knowing if developments are helped or hindered by these
planning studies. Keysser said he thinks within the next 20 years the market will change
significantly.
Kluchka asked how the Douglas Drive Corridor Study addresses maintaining residential
character along the corridor and the potential impact to neighboring property. Schroeder
stated that the intention is to use redevelopment to create a higher level of amenity, not
only to the corridor but to the neighborhoods near the corridor. He stated that the study
also tries to stabilize the negative impacts of the roadways and create character that
encourages more walking and more movement and enhances the image of the corridor
while still feeling residential in character.
McCarty referred to the northeast corner of Douglas Drive and Golden Valley Road and
asked how the study addresses that area. Schroeder stated that area differs from the
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
November 23, 2009
Page 11
Comprehensive Plan which suggests a multi-family use. Grimes stated that the
Comprehensive Plan designates that area as high density.
Grimes referred to the concern heard earlier about 6-story buildings in the Douglas Drive
Corridor and stated that they would be located only along TH 55. Schroeder agreed and
added that every other area is either 3 or 4 story, multi-family buildings.
McCarty said he thinks the study is very well thought out but he is not convinced that the
idea of front yards facing Douglas Drive will work, especially for families with children.
Grimes agreed that wouldn't be the typical choice for families with children. It is probably
more appropriate for single people or families without children.
Schmidgall said he would cheerfully live in the community that is depicted in the study. He
said he understands that 25 years from now the community will look different than what
has been depicted because the study is a starting off point or guideline. He said it is an
excellent plan that involved wide participation by members of community and it is an
excellent direction for the future of this area.
MOVED by Schmidgall, seconded by Eck and motion carried unanimously to recommend
the adoption of the Douglas Drive Corridor study as a part of the Special Planning
Districts chapter of the Comprehensive Plan.
--Short Recess--
6. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City
Council, Board of Zoning Appeals and other Meetings
Kluchka stated that the District 281 Divestiture Committee has continued to meet and
discuss options for the district's properties.
7. Other Business
No other business was discussed.
8. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 9:35 pm.
Lester Eck, Secretary
Golden Valley Human Services Foundation (GVHSF) Meeting
Minutes
October 12, 2009
Present: Dan Blumb, Hilmer Erickson, Elissa Heilicher, Brenda McGhie, Diane Nimmer, Connie
Sandler, Steve Schumacher and Toots Vodovoz. Also present Jeanne Fackler, Staff Liaison.
Not Present: Gloria Johnson and Chris Monroe.
Call to Order: Chairman Blumb called the meeting to order at 6:38 p.m.
September 14 minutes: Erickson moved and Sandler seconded the motion to approve the
minutes of September 14. The motion passed unanimously.
Allocation of Funds:
After much discussion, Heilicher moved and Nimmer seconded the motion to recommend the
following allocations to the City Council:
Northwest Suburban Dinner At Your Door $5,000
Crisis Connection $1,500
Community Mediation Services $1,500
Greater Minneapolis Crisis Nursery $7,500
TreeHouse $5,000
Home Free $2,500
PRISM $5,000
Senior Community Services Outreach $2,500
Senior Community Services HOME $5,000
Northwest YMCA $5,000
For a total of $40,500. Funding requests from The Bridge for Youth and LOA Minnesota were
denied. Motion passed unanimously.
Members would like to review the application and make possible changes emphasizing the
service and impact to Golden Valley residents by the agency.
Taste of Golden Valley:
Members are following up with restaurants. Commitments from Kips Irish Pub, Olive Garden,
Noodles and Company and Perkins. Perpich students will entertain from 5:30-6 PM Tim Mahoney
is being confirmed. Dan Wascoe is available, if needed. Several silent auction items have been
donated including Viking tickets, signed guitars, golf basket and night at Holiday Inn Express.
McGhie passed out publicity contacts. Vodovoz will contact volunteer groups as needed. Baskets
will be put together with a tentative date of November 5th.
Other Business:
Vodovoz presented fund-raising information from Perkins. The manager of Perkins will send
information to Vodovoz for the GVHSF to review.
Members felt it was not necessary to meet in November or December.
Adjournment: Sandler moved to adjourn the meeting, Erickson seconded the motion. The
meeting was adjourned at 8:07 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Jeanne Fackler
GVHSF Staff Liaison
Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission
Minutes of the Meeting of November 18, 2009
1. Call to Order
The Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission (BCWMC) was called to order at 11:40 a.m.,
Wednesday, November 18,2009, at Golden Valley City Hall by Chair Welch. Ms. Herbert conducted roll
call.
Roll Call
Crystal
Golden Valley
Medicine Lake
Minneapolis
Minnetonka
New Hope
Plymouth
Robbinsdale
St. Louis Park
Also present:
Commissioner Pauline Langsdorf, Secretary
Commissioner Linda Loomis, Treasurer
Alternate Commissioner Ted Hoshal
Commissioner Michael Welch, Chair
Commissioner Kris Sundberg
Alternate Commissioner John Elder
Commissioner Ginny Black
Not represented
Commissioner Jim deLambert
Counsel
Engineer
Recorder
Charlie LeFevere
Karen Chandler
Amy Herbert
Derek Asche, BCWMC Technical Advisory Committee, City of Plymouth
Alye Bohn, City of Golden Valley intern
Jack Frost, Metropolitan Council
Dave Hanson, Alternate Commissioner, City of Golden Valley
Tom Mathisen, BCWMC Technical Advisory Committee, City of Crystal
Jeff Oliver, BCWMC Technical Advisory Committee, City of Golden Valley
Stu Stockhaus, Alternate Commissioner, City of Crystal
Liz Stout, BCWMC Technical Advisory Committee, City of Minnetonka
Liz Thornton, Alternate Commissioner, City of Plymouth
2. Approval of Agenda and Consent Agenda
Ms. Black moved to approve the agenda as amended. Ms. Loomis seconded the motion. The motion
carried unanimously [City of Robbinsdale absent from the vote]. Chair Welch requested the removal of
the October 15, 2009, meeting minutes and the November financial report from the Consent Agenda and
announced that there is no need to take action on the Consent Agenda. Chair Welch introduced the New
Hope Alternate Commissioner John Elder, who will be taking over the Commissioner role on February
1st.
3. Citizen Input on Non-Agenda Items
No citizen input on non~agenda items.
4. Administration
A. Presentation of the October 15, 2009, BCWMC meeting minutes. Chair Welch requested on behalf
of Commissioner Langsdorf that the meeting minutes be amended on page 6, second to last
paragraph, third sentence to read, "She said he responded that when included as part of a larger
project application that funding would rank higher if there was a component of public outreach."
Ms. Black moved to approve the minutes as amended. Ms. Loomis seconded the motion. The
motion carried unanimously [City of Robbinsdale absent from the vote].
B. Presentation of the Financial Statement Chair Welch stated he removed the rmancial report from
the Consent Agenda so the Commission would take a few minutes to review it since the
Commission is approximately three.fourths of the way through its rlScal year. Chair Welch noted
the amount of permit reveuue received to.date is lower than anticipated and reflects the economy.
Chair Welch asked Ms. Chandler to look at the amounts remaining in the Engineering water
quality/ monitoring budget and Engineering Administration budget and asked if there are water
quality/ monitoring expenses that haven't yet been billed to the BCWMC. Ms. Chandler said Barr
will be reviewing the monitoring data and writing the reports. Chair Welch stated that if the
Administration costs run over budget then the BCWMC would want an explanation.
Ms. Loomis announced that the date for non-interest bearing accounts being FDIC secured has
been extended to 2013. Ms. Loomis also mentioned that the BCWMC may want to consider during
its 2011 budget process using financial incentives for residents to encourage installation of Best
Management Practices (BMPs) as part of the TMDL implementation process. Chair Welch stated
that the Commission would receive and me the financial report.
The general and construction account balances reported in the November 2009 Financial Report
are as follows:
Checking Account Balance
TOTAL GENERAL FUND BALANCE
509,057.25
509,057.25
Construction Account Cash Balance
Investment due 10/18/2010
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION ACCOUNT BALANCE
-Less: Reserved for CIP projects
Construction cash/ investments available for projects
2,635,670.77
533,957.50
3,169,628.27
3,256,699.00
(87,070.73)
C. Presentation of Invoices for Payment Approval.
Invoices:
i. Kennedy & Graven - Legal Services through September 30, 2009 . invoice for
the amount of $2,564.90.
ii. Barr Engineering Company - September Engineering Services. invoice for the
amount of $28,329.33.
iii. Amy Herbert - October Recording Administrator Services - invoice for the
amount of $3,272.62.
iv. Judy Arginteanu - Contract for three watershed education articles in 2009.
invoice for the amount of $900.00.
v. City of New Hope - Final reimbursement for Northwood East Sediment Pond
- request in the amount of $10,754.14.
vi. SEH, Inc. - Review of St. Louis Park Local Water Management Plan.
$1,200.00.
Ms. Loomis moved to approve the payment of the invoices. Ms. Black seconded the motion. By call
of roll, the motion carried unanimously with seven votes in favor [City of New Hope abstained
from the vote. City of Robbinsdale absent from the vote].
D. The Open Meeting Law and E-Mail. Mr. LeFevere said the League of Minnesota Cities
#249441 vI
BCWMC November IS, 2009 Meeting Minutes
2
Insurance Trust (LMCIT) Open Meeting Law policy is a good guideline for the Commission to
keep in mind. He stated that the Open Meeting Law also applies to BCWMC committees. Mr.
LeFevere reminded the Commission that an e-mail communication involving a quorum of the
Commission may be a violation of the Open Meeting Law. Mr. LeFevere advised the
Commission that if the members have an electronic communication that is more than a one-to-
one person communication, the communication should be funneled to Ms. Herbert and she can
pass it on and can also consult with Mr. LeFevere with respect to Open Meeting Law
guidelines.
Chair Welch remarked that the BCWMC doesn't really have a set of governance policies and
he thinks the Commission should review whether it needs some in place. He said that he has
asked staff to look at background information on a records retention policy, which the
Commission does not have but needs to have. Chair Welch pointed out that one-on-one
electronic communication forwarded ahead to one, then again to one, and then again to one is
a violation of the Open Meeting Law. Mr. LeFevere reminded the Commission that a few
years ago it did add Open Meeting Law insurance to provide some, although limited,
protection in case of a violation of the Open Meeting Law. He said that however, a lengthy
lawsuit that is won isn't better than not having to go through the lawsuit in the first place.
Chair Welch said the best practice for the Commission is to route things though Ms. Herbert.
Mr. LeFevere reminded the Commission to use him as a resource for questions. Ms. Langsdorf
asked if she should send out committee meeting agendas through Ms. Herbert. Chair Welch
said it would be best because otherwise it would be easy for someone to receive the e-mail,
reply to all, and begin a discussion that way. Mr. LeFevere mentioned that related to the Data
Practices Act, e-mail communications are subject to recovery as public data.
5. New Business
A. Presentation by Alye Bohn on her thesis "BASSETT CREEK: PERCEPTIONS OF AN
URBAN STREAM: Discovering why Bassett Creek developed as it did and resident
perceptions today." Ms. Alye Bohn, a current intern with the City of Golden Valley, presented to
the Commission her spring 2009 undergraduate senior honors thesis "Bassett Creek: Perceptions
of an Urban Stream: Discovering why Bassett Creek developed as it did and resident perceptions
today". Ms. Bohn described her research process including a 21-question mailed survey sent to
residents through a random selection based on Hennepin County tax parcel data. She shared the
historical information she had gathered about the creek including its physical geography, early
settlement and development, and urbanization. Ms. Bohn discussed the data she received from the
51 completed or partially completed surveys out of the 161 surveys received via mail by residents.
She highlighted that 95 % of the respondents believed that Bassett Creek is an important
environmental element in the community. Ms. Bohn summarized that respondents show a high
concern and interest for the creek and its surroundings and the five important factors residents
base their perceptions of the creek on are recreation, scenery, water quality, participation, and
maintenance.
Following the presentation the Commission discussed whether Bassett Creek historical
information is archived and the Commission recommended that the Education Committee discuss
the topic and bring ideas back to the Commission at some point.
6. Old Business
A. Administrative Services Committee Update on Request for Proposals. Chair Welch clarified
that the request for proposals is for administrative services tasks. He reported that the Committee
3
#249441 vI
BCWMC November 18, 2009 Meeting Minutes
has meet with Springsted, Inc., who is contracted with the BCWMC to develop a scope of services
for the administrative tasks. Ms. Black reported that she has spoken with Springsted, Inc. who will
be sending the Committee a draft scope of services either today or tomorrow. Ms. Black said the
Administrative Services Committee will meet after Thanksgiving to discuss the draft scope of
services and will bring the draft scope and the Committee's comments to the Commission at the
December meeting.
B. Resource Management Plan. Chair Welch provided the background of the Resource
Management Plan (RMP). He said the Commission packaged a number of projects together for
the purpose of preliminary permitting with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Army Corps).
Chair Welch said the process for getting the RMP approved by the Army Corps is coming to a
close and two agencies responded as part of the public comment process.
Ms. Chandler said the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) commented as did the
Minnesota Historical Society. She said the DNR letter had specific comments and addressed three
projects in particular and its concern about the proposed excavation for storm water ponds in
wetlands. Ms. Chandler explained that the Grimes Pond and Wirth Lake ponds are probably not
going to end up being projects in the long run. She stated that the City of Robbinsdale is
considering eliminating the Grimes Pond project and the Wirth Lake TMDL as it is currently
being crafted calls for the modification of the Wirth Lake outlet, which will eliminate the need for
the pond. Ms. Chandler said a response would be needed only for the proposed pond in the Main
Stem Watershed. She said the DNR also commented regarding the use of specific design principles
for stream restoration projects. Ms. Chandler said the Commission Engineer recommends
responding to comments from the Army Corps and also to the comments from the DNR.
Chair Welch said he was glad the Commission heard from the DNR. He said one of the values of
the RMP proved itself already with this letter in the fact that the DNR now knows what the
BCWMC has in mind in terms of future projects. Chair Welch said the Commission could work
with the DNR on how to modify the idea or design before the Commission spends money on the
feasibility study or capital project.
Chair Welch said the Historical Society letter refers to a review process that is very long and
costly. He said the Commission needs to decide how to proceed. Chair Welch suggested the
Commission begin to assess the costs of a cultural 106 review and to have at least a telephone
conference if not a sit down conference with the Army Corps regarding the area of possible effects
and next steps. Ms. Chandler said that Barr had hired a firm to conduct the first level of a cultural
review for the RMP. Mr. LeFevere suggested that Barr call the consultant before calling the Corps
or the Historical Society since the consultant may have some ideas on how to frame the issues.
Chair Welch asked Ms. Chandler to make a phone call to that f'mn to ask about what the
Commission's next steps would be and then to contact the Army Corps to set up a discussion. He
said he is willing to participate in the discussion with the Army Corps and Mr. deLambert also
volunteered to participate in the discussion with the Army Corps. Ms. Chandler said that Barr can
contact the f'mn and ask about the next steps and get back to the Commission and can also contact
the Army Corps.
C. Comments on Medicine Lake TMDL Public Meeting. Chair Welch reported that based on
the Medicine Lake Steering Committee and the public meeting the MPCA is redoing the draft
TMDL, which the MPCA thought would be ready by now. He said the TAC didn't want to spend
time reviewing the draft until it is in its final form but said it could hold a special meeting to
review the draft TMDL if the Commission concurs. Chair Welch reported that Joel Settles of
Hennepin County indicated that the County is interested in being part of the categorical wasteload
allocation.
4
#249441 vI
BCWMC November 18, 2009 Meeting Minutes
Chair Welch stated that the Commission should consider whether it wants to communicate to the
MPCA before it finishes the next draft. He said the TAC is not interested in doing so and would
rather see how the MPCA handles the comments the Commission and other stakeholders have
already provided. Chair Welch remarked that there is a lot that still needs to be figured out. He
said there is concern about the aspect that the draft TMDL states that the internal load will be
zero. Chair Welch said that issue is the one he thinks the Commission should consider whether or
not it wants to comment on prior to the MPCA finishing the next TMDL draft. He said he thinks
the Commission may want to comment on the issue before it agrees to the assumption of zero
internal load. Chair Welch asked the Commission if it wants to communicate to the MPCA right
now or to wait for the draft TMDL. The Commission agreed it wanted to comment on the draft
once it is received. Chair Welch stated that the Chair and staff will work together to convene a
TAC meeting as soon as the Commission receives the draft TMDL from the MPCA and the TAC
will provide the input to the Commission at either the December or January BCWMC meeting.
Mr. Oliver said that even if the City and the members of the categorical wasteload allocation
remove the majority of the phosphorus assigned, Medicine Lake still won't meet its goal once the
wind blows. He said the City is concerned that the MPCA through the MS4 permits will come
back and say the cities did not meet their allocation goals and that it will cost the cities many more
millions of dollars to follow up. Mr. Oliver said the City of Golden Valley wants a commitment
from the MPCA that it will be measured solely on the efforts for the source load rather than the
internal load and that the MPCA cannot put restrictions on permits because of internal loading.
Mr. Oliver said he thinks the cities, the MS4s, and the Commission should do anything it can to get
assurances from the MPCA.
Mr. LeFevere suggested that the Commission could acknowledge that the plan is based on a
premise that is untested and probably false and that it is seeking assurance that the cities wouldn't
be pushed to achieve goals that aren't realistic. Chair Welch reminded the Commission that it isn't
an MS4 and the Commission's comments shouldn't preclude the cities from submitting their own
comments even though as a Joint Powers organization the cities and the Commission can
coordinate its comments.
Chair Welch said the Commission may consider developing a cost share program that would offer
residents money for implementing best management practices. He said he thinks the Commission
will need a steering committee that meets four to six times a year as a way for the Commission to
manage the TMDL implementation activities.
Chair Welch said the clear direction is for staff to work with him and the T AC to generate
comments on the draft TMDL for Commission review and he will contact the MPCA to rmd out
when the Commission can expect to receive the draft and if an MPCA representative would be
available to attend the Commission's January meeting to provide an update.
[Mr. Elder and Ms. Sundberg depart meeting.]
D. Mississippi River E. coli Study. Chair Welch said that Ms. Loomis brought up at a previous
BCWMC meeting the option of asking the MPCA to include Bassett Creek in the Mississippi River
E. coli TMDL. He said he spoke with the MPCA and said the Commission would want to see the
plan clearly dermed regarding how it would work between the Commission and the MPCA and
that the Commission would want it to be a collaborative process. Chair Welch said then he heard
that Barb Peichel of the MPCA reported that Bassett Creek has been added to the Mississippi
River E. coli TMDL study.
Ms. Chandler reported that the additional E. coli monitoring doesn't fit the grant opportunity
because there is enough data already collected for the stream to be listed as impaired even though
5
#249441 vI
BCWMC November 18, 2009 Meeting Minutes
the TMDL is not underway.
Chair Welch directed staff to contact Ms. Peichel and let her know that the Commission would
like the MPCA to provide for the Commission's December meeting packet a memo describing
how the Commission's E. coli TMDL would fit in with the Mississippi River TMDL.
E. Grants Update. Ms. Chandler reported that at the last month's BCWMC meeting, the
Commission discussed applying for the MN Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR) Clean
Water Fund Grants for three projects including a Plymouth pond project upstream of Northwood
Lake. She said that after talking with the City of Plymouth staff about the project, she and the
City staff agreed the project would have a better chance of being awarded grant funding next year
when the feasibility study would be complete. She said she is going ahead with the assumption that
the Commission wants to move forward with the grant application for the two channel restoration
projects and just needs to know how much the Commission would like to apply for in its grant
application. Ms. Chandler said she recommends asking for $200,000 to $300,000 per project.
Chair Welch moved for staff to apply for $300,000 of grant funding for the Plymouth Creek
restoration project and for $200,000 for the Main Stem restoration project. Ms. Black seconded
the motion. The motion carried unanimously with six votes in favor [Cities of Minnetonka, New
Hope, and Robbinsdale absent from the vote].
F. TAC Recommendations. The Commission agreed that if the TAC decides it needs a February
meeting that it should be able to schedule one. Chair Welch stated that the TAC should consider
outlining a strategy of how to assess the CIP project maintenance costs and how to consider the
maintenance issues as part of the CIP project assessment. Ms. Black recommended the TAC also
consider what costs the Commission would need to add into its operating budget.
G. Education and Public Outreach Committee: Amending Contract with Writer. Chair Welch
moved to approve amending the BCWMC's contract with Judy Arginteanu to increase the
amount by $300. Mr. deLambert seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously [Cities of
Minnetonka, New Hope, and Robbinsdale absent from the vote].
7. Communications
A. Chair:
i. Chair Welch reported that the Commission participated in a project in St. Louis Park and the
project was completed for less than the amount the Commission had budgeted for the project.
He said the Westwood Hills Nature Center asked the Commission to contribute $3,000 towards
educational signage about the project and the Commission approved the contribution. Chair
Welch said that the signage project had not been pursued until this month when a contact
from the nature center asked if the Commission's $3,000 is still available for the project. Chair
Welch said that Mr. LeFevere has looked at it to make sure there were no timing issues
regarding when the funds needed to be spent and it looks like there are no issues. He said Ms.
Herbert will make sure the BCWMC still has access to those funds.
ii. Chair Welch announced that the Met Council has contacted the BCWMC to ask it to conduct
FLUX modeling on the WOMP station data. Chair Welch asked Ms. Chandler if the issue
could wait until the December BCWMC meeting. She said it could. Chair Welch directed staff
to prepare a memo on the item. Ms. Black asked that staff include in the memo information
regarding whether it would be a one-time expense or recurring and also why the BCWMC is
being asked for this now when it hasn't been asked to participate previously.
B. Commissioners: No communications.
#249441 vI
BCWMC November 18,2009 Meeting Minutes
6
C. Committees: Education Committee:
i. Ms. Langsdorf announced that NEMO (Nonpoint Education for Municipal Officials) is
interested in having watersheds participate with them as partners at no cost to the watersheds.
Ms. Langsdorf said the deadline for signing up to participate is December 31, 2009, and that
she will bring it up as an agenda item at the December meeting.
n. She mentioned that NEMO has board games that are educational tools about watersheds and
lakes and that she believes that the games it would be useful for lake associations, planning
commissions, and city councils. She said the games and related educational activities take 1.5
to 2 hours to complete and require a facilitator.
ill. Ms. Langsdorf said the Joint Education and Public Outreach Committee (Joint EPOC) has the
first draft of its outreach plan. She reported that the next Joint EPOC meeting will be on
Tuesday, December 8th at 8:30 a.m. at Plymouth City Hall.
iv. Ms. Langsdorf reported that the next BCWMC Education Committee meeting will be at 9:00
a.m. on Friday, December 4th at Plymouth City Hall.
v. Mr. Stockhaus reported that seven teachers are conf"mned for the focus group so far.
vi. Ms. Langsdorf stated that the BCWMC Education Committee participated in the
Meadowbrook Fall Festival.
vii. Ms. Langsdorf requested that staff post the education articles written by Judy Arginteanu on
the BCWMC Web site.
viii. Ms. Langsdorf announced that the Education Committee is investigating alternative Web site
hosts for the Commission's Web site.
D. Counsel: No communications.
E. Engineer:
i. Ms. Chandler reported that Barr sent the memo included in the meeting packet to the
Association of Medicine Lake Area Citizens regarding Medicine Lake water levels and the
outlet structure.
9. Adjournment
Ms. Black moved to adjourn the meeting. Ms. Loomis seconded the motion. The motion carried
unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 2:20 p.m.
Michael Welch, Chair
Date
Amy Herbert, Recorder
Date
Pauline Langsdorf, Secretary
Date
7
#249441 vI
BCWMC November 18, 2009 Meeting Minutes
alley
M 0
Park and Recreation
763-512-2342 I 763-512-2344 (fax)
Executive Summary For Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
January 19,2010
Agenda Item
3. E. 1. Bids - Golf Carts
Prepared By
Rick Jacobson, Director of Parks and Recreation
Greg Spencer, Golf Course Superintendent
Summary
The 2010-2014 Capital Improvement Program GC-009 (page 67) includes $165,000 for the
purchase of sixty golf carts for Brookview Golf Course. Sealed bids were received and
opened on Tuesday, January 12. Financing options will be presented at the February 3, 2010
City Council Meeting.
The following is a summary of the bids received:
Yamaha Golf & Utility Inc.
Cost 60 carts
Trade Allowance
Net Price
$ 233,700
$ (98,700)
$ 135,000
$ 224,340
$ (73,450)
$ 150,890
Versatile Vehicle Inc.
Cost 60 carts
Trade Allowance
Net Price
Recommended Action
Motion to approve the purchase of sixty golf carts and trade in Brookview's current fleet of
fifty golf carts, from the lowest responsible bidder, Yamaha Golf & Utility Inc. for a net price of
$135,000.
alley
Memorand m
City Administration/Council
763-593-8002/763-593-8109 (fax)
Executive Summary For Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
January 19, 2010
Agenda Item
3. E. 2. Quotes - City Newsletter Printing/Mail Handling
Prepared By
Cheryl Weiler, Communications Coordinator
Summary
Because of its solid editorial focus and publishing strategy, CityNews has long been one of
Golden Valley's strongest communications tools. The successful editorial strategy focuses on
educating citizens about City services and includes educational pieces about service-related
topics (eg, environmental, personal safety, citizen involvement, etc) that enhance quality of
life for individuals and the community as a whole. This user-friendly package enhances the
City image and increases community awareness. The budget for 2010 is $26,000, which
includes printing plus $4,584 for mail handling costs (but not postage).
CityNews is mailed bulk rate to around 11,500 homes and businesses. All writing, editing,
design, and prepress production is done in-house. An electronic file is provided to the printer
for output and printing.
Ten printers submitted quotes in response to the newsletter's current specifications aimed at
providing the City with the highest quality at lowest cost.
Printer
The John Roberts Company
Leffler Printing
Express Press
Brooklyn Printing
Church Offset Printing
Nystrom Publishing
Universal Printing
MLB Printing
The John Roberts Company
Express Press
Custom Business Forms
Universal Printing
The John Roberts Company
Presswrite Printing & Design
Quote (6 Issues)
$19,320 (did not bid specified paper stock)
$19,788
$19,894.80 (did not bid specified paper stock)
$21,750
$22,134
$22,147.92
$22,200 (did not bid specified paper stock)
$22,350 (did not bid specified paper stock)
$22,380
$22,852.50
$23,640
$24,318
$24,708
$27,000
Recommended Action
Motion to authorize the printing and mail handling for six issues of the City newsletter from
January 2010 through January 2011 to the lowest responsible bidder, Leffler Printing for
$19,788.
alley
M morand m
Fire Department
763-593-8079 I 763-593-8098 (fax)
Executive Summary for Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
January 19, 2010
Agenda Item
3. F. Authorization to Sign Consulting Agreement Amendment Three with Center for Energy
and Environment Consulting for Housing Rehabilitation Program
Prepared By
Mark Kuhnly, Chief of Fire & Inspections
Summary
The Center for Energy and Environment (CEE) has provided assistance since 2007 to
Golden Valley homeowners interested in home improvement. In 2009, this service was made
available to homeowners participating in the newly developed Neighbors Helping Neighbors
Program. During 2007, CEE provided twenty-nine (29) on-site building analyses, in 2008
provided thirty-four (34), and in 2009 provided seventy-seven (77).
During the on-site analyses, CEE remodeling advisors meet with homeowners at their home
for 1-2 hours, inspecting the home, offering advice regarding remodeling or maintenance
projects, reviewing contractor estimates and answering questions the homeowners may have
regarding their home and projects. CEE additionally offers home improvement financing to
homeowners in Golden Valley.
The 2010 agreement remains as written in the original agreement except for extension of the
effective date through December 31, 2010. The 2010 budget includes $7,500 for this
program.
Attachment
Amendment Three to the Consulting Agreement (1 page)
Recommended Action
Motion to authorize the Mayor and City Manager to sign Amendment Three to the Consulting
Agreement with the Center for Energy and Environment.
AMENDMENT THREE to the CONSULTING AGREEMENT
Between
CENTER FOR ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT
And
CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY
(Golden Valley Rehabilitation Program)
The Agreement, made the 16th day of January, 2007, by and between the CITY OF GOLDEN
V ALLEY, with offices at 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, MN 55427 ("City"), and
the CENTER FOR ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT, a 501 (c)(3) non-profit corporation, with
its offices at 212 3rd Avenue North, Suite 560, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 ("CEE") is hereby
amended.
Section 4. Term and Termination of the agreement shall read:
4.1
Unless earlier terminated as provided in the following paragraphs, this Agreement shall
become effective on January 1, 2007 and continue through December 31, 2010.
All other sections of the contract shall remain as written in the original agreement.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereunder set their hands as of the date written below:
CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY
Mayor
By
Date
iDEe 2 B -
Date
By
TAX ID 41-1647799
City Manager
Date
T:\Admln\Contracts\ACTlVE\CEE Financial Resources\Golden Valley\Golden Valley CBA Amend 3 CEE 1169.doc
12/28/2009
olderiValley
M 0 nd
Finance
763-593-8013/763-593-8109 (fax)
Executive Summary For Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
January 19, 2010
Agenda Item
3. G. Support for Administrative Fee Increase for Deputy Registrars
Prepared By
Sue Virnig, Finance Director
Steve Dahlberg, Deputy Registrar Supervisor
Summary
Minnesota Deputy Registrars Association (MORA) is asking for support from the 173 license
bureaus throughout the state to raise the fee on each transaction by $1.50. This fee has not
been increased since 2001. Over the years, the State has captured 30% of our tab renewal
due to internet transactions and direct mail options. Those options have left Golden Valley
with a limited market.
Attachments
Resolution Supporting a Fee Increase for Deputy Registrars (1 page)
Recommended Action
Motion.to adopt Resolution Supporting a Fee Increase for Deputy Registrars.
Resolution 10-8
January 19, 2010
Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION SUPPORTING A FEE INCREASE FOR DEPUTY REGISTRARS
WHEREAS, the State of Minnesota established a public/private deputy registrar
system to provide citizens convenient locations to conduct title registration services for
motor vehicles and DNR recreational vehicles; and,
WHEREAS, the State of Minnesota in 1949 established a user service fee on motor
vehicle transactions to be retained by the deputy registrar to defray the cost of providing
the local service; and,
WHEREAS, the State of Minnesota has shifted increased costs and responsibilities
onto the deputy registrar such as regular replacement schedules of computers and
associated electronic equipment, printing of previously supplied state forms, and expanded
auditing tasks with additional risks and potential liability that was previously the
responsibility of the State; and,
WHEREAS, the State of Minnesota now competes with deputy registrar offices for
the retention of some user fees that were traditionally retained primarily by deputy
registrars; and,
WHEREAS, collectively the deputy registrar system handles over one billion dollars
of state funds for the State of Minnesota annually on a cash basis only with considerable
risk whereby dishonored checks are the responsibility of the deputy registrar in the full
amount rendered after remitting the bulk of those funds to the State; and,
WHEREAS, the deputy registrar administrative fee is a user service fee that should
fully support the cost for providing motor vehicle transactions; and,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Golden Valley agrees with
the Minnesota Deputy Registrars Association in supporting the State Legislature to
authorize the acceptance of more secure alternative payments at deputy registrar offices;
and to achieve a greater retention of existing fees or a user service fee increase in the year
2010 to maintain local title and registration service to the citizens of Minnesota.
Linda R. Loomis, Mayor
ATTEST:
Susan M. Virnig, City Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was seconded by Member
and upon a vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted, signed by the Mayor
and her signature attested by the City Clerk.
Da
alley
Public Works
763-593-8030 I 763-593-3988 (fax)
Executive Summary For Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
January 19, 2010
Agenda Item
3. H. Authorize Participation in the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant
Application Process
Prepared By
Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works
Mitchell Hoeft, Engineer
Summary
American Reinvestment and Recovery Act of 2009 grant money has been made available
through the Minnesota Department of Commerce Office of Energy Security for updating
municipalities with energy efficient fixtures. The maximum amount of funding that the City
can receive with this grant is $100,000. It is a competitive grant process that focuses on
energy savings, job retention, and reducing emissions. The grant application is due
January 25, 2010.
Current projects that the City would like to request funding include installation of energy
efficient lighting systems in the Golf Maintenance, Vehicle Maintenance, and Park
Maintenance Buildings. The City will also request funding for a new radiant heating system
in the Golf Maintenance Building. The City will also add the conversion of incandescent to
LED signal lighting changes to the City traffic signals up to the $100,000 grant limit in its
application.
Attachments
Resolution Authorizing Participation in the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant
Process (1 page)
Office of Energy Security Request for Proposal (1 page)
Recommended Action
Motion to adopt Resolution Authorizing Participation in the Energy Efficiency and
Conservation Block Grant Process.
Resolution 10-9
January 19, 2010
Member
introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PARTICIPATION IN THE
ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION BLOCK GRANT PROCESS
WHEREAS, the City of Golden Valley will submit an application to the Minnesota
Department of Commerce Office of Energy Security for the installation of energy efficient
fixtures throughout City owned facilities; and
WHEREAS, the City Council authorizes the Director of Public Works or her designee
to submit the application on behalf of the City of Golden Valley; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Golden
Valley that the City supports the development of energy efficient changes within the City of
Golden Valley, for which a grant application will be submitted to the Minnesota Department
of Commerce Office of Energy Security on January 25,2010, by the City of Golden Valley.
Linda R. Loomis, Mayor
ATTEST:
Susan M. Virnig, City Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was seconded by Member
and upon a vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted, signed by the Mayor
and her signature attested by the City Clerk.
Minnesota Energy
Page 1 ofl
Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant
The Minnesota Department of Commerce Office of Energy Security (OES) requests proposals from
Minnesota local units of government, who are eligible as determined by U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)
eligibility guidelines, for the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant Program (EECBG) as part of
the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act of 2009 (ARRA).
The purpose of these competitive grants is to provide funding to reduce energy use, create or retain jobs,
and to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG). Eligible activities are defined in the Request for
Proposals (RFP).
The RFP will be available for download here through January 25, 2010. Requests for hard copies must be
received by the Office of Energy Security no later than 12:00 p.m. Central Standard Time (CST), on
January 25,2010.
Proposals must be received no later than 4:00 p.m. CST, January 25,2010. Late proposals will not be
considered. Instructions for submitting proposals are detailed in the RFP.
An amended version of this RFP was made available on January 8, 2010.
Questions and Responses related to the EECBGRFP.
http://www.state.mn.us/porta1/mn/jsp/common/content/include/contentitem.jsp?contentid=...1/12/20 1 0
Valley
Public Works
763-593-8030 I 763-593-3988 (fax)
Executive Summary For Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
January 19,2010
Agenda Item
3. I. Country Club Pond Excavation and Stream Bank Stabilization Professional Services
Prepared By
Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works
AI Lundstrom, Environmental Coordinator
Summary
In 2009, a storm water pond adjacent to Bassett Creek was identified as having significant
sediment deposition within the limits of the Golden Valley Country Club. The pond receives
approximately one hundred and twenty (120) acres of storm water from a residential
neighborhood on the north side of the golf course. As a requirement of the City's National
Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Phase II Permit, staff has developed a
Capital Improvement Plan to dredge pond sediment accumulation to improve the water
quality of Bassett Creek and other downstream water bodies.
In addition to pond dredging, the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission
(BCWMC) has determined that it is in the best interest of its member communities and the
BCWMC to address bank stabilization concerns occurring along the Main Stem, Sweeney
Branch, Plymouth Creek, and the North Branch of Bassett Creek. Erosion and sediment
deposition contribute to diminished water quality. In order to qualify for funding, the member
cities must have had completed a creek inspection program. Golden Valley was the first
community of the BCWMC member cities to complete its creek inspection program.
Through its creek inspection program, Public Works staff identified that erosion and
downstream sedimentation has occurred along the main stem of the creek adjacent to the
pond within the Golden Valley Country Club (see attached location map).
The City is anticipating the BCWMC will approve the City's request at its January 21 meeting
to utilize up to $100,000 of its allotted Streambank Stabilization Funds for this portion of the
project.
The final step of the project will include creating a buffer adjacent to the pond. The Golden
Valley Country Club has agreed to complete this portion of the project this spring.
Staff has negotiated an agreement with WSB and Associates for the engineering work
needed to be done to complete the project. The total cost of WSB's agreement is $23,500.
The City's Storm Sewer Capital Improvement Program has identified $100,000 in the 2010-
2014 CIP for this project on page 87, project SS-23.
If Council authorizes the project, the following is the proposed schedule:
Approve agreement with WSB
Award contract
Project substantial completion
January 19, 2010
February 2010
April 2010
Attachments
Location Map (1 page)
Proposal from WSB and Associates, dated December 22,2009 (3 pages)
Recommended Action
Motion to authorize the City Manger sign the agreement with WSB and Associates, Inc. in the
amount of $23,500.
PROJECT LOCA TION MAP
<(
z
<(
-
(f)
::::>
o
.....J
c\,ue
~\~'<
CO\)
\J ~\,\,~'<
\D~~
GO"
P.
PONDEXCAVA~ON & BANK
STABIUZA~ON PROJECT LOCA~ON
c\,ue
~\~'<
COU
\J ~\,\,~'<
\D~~
GO"
ey 2010 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
PL YMOUTH & JERSEY NO SCALE
(GOLDEN VALLEY COUNTRY CLUB JOINT PROJECT)
~
.
WSB
&~lDc.
IDfnstracture. EDgIneerJDg. PIaJmIDg . CoDSb'llctlon
701 XenIa AY&\D1Ie South
SuIte 300
MInneapoDs, MN 55416
December 22, 2009
Ms. Jeannine Clancy
Director of Public Works
City of Golden Valley
7800 Golden Valley Road
Golden Valley, MN 55427
Re: Soope of Work Associated with Providing Engineering Services to Facilitate the Clean
Out of a Pond within the Golden Valley Country Club.
Dear Ms. Clancy:
Outlined below, please find a work plan and cost estimate to facilitate completion of plans and
specifications for the clean out of a pond within the Golden Valley Country Club.
Tul 1: Obttlln BflCkgroruulInlormtltlon / CoIftJ1Iete Site Survey / Inspection /
Sedbnent SflItlJlllng
This task consists of completing a site survey to quantify the amount ofmateria1 to be
removed and also to visually inspect the sediment within the basin for the purpose of
detennining its composition and suitability for use as fill. As part of this task, we will be
responsible for collecting sediment samples and will provide testing of the samples,
gathering appropriate information to define how the work can be best undertaken, where
the spoils can be disposed, estimate the impact the work will have on turf and vegetation
within the area, and define how the area will be restored when the work is completed.
Tu12: Prepare Prelimiluzry Construction Pltms tuttl SpecljlctdiollS / Review Concept
Pltm with City Staff
This task involves prepamtion of a basic construction plan and constmction requirements
that will provide guidance to the contractors in understanding and bidding the project It
is anticipated two or three bids will be received tbrough an informal bidding process.
These plans and project approach will be reviewed with City S~ Golf Course Staft;
and Regulatory Agencies (Bassett Creek Water Management Organization). Following
this review, it is anticipated we will have a basic understanding of the project from the
perspective of the various stakeholders (City, Golf Course, and Bassett Creek WMO),
suitable changes will be made and the plans and construction requirements will be
finalized.
M1nneapoDs . St. Cloud
Equal Opportunity Employer
C:~\ApJlData\Looal\MlomsoftW/mlDwll\TCIIIJI01lIIY_~!l:IljIeof_.J222lI9(Z).dDc
Ms.leannine Clancy
December 22, 2009
Page 2
Tul3: Prepue au Submit ApplictltJon to Permittlng Agencies Regarding Project,
MllIIIlge Dlspostd of Spoils
The area impacted for this project is anticipated to be approximately 0.37 acres with an
anticipated excavated volume of approximately 2,800 cubic yards. Unless new
information is obtained during the completion of the first two tasks, it is anticipated a no-
net loss determination will be issued by the City for work in a wetland. A formal permit
from the Bassett Creek Water Management Organization will be required. At this time,
MPCA regulations regarding spoil disposal does not require a permit for projects of this
size; however the MPCA does require notification of dredging activities. A loint
Water/Wet1and Application will also need to be prepared and submitted to the Army
Corps of Engineers. We do not anticipate the need for a DNR permit for this project.
We will be responsible for the submittal of all of the required materials to all of the
regulatory agencies in an effort to obtain all necessary permits to complete this project. If
additional actions or follow-up is needed in this area, it will be considering an extra to
this scope of work.
Tut 4: Provide follow-upon permits, hold meetings with stakeholt:lera to i4entlh IUIY
outsttuullng IsBue6/concems.
As part of this task, we will provide up to 24 hours of time to follow-up on permits that
are submitted and meet with Bassett Creek, Army Cmp of Engineers, City of Golden
Valley, and Golf Course Staff for the putpOse of coordinating various project elements,
and responding to their comments and questions.
Tat S: Develop Fl1ud Pltms IUId SpeciJietdiollB / Cost Bsdnuzte
As part of this task final plans and specifications will be prepared that will be suitable for
use in an informal bid process. Preliminmily, we anticipate the project will include
removal of sediment from the pond, construction of a berm loutfall across the pond
entrance to the channel, and the installation of rip rap toe protection and shaping of the
stream bank in selected locations near the pond The procedures for measurement and
payment will be defined as part of this task and an engineer's estimate of cost will also be
provided.
Tal6: MflIUl/le Bid Process / Assist in ProJectAwud
This task includes seeking out and obtaining bids ftom qualified contractors for the
project, evaluating the bids, and the contractor qualifications to do the work and making a
recommendation to the City regarding award of the contract. It is anticipated no bid bond
would be required; however, a performance and payment bond would be required of the
contractor selected to do the work.
Tut 7: Provide Construction Observation / MllIIIlgement
This task includes providing up to 50 hours of constnwtion observation and management
services to assure that the project is constructed in accordance with the specifications. It
C:\1lsas\ahmdsl\AppDala\Loo:a1lMlaasllWiDdowsl'l'eIIIJllI1lIIY- FlI",\CGIIleat.CllltlllDk\SMIIIlY/mMllMO_ofwmlt.l22209(:
Ms. Jeannine Clancy
December 22, 2009
Page 2
will include on-site observation, quantity measurements, developing and assisting in
processing pay requests, dealing with stake holders in the area, and coordinating the work
with City staft
SchetbdelCost
We estimate that the above scope of work can be completed for a cost of $23,500 with actual
costs billed hourly in accordance with our cutrent stmidard fee schedule. Furthermore, UDless
permit considerations delay the project, we would anticipate tasks 1 tbru 6 could be substantially
completed within 8 weeks from the date we receive notice to proceed, with a focus on
substantially completing construction by April 1st, 2010.
Thank you for the opportunity to be of service to you. If you are in agreement with the scope of
services listed above, please sign below and return one copy to me. Please do not hesitate to
contact me at 763-287-7188 with any questions or comments.
Sincerely,
WSB & Associtdes, Ine.
Pete Willenbring, PE
Vice President
Attachment
co Mr. AI Lundstrom, Environmental Coordinator, City of Golden Valley
ACCEPTED BY:
Oty of Golden Valley
By:
Title:
Date:
C"\1Jkuo~\AppDala\LcJo81\Mll:rosWiDdowB\T~_FiIfs\CoDlad.OatIook\5MIIIIY_of'lfOll<.122209(4
G:1}
?~ol
lllley
M m ran urn
Fire Department
763-593-8079 I 763-593-8098 (fax)
Executive Summary for Action
Golden Valley City Council
January 19, 2010
Agenda Item
3. J. Authorization to Sign Contract Renewal with Embedded Systems, Inc. for Tornado Siren
Maintenance
Prepared By
Mark Kuhnly, Chief of Fire & Inspections
Summary
Embedded Systems, Inc. has provided, for the past several years, service and maintenance
of the seven tornado sirens located within the City. The maintenance contract renewal fee for
2010 is $37.95 per siren, per month, for a total of $3,187. This expenditure is included in the
2010 budget, 1346.6382. The 2010 budget for maintenance and repair is $6,000.
Attachment
2010 Contract Renewal (2 pages)
Recommended Action
Motion to authorize the City Manager to sign the 2010 contract renewal with Embedded
Systems, Inc. for tornado siren maintenance for $3,187.
r
embedded c:S~2tem2, ilnc.
Tel. (763) 757-3696
www.embedsys.com
11931 Hwy 65 NE, Minneapolis, MN 55434
Fax: (763) 754-0954
Jburgett@embedsys.com
Contract Renewal
October 15,2009
Golden Valley Civil Defense
Roger Johnson
7800 Golden Valley Rd.
Golden Valley, MN 55427
We are at the end of another tornado season. Embedded Systems, Inc. has provided our best service
toward maintaining the tornado sirens for your city for the past several years. We would be very pleased
to continue to provide Tornado Siren Maintenance for your city.
The Monthly Siren Maintenance Fee for 2010 will be $37.95 per siren, per month.
The decoder batteries for your city are scheduled to be replaced in 2011 for preventive maintenance.
Battery replacement will occur once every 2 years for Hennepin and Ramsey County and once every
three years for Anoka County for all units maintained by Embedded Systems under the original
maintenance agreement, including those batteries which may have been replaced since the last scheduled
replacement because of failure.
We are asking that you please sign and return this contract renewal to us before November 16th, 2009 to
enable us to continue to provide our best service through the end of2010. Feel free to fax the signed
contract renewal to (763) 767-2817 or email ittoiburgett@embedsys.com.
Thank you for your business and we look forward to servicing your needs through the next year. If you
have any questions feel free to contact me directly.
Thank you,
Julie Burgett
Embedded Systems, Inc.
.._._-_..._.............-..___...___.y........_6N'<#'___..__-.___,......_.....,O>.4o..............~........"'~~~......_.___._..................-....__~.........,..y.---.........__..__~--...__.......-..-...-
Contract terms accepted:
Signature
Date
Phone
Email
For continuation of services through the end of the year 2010
....-
Tornado Sirens
Master List
Golden Valley
1 7800 Golden Valley Road
2 2601 Noble Ave. N
3 600 Zane Ave. N.
4 9100 Olympia St.
5 7100 Sandburg Rd.
6 Skyline Dr.
7 3901 Glenwood Ave.
~
.
Updated 101812009
~bi
alley
m n um
City Administration/Council
763-593-8096/763-593-8109 (fax)
Executive Summary For Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
January 19, 2010
Agenda Item
3. K. Authorization to Sign Patrol Officer (LELS Local 27) Agreement
Prepared By:
Paula A. Graff, Human Resources Coordinator
Summary
A one year agreement with LELS Local 27, the Patrol Officer unit of LELS, has been reached.
The contract calls for no increase in wages for 2010 but provides clarification on how
longevity is applied. The contract also makes changes to disciplinary procedures and amends
the funeral leave policy so that the list of those people considered immediate family members
is identical to non-union City employees. The agreement also provides for an increase in the
monthly insurance contribution and a greater incentive for wellness participation, from $10
per month to $20 per month.
The agreement has been approved by the members of the unit. This item authorizes the
Mayor and City Manager to sign the agreements.
Attachments
Labor Agreement - LELS Police Officer 2010 (20 pages, underscored/overstrike version,
loose in agenda packet)
Recommended Action
Motion to authorize the Mayor and City Manager sign the 2010 Patrol Officer agreement.
LABOR AGREEMENT
LELS POLICE OFFICER
For 20092010
This Agreement dated February 3, 2009Januarv 19. 2010 is made and entered
into by and between the City of Golden Valley, hereinafter referred to as the
"Employer" and Local #27 of Law Enforcement Labor Services, Inc., hereinafter
referred to as the "Union."
DEFINITIONS
For the purpose of this Agreement, the following terms and phrases shall have
the meaning given to them.
EMPLOYER:
UNION:
EMPLOYEE:
City of Golden Valley or its representative
Local #27 of Law Enforcement Labor Services, Inc.
A member of the exclusively recognized bargaining
unit
OFFICER:
Officer elected or appointed by the Union
MEMBER:
A member of LELS Local #27 in the bargaining unit
to which this contract applies
ARTICLE 1. Purpose of Agreement.
This Agreement has as its purpose the promotion of harmonious relations
between the Employer, its Employees and the Union, the furtherance of efficient
governmental services; the establishment of an equitable and peaceful
procedure for the resolution of disputes that may arise without interference or
disruption of efficient operation of the department; and the establishment of a
formal understanding relative to all terms and conditions of employment. The
Employer and the Union, through this Agreement, continue their dedication to the
highest quality of public service. Both parties recognize this Agreement as a
pledge of this dedication.
ARTICLE 2. Recognition.
Section 1. The Employer recognizes the Union as the exclusive
representative under Minnesota Statutes 179A.03, Subdivision 14, for all
employees of the Golden Valley Public Safety Department bargaining unit as
identified by the Bureau of Mediation Services, Certification of Exclusive
Representative dated August 24, 1978, case #77-PR-866-A.
- 1 -
Section 2. In the event that the Employer and the Union are unable to
agree as to the inclusion or exclusion of a new or modified job class, the issue
shall be submitted to the Bureau of Mediation for determination.
ARTICLE 3. Employer Authority.
Section 1. It is recognized and accepted by the Union and Employer that
the management, direction and control of the Police Department and its
personnel are exclusively the function of the Employer. The exercise of the
City's management rights shall take place "without hindrance or interference by
the Union", except as limited by the terms of this Agreement. City's management
rights include, but shall under no circumstances be construed to be limited to, the
right to:
a. Manage the operation through the selection and direction of the work
force, including the right to hire and promote, transfer Employees to
positions, departments and classifications both covered and not covered
by this Agreement, except that no Employee shall be transferred out of the
Bargaining Unit as a disciplinary action.
b. Layoff Employees.
c. Demote, suspend, discipline or discharge Employees.
d. Make such operating changes as deemed necessary by the Employer
for the efficient, economical operation of the City, including but not limited
to the right to sub-contract work performed by members of the Bargaining
Unit, to change the normal work week, the length of the normal work day,
hours of work, the beginning or ending time of each shift or assignment
and the number of shifts to be operated.
e. Determine the organizational structure, number of personnel and the
assignment of duties, including the right to increase, decrease or change
duties.
f. Establish functions, programs, its overall budget and the utilization of
technology.
g. Promulgate work rules and regulations.
Section 2. Any specifically enumerated management right not limited by
the terms of this Agreement shall not be eligible to be grieved by the Union.
Section 3. Any terms and conditions of employment not specifically
established or modified by this Agreement shall remain solely with the discretion
of the Employer to modify, establish or eliminate.
-2-
ARTICLE 4. Union Security.
Section 1. A. The Employer agrees to cooperate with the Union in the
deduction of regular monthly dues, for those Employees who request in writing to
have regular monthly Union dues checked off by payroll deduction. The
Employer agrees to remit such regular monthly dues in a manner to be
determined by the Union and Employer.
B. The Union agrees to indemnify and hold the Employer
harmless against any and all claims, suits, orders or judgment brought or issued
against the Employer as a result of any action taken or not taken by the
Employer under the provisions of Paragraph A of this Section.
Section 2. The Union may designate members to act as stewards or
officers and shall inform the Employer of such choice and of any changes in
stewards or officers in writing.
Section 3. The Employer agrees to make space available on the
Employer bulletin board for the posting of Union notice(s) and announcements
and to make space available for Union meetings when it does not conflict with
the operation of the department.
Section 4. The Employer agrees to allow the officers and representatives
of the Bargaining Unit reasonable time off and leaves of absence, with prior
approval and without pay for the purpose of conducting Union business when
such time would not be detrimental to the work programs of the Employer.
Section 5. The Employer agrees to post on the department bulletin board
all promotional opportunities within the Bargaining Unit; to publish the method by
which promotions shall be made within the Bargaining Unit; and to make copies
of all work rules and regulations available to Employees.
ARTICLE 5. Employer Security.
Section 1. Neither the Union, its officers or agents, nor any of the
Employees covered by this Agreement will engage in, encourage, sanction,
support or suggest any strike, slowdown, mass resignations, mass absenteeism,
the willful absence from one's position, stoppage of work or the absence in whole
or part of the full, faithful and proper performance of duties of employment for the
purpose of inducing, influencing, or coercing a change in the conditions,
compensation or the rights, privileges or obligations of employment.
Section 2. Any Employee who engages in a strike may have their
appointment terminated by the Employer effective the date the violation first
occurs. Such termination shall be effective upon written notice served upon the
Employee.
-3-
ARTICLE 6. Equal Application~
Section 1. The provisions of this Agreement shall be applied equally to all
Employees in the Bargaining Unit without discrimination as to race, color, creed,
sex, national origin, religion, political affiliation or marital status. The Union and
the Employees covered by this Agreement shall share equally with the Employer
the responsibilities established by this Article.
Section 2. The Employer shall not discriminate against, interfere with,
restrain, or coerce an Employee from exercising the right to join or not to join the
Union or participate in an official capacity on behalf of the Union, which is in
accordance with the provisions of this Agreement. The Union shall not
discriminate against, interfere with, restrain, or coerce an Employee from
exercising the right to join or not to join the Union and will not discriminate
against any Employee in the administration of the Agreement because of non-
membership in the Union.
Section 3. The Union accepts its responsibilities as exclusive
representative and agrees to represent all Employees in the Bargaining Unit
without discrimination.
ARTICLE 7. Savings.
Section 1. This Agreement is subject to the laws of the United States and
the State of Minnesota.
Section 2. In the event that any provision of this Agreement shall be held
to the contrary of law by a court of competent jurisdiction from whose final
judgment or decree no appeal has been taken within the time provided, such
provision shall be voided. All other provisions of this Agreement shall continue in
full force and effect. The voided provisions may be renegotiated upon written
request of either party.
ARTICLE 8. Grievance Procedure.
Section 1. A. For the purpose of this Agreement, the term "grievance"
means any disputes arising concerning the interpretation or application of the
express provisions of this Agreement.
B. In the event of such grievance arising there shall be no
suspension of operations but an earnest effort shall be made to resolve such
grievances in the manner prescribed by this Agreement.
C. It is recognized and accepted by the Union and the
Employer that the processing of grievances, as herein provided, is limited by the
job duties and responsibilities of the Employee and shall therefore be
accomplished during normal working hours only when consistent with such
Employee duties and responsibilities. The aggrieved Employee and the Union
-4-
Representative shall be allowed a reasonable amount of time without loss in pay
when a grievance is investigated and presented to the Employer during normal
working hours provided the Employee and the Union Representative have
notified and received prior approval from the designated supervisor who has
determined that such absence is reasonable and would not be detrimental to the
work programs of the Employer.
Section 2. Grievances, as defined by Section 1, shall be resolved in
conformance with the following procedure and all references to days in Steps 1-4
are calendar days:
Step 1. An Employee who feels that the City has misinterpreted or
misapplied any section of the Agreement in dealing with that
Employee, should discuss their claim with the Employee's
immediate supervisor. This should be done within twenty-one (21)
calendar days from the occurrence of the believed violation or from
when the Employee became aware of it. The Employee should
complete the grievance notice sheet and submit it to the supervisor
at the time of the discussion with the supervisor. The supervisor
will respond, in writing, within fourteen (14) days from the date the
grievance sheet was received. Every effort shall be made to settle
the grievance at this step. Nothing shall prevent an Employee from
seeking guidance from LELS at this step.
Step 2. If the dispute is not solved at Step 1 between the
Employee and the supervisor, then the Employee should meet with
LELS and the dispute should be put in writing, stating the nature of
the grievance, the name or names of the Employees involved, the
provisions of the Agreement believed violated and the remedy
requested. This shall be submitted to the Employer-designated
Step 2 Representative within ten (10) calendar days of the Step 1
written response. The Step 2 Representative shall render an
answer, in writing, within ten (10) days of the receipt of the Step 2
submittal and the answer shall be transmitted to the Employee and
LELS.
Step 3. If the dispute is not solved by the Step 2 process, the
written grievance with the information required in Step 2, shall be
presented to the Employer-designated Step 3 Representative. This
shall be submitted within ten (10) days of receipt of the Step 2
answer. The Step 3 Employer-designated Representative shall
render a written answer within ten (10) days from receipt of the
Step 3 grievance and the answer shall be transmitted to the
Employee and LELS. Where no Employer Step 3 Representative is
appointed, the grievance shall progress from Step 3 to Step 4.
Step 4. If the dispute is not solved by the Step 3 process, the
written grievance with the information required in Step 3, shall be
- 5-
presented to the Employer-designated Step 4 Representative. This
shall be submitted within ten (10) days from receipt of the Step 4
grievance and the answer shall be transmitted to the Employee and
LELS.
Step 5. A grievance unresolved in Step 4 may be appealed by the
Employee and LELS to Step 5. Notification of intent to appeal to
Step 5 shall be made within ten (10) days of receipt of Employer's
Step 4 answer. A Step 5 grievance shall be submitted to arbitration
subject to the provisions of the Public Employment Labor Relations
Act of 1971 as amended. The selection of an arbitrator shall be
made in accordance with the "Rules Governing the Arbitration of
Grievances", as established by the Bureau of Mediation Services.
Section 3. A. The arbitrator shall have no right to amend, modify, nullify,
ignore, add to or subtract from, the terms and conditions of this Agreement. The
arbitrator shall consider and decide only the specific issue(s) submitted in writing
by the Employer and the Union, and shall have no authority to make a decision
on any other issue not so submitted.
B. The arbitrator shall be without power to make decisions
contrary to, or inconsistent with, or modifying or varying in any way the
application of laws, rules or regulations having the force and effect of law. The
arbitrator's decision shall be submitted in writing within thirty (30) days following
close of the hearing or the submission of briefs by the parties, whichever be later,
unless the parties agree to an extension. The arbitrator shall consider and
decide only the specific issue or issues submitted to him by the parties of this
Agreement and shall have no authority to make a decision on any other matter
not submitted to him, and the decision shall be binding on both the Employer and
the Union.
C. The fees and expenses for the arbitrator's services and
proceedings shall be borne equally by the Employer and the Union provided that
each party shall be responsible for compensating their own representative and
witnesses. If either party desires a verbatim record of the proceedings, they may
cause such a record to be made providing they pay for the record. If both parties
desire a verbatim record of the proceedings, the cost shall be shared equally.
Section 4. Waiver. If a grievance is not presented within the time limits
set forth above, it shall be considered "waived", If a grievance is not appealed to
the next step within the specific time limit or any agreed extension thereof, it shall
be considered settled on the basis of the Employer's last answer. If the
Employer does not answer a grievance or an appeal thereof within the specified
time limits, the Union may elect to treat the grievance as denied at that step and
immediately appeal the grievance to the next step. The time limit in each step
may be extended by mutual written agreement of the Employer and the Union in
each step.
-6-
Section 5. Choice of Remedy. If, as a result of the written Employer
response in Step 4, the grievance remains unresolved, the grievance may be
appealed either to Step 5 of Article 8 or a procedure such as: Civil Service,
Veteran's Preference, or Fair Employment. If appealed to any procedure other
than Step 5 of Article 8 the grievance is not subject to the arbitration procedure
as provided in Step 5 of Article 8. The aggrieved Employee shall indicate in
writing which procedure is to be utilized - Step 5 of Article 8 or another appeal
procedure - and shall sign a statement to the effect that the choice of any other
hearing precludes the aggrieved Employee from making a subsequent appeal
through Step 5 of Article 8.
ARTICLE 9. Safety.
It shall be the policy of the employer that the safety of employees, the protection
of work areas, the adequate training in necessary safety practices and the
prevention of accidents are a continuing and integral part of its every day
responsibility. It shall also be the responsibility of all employees to cooperate in
programs to promote safety to themselves and the public and to comply with
rules promulgated to ensure safety. This employee responsibility shall include the
proper use of vehicles, equipment and all safety devices in accordance with
recognized safety procedures. It shall be the responsibility of the employer to
maintain all employer-owned equipment in a safe and workable order, repairing
or replacing as needed.
ARTICLE 10. Working Out of Classification.
A Patrol Officer assigned as Officer in Charge will receive. 75 hour of straight
time payor .75 hour accrued time for each four (4) hour period so worked. A
Detective assigned as Officer in Charge for a period of four (4) or more
consecutive hours will receive. 75 hour of straight time payor. 75 hour accrued
time for each four (4) hour period so worked.
ARTICLE 11. Seniority.
Section 1. Definition. Seniority shall mean an Employee's length of
service with the Department since their last date of hire. An Employee's
continuous service record shall be broken only by separation from service by
reasons of resignation, discharge for cause, retirement, death or leave of
absence without pay. For the purposes of this Agreement, time off due to
disciplinary action will not be counted as Leave of Absence Without Pay. The
Union shall prepare a seniority list to be submitted to the Employer for approval
and posting. When two or more Employees have the same seniority date, their
position on the seniority list shall be determined by their position on the Civil
Service list when hired.
Section 2. Lay Offs. When a reduction in the work force becomes
necessary, the Employee with the least seniority shall be laid off first. The last
Employee laid off shall be the first to be recalled for work. No new employees
- 7 -
shall be hired until the lay-off list has been exhausted. If a reduction in the
number of sergeants becomes necessary, the sergeant with the least time in
grade shall be permitted to bump back into a patrol officer's position with less
departmental seniority.
Section 3. Probationary Employees. During the probationary period a
newly hired or rehired Employee may be discharged at the sole discretion of the
Employer. During the probationary period, a promoted Employee may be
returned to their previous position at the sole discretion of the Employer. The
probationary period shall be one (1) year for promoted Employees and one (1)
year for new Employees from date of hire or completion of basic recruit school if
completed while on City payroll.
ARTICLE 12. Discipline.
Section 1. The Employer will discipline for cause only. Discipline will be
one or more of the following forms:
a. oral reprimand
b. written reprimand
c. suspension
d. demotion, or
e. discharge
Section 2. An Employee who is to be suspended, demoted or discharged,
shall receive a written statement of cause of the suspension, demotion or
discharge within 72 hours after the action has been taken. Suspension will set
forth the time period for which the suspension shall be effective. Demotions will
state the classification to which the Employee is demoted. The Union shall be
provided with a copy of such notice.
Section 3. Written reprimands, notices of suspension or demotion and
notices of discharge which are to become part of an Employee's personnel file
shall be read and acknowledged by signature of the Employee. Such signature
shall not be an admission of guilt but only an acknowledgment of receipt and the
Employee shall have the opportunity to attach a response to the reprimand or
notice to the copy in the Employee's personnel file. The Employee will receive a
copy of such reprimands and/or notices. Written reprimands will be purged from
the Employee's personnel file and be of no effect 18 months after the date on
which Employee acknowledged the reprimand.
Section 4.
A. Employees shall have the opportunity to request to have a
representative present when a Garritv Warning is given prior to being
questioned regarding a possible disciplinary action, or when the emplovee
feels a non-Garrity discussion with a supervisor may lead to discipline. In
the case of a non-Garrity discussion, U-if a representative is not presont
-8-
reauested but cannot appear within two (2) hours, questioning may
proceed.
B. If an im'estigation is not oommenoed during the shift when the
oomplaint was received, the Employee shall still have an opportunity to request 3
representati'/e. However, for these incidents, if a representati'..'O is not present
\f.'ithin sixteen (16) hours, questioning may prooeed.
Section 5. Employees may not be suspended without pay for more than
sixty (60) working days in any calendar year. Discharges will be preceded by a
five (5) calendar day suspension without pay.
Section 6. Employees may examine their own individual personnel files at
reasonable times under the direct supervision of the Employer. Union
representatives may, upon invitation of the Employee, also examine the
personnel files.
Section 7. Grievances relating to this Article may be initiated by the Union
in Step 4 of the grievance procedure.
ARTICLE 13. Work Schedules.
Section 1. Sole authority in establishing work schedules is the Employer.
The normal work year shall consist of 2,080 hours to be accounted for by each
Employee through schedule of hours worked, holidays, roll call, training and
vacations. Nothing contained in this or any other Article shall be interpreted to be
a guarantee of a minimum or maximum number of hours the Employer may
assign Employees. All regularly scheduled hours worked over 2,080 in a 52
weeks calendar year (except as provided in Article 24) shall be compensated as
overtime pursuant to Article 17.
Section 2. Split shifts shall not be scheduled except by mutual agreement
of City and affected Employees.
Section 3. Changes in the format of duty schedules shall be posted two
weeks in advance.
ARTICLE 14. Court Time.
Section 1. An Employee who is scheduled to appear in court during their
off-duty time shall receive a minimum of four (4) hours straight time payor pay at
1 1/2 times the Employee's pay rate for the actual number of hours spent in
court, whichever is greater. An extension or early report to a regularly scheduled
shift does not qualify the Employee for the minimum. When an Employee is
notified of a cancellation of a court appearance less than 24 hours before the
scheduled appearance, four (4) hours of straight time shall be paid. When an
Employee is notified of a cancellation of a court appearance more than 24 hours
-9-
prior to the scheduled appearance, no court time shall be authorized.
Section 2. The City shall make reimbursements for necessary parking
fees incurred when appearances in Court are required.
ARTICLE 15. Call Back.
An employee called back to work outside of their regularly scheduled shift shall
be paid for a minimum of three (3) hours at time and one-half of their regular
base rate of pay. However, nothing in this Section shall be construed to prevent
a supervisor from requiring an Employee to report early to their shift which shall
be compensated at straight time provided that the total hours worked on the early
report do not exceed that which is scheduled normally. Call back starts from
receipt of order to return.
ARTICLE 16. Standby.
Employees specifically required by the Employer to stand by shall be paid for
such standby time at the rate of one hour regular pay for each hour of standby,
with a minimum of two (2) hours of pay.
ARTICLE 17. Overtime.
Section 1. Overtime shall be worked only at the specific authorization of
the Employee's supervisor. The Employer has the right to require reasonable
assignments of overtime work and such assignments shall be performed by the
Employee except as otherwise provided in this Agreement. Employees shall be
compensated at one and one-half times the employee's base rate of pay for
hours worked beyond the Employee's regularly scheduled work shift. Changes
in shifts do not qualify the Employee for overtime. For the purpose of computing
overtime compensation, overtime hours worked shall not by pyramided,
compounded or paid twice. Overtime shall be calculated to the nearest 1/10 of
an hour.
Section 2. Employees earning overtime shall, at the end of each payroll
period inform their supervisor whether they wish to take the overtime hours in
payor time off (referred hereto as accrued time); shall receive one and one-half
(1 1/2) hours off for each overtime hour worked. Accrued time shall be taken in
the same manner as vacation time. Employees shall be allowed up to a
maximum of sixty (60) hours of accrued time. Voluntary overtime may be taken
off as accrued time only with Employer approval.
ARTICLE 18. Sick Leave.
Each permanent full-time Employee shall be granted eight (B) hours sick leave
with pay for each month of full-time employment and will be allowed to accrue
credit for earned sick leave to a total of eight hundred (BOO) hours. For every day
of sick leave an Employee earns after accumulating eight hundred hours, they
-10 -
will be given credit for four (4) hours additional vacation and four (4) hours of pay.
Sick leave may not be used during the first six (6) months of employment, but will
be credited for use following the first six (6) months of employment. Sick leave
shall not be considered as a privilege which an Employee may use at their
discretion, but shall be allowed in the case of actual illness, legal quarantine or
disability of the Employee, or because of death or critical illness in their
immediate family, or to receive dental or medical care or other sickness
preventative measures. Employees claiming sick leave may be required to file
competent written evidence that they have been absent as authorized above, or
if more than two days, that they have been under treatment and supervision of a
doctor or dentist who recommended work not be performed.
If Employee has been incapacitated for the period of their absence or a major
part thereof, they may be required to provide evidence that they are again
physically able to perform their duties. Sick leave shall be computed on a
working day basis when used.
Sick leave is intended as a benefit primarily to the Employee themselves and as
a protection or insurance of earning power. While it is permitted due to death or
critical illness in the immediate family, it is intended to be available on a restricted
basis and in limited amounts for this purpose. For discretionary attendance on
family illness or medical needs, vacation or leave of absence should be used. All
provisions and definitions of the Family and Medical Leave Act are incorporated
into this sick leave provision.
Employees hired under the PTO plan are subject to the provisions under Article
24.
ARTICLE 19. Termination Pay.
Termination removes job rights and benefits and rehire status benefits as with. a
new Employee. Settlement of all benefits for the Employees who have been laid
off, retired, or whose actions were not a factor in their termination shall be ma(!te
at termination as follows: Upon termination of service and after completion of
five years of continuous service to the City as a full-time permanent Employee,
an Employee shall be entitled to receive in pay 1/3 of unused sick leave in
addition to accrued annual leave. Also, after 10 years of service or PERA
certifiable disability which results in termination of employment, such Employees
shall receive one days' pay for each full year of service to the City. In the event
of death, payment shall be made to the survivor.
ARTICLE 20. Leaves of Absence.
Section 1. Jury Duty. Employees called for jury duty shall suffer no loss
in their normal salary. Employees claiming jury duty pay shall sign over all jury
duty fees to the Employer.
- 11 -
Section 2. Military Reserve. Employees serving in the military reserve
shall suffer no loss in their normal salary to the extent provided by Minnesota
Law.
Section 3. Illness or Injury. A leave of absence without pay may be
granted by the City Manager for up to 90 days for extended illness or personal
hardship if such absence would not be detrimental to the Employer's work
program. The Employee shall not be entitled to accrue leave or seniority while
on a leave of absence without pay granted pursuant to this section.
Section 4. Maternity/Paternity. After employees have worked for the City
for one year, they are eligible for up to 12 weeks leave for the birth or adoption of
a child or placement of a foster child. To care for a newborn or adopted child,
employees must first use available sick leave, vacation leave, or accrued time at
the employee's option.
If you wish to take a 12-week leave but have fewer than 12 weeks of paid leave
available, you may take the remainder of the leave unpaid. All paid accrued
leave must be used before employees are eligible for unpaid leave. Leave to
care for a newborn, adopted, or recently placed foster child must be taken in
consecutive weeks and must be taken within 12 months of the child's birth or
placement.
Section 5. Military. Employees shall be granted unpaid military leaves
consistent with applicable Minnesota Statutes. Requests shall be made in writing
to the City Manager.
ARTICLE 21. Funeral Leave
Up to five (5) days leave with pay without deduction from sick leave and/or PTO
shall be granted to death of spouse or child. Up to three (3) days sick leave and
or PTO where applicable shall be granted for death in the immediate family ill
person residinQ as a member of the emplovee's immediate household and up to
one day in the case of death in the next degree of kindred. Immediate family
includes spouse, children, mother, father, brother, sister, grandmother,
grandfather of both the employee and the employee's spouse.
Immediate familv includes anv person havinQ the followinQ relationship to an
emplovee or a IivinQ or deceased spouse:
· parent
· mother-in-Iaw/father-in-Iaw
· sister/brother
· sister-in-Iaw/brother-in-Iaw
· son-in-law/dauQhter-in-law
· Qrandparents
- 12-
· arandparents-in-Iaw
· arandchildren
· stepparents and/or leaal auardians.
ARTICLE 22. Vacation Leave.
Section 1. Employees shall be entitled to a paid vacation based upon
service in the prior years. Annual leave shall be earned as follows:
Date of Hire until completion of 5 years
5 years until completion of 10 years
11 years
12 years
13 years
14 years
15 years
16 years
17 years
18 years
19 years
20 years and above
2 weeks
3 weeks
3 weeks plus 1 day
3 weeks plus 2 days
3 weeks plus 3 days
3 weeks plus 4 days
4 weeks
4 weeks plus 1 day
4 weeks plus 2 days
4 weeks plus 3 days
4 weeks plus 4 days
5 weeks
No annual leave shall be granted during the initial six months of employment.
But if an Employee satisfactorily completes the six month period, annual leave
accrued during the initial six month period will be granted.
Section 2. Vacation periods shall be selected on a seniority basis within
the bargaining unit. Prior to June 1 vacations will be selected on a seniority
basis. After June 1, vacation periods shall be selected as available without
seniority privilege. Arrangements for taking vacation time must be arranged in
advance with the supervisor in charge of the work schedule. Vacations will, so far
as possible, be granted at times most desired by the Employee except that the
Employer shall have the final right to allot vacations in order to ensure the orderly
operation of the City.
Section 3. Employees shall be permitted to carry over double their current
accumulation from one calendar year to the next.
Section 4. Employees may request additional time off without pay up to a
maximum of one year in a five year period. Such requests shall be made in
writing and are subject to the approval of the City Manager.
Section 5. Employees hired under the PTO plan are subject to the
provisions under Article 24.
ARTICLE 23. Holidays.
- 13-
Work schedules for Employees are made up without regard for weekends and
holidays. In view of this fact, each Employee is granted 12 additional days leave
each year in lieu of holidays. Holiday leave is added to vacation leave on a pro
rata basis each pay period and shall be credited whether or not the Employee is
scheduled to work on a holiday.
These days must be taken during the year earned, except Christmas which may
be carried over to the following year.
Work on January 1, Martin Luther King Day, Presidents' Day, Memorial Day, July
4, Labor Day, Veteran's Day, Thanksgiving Day, the day after Thanksgiving,
Christmas Eve Day and Christmas Day, will be compensated at the rate of time
and one-half (1 1/2) the Employee's regular rate of pay for all hours worked on
these holidays plus holiday time.
ARTICLE 24. Paid Time Off (PTO)
Employees hired after January 1, 2009 shall participate in the City's Paid-time off
plan. Paid-time off is based upon service in the prior years and shall be earned
as follows:
Holiday PTO+Holiday
#of8 PTO hours hours Total hours Maximum
hour per pay accrued per accrued per Accrual In
Years days period pay period pay period hours
0-5 17 5.23 3.69 8.92 348
over 5 22 6.77 3.69 10.46 408
ovelf'11 23 7.08 3.69 10.77 420
ovelf'12 24 7.38 3.69 11.07 432
ovelf'13 25 7.69 3.69 11.38 444
ovelf'14 26 8.00 3.69 11.69 456
over 15 27 8.31 3.69 12.00 468
over 16 28 8.62 3.69 12.31 480
over 17 29 8.92 3.69 12.61 492
over 18 30 9.23 3.69 12.92 504
over 19 31 9.54 3.69 13.23 516
over 20 32 9.85 3.69 13.54 528
No paid time off shall be granted during the initial six months of employment. But
if an Employee satisfactorily completes the six month period, annual PTO
accrued during the initial six month period will be granted.
Section 2. Paid time off shall be selected on a seniority basis within the
bargaining unit. Prior to June 1 paid time off will be selected on a seniority basis
in accordance with Section 22.2. After June 1, paid-time off periods shall be
selected as available without seniority privilege. Arrangements for taking PTO
must be arranged in advance with the supervisor in charge of the work schedule.
- 14-
PTO will, so far as possible, be granted at times most desired by the Employee
except that the Employer shall have the final right to allot PTO in order to ensure
the orderly operation of the City. Paid time off shall be used in quarter hour
increments.
Section 3. Employees shall be permitted to accrue to the maximum hours
as designated above, equivalent to 1.5X their current annual PTO accumulation
plus holidays.
Section 4. Employees may request additional time off without pay up to a
maximum of one year in a five year period. Such requests shall be made in
writing and are subject to the approval of the City Manager.
ARTICLE 25. Injury on Duty.
Employees injured during the performance of their duties for the Employer and
thereby rendered unable to work for the Employer will be paid the difference
between the Employer's regular pay and Worker's Compensation insurance
payments for a period not to exceed one hundred twenty (120) working days per
injury, not charged to the Employee's vacation, sick leave, PTO or other
accumulated paid benefits, after a three (3) working days initial waiting period per
injury. The three (3) working days waiting period shall be charged to the
Employee's sick leave or PTO account less Worker's Compensation insurance
payments.
ARTICLE 26. Training and Department Meetings.
The City will pay for ongoing Post Board licensing required of each officer.
Training and meetings beyond 2080 hours in the work year will be compensated
at time and one-half consistent with Article 17 of this Agreement. Travel time will
be paid in accordance with FLSA definitions of compensable time.
ARTICLE 27. Field Training Officer Compensation.
Employees working as Field Training Officers shall receive .66 hour of straight
time payor .66 hour accrued time for each 4 hour period so worked.
ARTICLE 28. Qualifications for Continuing Employment.
Any Employee deprived of their state license to act as a police officer shall be
suspended without pay during that period.
ARTICLE 29. Personal Liability Insurance.
The City will maintain current personal injury liability insurance coverage
throughout the duration of the contract. The Employer shall furnish legal counsel
to defend any police officer in all actions brought against such officer to recover
damages for alleged false arrest or alleged injury to persons, property, or
-15 -
character, when such alleged false arrest or alleged injury to person, property, or
character was the result of an arrest made by such officer in good faith and in the
performance of their official duties and pay reasonable costs and expenses of
defending such suit, including witness fees and reasonable counsel fees.
ARTICLE 30. Educational Reimbursement.
The City will reimburse 100% of the Employee expenses for tuition, fees and
books required for job-related educational courses upon completion of the course
provided that:
1. The course has received prior approval of the Employee's department
head and the City Manager.
2. The Employee attain a grade of "C" or better and is so certified to the
City.
3. The Employee's attendance at course sessions is satisfactory.
4. No other reimbursement is claimed or applied for from another agency
or source.
All other non-related course work will be reimbursed at a rate of 50%, with an
annual cap of $500.
ARTICLE 31. Part Time Work.
The Employer shall contract with all businesses or individuals required to employ
the services of police officers. The officers shall be compensated for such
services in the amount prescribed by other sections of this Agreement. Overtime
resulting from such contracts shall be distributed as equally as practicable in a
voluntary manner.
ARTICLE 32. Administrative Leave/Light Duty
The City recognizes that from time to time, as a result of traumatic incidents
happening on the job, Police Officers may experience stress reactions or other
emotional problems that impact their ability to work efficiently and effectively. In
light of the foregoing, the City's decision to grant administrative leave or light duty
will be based on the following criteria:
1. That the Police Officer is referred to a psychologist or other qualified
mental health professional by the Police Chief. Self referral with the concurrence
of the department head will be deemed to be referral by the City.
2. The cost of any evaluation recommended by the Department will be
borne by the City and the time spent by the officer undergoing the evaluation will
be considered duty time.
3. Administrative leave/light duty shall be granted based on the
recommendation of the Evaluator and a finding that the need for administrative
-16 -
leavellight duty is reasonably related to an incident occurring in the course and
scope of the Officer's employment with the City.
4. The Police Chief will be advised of all findings and recommendations of
the Evaluator, excluding any background material that led to the finding and
recommendation.
5. Any administrative leave/light duty granted will be for the purpose of
obtaining treatment and/or counseling or participating in other activities
prescribed by medical/mental health Evaluator.
6. Light duty or other assignment, consistent with medical
recommendations may be granted. Persons on special assignment or light duty
shall not be eligible for any special assignment pay unless they were so assigned
at the time administrative leave or light duty was granted.
7. Treatment for drug and alcohol rehabilitation is specifically excluded
from consideration for administrative leave.
ARTICLE 33. Salaries and Benefits.
Section 1. Salary - Patrol Officer:
START 6 MO. 9 MO. 1 YEAR 2 YEAR
01 01 091Q.$3609.62 $3850.64 $4013.38 $4413.02 $4948.62
3 YEAR
$5482.16
The City reserves the right to start Employees at levels beyond the starting salary
and to advance Employees through the steps faster than indicated.
Section 2. Incentives. Employees are to choose between educational
incentive and longevity track each January 1. provided that Employeos ourrontly
reooiving both maximum longovity and oduo3tional inoontive shall bo
grandfatherod into tho maximum longovity stop.Emplovees shall receive the
greater of the two following incentives. but not both simultaneouslv:
Longevity.
Over 3.99 years of continuous emplovment. each EMPLOYEE shall be
paid supplementary pay of three percent (3%) of the base rate.
Over 7.99 years of continuous emplovment each EMPLOYEE shall be
paid supplementary pay of five percent (5%) of the base rate.
Over 11.99 years of continuous emplovment each EMPLOYEE shall be
paid supplementary pay of seven percent (7%) of the base rate.
Over 15.99 years of continuous emplovment each EMPLOYEE shall be
paid supplementary pay of nine (9%) of the base rate.
-1 yoars 3%
-17-
8 yoars 5%
12 yoars 7%
16 yoars 9%
. Educational Incentive. $1.00 per credit in blocks of 10 credits to a
maximum of $200.00. For the educational incentive pay, credits must be
approved by the City, but previously approved credits will count, and an AA law
enforcement degree will count the full 90 credits, a SA will count the full 180
credits, etc.
Section 3. Insurance. City will provide a flat contribution of $9Q4-1 023 per
month for insurance for 2QQ92010 which is inclusive of $10 per month for
successful 2009 participants in the Emplover-sponsored wellness initiative. For
2011 the City insurance contribution shall include $20 per month for those who
successfullv participate in the wellness initiative in 2010. The amount of increase
will be equal to 50% of the largest increase in the "Family" premium. Thoso
employoos v:ho successfully participato in tho Employer sponsored 'A'ellness
initiativo in 2009 shall recoivo the full insuranco contribution in 2010.
Unsuccossful or non participating omployoos shall recoivo $10 por month loss in
2010. Insurance must be purchased from a City approved vendor and be a City
authorized plan. The City shall contribute towards insurance through the end of
the month in which termination occurs. The City will provide Long Term Disability
Insurance for the bargaining unit.
Section 4. Uniform Allowance. City will provide all necessary uniforms
and equipment. Employees in any of the enumerated non-uniform special
assignments shall receive $593.24 $600.95 for clothing in 2QQ9201 O. That rate
will be adjusted each year hereafter by the October to October Consumer Price
Index/Apparel Index. Employees who are assigned to plain clothes assignments
(see Article 30, Section 5) for 16 hours or more in a payroll period shall receive
$5 for each 8 hours in that assignment or $3 for increments of 4 hours or
multiples thereof. In addition, officers assigned for more than 45 days to plain
clothes shall receive $243.17246.43 supplemental clothing allowance. The
numbers reflected in the clothing allowance are based on the CPI-U Midwest
Region.
The City will agree to repair or replace where necessary, leather holsters
worn in the line of duty for the City. Replacement and repair of individual
weapons will be reviewed and decided by the City Manager on a case by case
basis.
Section 5. Promotions. Officers who are promoted to the following
classifications shall receive an amount equal to 5% of top patrol base pay as
additional compensation: Detective, and other classifications that are mutually
agreed upon. After 12 consecutive months in one of these classifications, the
officer shall be considered to have completed their probationary period in that
classification.
- 18-
Section 6. Special Assignments. The Police Chief may appoint patrol
officers into special assignments in the Investigation Division for the purposes of
career development, for a period not to exceed eighteen (18) months. Officers
so assigned shall receive five percent (5%) additional compensation and shall be
considered to be in a probationary period throughout the assignment period.
Section 7. Other Assignments. The Police Chief may assign patrol
officers to other types of special assignments as they arise. The duration and
specific details of the assignment will be determined by mutual agreement of the
officer receiving the assignment, the Union and the City.
ARTICLE 34. Duration.
The term of this Agreement shall be from January 1, 2009-2010 to December 31,
20092010.
LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR SERVICES
CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY
Representing Negotiating Committee
Linda R. Loomis, Mayor
Representing Negotiating Committee
Thomas D. Burt, City Manager
For Law Enforcement Labor Services, Inc.
- 19-
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
Shift Bidding
The parties, law Enforcement labor Services, Inc. and the City of Golden
Valley agree that shift selection will:
1. be based on seniority
2. be bid quarterly
The parties agree the above will be the basis for shift selection. The City
and the Union will meet and confer over any proposed changes.
City
Date
Union
Date
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
Shift Biddina
"The parties aaree that the Patrol work schedule structure previously understood
to likely be in place for only 2010 and 2011 shall only be in place for 2010 and
2011 unless otherwise aareed to by both parties. The 2010/2011 work schedule
structure is inclusive of biddable shift spots defined by years of police experience
and also inclusive of two shifts with work hours normally defined as 1500-0300
hours. Nothina in this Memorandum of Understandina overrides the Employer's
manaaement riahts to set work schedules as defined in Article 3 Section 1 of the
lElS labor contract beyond Iimitina the Patrol work schedule structure for 2010
and 2011 as described above."
City
Date
Union
Date
- 20-
alley
Mem ran urn
City Administration/Council
763-593-3990/763-593-8109 (fax)
Executive Summary For Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
January 19, 2010
Agenda Item
3. L. Council Liaisons and Other Assignments
Prepared By
Linda R. Loomis, Mayor
Summary
Each year the Council assigns Council Members to serve as representatives on various
Committees and Subcommittees. These appointments are for a one year term.
Council Liaisons
Board of Zoning Appeals
Civil Service Commission
Environmental Commission
Human Rights Commission
Human Services Foundation
Open Space and Recreation Commission
Planning Commission
Shaffer, Pentel
Freiberg
Pentel, Loomis
Scanlon, Freiberg
Scanlon, Freiberg
Scanlon, Shaffer
Freiberg, Shaffer
Other AssiQnments
Bottineau Transitway Policy Advisory Committee
Golden Valley Historical Society Board Member
Hopkins School District 270 Cities Joint Monthly Meetings
1-394 Joint Task Force
Joint Water Planning and Governance Task Force
Legislative Liaison and Spokesperson
Metro Cities
Northwest Hennepin Human Services Council Executive Board
Northwest Metro Transit Study Task Force
Northwest Suburbs Cable Communications Commission
Northwest YMCA Board of Directors
Robbinsdale School District 281 Government Advisory Committee
Pentel
Freiberg
Loomis
Pentel, Loomis
Loomis, Shaffer
Loomis
Shaffer, Delegate
Loomis, Alternate
Pentel
Scanlon
Shaffer
Scanlon
Scanlon
Recommended Action
Motion to make the appointments as listed above.
Public ~U~Y
Men10randu
Police Department
763-593-8079 I 763-593-8098 (fax)
Executive Summary For Action
Golden Valley City Council Meeting
January 19, 2010
Agenda Item
6. A. Authorization to Sign Request and Termination Letters for Dispatch Services
Prepared By
Stacy Altonen, Chief of Police
Summary
Golden Valley has contracted for Police and Fire dispatch service with the City of St. Louis
Park since 2005. During that time, the annual cost for this service has increased from about
$171,000 to a high of $337,000. In 2008, the City Council directed Staff to explore other
options for dispatch services. The Hennepin County Sheriffs Office provides free dispatch
services to a number of other suburbs, and in December 2008, a request was sent to Sheriff
Richard Stanek to discuss transferring our dispatch services to the Sheriffs Office at the end of
our initial contract term with St. Louis Park. Sheriff Stanek has indicated current staffing levels
at the Golden Valley Sheriffs Office communications facility could absorb our annual calls for
service with no increase in personnel necessary.
Since a Hennepin County Board Resolution from 2004 is currently in place and prohibits any
cities from receiving Sheriffs Office dispatch services if not in place prior to 2005, City staff met
with Hennepin County Administrator Richard Johnson and County Commissioner Mark
Stenglein to discuss rescinding the County Board resolution and agreeing to provide dispatch
services to Golden Valley effective January 1, 2011. Our request will be brought before all
County Commissioners during the first quarter of this year, and we anticipate approval (with or
without an annual fee for service) around the end of the first quarter of 2010. Since the term of
our contract with St. Louis Park requires a 12-month termination notification, a verbal
notification was given to the St. Louis Park City Manager and Police Chief on December 21,
2009.
To formalize both the request to the County Commissioners for dispatch services and the
termination notice to St. Louis Park, Council is requested to approve sending a letter to both
entities indicating the respective actions.
Attachments
Letter to Hennepin County Board of Commissioners (1 page)
Letter to St. Louis Park City Manager (1 page)
Recommended Action
Motion to authorize the Mayor and/or City Manager to sign the request for dispatch services
letter to the Hennepin County Commissioners and the dispatch services termination letter to
the City of St. Louis Park.
January 20, 2010
Hennepin County Board of Commissioners
A2400 Government Center
300 South 6th Street
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55487-0241
Dear County Commissioners:
This letter is an official request from the City of Golden Valley to use the
dispatch services of the Hennepin County Sheriffs Office beginning
January 1, 2011. You may already be aware that we have been in
conversation with Sheriff Stanek, Commissioner Stenglein and County
Administrator Richard Johnson to discuss this request. Sheriff Stanek
has indicated current dispatch staffing levels would be able to absorb
our calls for service without any i crease in personnel or equipment.
Mr. Johnson told us that he woul bring this issue to the Board of
Commissioners for a decision du ing the first quarter of this year, and
we understand it is on the agend for an upcoming meeting. We are
currently under contract with the ity of St. Louis Park for dispatch
services, but we have notified them of our intent to terminate that
contract upon approval from Hennepin County and transfer to the
Sheriffs Office dispatch service in Golden Valley.
As your discussions about this request occur, I will certainly avail
Golden Valley staff to assist with ~nswering any questions you may
have. I appreciate your considera ion in this matter.
Sincerely,
Linda R. Loomis
Mayor
January 20, 2010
Tom Harmening, City Manager
City of St. Louis Park
5005 Minnetonka Boulevard
St. Louis Park, Minnesota 55416-2216
Dear Tom:
The purpose of this letter is to confirm our conversation of December
21, 2009 regarding our contract with your City for dispatch services. At
the direction of our City Council, we would like to terminate our dispatch
contract effective December 31, 2010. It is our intent to transition to
dispatch services via the Hennepin County Sheriff's Office on January
1,2011. As this year progresses, we can discuss the logistics of how
the switch-over will occur on the final day of the contract.
While we have certainly enjoyed a positive partnership with St. Louis
Park for many years, the changing economic picture has made financial
decisions all the more critical to maintaining cost-effective government
services. Please extend our appreciation to your dispatch staff for many
years of good service.
Sincerely,
Thomas D. Burt
City Manager