HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006 03-27 City Council PacketNo CouncilfManager Workshop
AGENDA
MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL
7 :00 P.M. Monday, March 27, 2006
Council Chambers, City Hall
Meeting No. 06 -09
A. CALL TO ORDER
B. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Acknowledgement of Maplewood Residents Serving the Country
C. ROLL CALL
Mayor's Address on Protocol:
"Welcome to the meeting of the Maplewood City Council. It is our desire to keep all discussions civil as we work through
difficult issues tonight. If you are here for a Public Hearing or to address the City Council, please familiarize yourself with
the Policies and Procedures and Rules of Civility, which are located near the entrance. When you address the council,
please state your name and address clearly for the record. All comments /questions shall be posed to the Mayor and
Council. I then will direct staff, as appropriate, to answer questions or respond to comments."
D. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
E. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1. Minutes from the March 13, 2006 City Council Meeting (Continued on March 16, 2006)
2. Minutes from the March 14, 2006 Special City Council Meeting
F. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS
G. APPOINTMENTS/PRESENTATIONS
1. Trunk Highway 36 Reconstruction (White Bear to Century) — Presentation by MnDOT
on Project Planning Issues
H. CONSENT AGENDA
All matters listed under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted by one
motion. If a member of the City Council wishes to discuss an item, that item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and will
be considered separately.
1. Approval of Claims
2. Parks and Recreation Commission Annual Report
3. County Road D Extension, West of Highway 61 — City Project 02 -08
a. Resolution for Modification of Existing Construction Contract, Change Orders Nos. 5 -16
4. Kenwood Area Street Improvements, City Project 05 -16, Resolution Approving Application for
Easement across State Land
5. Kenwood Area Street Improvements, City Project 05 -16, Resolution Ordering Assessment
Hearing
6. Council /Manager /Staff Retreat
1. PUBLIC HEARINGS
7:00 p.m. Tax - Exempt Financing Request — Ecumen (Lakeview Commons —
1200 Lakewood Drive North)
J. AWARD OF BIDS
K. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
1. TH 5 and TH 120 Property Owned by MnDOT — City Project 03 -20 — Review Finding of
Public Purpose for Wetland Restoration Process
2. Reduced Front Yard Setback Appeal (2413 Linwood Avenue)
3. Predatory Offender Ordinance — Draft /First Reading
4. Code Amendment — Nonconforming Uses (Second Reading)
L. NEW BUSINESS
1. Menards — 2280 Maplewood Drive
a. Conditional Use Permit Revision
b. Parking Reduction Authorization
C. Design Approval
2. 111 Reduction Program @ 3M — City Project 06 -02 — Initiate Project and Authorize
Project Funding
3. Gladstone Redevelopment Initiative — City Project 04 -21 — Approve Resolution Calling
Special Meeting for April 18, 2006 to Review Alternatives
4. City Manager Purchasing Authority — Draft/First Reading
5. Council Appointments
M. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS
1. South Maplewood — Council Meeting(s)
2. Mapletree Group Home — Set Public Hearing (No Report)
N. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS
1. Monday, April 3, 2006 — Class B Form of Government /Democratic Governance
2. Council /Manager /Staff Retreat —April 28, 2006
O. ADJOURNMENT
Sign language interpreters for hearing impaired persons are available for public hearings upon request. The
request for this service must be made at least 96 hours in advance. Please call the City Clerk's Office at (651) 249 -2001
to make arrangements. Assisted Listening Devices are also available. Please check with the City Clerk for availability.
RULES OF CIVILITY FOR OUR COMMUNITY
Following are some rules of civility the City of Maplewood expects of everyone appearing at Council Meetings - elected
officials, staff and citizens. It is hoped that by following these simple rules, everyone's opinions can be heard and understood in
a reasonable manner. We appreciate the fact that when appearing at Council meetings, it is understood that everyone will
follow these principles: Show respect for each other, actively listen to one another, keep emotions in check and use respectful
language.
El
A
A
0
E.
DRAFT -- MINUTES
MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL
7:00 P.M. Monday, March 13, 2006
Continuation 5:00 P.M. Thursday, March 16, 2006
Council Chambers, City Hall
Meeting No. 06 -06
CALL TO ORDER
A meeting of the City Council was held in the Council Chambers, at the
order at 7:00 P.M. by Mayor Longrie.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL
Diana Longrie, Mayor
Present
David Bartol, Councilmember
Present
Erik Hjelle, Councilmember
Present
Kathleen Juenemann, Councilmember
Present
Will Rossbach, Councilmember
Present
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Mayor Longrie
L6. Manager's Memo Dated March 10, 2006
L7. Preservation of Electronic Data
Seconded by Councilmember Hjelle Ayes -All
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1. Minutes from the February 27, 2006 Council /Manager Workshop
Agenda Item E1
II, and was called to
Mayor Longrie
Seconded by Councilmember Cave Ayes -Mayor Longrie, Councilmembers Hjelle,
Juenemann and Rossbach
Abstain - Councilmember Cave
2. Minutes from the February 27, 2006 City Council Meeting
Mayor Longrie moved to approve the minutes from the February 27, 2006 City
Council /Manager Workshop as corrected.
Seconded by Councilmember Juenemann Ayes -Mayor Longrie, Councilmembers Hjelle,
Juenemann and Rossbach
Abstain - Councilmember Cave
3. Minutes from the March 6, 2006 Special City Council Meeting
City Council Meeting 03 -13 -06
Mayor Longrie moved to approve the minutes from the February 13, 2006 City
Council /Manager Workshop as corrected.
Seconded by Councilmember Hjelle Ayes -Mayor Longrie, Councilmembers Hjelle,
Juenemann and Rossbach
Abstain - Councilmember Cave
F. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS
John Fallon, land and business owner in the City of Maplewood requested council input on the
development of property he owns in Maplewood. Mayor Longrie and Council suggested
Mr. Fallon provide new councilmembers with information on his proposal, and make
application to the city.
2. David Bartol, 1249 Frisbee Avenue, Maplewood, recognized Public Works Director AN for the
tremendous amount of work and persistence involved in the recent award his department
received. Mr. Bartol read the following letter into the record:
TO MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL Of MAPLE4VOOD
FRO. DAVID BARTOL
SUBJECT- INLARCII 2 MEETING ON € LAIISTO E AI.TI RNATIVE PLAN
DATE: 3/1312006
City Council Meeting 03 -13 -06
Mayor Longrie announced, due to the poor weather conditions, the Menards Development agenda item
(1-4) will not be heard at this council meeting. This agenda item will be rescheduled to the March 27,
2006 meeting.
APPOINTMENTSIPRESENTATIONS
Resolutions of Appreciation — Rick Brandon /Audrey Duellman
a. City Manager Fursman presented the report.
b. Parks Director Anderson presented specifics from the report.
Mayor Juenemann moved to adopt the following resolutions of appreciation to Rick Brandon and
Audrey Duellman for their years of service on the Parks and Recreation Commission:
46 -03 -031
JOINT RESOLUTION OF,
WHEREAS, Rick Brandon has been a n
Commission since March 1995 and has served
WHEREAS, the Parks and Recreation
insights and good judgment and
WHEREAS, he has freely given
betterment of the City of Maplewood, a,
the N
i that
and energy,
for the
WHEREAS, he has shown sincere dedication to his duties and has consistently
contributed his leadership, time and effort for the benefit
of the City.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED for and on behalf of the City of
Maplewood, Minnesota and its citizens, that Rick Brandon is hereby extended our heartfelt
gratitude and appreciation for his dedicated service, and we wish him continued success in the
future.
06 -03 -032
JOINT RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION
WHEREAS, Audrey Duellman has been a member of the Maplewood Parks and
Recreation Commission since danuary 1997 and has served faithfully in that capacity to the
present time; and
WHEREAS, the Parks and Recreation Commission has appreciated her experience,
insights and good judgment and
WHEREAS, she has freely given of her time and energy, without compensation, for the
betterment of the City o f Maplewood; and
WHEREAS, she has shown sincere dedication to her ditties and has consistently
contributed her leadership, time and effort for the benefit
of the City.
FOR
f Parks and Recreation
to the present time; and
his experience,
City Council Meeting 03 -13 -06
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBYRESOLyED for and on beha�fof the City of
Maplewood, Minnesota and its citizens, that Audrey Duellman is hereby extended our hear /elt
gratitude and appreciation for her dedicated service, and we wish her continued success in the
future.
Seconded by Councilmember Rossbach Ayes-All
H. CONSENT AGENDA
Councilmember Juenemann
Seconded by Councilmember Rossbach Ayes-All
Councilmember Juenemann
Seconded by Councilmember Rossbach Ayes-All
Mayor Longrie moved to adopt consent agenda item;
Seconded by Councilmember Juenemann Ayes-All
Councilmember Juenemann moved to adopt consent
Community Design Review Board Members.
Seconded by Mayor Longrie Ayes -All
1. Approval of Claims
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE:
$ 317,956.21
Checks # 69324 thru # 619381
dated 02124106 thru 02128106
$ 150,375.58
Disbursements via debits to checking account
dated 02 -16 -06 thru 02 -23 -06
$ 153,057.18
Manual Checks # 69382 thru # 69385
dated 02127106' thru 03101106
$ 385,091.05
Checks # 69386 thru # 69436
dated 03107106
$ 406,157.36
Disbursements via debits to checking account
dated 02124106 thru 03102106
$ 1,412,637.38
Total Accounts Payable
_
Payroll Checks and Direct Deposits dated
$ 476,943.80 02124106
City Council Meeting 03 -13 -06 4
$ 2,284.75
Payroll Deduction check # 104298 thru # 104299
dated 02124106
$ 479,228.55 Total Payroll
$ 1,891,865.93 GRAND TOTAL
2. North St. Paul /Lakeview Ambulance EMS Mutual Aid Agreement
Adopted the Mutual Medical Services Mutual Aid Agreement between the City of Maplewood
the City of North St. Paul and Lakeview Emergency Medical Services.
3. County Road D East Improvements (TH 61 to Southlawn) — City Project 02 -07 — Approve
Amendment to Extend Temporary License Agreement with Xcel Energy
Approved the following amendment to Extend the Temporary License Agreement with
Xcel Energy for the County Road D East Improvements, City Project 02 -07, and authorized the
Mayor and City Manager to execute the Amendment to Extend the Temporary License
Agreement:
AMENDMENT TO EXTEND
TEMPORARY LICENSE AGREEMENT
This AMENDMENT TO EXTEND TEMPORARY LICENSE AGREEMENT ( "Amendment ") is made effective
this 31st day of January, 2006 by and between NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY, a Minnesota
corporation, dlbla Xcel Energy, with an address of 414 Nicollet Mall, Mezzanine, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401
( "Licensor') and CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, Minnesota, a municipal corporation organized under the laws of the
State of Minnesota, with an address of 1830 County Road B East, Maplewood, MN 55109 ( "Licensee ")
(collectively, the "Parties "). .
WHEREAS, Licensor is the fee
SURVEY NO. 262, FILES OF THE RE
and
WHEKLAS, on August V, 2UUS, tn{
limited access to a portion of the Proper
rights and duties among the Parties, one
of certain real property described as TRACT A, REGISTERED LAND
4R OF TITLES, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA (the "Property ");
arties entered into a Temporary License Agreement granting Licensee
nore particularly described in Exhibit A and setting forth certain other
another;
WHEREAS, the License Agreement set forth the intent of Licensor to sell, and Licensee to purchase the
Licensed Premises in accordance with the terms of a purchase agreement ( "Purchase Agreement ") not yet entered
into by the Parties;
WHEREAS, the License Agreement further provided that the Purchase Agreement would contain a closing
date not later than sixty (60) days after the date of the License;
M
WHEREAS, the License Agreement was subsequently extended by amendment dated October 7, 2005;
WHEREAS, it is the Parties desire to further extend the closing date, and continue to otherwise operate under
the terms of the License Agreement, as previously amended, until the date of closing;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals and the agreement by Licensee to use the
Licensed Premises as set forth in the Temporary License Agreement, and for other good and valuable
consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the Parties hereby agree as follows:
City Council Meeting 03 -13 -06
The term of the Temporary License Agreement is hereby extended by amending the Expiration Date to
February 28, 2006. The Parties shall enter into a Purchase Agreement as provided for under the License, and
close on the purchase of the Licensed Premise on or before the Expiration Date.
This Amendment serves to amend the Temporary License Agreement dated August 9, 2005. Except as
amended herein, said Agreement remains in full force and effect and togetherwith this amendment represents the
entire understanding between Licensor and Licensee; and all prior agreements, either oral or written, are hereby
declared null and void. Any further amendment to the Temporary License Agreement shall only be effective upon
reduction to writing, with said writing to be executed by both Licensor and Licensee.
If any provision of this Amendment shall be held to be invalid in any
invalidity of such provision shall not affect any other provisions.
This Amendment may be executed in two or more counterpart
original, but all of which shall constitute one and the same instrument
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this instrument shall be effective
5
C:
7
I
r first a
Approval of Spring Clean -Up Event Scheduled for April 29, 2C
Approved the Spring Clean -up event scheduled for April 29, 2
Community Design Review Board 2005 Annual Report
Accepted the annual report from the Maplewood Community
Conditional Use Permit Review — University Auto Sales (1145
mpetent jurisdiction, the
shall be deemed to be an
hway 36)
Approved the conditional use permit for University Auto Sales and Leasing at 1145 Highway 36
East. The City Council should review the permit again in the future if a problem arises or if the
owners propose an expansion.
Parks and Recreation Department - Regular Part! -Time Employees
Approved the creation of two regular part -time community gym representative positions to
assist with day -to -day operations of the Edgerton and Carver Community Gyms.
Purchase of One -Ton Truck and Utility Body
Authorized entering into a contract with Stillwater Motors for the purchase of the cab and
chassis and Aspen Equipment for the purchase of the utility crane body.
1. PUBLIC HEARINGS
7:45 p.m. -- TH 5 and TH 120 Property Owned by MnDOT — City Project 03 -20 —
Review Marsh 212 and Hill— Murray Schools Concepts for Property Usage
a. City Manager Fursman presented the report.
b. Public Work Director AM presented specific from the report.
C. Ron Cockriel, 943 Century Avenue, provided specifics from the report.
d. Joe Peschges, President of Hill- Murray School, was present to provide further specifics, and to
answer council questions.
e. Craig Rafferty, Rafferty, Rafferty, Tollefson Architects spoke regarding design details.
City Council Meeting 03 -13 -06
Ron Leif, Short, Elliott, Hendrickson provided details about the wetlands.
g. Mark Guess, MnDOT representative, defined public vs transportation purpose.
Parks and Recreation Anderson spoke about to the lack of need or demand
for additional athletic fields for the City of Maplewood.
Terry Wasiluk, 648 Birch Lane South, explained the bus garage is a school district owned
operation.
Mayor Longrie opened the public hearing, calling for prop
persons were heard:
John Sprangers, 7233 Courtly Road, Woodbury
Larry Wauker, 365 E. Kellog Blvd., St. Paul
Tom Peterson, District Manager Ramsey Conse
Drive, Arden Hills
Mark Gerness, 1837 McKnight Road, Maplewoc
Kevin Kline, 2488 Arlington Avenue East, Maple
Terry Wasiluk, 648 Birch Lane South, Shoreview
Andrew Kline, 2488 Arlington Avenue East, Mar
j. Mayor Longrie closed the publ
Mayor Longrie
Seconded by Councilmember Hjelle
9;37 p.m. Council took a brief recess.
J. AWARD OF BIDS
None
K. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
opponents. The following
,1425
Ayes -Mayor Longrie, Councilmembers
Cave, Hjelle and Rossbach
Nays - Councilmember Juenemann
Kenwood Area Street Improvements, Project 05 -16
a. Resolution Approving Plans and Advertising for Bids
b. Resolution Ordering Preparation of Assessment Roll
a. City Manager Fursman presented the report.
b. Public Works Director Ahl presented specifics from the report.
Councilmember Rossbach moved to adopt the following resolution for the Kenwood Area Street
Improvements, Project 05 -16 Approving Plans and Advertising for Bids:
RESOLUTION 06 -03 -033
APPROVING PLANS
ADVERTISING FOR BIDS
WHEREAS, pursuant to resolution passed by the city council on December 12 2005, plans and
specifications for Kenwood Area Street Improvements, Project 05 -16, have been prepared by (or under the
direction of) the city engineer, who has presented such plans and specifications to the council for approval,
ng at 9:03 p.m.
City Council Meeting 03 -13 -06
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MAPLEWOOD,
MINNESOTA:
1. Such plans and specifications, a copy of which are attached hereto and made a part hereof, are
hereby approved and ordered placed on file in the office of the city clerk.
2. The city clerk shall prepare and cause to be inserted in the official paper and in the Construction
Bulletin an advertisement for bids upon the making of such improvement under such approved plans and
specifications. The advertisement shall be published twice, at least ten days before the date set for bid
opening, shall specify the work to be done, shall state that bids will be publicly opened and considered by the
council at 10:00 a.m. on the 14th day of April, 2006, at the city hall and that no bids shall be considered unless
sealed and filed with the clerk and accompanied by a certified check or bid bond, payable to the City of
Maplewood, Minnesota for five percent of the amount of such bid.
3. The city clerk and city engineer are hereby authorized and instructed to receive, open, and read
aloud bids received at the time and place herein noted, and to tabulate the bids received. The council will
consider the bids, and the award of a contract, at the regular city council meeting of April 24 2006.
Seconded by Councilmember Hjelle
Ayes-All
Councilmember Rossbach moved to adopt the following resolution for the Kenwood Area Street
Improvements, Proiect 05 -16 Ordering the Preparation of the Assessment Roll:
RESOLUTION 06 -03 -034
ORDERING PREPARATION OF ASSESSMENT ROLL
WHEREAS, the city clerk and city engineer will receive bids for the Kenwood Area Street
Improvements, City Project 05 -16.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA
that the city clerk and city engineer shall forthwith calculate the proper amount to be specially assessed for
such improvement against every assessable lot, piece or parcel of land abutting on the streets affected,
without regard to cash valuation, as provided by law, and they shall file a copy of such proposed assessment
in the city office for inspection.'
FURTHER, the clerk shall, upon completion of such proposed assessment notify the council thereof.
econded by Councilmember Hjelle Ayes -All
2. Carver Crossings Improvements (formerly CoPar Development) — City Project 05 -07 — Approve
Resolution Authorizing Distribution of Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW)
a. City Manager Fursman presented the report.
b. Public Works Director Ahl presented specifics from the report.
C. Kurt Schneider, CoPar Companies, 8677 Eagle Point Blvd., Lake Elmo, responded to council
questions regarding current properties on the parcel.
d. Fire Chief Lukin responded to Councilmember Hjelle's request about acquiring a permit from
the DNR to use the property for Fire Department Training.
Councilmember Juenemann moved to adopt the following resolution receiving the EAW for the Carver
Crossing Development Proposal and authorizing distribution of the EAW according to the
Environmental Quality Board (EQB) distribution list and establishes a 30 -day comment period:
City Council Meeting 03 -13 -06
RESOLUTION NO. 06 -03 -035
A RESOLUTION APPROVING DISTRIBUTION FOR PUBLIC COMMENT OF A DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL
ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET FOR
CARVER CROSSING OF MAPLEWOOD DEVELOPMENT PLAN
WHEREAS, on March 14, 2005, the City Council approved a resolution, authorizing that an Environmental
Assessment Worksheet ( "EAW ") be initiated and completed for the proposed Carver Crossing Development
project; and
WHEREAS, the City of Maplewood has prepared a draft EAW docu
environmental impacts of the development scenario; and
WHEREAS, EQB guidance calls for a mandatory 30 -day publi
EAW document that commences with publication in the EQB Monitor;
WHEREAS, the next publication date for the EQB
April 12
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City C
draft EAW environmental analysis document for the Carver C
comment commencing on March 13 and running to April 12 in
Board Environmental Review Program procedures.
ent deadline of
City of Maplewood, Minnesota, that the
Dlopment Plan be distributed for public
with Minnesota Environmental Quality
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MAPLEWOOD THIS 13 DAY OF MARCH
2006.
Seconded by Councilmember Hjelle Ayes -All'
Mr. AN announced a neighborhood meeting will be held March 30 regarding this item at the
Fire Station on London Lane. Further information is available on the city website.
3. Conditional Use Permit Review — Comfort Bus Company (1870 Rice Street)
a. City Manager Fursman presented the report.
b. Assistant City Manager Coleman presented specifics from the report.
C. The following person was heard:
d. Bill McCoskey, 106 Roselawn Avenue East
Councilmember Rossbach moved to table this item until the March 27 City Council Meeting, in order
for the applicant to be present.
Seconded by Councilmember Juenemann Ayes -All
4. Purchasing Policies
a. City Manager Fursman presented the report.
b. Finance Director Faust presented specifics from the report.
Councilmember Rossbach moved to adopt the Purchase Policy from Employee -Owned Companies.
Seconded by Councilmember Cave
Ayes-All
is March 13 with a pu
aces the cumulative
meet period on the draft
City Council Meeting 03 -13 -06
L. NEW BUSINESS
1. Intoxicating Liquor License — Sherry Peake — Keller Golf Course Clubhouse
a. City Manager Fursman presented the report.
b. REAL Director Guilfoile presented specifics from the report.
C. Sherry Peake, 2166 Maplewood Drive, Maplewood, was present for council questions.
Councilmember Rossbach moved to approve the on -sale liquor license for Sherry Peake for the Ke
Golf Course Clubhouse.
Seconded by Councilmember Hjelle Ayes-All
2. Approve Settlement Claim for Sewer Backup at 2621 Ariel Street North with Joe and Susan
Grieman
a. City Manager Fursman presented the report.
b. Parks and Recreation Director Anderson presented specifics from the report.
Councilmember Juenemann moved to approve the settlement agreement with Joe and Susan Grie
Seconded by Councilmember Rossbach Ayes-All
3. Approve Noise Variance for Ramsey County to Perform Night Ti
Beam Avenue between Hazelwood and White Bear Avenue
Menards — 2280 Maplewood Drive
a. Conditional Use Permit Revision
b. Parking Reduction Authorization
C. Design Approval
a. City Manager Fursman presented the report.
b. Public Works Director Ahl presented specifics from the report.
; ouncilmember Rossbach moved to aoarove the noise variance for Ra
iffMITl IM = P, - a 11i11.T.. ". mi * M_ 'Li_
Seconded by Mayor Longrie Ayes -All
Councilmember Hjelle moved to continue the meeting until 11:30 p.m.
Seconded by Councilmember Cave Ayes -All
5. Predatory Offender Ordinance — Draft /First Reading
a. City Manager Fursman presented the report.
b. REAL Director Guilfoile presented specifics from the report.
C. Police Chief Thomalla provided further specifics from the report.
Maintenance on
T[iiL- R�
City Council Meeting 03 -13 -06 10
d. City Attorneys Kelly and Oliver provided legal perspective on the Predatory Offender Ordinance
and answered council questions.
Mayor Longrie moved to table the Predatory Offender Ordinance pending the receipt of all information
requested by council.
Seconded by Councilmember Rossbach Ayes-All
Mayor Longrie adjourned the meeting at 12:00 a.m.
CONTINUATION OF MARCH 13 CITY COUNCIL MEETING
5:00 p.m. Thursday, March 16
Councilmember Cave moved to waive the Robert Rules of Order regardinq additions to the agenda,
Seconded by Councilmember Hjelle
r Rossbach expressed how important it is not to have serial meetings, nor
6her than from the dais.
M1. Acknowledgement of Petition
M2. Ramsey/Washington County Cable Commission
M3. Tartan Ice Arena Joint Powers
M4. Mapletree CUP
M5. Council Meetings /South Maplewood Location
6. Manager's March 10, 2006 Memorandum
a. City Manager Fursman presented the report.
b. Councilmemb
to d i rect staff
C. City Attorney
meetings and
d. City Manager
at the Council
Government.
Preservation of Elect
a. Mayor Longrii
Mayor Longrie move
Ayes-All
)lained the content of the discussion is key in defining serial
the day to day functioning of a typical Class B city.
sman reminded council a speaker from the League of MN Cities will be
eager Workshop on April Td to discuss the Plan B Form of
nic
the report and provided specifics of the report.
to table this item the April 10 City Council Meeti
Imember Rossbach Ayes-All
MI. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS
Acknowledgement of Petition -Mayor Longrie acknowledged the seven page petition received
from City Employees at the Tuesday, March 14 Special meeting. The original petition is
on file with the City Clerk.
2. Ramsey/Washington Cable Commission - Councilmember Hjelle announced there is a proposed
$150,000 that the Cable Commission will be returning to the city in cable fees.
3. Joint Powers /Tartan Ice Area - Councilmembers Cave and Hjelle attended the March 15
meeting and Ms. Cave provided an update from the meeting.
City Council Meeting 03 -13 -06 11
4. Public Hearing to Revoke the CUP for Mapletree- Councilmember Cave asked City Manager
Fursman to include this item on the next City Council Agenda.
rA
5. Council Meetings /South Maplewood - Councilmember Cave requested a Council Meeting be
held in south Maplewood, possibly when the chambers is under renovation.
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS
1. Bid Award on Bond Issue — Mr. Fursman reminded council this brief meeting will be held on
Thursday, March 23, 2006 at 5:00 p.m.
2. Retreat Update -Mr. Fursman suggested April 21S or the 28 for a Council /Staff Retreat with the
28 being preferred by the majority of the council.
3. April 3, 2006 /Council /Manager Workshop /Plan B Form of Government and Democratic
Governance -City Manager Fursman announced Kevin Frazell from the League of MN Cities will
be the Guest Speaker at this meeting.
4. Liquor License Ordinance - Councilmember Cave asked that the liquor license ordinance be
available for the March 27 meeting. REAL Director Clerk G'uilfoile asked to leave the date at
April 24 to ensure what is proposed is statutorily sound and offers council various options to
decide upon.
5. Options to the League of MN Cities-Council member Hjelle asked if there is an additional source
that could be brought in to speak to the Plan B Form of Government to provide a second
perspective on the subject. City Manager Fursman suggested the International City Manger's
Association as an option and he will contact them to see if a speaker would be available.
6. RCLLG- Councilmember Rossbach not
Government will be holding a brainstoi
focus on for the remainder of the year.
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Longrie adjourned at 5:42 p.m.
March 30`', a Ramsey County League of Local
meeting to determine areas of common interests to
City Council Meeting 03 -13 -06
12
Agenda Item E2
DRAFT -- MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING
MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL
5:32 P.M. Tuesday, March 14, 2006
Council Chambers, City Hall
Meeting No. 06 -07
A. CALL TO ORDER
1 =11
A
41
A meeting of the City Council was held in the Council Chambe
order at 5:30 P.M. by Mayor Longrie.
lied to
ROLL CALL
Diana Longrie, Mayor
Present
Rebecca Cave, Councilmember
Present
Erik Hjelle, Councilmember
Present
Kathleen Juenemann, Councilmember
Present
Will Rossbach, Councilmember
Present
City Attorney Kelly gave a clarification of the open meeting law.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
2a. Visitor Presentations
2b. Council Comments
Councilmember Rossbach moved to approve the agenda
as amended.
Seconded by Mayor Longrie
Ayes -Mayor Longrie,
Councilmembers Cave, Hjelle and
Rossbach
Nays- Councilmember Juenemann
NEW BUSINESS
1. Appointment to the Dispatch Policy Committee
a: Mayor Longrie presented the report.
b. City Manager Fursman presented specifics from the report.
C. Police Chief Thomalla and Councilmember
Juenemann provided further specifics from
the report.
Councilmember Rossbach moved to appoint Councilmember Juenemann to the Dispatch Policy
Committee.
Seconded by Councilmember Hjelle Ayes -Mayor Longrie, Councilmembers Cave,
Hjelle, and Rossbach
Abstain - Councilmember Juenemann
03 -14 -06 Special City Council Meeting
2. Maplewood Ordinance Sec. 2 -101 — Pertaining to the City Manager
a. Mayor Longrie presented the report.
Mayor Longrie moved to terminate the City Manager from his position with his full severance
package and have Assistant City Manager Melinda Coleman as interim City Manager during the
search and hiring of Manager Fursman's replacement.
Seconded by Councilmember Cave
The following persons were heard:
Jerry Serfling, AFSCME Council V
Lori Tolzman, 812 Mary Street, Maplewood
Roxanne De Florin, Representing Citizens against Petty Politics
MaryLee Abrams, 2940 Frank Street, General Council for Law Enforcement Officers
Steven Hines, Maplewood Police Officer, 837 Lake Jane Trail, Lake Elmo
George Rossbach, 1406 E. County Road C, Maplewood
Mike Stockstead, President, Minnesota Profession< "'
Kevin Schmidt, 1800 Phalen Place, Maplewood
Peter Fischer, Parks Commission Chair, 2443 Stan
Mark Gerness, 1837 McKnight Road, Maplewood
City Attorney Kelly and City Attorney Lee disci
councilmember Hjelle voting to remove the Cit
Department employee.
Attorney Lee informed Mayor Longrie that due
was unable to obtain an opinion from the Attar
Mayor Longrie
Mayor
Seconded by Council
E. ADJOURN
venue
ibility of a conflict of interest for
n his position since Mr. Hjelle is a Fire
ie timeline of the meeting being called and held he
General's Office.
r Cave Ayes -Mayor Longrie, Councilmembers Cave,
Juenemann and Rossbach
Abstain - Councilmember Hjelle
Mayor Longrie moved to adjourn the meeting at 8 :25 p.m.
03 -14 -06 Special City Council Meeting
Agenda Item G1
AGENDA REPORT
TO: Richard Fursman, City Manager
FROM: Charles Ahl, Public Works Director /City Engineer
SUBJECT: Trunk Highway 36 Reconstruction (White Bear to Century) —
Presentation by MnDOT on Project Planning Issues
DATE: March 20, 2006
INTRODUCTION
MnDOT and Ramsey County are proposing a major highway project on Highway 36 between White Bear
Avenue and Century Avenue. MnDOT officials will be present to discuss the planning for the project. No
action by the City Council is required.
Background
The Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT), Ramsey County and the City of North St. Paul are
currently preparing plans to reconstruct Trunk Highway 36 between White Bear Avenue and Century
Avenue. The proposed project will include the addition of a grade - separated interchange at McKnight
Road, grade separation at Margaret Street and pedestrian bridge at 1 s' Avenue in North St. Paul. Current
plans call for the project to begin in 2007. When completed, the only signal system on TH 36 between
Century Avenue and Interstate 35W in Roseville will be at the English Street intersection. The current cost
estimate is $30 million. Officials at MnDOT, who are responsible for construction staging, are considering
closing TH 36 during the 2007 construction season to facilitate the project. The disruption and local
impacts could be considerable. The posted detour will be TH 61 to 1 -694.
Chris Roy, MnDOT Regional Manager, and Kent Barnard, MnDOT Public Affairs Officer, will be present to
explain why MnDOT is considering closing such a major roadway. The current budget for this project is
just over $28 million. The closure of TH 36 would be for approximately four months and could save
MnDOT and Ramsey County between $2 million and $3 million. Officials suggest that a majority of the
project would be substantially complete in 2007 with the closure. The alternative to keep the roadway
partially open during construction requires an additional $2.5 million and extends the project well into 2008.
It is important to note that none of the participating agencies have funds available to cover the additional
$2.5 million in project costs.
MnDOT is continuing to prepare documents that are anticipated to be completed in April. A public meeting
for North St. Paul residents was to be held on March 21. A similar meeting will be held for Maplewood
residents following this presentation.
RECOMMENDATION
Attachments:
1. MnDOT Press Release on TH 36 Project
Agenda Item G1
wa 11 ota Department of Transportation
N; OF �
Metropolitan District
Waters Edge Building
1500 County Road B2 West
Roseville, MN 55113
March 9, 2006
For Immediate Release
6121640 -4142
Phone: 651/582
Contact: Kent Barnard
Office Phone: 6511582 -1364
Innovative construction to highlight
Highway 36 open house in North St. Paul
News Release
Em
(Roseville, Minn.) — Innovative proposals for reconstruction of Highway 36 between Highway 120
(Century Avenue) and White Bear Avenue in the cities of North St. Paul and Maplewood will be
outlined at a public open house later this month in North St. Paul. Residents and commuters
along the highway are invited to attend a public open house scheduled from 3 p.m. to 7 p.m.,
Tuesday, March 21, at the North St. Paul City Hall, 2400 Margaret St.
Mn /DOT Metro District is considering some innovative construction methods, including full
closure of the highway for approximately five months at the beginning of the project to accelerate
work on the roadway and lessen the long -term affects of the work during the two -year construction
period.
The proposed project would rebuild Hwy 36 between White Bear Ave. and Century Ave.
(Highway 120) to increase safety and improve access through the area.
As planned, the new highway would feature a diamond interchange at Hwy 36 and
McKnight Rd., a bridge to carry Margaret St. traffic over Hwy 36 and a pedestrian /bicycle bridge
crossing the highway for the Gateway Trail. Currently reconstruction is scheduled to begin in the
spring of 2007 with completion in the fall of 2008. Six at -grade intersections also will close and a
frontage road is planned from McKnight Rd. to First St. Further information is available at
http://www.dot.state.mn.us/metro/12rojects/th36/index.htmI
Individuals with a disability, who need reasonable accommodations to participate, please
contact Kent Barnard at 6591582 -1364. Hearing or speech impaired persons contact the Minnesota
Relay Service at 1 -800- 627 -3529.
AGENDA NO. H -1
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Council
FROM: Finance Director
RE: APPROVAL OF CLAIMS
DATE: March 27, 2006
Attached is a listing of paid bills for informational purposes. The City Manager has reviewed the bills
and authorized payment in accordance with City Council approved policies.
ACCOUNTSPAYABLE:
$ 24,381.10 EFT 9 69437 thru 4 69438
dated 3114106
$ 311,955.43 Checks 9 69439 thru 4 69489
dated 3114106
$ 156,014.52 Disbursements via debits to checking account
dated 3103106 thru 3109106
$ 266,349.10 Checks 9 69490 thru 9 69535
dated 03/21/06
$ 299,765.94 Disbursements via debits to checking account
dated 03110106 thru 03116106
$ 1,058,466.09 Total Accounts Payable
PAYROLL
$ 491,050.97 Payroll Checks and Direct Deposits dated 03/10/06
$ 2,284.75 Payroll Deduction check 9 104516 thru 9 104517
dated 03110106
$ 493,335.72 Total Payroll
$ 1,551,801.81 GRAND TOTAL
Attached is a detailed listing of these claims. Please call me at 651- 249 -2902 if you have any questions
on the attached listing. This will allow me to check the supporting documentation on file if necessary.
ds
attachments
S: \CTY_CLRK\Agenda Lists and Reports 2006\Agenda Reports\03- 27 -06 \H1 Approval of Claims.xis
vchlist
0311012006 10:17:25 AM
Check Register
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
Check Date Vendor Description/Account
69437 3/14/2006 02728 KIMLEY -HORN & ASSOCIATES INC PROJ 02 -21 PROF SRVS THRU 1(31
PROJ 03 -26 PROF SRVS THRU 1131
PROJ 04 -21 PROF SRVS THRU 1131
PROJ 05 -10 PROF SRVS THRU 1131
PROJ 05 -38 PROF SRVS THRU 1131
69438 3/14/2006 02652 TETZLAFF. JUDY REIMB FOR TUITION & BOOKS
2 Checks in this report
Amount
2,637.50
812.35
2,565.20
9,057.10
8,216.39
1,092.56
Total checks : 24,381.10
2
Check Register
City of Maplewood
03/1012006
Check
69439
69440
69441
69442
69443
69444
69445
69446
69447
69448
69449
69450
69451
69452
69453
69454
69455
69456
69457
69458
69459
69460
69461
69462
69463
69464
69465
69466
69467
69468
69469
69470
69471
69472
69473
69474
69475
69476
69477
69477
69478
Date
03/1412006
03114/2006
0311412006
03114/2006
03/1412006
0311412006
03/14/2006
03114/2006
03/14/2006
03114/2006
03114/2006
03114/2006
03/14/2006
03114/2006
03/14/2006
03114/2006
03/14/2006
03114/2006
03114/2006
03114/2006
03/14/2006
03114/2006
03/14/2006
03114/2006
03/14/2006
03114/2006
03114/2006
03114/2006
03/14/2006
03114/2006
03/14/2006
03114/2006
03/14/2006
03114/2006
03114/2006
03114/2006
03/14/2006
03114/2006
03/14/2006
03114/2006
03/14/2006
03114/2006
03114/2006
03114/2006
03/14/2006
03114/2006
03/14/2006
03114/2006
03/14/2006
03114/2006
03114/2006
03114/2006
03/14/2006
03114/2006
03/14/2006
03114/2006
03/14/2006
03114/2006
03114/2006
Vendor
00111
00130
02914
03623
03628
03595
00494
03593
02974
00241
00241
00358
00358
00358
00358
00358
00358
00358
00358
00412
00412
00412
03576
03516
00589
00652
00718
00718
00721
00708
00788
01894
01894
00809
00827
00904
00904
03624
03354
01088
01160
01202
01213
00001
00001
02043
01269
03625
00396
01387
01409
01409
01409
01409
01409
01418
01418
01418
01418
ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES INC
ASIAN AMERICAN PRESS
BLUECROSS BLUESHIELD OF MN
BOB WOLLER & SONS BLACKTOPPING
JOHN CAPISTRANT
STEVE CHEZIK
CHILDREN HOME & FAMILY SERVICE
CITY HEIGHTS INC
THE CORBAN GROUP INC
CSI SOFTWARE
CSI SOFTWARE
DGM INC.
DGM INC.
DGM INC.
DGM INC.
DGM INC.
DGM INC.
DGM INC.
DGM INC.
DONALD SALVERDA & ASSOCIATES
DONALD SALVERDA & ASSOCIATES
DONALD SALVERDA & ASSOCIATES
EUREKA RECYCLING
ANTHONY GABRIEL
DAVE GRAF
STEVE HEINZ
INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DIST #622
INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DIST #622
INDEPENDENT SPORTS NETWORK
IPMA MN CHAPTER ADMIN
FLINT KAKIS
KELLY & FAWCETT PA
KELLY & FAWCETT PA
TOMMY KONG
LMCIT
MLEEA
MLEEA
KEN MAUSTON
MCA STUDENT SERVICES COMMITTEE
MN POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY
NEWMAN TRAFFIC SIGNS
NYSTROM PUBLISHING CO INC
JULIE OLSON
ONE TIME VENDOR
ONE TIME VENDOR
OVERHEAD DOOR COMPANY
PIPE SERVICES CORP
PREMIUM ELECTRICAL SRVS LLC
DEPT OF PUBLIC SAFETY
DR. JAMES ROSSINI
S.E.H.
S.E.H.
S.E.H.
S.E.H.
S.E.H.
SAM'S CLUB DIRECT
SAM'S CLUB DIRECT
SAM'S CLUB DIRECT
SAM'S CLUB DIRECT
Description
PATROL & BOARDING FEES 2113 - 2126
EMPLOYMENT ADS
MONTHLY PREMIUM
GRADING ESCROW FOR 2263 TILSON
REIMB FOR COAT REPAIR
SCOREKEEPER 1/21 THRU 2118
MAPLEWOOD YOUTH DIVERSION - FEB
WINDOW CLEANING
ROB CHAFFEE CONSULTING
KEY TAGS
KEY TAGS
TOW FORFEITURE VEHICLE
TOW FORFEITURE VEHICLE
TOW FORFEITURE VEHICLE
TOW FORFEITURE VEHICLE
TOW FORFEITURE VEHICLE
TOW FORFEITURE VEHICLE
TOW FORFEITURE VEHICLE
TOW FORFEITURE VEHICLE
TRAINING & MATERIALS
TRAINING & MATERIALS
TRAINING
RECYCLING - MAR
REIMB FOR TUITION & BOOKS
KARATE INSTRUCTOR 2/7 - 2/28
REIMB FOR MEALS 3/2 - 3/3
GYM SUPERVISION & RENTAL
ROOM RENTAL
BASKETBALL OFFICIAL SERVICES
REGISTRATION FEE
REIMB FOR MEAL & PRK 1/11 - 2127
LEGAL SERVICES - FEB
PROSECUTION SERVICES - FEB
REIMB FOR GUN SAFE
CLAIM DEDUCTIBLE 11054187
POLICE EXPL CONF REGISTRATION
MEMBERSHIP
REIMB FOR MILEAGE 2 -16
CRIMINAL JUSTICE CAREER FAIR
REGISTRATION FEE
SIGN BLANKS
MCC NEWSLETTER
REIMB FOR MEAL 3/2
REF MARY WIMER - CANCEL RM
REF ANITA TENISON- CANCEL RM
INSTALL NEW ROLLING DOOR
PROD 05 -16 STORM SWR TELEVISE 2121
208 VOLT & (2) 120 VOLT
RECERTIFICATION CLASS
FITNESS PROGRAM ADMIN FEE - FEB
PROD 05 -36 PROF SRVS - JAN
PROJ 05 -29 PROF SRVS - JAN
PROD 04 -22 PROF SRVS - JAN
AFTON HTS PARK WATER RES - JAN
MONTHLY SRV FEE FOR NPDES - JAN
MERCH FOR RESALE & PROG
MERCH FOR RESALE
CARVER & EDGERTON GYM SUPPLIES
MERCH FOR RESALE
Amount
1,050.98
240.46
141,052.50
1,000.00
27.00
84.00
3,526.08
1,917.00
567.00
560.00
555.00
170.40
143.78
143.78
143.78
111.83
111.83
111.83
111.83
873.73
873.73
600.00
20,148.70
497.22
175.50
86.32
873.00
18.00
1,368.00
20.00
19.80
14,162.74
9,825.00
100.00
796.15
1,320.00
60.00
12.15
40.00
120.00
670.95
1,520.82
86.53
175.00
150.00
9,000.00
2,040.35
370.00
45.00
100.00
2,806.99
593.44
387.79
340.51
220.50
290.67
271.35
219.31
205.16
3
03/1012006
Check
69479
69480
69481
69482
69483
69484
69485
69486
69487
69488
69489
Date
03/1412006
03114/2006
0311412006
03114/2006
03/1412006
0311412006
03/1412006
03114/2006
03/1412006
03114/2006
0311412006
03114/2006
03/1412006
0311412006
03/1412006
03114/2006
03/1412006
03114/2006
0311412006
03114/2006
03/1412006
0311412006
03/1412006
Vendor
01418
01418
01418
01418
01418
01418
01418
01418
01418
01556
01410
01504
03627
03626
01649
01649
00449
00449
03334
03334
01771
01190
01798
Check Register
City of Maplewood
SAM'S CLUB DIRECT
SAM'S CLUB DIRECT
SAM'S CLUB DIRECT
SAM'S CLUB DIRECT
SAM'S CLUB DIRECT
SAM'S CLUB DIRECT
SAM'S CLUB DIRECT
SAM'S CLUB DIRECT
SAM'S CLUB DIRECT
SPEEDWAY SUPERAMERICA LLC
SPI DESIGN GROUP
CITY OF ST PAUL
PAUL H SWETT
TRI- COUNTY ASSN
TRI -STATE BOBCAT, INC.
TRI -STATE BOBCAT, INC.
TYLER TECHNOLOGIES INC
TYLER TECHNOLOGIES INC
UNIQUE PAVING MATERIALS CORP
UNIQUE PAVING MATERIALS CORP
CITY OF WHITE BEAR LAKE
XCELENERGY
YOCUM OIL CO.
Description
MERCH FOR RESALE
MERCH FOR RESALE
BIRTHDAY CAKES & SUPPLIES
FIRE STATION SUPPLIES
EDGERTON GYM SUPPLIES
MCC BIRTHDAY PROGRAM
MCC BIRTHDAY PROGRAM
MCC BIRTHDAY PROGRAM
MCC BIRTHDAY PROGRAM
FUEL
DAILY ADMISSIONS CARDS
CRIME LAB SRVS -JAN
REIMB FOR MEETING 317
MEMBERSHIP DUES
T -250 COMPACT TRACK LOADER &
RETURN 4 TIRES
EDEN SYSTEMS ANNUAL SUPPORT
CREDIT - CANCEL CITIZEN SRVS
PATCHING MATERIAL
PATCHING MATERIAL
TRAINING 3113 & 3114
GAS & ELECTRIC UTILITY
PERF GOLD RED DYED DIESEL FUEL
Amount
186.51
109.59
96.16
94.00
87.32
70.35
57.48
38.61
9.87
72.85
589.20
750.00
20.00
60.00
15,834.40
- 829.51
33,985.30
-2,377.90
417.48
351.02
25.00
24,642.71
14, 591.50
J 1 1.Vyz.41D
4
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
Disbursements via Debits to Checking account
Transmitted Settlement
Date Date Payee
Description
03/02/06
03/03/06
MN State Treasurer
Drivers License /Deputy Registrar
03/02/06
03/03/06
MN Dept of Natural Resources
DNR electronic licenses
02/24/06
03/03/06
WI Dept of Revenue
State Payroll Tax
03/03/06
03/06/06
MN State Treasurer
Drivers License /Deputy Registrar
03/06/06
03/07/06
MN State Treasurer
Drivers License /Deputy Registrar
03/07/06
03/08/06
MN State Treasurer
Drivers License /Deputy Registrar
03/03/06
03/08/06
US Bank VISA One Card*
Purchasing card items
03/08/06
03/09/06
MN State Treasurer
Drivers License /Deputy Registrar
TOTAL
*Detailed listing of VISA purchases is attached.
Amount
21,448.75
460.50
2,054.52
20,636.50
19,505.00
22, 759.32
56, 327.98
12,821.95
156,014.52
VISA transactions 02 -18 -06 to 03- 03 -06.
Trans Date
Posting Date
Merchant Name
Trans Amount
Name
20060221
20060223
CVS PHARMACY #1751 Q03
$3.18
BRUCE K ANDERSON
20060301
20060303
SPRINT PCS- 996 -SP IVR
$60.00
BRUCE K ANDERSON
20060217
20060220
ANDON BALLOONS INC - 2
$111.82
MANDY ANZALDI
20060217
20060220
FACTORY CARD OUTLET #284
$77.66
MANDY ANZALDI
20060218
20060220
TARGET 00000612
$3.20
MANDY ANZALDI
20060224
20060227
ALL ABOUT DANCE.COM
$456.95
MANDY ANZALDI
20060224
20060227
KMART 00030346
$51.95
MANDY ANZALDI
20060228
20060301
THEATRE HOUSE
$162.40
MANDY ANZALDI
20060228
20060302
ORIENTAL TRADING CO
$138.80
MANDY ANZALDI
20060301
20060303
JOANN ETC #1970
$30.42
MANDY ANZALDI
20060301
20060303
TOYS R US #6046
$31.94
MANDY ANZALDI
20060301
20060303
MICHAELS #2744
$28.88
MANDY ANZALDI
20060221
20060223
STRETCHERS INC
$723.80
JOHN BANICK
20060221
20060228
RHINO COMMUNICATIONS
$1,304.63
JOHN BANICK
20060222
20060224
SHRED -IT 01 OF 01
$113.22
JOHN BANICK
20060223
20060227
EAT INC
$261.35
JOHN BANICK
20060224
20060227
NORTH STAR TOWING
$105.20
JOHN BANICK
20060228
20060302
ARROWHEAD EMERGENCY MEDIC
$245.00
JOHN BANICK
20060216
20060220
VIKING ELEC- CRED101 OF 01
$194.85
JIM BEHAN
20060217
20060220
MUSKA LIGHTING CENTER
$1,581.14
JIM BEHAN
20060217
20060220
MUSKA LIGHTING CENTER
$254.56
JIM BEHAN
20060217
20060220
PRIORTIY COURIER
$64.17
JIM BEHAN
20060217
20060220
THERMO -DYNE INC
$1,002.73
JIM BEHAN
20060217
20060220
THERMO -DYNE INC
$979.00
JIM BEHAN
20060221
20060223
SIMPLEX GRINNELL WEB P
$283.29
JIM BEHAN
20060222
20060223
VIKING AUTOMATIC SPRINKL
$294.00
JIM BEHAN
20060222
20060223
US BUILDER SUPPLY
$133.30
JIM BEHAN
20060228
20060301
EL REINHARDT COMPANY INC
$446.24
JIM BEHAN
20060302
20060303
GOPHER BEARING COMPANY
$404.86
JIM BEHAN
20060217
20060220
BLUE RIBBON BAIT & TACKL
$6.18
OAKLEY BIESANZ
20060227
20060301
AUTOZONE #3082
$21.66
RON BOURQUIN
20060221
20060222
USPS 2663650015
$39.50
ROGER BREHEIM
20060224
20060227
CITI -CARGO
$106.50
ROGER BREHEIM
20060224
20060227
SEARS ROEBUCK 1122
$372.74
TROY BRINK
20060227
20060301
SEARS ROEBUCK 1122
$101.07
TROY BRINK
20060301
20060302
FEDEX KINKO'S #0617
$59.64
HEIDI CAREY
20060301
20060302
HELMER PRINTING
$531.44
HEIDI CAREY
20060222
20060223
SAINT PAUL AREA CHAMBER
$10.00
MELINDA COLEMAN
20060222
20060224
CUB FOODS
$7.44
MELINDA COLEMAN
20060223
20060227
WOLF CAMERA #1530
$14.46
MELINDA COLEMAN
20060220
20060222
PROMOTE IT INTERNATIONAL
$149.00
LINDA CROSSON
20060224
20060227
GE CAPITAL
$158.69
LINDA CROSSON
20060224
20060228
CITY BUSINESS - MINNEAPOLIS
$79.95
LINDA CROSSON
20060225
20060228
TIME WARNER CABLE
$109.79
LINDA CROSSON
20060301
20060303
BLOOMINGTON SECURITY SOLU
$71.36
LINDA CROSSON
20060301
20060303
BLOOMINGTON SECURITY SOLU
$39.14
LINDA CROSSON
20060227
20060301
SKILLPATH SEMINARS
$199.00
ROBERTA DARST
20060228
20060301
COMCAST CABLE COMM
$107.09
ROBERTA DARST
20060228
20060301
TWIN CITY SAW CO
$40.98
THOMAS DEBILZAN
20060217
20060220
RAY ALLEN MFG CO INC
$249.60
RICHARD DOBLAR
20060301
20060302
JIMMY JOHNS #382 Q62
$37.33
RICHARD DOBLAR
20060223
20060224
CORPORATE MARK INC
$22.50
ROBERT J DOLLERSCHELL
20060224
20060227
SEARS ROEBUCK 1122
$15.96
DOUG EDGE
20060224
20060227
SEARS ROEBUCK 1122
$350.26
DOUG EDGE
20060224
20060227
THE HOME DEPOT 2801
$71.32
DOUG EDGE
20060216
20060220
HIRSHFIELD'S MAPLEWOOD
$292.75
DAVE EDSON
VISA transactions 02 -18 -06 to 03- 03 -06.
Trans Date
Posting Date
Merchant Name
Trans Amount
Name
20060228
20060301
MAUTZ #3525
$100.38
DAVE EDSON
20060215
20060220
CRAMER BLDG SERVICES INC
$208.00
LARRY FARR
20060217
20060220
FERGUSON ENT #1650
$68.71
LARRY FARR
20060217
20060220
THE HOME DEPOT 2801
$41.41
LARRY FARR
20060217
20060220
CYBEX INTERNATIONAL
$110.20
LARRY FARR
20060221
20060223
MINVALCO INC
{$265.97}
LARRY FARR
20060221
20060223
MILLS FLEET FARM #27
$70.55
LARRY FARR
20060222
20060224
EXPRESS MESSENGER SYSTEM
$23.80
LARRY FARR
20060224
20060227
SPRINT STORE #NO354
($33.54)
LARRY FARR
20060227
20060301
MENARDS 3022
$40.33
LARRY FARR
20060302
20060303
CYBEX INTERNATIONAL
$90.87
LARRY FARR
20060218
20060220
SENSIBLE LAND USE COAL
$32.00
SHANN FINWALL
20060218
20060220
SENSIBLE LAND USE COAL
$32.00
SHANN FINWALL
20060223
20060224
SUPER STOP PLUS
$18.85
SHANN FINWALL
20060220
20060221
WMS *WASTE MGMT WMEZPAY
$345.23
DAVID FISHER
20060220
20060221
WMS *WASTE MGMT WMEZPAY
$345.23
DAVID FISHER
20060228
20060302
INT'L CODE COUNCIL INC
$311.00
DAVID FISHER
20060228
20060302
INT'L CODE COUNCIL INC
$71.00
DAVID FISHER
20060217
20060220
POSGUYS.COM
$415.54
MYCHAL FOWLDS
20060221
20060223
THE PERCS INDEX INC
$500.00
MYCHAL FOWLDS
20060223
20060227
ACS GOVERNMENT SYSTEMS
$2,157.69
MYCHAL FOWLDS
20060224
20060227
NEWEGG COMPUTERS
$514.96
MYCHAL FOWLDS
20060224
20060227
CABLES N MOR, INC
$64.64
MYCHAL FOWLDS
20060227
20060301
HENRIKSEN ACE HARDWARE
$2.96
MYCHAL FOWLDS
20060301
20060302
QQEST ASSET MANAGEMENT
$349.00
MYCHAL FOWLDS
20060301
20060303
ELECTRO WATCHMAN INC
$319.50
MYCHAL FOWLDS
20060302
20060303
NEWEGG COMPUTERS
($258.98)
MYCHAL FOWLDS
20060302
20060303
HP HOME STORE
$336.53
MYCHAL FOWLDS
20060218
20060220
HP DIRECT- PUBLICSECTOR
$4,651.09
NICK FRANZEN
20060222
20060223
BATTERIES PLUS
$12.12
NICK FRANZEN
20060222
20060223
HP DIRECT- PUBLICSECTOR
$3,397.78
NICK FRANZEN
20060223
20060224
GENERAL NANOSYSTEMS INC
$176.54
NICK FRANZEN
20060223
20060227
WWW.CIRCUITCITY.COM
$53.24
NICK FRANZEN
20060302
20060303
HP DIRECT- PUBLICSECTOR
$333.04
NICK FRANZEN
20060217
20060220
PAKOR INC
$439.83
PATRICIA FRY
20060223
20060224
S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS
$377.74
PATRICIA FRY
20060224
20060227
S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS
$36.23
PATRICIA FRY
20060224
20060227
S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS
$28.76
PATRICIA FRY
20060227
20060301
CUB FOODS, INC.
$80.27
PATRICIA FRY
20060228
20060301
S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS
($33.99)
PATRICIA FRY
20060228
20060302
RED'S SAVOY PIZZA
$82.02
PATRICIA FRY
20060228
20060302
5 -8 TAVERN & GRILL
$80.50
PATRICIA FRY
20060225
20060227
CUB FOODS, INC.
$32.60
RICHARD FURSMAN
20060301
20060302
MENARDS 3129
$36.62
VIRGINIA GAYNOR
20060222
20060224
CREATIVE PROMOTIONS INTER
$828.07
CLARENCE GERVAIS
20060217
20060220
S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS
$248.86
JEAN GLASS
20060227
20060228
S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS
$38.08
JEAN GLASS
20060222
20060224
OFFICE MAX 00002204
$9.85
MIKE GRAF
20060223
20060227
DEMCO INC
$28.68
JANET M GREW HAYMAN
20060228
20060302
RAINBOW FOODS 00088526
$28.84
JANET M GREW HAYMAN
20060228
20060302
CUB FOODS, INC.
$31.73
KAREN E GUILFOILE
20060301
20060303
INTAB INC
$1,973.73
KAREN E GUILFOILE
20060221
20060222
NORTHERN TOOL EQUIPMNT
$7.40
MARK HAAG
20060227
20060228
NORTHERN TOOL EQUIPMNT
$14.89
MARK HAAG
20060227
20060228
NORTHERN TOOL EQUIPMNT
$30.30
MARK HAAG
20060227
20060228
NORTHERN TOOL EQUIPMNT
$111.79
MARK HAAG
VISA transactions 02 -18 -06 to 03- 03 -06.
Trans Date
Posting Date
Merchant Name
Trans Amount
Name
20060223
20060224
S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS
$77.81
LORI HANSON
20060301
20060303
DATABAZAAR.COM
$143.59
LORI HANSOM
20060302
20060303
S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS
$19.04
LORI HANSOM
20060218
20060220
MENARDS 3059
$47.24
PATRICK HEFFERNAN
20060223
20060224
MENARDS 3059
$36.68
PATRICK HEFFERNAN
20060228
20060302
CENTURY COMMUNITY TECHNIC
$720.00
PATRICK HEFFERNAN
20060302
20060303
SWIMOUTLET.COM
$374.25
RON HORWATH
20060302
20060303
PSW *FRONTIER PRO SHOP
$199.71
RON HORWATH
20060301
20060303
DE LACE LANDEN OP01 OF 01
$206.61
ANN E HUTCHINSON
20060221
20060223
TIERNEY BROTHERS INC
$782.10
SCOTT JACOBSON
20060227
20060301
THE HOME DEPOT 2801
$63.90
DON JONES
20060224
20060227
MILLS FLEET FARM #27
$13.83
TOM KALKA
20060227
20060301
WOLF CAMERA #1530
$5.10
TOM KALKA
20060221
20060222
U OF M WATER RESOURCES
$200.00
LOIS KNUTSON
20060221
20060222
MECA
$240.00
LOIS KNUTSON
20060216
20060220
SPORTSMITH LLC
$50.31
MARY B KOEHNEN
20060222
20060224
SPORTSMITH LLC
$11.68
MARY B KOEHNEN
20060223
20060224
VERIZON WRLS OT 12KW
$141.31
DUWAYNE KONEWKO
20060220
20060222
OFFICE DEPOT #375
$29.79
STEVEN KUMMER
20060221
20060223
UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC
$163.07
DAVID KVAM
20060227
20060301
KEYS ROBERT STREET CAFE
$8.02
DAVID KVAM
20060224
20060227
VERIZON WRLS OT 12KW
$137.37
SHERYL L LE
20060216
20060220
THE HOME DEPOT 2801
$20.02
DENNIS LINDORFF
20060224
20060227
NORTHERN TOOL EQUIP -MN
$9.56
DENNIS LINDORFF
20060220
20060221
AMERICAN MESSAGING RECUR
$17.71
STEVE LUKIN
20060223
20060224
EMERGENCY APPARATUS MAINT
$111.78
STEVE LUKIN
20060223
20060227
METRO SALES INC
$268.81
STEVE LUKIN
20060223
20060227
DEPT OF PUBLIC SAFETY
$165.00
STEVE LUKIN
20060228
20060301
AIRGAS NORTH CENTRAL INT
$205.56
STEVE LUKIN
20060228
20060301
AIRGAS NORTH CENTRAL INT
$1,109.21
STEVE LUKIN
20060301
20060302
AIRGAS NORTH CENTRAL INT
$880.04
STEVE LUKIN
20060302
20060303
ANCOM TECHNICAL CENTER IN
$171.65
STEVE LUKIN
20060221
20060222
METRO ATHLETIC SUPPLY INC
$726.33
MARK MARUSKA
20060222
20060223
VIKING INDUSTRIAL CENTER
$118.13
MARK MARUSKA
20060227
20060228
FACTORY CARD OUTLET #284
$19.14
ALEISA METRY
20060216
20060220
OFFICE MAX 00002204
$138.44
ED NADEAU
20060227
20060228
AMERICAN TRAINCO INC
$790.00
ED NADEAU
20060301
20060302
METROCALL ARCH WIRE
$39.35
ED NADEAU
20060222
20060223
SPRINT *WIRELESS SVCS
$520.91
BRYAN NAGEL
20060223
20060224
CERTIFIED LABORATORIES
$295.62
BRYAN NAGEL
20060221
20060223
RYCO SUPPLY COMPANY
$29.44
JEAN NELSON
20060221
20060223
THE HOME DEPOT 2801
$185.09
RICHARD NORDQUIST
20060222
20060223
IRON AGE CORP
$123.44
ERICK OSWALD
20060220
20060222
THE HOME DEPOT 2801
$26.40
ROBERT PETERSON
20060216
20060220
PRO TEC DESIGN
$28.70
PHILIP F POWELL
20060217
20060220
PACK AND MAIL
$78.19
PHILIP F POWELL
20060217
20060220
ABACUS PLUS SERVICES INC
$6.60
PHILIP F POWELL
20060222
20060224
PEAVEY CORPORATION
$68.85
PHILIP F POWELL
20060226
20060228
BEST PAKIEBURLAP
$114.80
PHILIP F POWELL
20060217
20060220
EMERGENCY MEDICAL PROD
$359.96
ROBERT PRECHTEL
20060302
20060303
BEST BUY 00000109
$191.69
ROBERT PRECHTEL
20060301
20060302
GE CAPITAL
$331.22
WILLIAM J PRIEFER
20060216
20060220
CATCO PARTS & SERV #1
{$686.00}
STEVEN PRIEM
20060216
20060220
TRUCK UTILITES INC
$148.95
STEVEN PRIEM
20060217
20060220
CATCO PARTS & SERV #1
($44.59)
STEVEN PRIEM
20060217
20060220
BAUER BOLT TRE33200023
$390.47
STEVEN PRIEM
VISA transactions 02 -18 -06 to 03- 03 -06.
Trans Date
Posting Date
Merchant Name
Trans Amount
Name
20060217
20060220
PIONEER RIM & WHEEL CO.
$25.18
STEVEN PRIEM
20060217
20060220
KATH AUTO PARTS NSP
$13.37
STEVEN PRIEM
20060221
20060222
KATH AUTO PARTS
$69.59
STEVEN PRIEM
20060221
20060222
ZIEGLER INC CREDIT DEPT
$60.67
STEVEN PRIEM
20060221
20060223
TOUSLEY FORD 127200039
$494.56
STEVEN PRIEM
20060222
20060223
MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT INC
$335.79
STEVEN PRIEM
20060222
20060223
MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT INC
$150.00
STEVEN PRIEM
20060223
20060224
KATH AUTO PARTS NSP
$42.30
STEVEN PRIEM
20060223
20060224
KATH AUTO PARTS
$46.55
STEVEN PRIEM
20060223
20060227
GILLUND ENTERPRIZES
$93.90
STEVEN PRIEM
20060224
20060227
KATH AUTO PARTS NSP
$14.31
STEVEN PRIEM
20060227
20060228
#19 FACTORY MTR PRTS
$434.35
STEVEN PRIEM
20060227
20060228
#41 FACTORY MTR PRTS
$43.51
STEVEN PRIEM
20060227
20060301
BAUER BOLT TRE33200023
$376.05
STEVEN PRIEM
20060227
20060301
O'REILLY #1569
$35.91
STEVEN PRIEM
20060228
20060301
MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT INC
($103.13)
STEVEN PRIEM
20060228
20060301
BAUER BOLT TRE33200023
$116.38
STEVEN PRIEM
20060228
20060301
POLAR CHEVROLET
$195.99
STEVEN PRIEM
20060228
20060301
KATH AUTO PARTS NSP
$51.14
STEVEN PRIEM
20060301
20060303
COMO LOBE & SUPPL01 OF 01
$107.18
STEVEN PRIEM
20060227
20060301
UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC
$47.87
KEVIN RABBETT
20060228
20060301
SPRINT *WIRELESS SVCS
$2,097.84
KEVIN RABBETT
20060227
20060302
DALCO ENTERPRISES, INC
$730.89
MICHAEL REILLY
20060219
20060221
WALGREEN 00029363
$33.14
AUDRA ROBBINS
20060220
20060222
MARCUS OAKD.CIN #488 Q25
$75.25
AUDRA ROBBINS
20060228
20060301
MAPLEWOOD PARKS AND RECRE
$3.00
AUDRA ROBBINS
20060221
20060222
NEEDELS SUPPLY INC
$116.92
ROBERT RUNNING
20060224
20060227
KATH AUTO PARTS
$134.19
ROBERT RUNNING
20060227
20060301
THE HOME DEPOT 2801
$86.69
ROBERT RUNNING
20060218
20060220
STAPLES SCC #467
$237.66
DEB SCHMIDT
20060222
20060224
SHRED -IT 01 OF 01
$17.65
DEB SCHMIDT
20060223
20060227
CLOVER SUPER FOODS
$140.71
RUSSELL L SCHMIDT
20060222
20060224
THE HOME DEPOT 2801
$8.37
SCOTT SCHULTZ
20060301
20060302
T- MOBILE
$46.42
SCOTT SCHULTZ
20060301
20060303
UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC
$57.51
MICHAEL SHORTREED
20060301
20060303
UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC
$69.00
MICHAEL SHORTREED
20060301
20060303
UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC
$5.86
MICHAEL SHORTREED
20060217
20060220
S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS
($2.74)
ANDREA SINDT
20060224
20060227
S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS
$126.01
ANDREA SINDT
20060216
20060220
MCDONALD'S F4918
$6.38
SCOTT STEFFEN
20060217
20060220
SUBWAY #400
$7.44
SCOTT STEFFEN
20060302
20060303
DON' PAINT & BODY SHOP
$100.00
SCOTT STEFFEN
20060216
20060220
DE LADE LANDEN OPERATIONA
($626.43)
JOANNE M SVENDSEN
20060221
20060222
INTERSTATE ALL BATTERY
$29.56
RUSTIN SVENDSEN
20060222
20060224
JEFFERSON FIRE & SAFETY I
$1,442.26
RUSTIN SVENDSEN
20060222
20060224
DEPT OF PUBLIC SAFETY
$165.00
RUSTIN SVENDSEN
20060223
20060227
FIREHOUSE SUBSCRIPTION
$52.00
RUSTIN SVENDSEN
20060223
20060227
VIKING ELEC- CRED101 OF 01
$421.03
RUSTIN SVENDSEN
20060301
20060303
ASPEN MILLS 8005717343
$281.49
RUSTIN SVENDSEN
20060301
20060303
ASPEN MILLS 8005717343
$153.63
RUSTIN SVENDSEN
20060301
20060303
ASPEN MILLS 8005717343
$278.29
RUSTIN SVENDSEN
20060301
20060303
ASPEN MILLS 8005717343
$145.17
RUSTIN SVENDSEN
20060301
20060303
ASPEN MILLS 8005717343
$103.79
RUSTIN SVENDSEN
20060301
20060303
ASPEN MILLS 8005717343
$185.58
RUSTIN SVENDSEN
20060301
20060303
ASPEN MILLS 8005717343
$44.95
RUSTIN SVENDSEN
20060221
20060223
EL REINHARDT COMPANY INC
$13.27
LYLE SWANSON
VISA transactions 02 -18 -06 to 03- 03 -06.
Trans Date
Posting Date
Merchant Name
Trans Amount
Name
20060222
20060223
GREEN LIGHTS RECYCLING IN
$158.20
LYLE SWANSON
20060227
20060301
FOREST PRODUCTS SUPPLY
$202.35
LYLE SWANSON
20060228
20060301
MUSKA LIGHTING CENTER
$92.76
LYLE SWANSON
20060228
20060301
MUSKA LIGHTING CENTER
$722.49
LYLE SWANSON
20060228
20060302
HIRSHFIELD'S MAPLEWOOD
$41.17
LYLE SWANSON
20060228
20060303
ARM COM DISTRIBUTING CO
$243.59
LYLE SWANSON
20060301
20060302
T- MOBILE
$144.04
DOUGLAS J TAUBMAN
20060220
20060221
QWESTCOMM *TN651
$371.88
JUDY TETZLAFF
20060224
20060227
QWESTCOMM *TN651
$57.65
JUDY TETZLAFF
20060217
20060220
MENARDS 3059
$344.38
TODD TEVLIN
20060228
20060302
TRUCK UTILITES INC
$353.31
TODD TEVLIN
20060223
20060227
FBI / LEEDA, INC
$225.00
DAVID J THOMALLA
20060227
20060301
BRODIN STUDIOS
$215.00
DAVID J THOMALLA
20060221
20060223
OFFICE MAX 00002204
$4.25
JOSEPH WATERS
20060226
20060228
OFFICE MAX 00002204
$28.73
JOSEPH WATERS
20060218
20060220
CUB FOODS, INC.
$24.18
SUSAN ZWIEG
20060223
20060227
QUILL CORPORATION
$145.28
SUSAN ZWIEG
20060223
20060227
QUILL CORPORATION
$274.72
SUSAN ZWIEG
20060223
20060227
AE SIGN SYSTEMS
$50.59
SUSAN ZWIEG
20060223
20060227
DEPT OF PUBLIC SAFETY
$165.00
SUSAN ZWIEG
20060227
20060301
QUILL CORPORATION
$360.63
SUSAN ZWIEG
20060301
20060303
QUILL CORPORATION
$64.90
SUSAN ZWIEG
20060301
20060303
QUILL CORPORATION
$4.36
SUSAN ZWIEG
$56,327.98
10
vchlist
0311712006 11:04:19 AM
Check Register
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
Check
Date
Vendor
Description /Account
Amount
69490
3121/2006
02113 FURSMAN, RICHARD
REIMB FOR TUITION & BOOKS
3010.40
69491
3121/2006
00058 AICHELE, CRAIG
REIMB FOR MILEAGE 2124 TO 3110
48.06
69492
312112006
00111 ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES INC
PATROL & BOARDING FEES 2127 -
1,257.40
69493
312112006
00159 BARTZ, PAUL
REIMB FOR MEAL
8.00
69494
3/2112006
00178 BERGGREN, GORDON
NAME SIGN
20.00
69495
3121/2006
00240 C.S.C. CREDIT SERVICES
APPLICANT BACKGROUND CHKS
100.22
69496
312112006
00283 CENTURY COLLEGE
FIREFIGHTER TRAINING
6,535.50
69497
312112006
03619 DRAIN KING INC
PROJ 05 -16 TELEVISE PROJECT
4,873.25
69498
3/2112006
01973 ERICKSON OIL PRODUCTS INC
CAR WASHES - FEB
168.00
69499
3121/2006
03597 HOFMEISTER, MARY JO
REIMB FOR MILEAGE 2123 - 3114
13.58
69500
3/2112006
03330 HOISINGTON KOEGLER GROUP INC
PROJ 04 -21 GLADSTONE - FEB
6,307.72
69501
3121/2006
02196 JORGENSON CONST INC
PROJ 03 -19 PW BLDG PYMT #8
77,339.50
69502
3/2112006
03502 KOEHNEN ELECTRIC INC
INSTALL PANEL METER FOR
453.00
69503
3121/2006
00935 MAPLEWOOD FIRE FIGHTERS RELIEF
STATE SUPPLEMENTAL BENEFITS
4,000.00
69504
3/21/2006
00945 MASYS CORP
POLICE LEGACY DATA - APR
738.68
69505
3/21/2006
00986 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL
MONTHLY SAC - FEB
42,966.00
69506
3/21/2006
01057 MN SAFETY COUNCIL
MEMBERSHIP DUES
325.00
69507
3/21/2006
02175 NIVEN, AMY
REIMB FOR MILEAGE 211 - 2/28
8.01
69508
3/21/2006
03358 NORTHEAST METRO SCH DIST 916
HEARING INTERPRETER - MCC
624.66
69509
3/21/2006
02886 OERTEL ARCHITECTS
PR #03 -19 PW BLDG PYMT #11
987.00
69510
3/21/2006
00001 ONE TIME VENDOR
REF MIZRAIN RODRIGUEZ - AMB
329.00
69511
3121/2006
00001 ONE TIME VENDOR
REF LOLA ISHOLA - AMB 00003076
274.60
69512
3/21/2006
00001 ONE TIME VENDOR
REF JANE ANDERSON - AMB
229.00
69513
3/21/2006
00001 ONE TIME VENDOR
REF MICHAEL TURNER - AMB
132.90
69514
3/21/2006
00001 ONE TIME VENDOR
REF G JELINEK - AMB 04000840
93.00
69515
3/21/2006
00001 ONE TIME VENDOR
REF KATHLEEN PRINS - BCBS
80.00
69516
3/21/2006
00001 ONE TIME VENDOR
REF L ALVERSON - AMB 05014887
59.40
69517
3121/2006
01941 PATRICK GRAPHICS & TROPHIES
BASKETBALL LEAGUE TROPHIES
1,118.78
69518
3/21/2006
03151 PETTY CASH
REPLENISH PETTY CASH
235.88
69519
3121/2006
02563 PHILIPS MEDICAL SYSTEMS
HEARTSTART DEFIBRILLATOR
2,392.31
69520
3/21/2006
03629 PRACTICAL SHOOTING ACADEMY INC
TRAINING
350.00
69521
3/21/2006
01302 PRIEM, STEVEN
REIMB FOR MILEAGE 3/8
40.94
69522
3/21/2006
01359 REGAL AUTO WASH DETAIL XX
CAR WASHES - FEB
95.67
69523
3/21/2006
01340 REGIONS HOSPITAL
MEDICAL DIRECTION FEE
29,823.00
69524
3/21/2006
03605 RESTORATION TECHNOLOGIES INC
REPAIR - RESTORE WATER SLIDE
29,950.00
69525
3/21/2006
02001 ROSEVILLE, CITY OF
JOINT POWER AGREEMENT - FEB
625.00
69526
3/21/2006
01418 SAM'S CLUB DIRECT
GYM SUPPLIES
215.11
69527
3121/2006
01504 ST PAUL, CITY OF
FUEL CONTRACT
100.00
CRIME LAB SERVICES - FEB
300.00
COBOL FROG MAPLEWOOD
971.71
69528
3/21/2006
01588 TAUBMAN, DOUGLAS J
REIMB FOR MILEAGE 2/9 - 3/14
20.25
69529
3/21/2006
01651 TROPHIES UNLIMITED
NAME PLATE
6.92
69530
3/21/2006
01580 TSE, INC.
JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 1123 - 2/17
1,006.03
69531
3/21/2006
01695 UNITED RENTALS, INC.
SAFETY JACKETS
607.05
69532
3/21/2006
02879 WASHINGTON COUNTY
NOTARY PUBLIC RECORDING FEE
100.00
69533
3121/2006
03378 WOEHRLE, MATT
REIMB FOR MILEAGE 2/23 - 3/7
42.72
69534
3/21/2006
01190 XCEL ENERGY
FIRE SIRENS
55.51
ELECTRIC & GAS UTILITY
4,861.36
ELECTRIC & GAS UTILITY
11,900.22
ELECTRIC & GAS UTILITY
10,376.29
ELECTRIC UTILITY
12,720.84
69534
3/21/2006
01190 XCEL ENERGY
(Continued)
ELECTRIC & GAS UTILITY
4,007.05
ELECTRIC & GAS UTILITY
495.50
ELECTRIC UTILITY
1,247.88
ELECTRIC UTILITY
1,665.60
69535
3/21/2006
01807 ZWIEG, SUSAN
REIMB FOR MILEAGE 3/7 - 318
35.60
45 Checks in this report
Total checks :
266,349.10
11
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
Disbursements via Debits to Checking account
Transmitted Settlement
Date Date Payee
03/09/06
03/10/06
03/09/06
03/10/06
03/10/06
03/10/06
03/10/06
03/13/06
03/10/06
03/10/06
03/10/06
03/10/06
03/14/06
03/15/06
03/13/06
03/10/06
03/10/06
03/10/06
03/13/06
03/13/06
03/13/06
03/13/06
03/14/06
03/14/06
03/14/06
03/14/06
03/14/06
03/15/06
03/16/06
03/16/06
MN State Treasurer
ICMA (Vantagepointe)
MN Dept of Natural Resources
MN State Treasurer
U.S. Treasurer
P.E.R.A.
Orchard Trust
MN State Treasurer
MN State Treasurer
MidAmerica - ING
Labor Unions
Federal Reserve Bank
MN State Treasurer
MN State Treasurer
ARC Administration
TOTAL
Description
Drivers License /Deputy Registrar
Deferred Compensation
DNR electronic licenses
Drivers License /Deputy Registrar
Federal Payroll Tax
P.E.R.A.
Deferred Compensation
Drivers License /Deputy Registrar
State Payroll Tax
HRA Flex plan
Union Dues
Savings Bonds
Drivers License /Deputy Registrar
Drivers License /Deputy Registrar
DCRP & Flex plan payments
Amount
20,547.16
7,216.61
1,029.00
17,083.05
98,065.41
62,260.12
26,018.62
24,215.53
18,890.65
3,076.79
1,719.88
100.00
5,596.50
9,709.45
4,237.17
299,765.94
12
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS REPORT
FOR THE CURRENT PAY PERIOD
13
CHECK 9 CHECK DATE
EMPLOYEE NAME
AMOUNT
dd
03/10/06
HJELLE, ERIK
397.80
dd
03/10/06
JUENEMANN, KATHLEEN
397.80
dd
03/10/06
ROSSBACH, WILLIAM
397.80
dd
03/10/06
COLEMAN, MELINDA
4,393.88
dd
03/10/06
DARST, ROBERTA
1,914.80
dd
03/10/06
FURSMAN, RICHARD
5,205.58
dd
03/10/06
FARR, LARRY
1,821.04
dd
03/10/06
SWANSON, LYLE
1,711.57
dd
03/10/06
LE, JENNIFER
173.25
dd
03/10/06
LE, SHERYL
4,246.65
dd
03/10/06
RAMEAUX, THERESE
2,448.10
dd
03/10/06
FAUST, DANIEL
4,417.22
dd
03/10/06
SCHMIDT, DEBORAH
1,570.96
dd
03/10/06
ANDERSON, CAROLE
1,993.86
dd
03/10/06
BAUMAN, GAYLE
3,537.43
dd
03/10/06
JACKSON, MARY
1,873.35
dd
03/10/06
KELSEY, CONNIE
1,454.43
dd
03/10/06
TETZLAFF, JUDY
1,873.35
dd
03/10/06
FRY, PATRICIA
1,738.95
dd
03/10/06
GUILFOILE, KAREN
3,094.70
dd
03/10/06
MORSON, JOHN
303.24
dd
03/10/06
SPANGLER, EDNA
906.57
dd
03/10/06
JAGOE, CAROL
1,679.66
dd
03/10/06
JOHNSON, BONNIE
955.45
dd
03/10/06
MECHELKE, SHERRIE
1,015.94
dd
03/10/06
MOY, PAMELA
810.76
dd
03/10/06
OLSON, SANDRA
1,402.88
dd
03/10/06
OSTER, ANDREA
1,973.63
dd
03/10/06
WEAVER, KRISTINE
1,839.75
dd
03/10/06
BANICK, JOHN
4,017.82
dd
03/10/06
CORCORAN, THERESA
1,689.35
dd
03/10/06
POWELL, PHILIP
2,336.04
dd
03/10/06
RICHIE, CAROLE
1,734.17
dd
03/10/06
THOMALLA, DAVID
4,429.01
dd
03/10/06
ABEL, CLINT
2,745.77
dd
03/10/06
ALDRIDGE, MARK
2,738.32
dd
03/10/06
ANDREWS, SCOTT
3,169.72
dd
03/10/06
BAKKE, LONN
2,560.09
dd
03/10/06
BELDE, STANLEY
2,558.32
dd
03/10/06
BIERDEMAN, BRIAN
2,581.40
dd
03/10/06
BOHL, JOHN
2,899.23
13
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS REPORT
FOR THE CURRENT PAY PERIOD
14
CHECK 9 CHECK DATE
EMPLOYEE NAME
AMOUNT
dd
03110106
BUSACK, DANIEL-
2,654.24
dd
03110106
COFFEY, KEVIN
2,484.97
dd
03110106
CROTTY, KERRY
3,040.36
dd
03110106
DOBLAR, RICHARD
2,831.57
dd
03110106
DUNN, ALICE
2,494.16
dd
03110106
GABRIEL, ANTHONY
1,988.74
dd
03110106
HEINZ, STEPHEN
2,747.43
dd
03110106
HIEBERT, STEVEN
3,079.42
dd
03110106
JOHNSON, KEVIN
3,512.91
dd
03110106
KALKA, THOMAS
1,017.85
dd
03110106
KAKIS, FLINT
3,141.95
dd
03110106
KONG, TOMMY
2,657.48
dd
03110106
KROLL, BRETT
2,400.11
dd
03110106
KVAM, DAVID
3,523.42
dd
03110106
LANGNER, TODD
1,936.03
dd
03110106
LU, JOHNNIE
2,598.76
dd
03110106
MARINO, JASON
2,400.11
dd
03110106
MARTIN, JERROLD
2,514.38
dd
03110106
MCCARTY, GLEN
2,331.55
dd
03110106
METRY, ALESIA
2,417.26
dd
03110106
NYE, MICHAEL
2,117.14
dd
03110106
OLSON, JULIE
2,532.55
dd
03110106
RABBETT, KEVIN
3,587.70
dd
03110106
RHUDE, MATTHEW
2,075.83
dd
03110106
STEFFEN, SCOTT
3,368.40
dd
03110106
STEINER, JOSEPH
1,645.93
dd
03110106
SYPNIEWSKI, WILLIAM
1,874.47
dd
03110106
SZCZEPANSKI, THOMAS
2,739.48
dd
03110106
IRAN, JOSEPH
2,331.55
dd
03110106
WENZEL, JAY
2,521.51
dd
03110106
XIONG, KAO
2,547.11
dd
03110106
BARTZ, PAUL-
2,811.29
dd
03110106
BERGERON, JOSEPH
3,329.46
dd
03110106
DUGAS, MICHAEL
2,685.67
dd
03110106
ERICKSON, VIRGINIA
2,605.80
dd
03110106
FLOR, TIMOTHY
2,773.91
dd
03110106
FRASER, JOHN
3,100.06
dd
03110106
LANGNER, SCOTT
2,217.28
dd
03110106
PALMA, STEVEN
2,987.43
dd
03110106
THEISEN, PAUL
2,217.28
dd
03110106
THIEVES, PAUL
2,628.65
14
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS REPORT
FOR THE CURRENT PAY PERIOD
15
CHECK 9 CHECK DATE
EMPLOYEE NAME
AMOUNT
dd
03110106
CARLSON, BRIAN
2,014.41
dd
03110106
DAWSON, RICHARD
2,972.22
dd
03110106
DUELLMAN, KIRK
2,527.38
dd
03110106
EVERSON, PAUL
2,389.80
dd
03110106
HALWEG, JODI
2,047.93
dd
03110106
JOHNSON, DOUGLAS
2,510.34
dd
03110106
NOVAK, JEROME
2,497.51
dd
03110106
PARSONS, KURT
2,322.54
dd
03110106
PETERSON, ROBERT
2,781.83
dd
03110106
PRECHTEL, ROBERT
2,402.27
dd
03110106
SVENDSEN, RONALD
2,997.43
dd
03110106
GERVAIS -JR, CLARENCE
2,868.34
dd
03110106
BAUER, MICHELLE
1,956.70
dd
03110106
FLAUGHER, JAYME
2,118.88
dd
03110106
HERMANSON, CHAD
1,788.72
dd
03110106
HUBIN, KENNARD
1,890.63
dd
03110106
KNAPP, BRETT
1,944.49
dd
03110106
LIMN, BRYAN
2,307.46
dd
03110106
PACOLT, MARSHA
2,529.68
dd
03110106
RABINE, JANET
2,221.42
dd
03110106
STAHNKE, JULIE
2,235.82
dd
03110106
LUKIN, STEVEN
4,016.18
dd
03110106
SVENDSEN, RUSTIN
3,219.37
dd
03110106
ZWIEG, SUSAN
1,813.36
dd
03110106
DOLLERSCHELL, ROBERT
293.39
dd
03110106
AHL, R. CHARLES
4,675.69
dd
03110106
BREHEIM, ROGER
1,897.97
dd
03110106
GROHS, JUDITH
1,820.28
dd
03110106
KONEWKO, DUWAYNE
3,059.51
dd
03110106
NIVEN, AMY
1,234.02
dd
03110106
PRIEFER, WILLIAM
2,936.35
dd
03110106
BRINK, TROY
1,770.15
dd
03110106
BRUNELL, DAVID
1,491.75
dd
03110106
DEBILZAN, THOMAS
1,901.35
dd
03110106
EDGE, DOUGLAS
1,906.35
dd
03110106
JONES, DONALD
2,147.36
dd
03110106
MEYER, GERALD
1,969.79
dd
03110106
NAGEL, BRYAN
2,368.18
dd
03110106
OSWALD, ERICK
2,080.46
dd
03110106
RUNNING, ROBERT
1,799.75
dd
03110106
TEVLIN, TODD
1,770.15
15
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS REPORT
FOR THE CURRENT PAY PERIOD
i[�
CHECK 9 CHECK DATE
EMPLOYEE NAME
AMOUNT
dd
03110106
DUCHARME, JOHN
2,414.88
dd
03110106
ENGSTROM, ANDREW
1,694.15
dd
03110106
ISAKSON, CHAD
46.20
dd
03110106
JACOBSON, SCOTT
2,327.60
dd
03110106
JAROSCH, JONATHAN
2,030.15
dd
03110106
KNUTSON, LOIS
1,315.26
dd
03110106
KUMMER, STEVEN
2,724.95
dd
03110106
LABEREE, ERIN
2,882.35
dd
03110106
LINDBLOM, RANDAL
3,036.04
dd
03110106
PECK, DENNIS
2,421.79
dd
03110106
PRIEBE, WILLIAM
3,851.81
dd
03110106
THOMPSON, MICHAEL
2,129.35
dd
03110106
ANDERSON, BRUCE
4,359.27
dd
03110106
CAREY, HEIDI
2,138.16
dd
03110106
HALL, KATHLEEN
1,820.28
dd
03110106
MARUSKA, MARK
2,754.63
dd
03110106
NAUGHTON, JOHN
1,770.15
dd
03110106
SCHINDELDECKER, JAMES
1,895.66
dd
03110106
BIESANZ, OAKLEY
1,618.22
dd
03110106
HAYMAN, JANET
1,428.49
dd
03110106
HUTCHINSON, ANN
2,330.27
dd
03110106
NELSON, JEAN
1,151.74
dd
03110106
GAYNOR, VIRGINIA
2,148.68
dd
03110106
EKSTRAND, THOMAS
3,134.50
dd
03110106
KROLL, LISA
1,254.21
dd
03110106
LIVINGSTON, JOYCE
926.24
dd
03110106
SINDT, ANDREA
1,695.75
dd
03110106
THOMPSON, DEBRA
941.12
dd
03110106
YOUNG, TAMELA
1,567.75
dd
03110106
CHRISTIANSEN, KEVIN
560.00
dd
03110106
FINWALL, SHANN
2,274.40
dd
03110106
ROBERTS, KENNETH
2,486.07
dd
03110106
CARVER, NICHOLAS
2,853.51
dd
03110106
FISHER, DAVID
3,374.28
dd
03110106
RICE, MICHAEL
2,012.55
dd
03110106
SWAN, DAVID
2,110.95
dd
03110106
SWETT, PAUL
1,544.55
dd
03110106
WELLENS, MOLLY
1,161.93
dd
03110106
BJORK, ALICIA
433.07
dd
03110106
EVANS, BRIAN
42.00
dd
03110106
FINN, GREGORY
2,280.01
i[�
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS REPORT
FOR THE CURRENT PAY PERIOD
if
CHECK 9 CHECK DATE
EMPLOYEE NAME
AMOUNT
dd
03110106
FRANK, PETER
280.00
dd
03110106
GALLANT, CHARLENE
201.88
dd
03110106
GOODRICH, CHAD
212.50
dd
03110106
KELLY, LISA
1,017.07
dd
03110106
MCBRIDE, PATRICK
200.00
dd
03110106
NIEMAN, JAMES
93.50
dd
03110/06
NIEMCZYK, BRIAN
210.00
dd
03110/06
NIEMCZYK, EMILY
42.50
dd
03110106
OHLHAUSER, MEGHAN
523.13
dd
03110106
ROBBINS, AUDRA
2,179.48
dd
03110106
SCHERPING, CLARE
32.25
dd
03110106
SCHERPING, ROGER
42.00
dd
03110106
SHERRILL, CAITLIN
362.25
dd
03110106
STAPLES, PAULINE
3,028.20
dd
03110106
TAUBMAN, DOUGLAS
2,854.34
dd
03110106
UNDERHILL, KRISTEN
148.76
dd
03110106
GERMAIN, DAVID
1,902.59
dd
03110106
NORDQUIST, RICHARD
1,893.35
dd
03110106
SCHULTZ, SCOTT
2,124.33
dd
03110106
ANZALDI, MANDY
1,589.40
dd
03110106
COLEMAN, PHILIP
170.00
dd
03110106
COLLINS, ASHLEY
128.00
dd
03110106
CRAWFORD - JR, RAYMOND
337.00
dd
03110106
CROSSON, LINDA
2,688.71
dd
03110106
DRE RTES, DEENA
177.60
dd
03110106
EVANS, CHRISTINE
798.53
dd
03110106
GRAF, MICHAEL
2,001.16
dd
03110106
HER, CHONG
375.65
dd
03110106
HOFMEISTER, MARY
825.92
dd
03110106
PELOQUIN, PENNYE
600.67
dd
03110106
SCHMIDT, RUSSELL
2,094.61
dd
03110106
SCHULZE, BRIAN
992.99
dd
03110106
ZIELINSKI, JUDY
38.85
dd
03110106
ANDREA, JOHANNA
27.00
dd
03110106
BRENEMAN, NEIL
393.93
dd
03110106
BRUSOE, CRISTINA
86.88
dd
03110106
BUCKLEY, BRITTANY
63.13
dd
03110106
CANTLON, COLLEEN
23.25
dd
03110106
DUNN, RYAN
819.30
dd
03110106
ERICKSON- CLARK, CAROL
95.00
dd
03110106
ESTRADA, KIEL
88.00
if
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS REPORT
FOR THE CURRENT PAY PERIOD
iE:3
CHECK 9
CHECK DATE
EMPLOYEE NAME
AMOUNT
dd
03110106
EVANS, KRISTIN
147.00
dd
03110106
FONTAINE, KIM
847.19
dd
03110106
GREDVIG, ANDERS
450.01
dd
03110106
HASSENSTAB, DENISE
42.60
dd
03110106
HAWBAKER, EVAN
23.10
dd
03110106
HORWATH, RONALD
2,159.70
dd
03110106
KOEHNEN, AMY
150.30
dd
03110106
KOEHNEN, MARY
1,441.35
dd
03110106
KRONHOLM, KATHRYN
460.36
dd
03110106
MATHEWS, LEAH
113.00
dd
03110106
OVERBY, ANNA
120.00
dd
03110106
PROESCH, ANDY
367.02
dd
03110106
SIMPSON, KIMBERLYN
24.33
dd
03110106
SMITH, ANN
275.80
dd
03110106
TRUE, CAROLINE
39.60
dd
03110106
TUPY, HEIDE
159.00
dd
03110106
TUPY, MARCUS
246.75
dd
03110106
WERNER, REBECCA
85.76
dd
03110106
WHITE, NICOLE
629.77
dd
03110106
WOLFGRAM, MARY
71.50
dd
03110106
GROPPOLI, LINDA
352.80
dd
03110106
ANDERSON, MATT
149.63
dd
03110106
BEHAN, JAMES
1,769.23
dd
03110106
LONETTI, JAMES
1,225.15
dd
03110106
PATTERSON, ALBERT
1,217.82
dd
03110106
PRINS, KELLY
1,122.74
dd
03110106
REILLY, MICHAEL
1,918.39
dd
03110106
SCHOENECKER, LEIGH
121.36
dd
03110106
AICHELE, CRAIG
1,949.19
dd
03110106
PRIEM, STEVEN
2,148.88
dd
03110106
WOEHRLE, MATTHEW
1,602.95
dd
03110106
BERGO, CHAD
2,355.82
dd
03110106
FOWLDS, MYCHAL
2,561.82
dd
03110106
FRANZEN, NICHOLAS
1,772.45
wf
104314
03110106
BARTOL, DAVID
397.80
wf
104315
03110106
LONGRIE, DIANA
452.00
wf
104316
03110106
JAHN, DAVID
1,638.86
wf
104317
03110106
MORIN, TROY
157.25
wf
104318
03110106
THOMAS, MOLLY
336.00
wf
104319
03110106
MATHEYS, ALANA
2,059.19
wf
104320
03110106
HANSEN, LORI
1,813.36
iE:3
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS REPORT
FOR THE CURRENT PAY PERIOD
IF
CHECK 9
CHECK DATE
EMPLOYEE NAME
AMOUNT
wf
104321
03110106
GENNOW, PAMELA
208.00
wf
104321
03110106
GENNOW, PAMELA
529.75
wf
104322
03110106
ANDERSON, SUZANNE
161.50
wf
104323
03110106
ANSARI, AHSAN UDDIN
120.00
wf
104324
03110106
BARRETT, MARLIS
64.00
wf
104325
03110106
BARTELT, JOAN
120.00
wf
104326
03110106
BELLAND, JAIME
120.00
wf
104327
03110106
BERGER, MERVIN
192.50
wf
104328
03110106
BORTZ, JEANNE
176.00
wf
104329
03110106
BREIDENSTEIN, ANNA
116.00
wf
104330
03110106
BUNDE, JENNETTE
156.75
wf
104331
03110106
CAHANES, LUCILLE
181.50
wf
104332
03110106
CARLE, JEANETTE
277.88
wf
104333
03110106
CARR, ROBERT
64.00
wf
104334
03110106
CONNOLLY, COLLEEN
96.00
wf
104335
03110106
DAVIDSON, MAE
132.00
wf
104336
03110106
DESAI, BHUPAT
181.50
wf
104337
03110106
DITTEL, KATHLEEN
156.75
wf
104338
03110106
DROEGER, DIANE
181.50
wf
104339
03110106
DUCHARME, FRED
187.00
wf
104340
03110106
DUELLMAN, AUDREY
192.50
wf
104341
03110106
ERICKSON, ELIZABETH
187.00
wf
104342
03110106
FISCHER, LORRAINE
220.00
wf
104343
03110106
FISCHER, MARY
161.50
wf
104344
03110106
FITZGERALD, DELORES
120.00
wf
104345
03110106
FOSBURGH, ANNE
192.50
wf
104346
03110106
FREER, MARY JO
104.00
wf
104347
03110106
GIERZAK, CLARICE
92.00
wf
104348
03110106
GRANGER, BETTY
57.00
wf
104349
03110106
GRANT, GUY
132.00
wf
104350
03110106
GUDKNECHT, JAMIE
120.00
wf
104351
03110106
HECHT, LLOYD
120.00
wf
104352
03110106
HOLZEMER, MARY
120.00
wf
104353
03110106
HORTON, SHIRLEE
128.00
wf
104354
03110106
HUNTOON, LYNN
120.00
wf
104355
03110106
IVERSEN, MILDRED
116.00
wf
104356
03110106
JEFFERSON, GWENDOLYN
48.00
wf
104357
03110106
JOHANNESSEN, JUDITH
152.00
wf
104358
03110106
JOHNSON, BARBARA
80.00
wf
104359
03110106
KREKELBERG, MONA
159.13
wf
104360
03110106
KROMINGA, JOSEPHINE
128.00
IF
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS REPORT
FOR THE CURRENT PAY PERIOD
ic7
CHECK 9
CHECK DATE
EMPLOYEE NAME
AMOUNT
wf
104361
03110106
LACKNER, MARVELLA
120.00
wf
104362
03110106
LAMPE, CHARLOTTE
120.00
wf
104363
03110106
LARSON, ANITA
161.50
wf
104364
03110106
LEO, ANN
120.00
wf
104365
03110106
LEO, PATRICIA
32.00
wf
104366
03110106
LINCOWSKI, STEVEN
116.00
wf
104367
03110106
LINCOWSKI, VIOLA
120.00
wf
104368
03110106
LOFGREN, RICHARD
161.50
wf
104369
03110106
LOWE- ADAMS, SHARI
82.00
wf
104370
03110106
LUTTRELL, SHIRLEY
187.00
wf
104371
03110106
MAHRE, CAROL
225.50
wf
104372
03110106
MANTHEY, JOHN
178.75
wf
104373
03110106
MARSH, DELORES
161.50
wf
104374
03110106
MASKREY, THOMAS
88.00
wf
104375
03110106
MECHELKE, GERALDINE
120.00
wf
104376
03110106
MECHELKE, MARYLOU
120.00
wf
104377
03110106
MISGEN, JOAN
120.00
wf
104378
03110106
MOLLERS, KATHERINE
120.00
wf
104379
03110106
MOSSONG, BETTY
120.00
wf
104380
03110106
MUR:4SKI, GERALDINE
116.00
wf
104381
03110106
MUR:4SKI, HOWARD
122.00
wf
104382
03110106
NIEMAN, JAMES
198.00
wf
104383
03110106
NIETERS, LOUISE
166.25
wf
104384
03110106
PEHL, DAVID
120.00
wf
104385
03110106
RUDEEN, ELAINE
120.00
wf
104386
03110106
SCHROEPFER, HARRIET
64.00
wf
104387
03110106
SHORES, TERESA
56.00
wf
104388
03110106
SPANGLER, ROBERT
120.00
wf
104389
03110106
STEVENS, SANDRA
104.00
wf
104390
03110106
TAYLOR, LORRAINE
161.50
wf
104391
03110106
TAYLOR, RITA
128.00
wf
104392
03110106
THOMPSON, MILO
60.00
wf
104393
03110106
THOMPSON, PATRICIA
110.00
wf
104394
03110106
TOLBERT, D- FRANKLIN
120.00
wf
104395
03110106
UNGER, CONSTANCE
116.00
wf
104396
03110106
URBANSKI, HOLLY
195.25
wf
104397
03110106
VAN BLARICOM, BEULAH
156.75
wf
104398
03110106
VANAGS, VILHELMINE
48.00
wf
104399
03110106
VANDEVEER, BARBARA
104.00
wf
104400
03110106
WAGNER, CONNIE
96.00
wf
104401
03110106
WASMUNDT, GAYLE
152.00
ic7
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS REPORT
FOR THE CURRENT PAY PERIOD
21
CHECK 9
CHECK DATE
EMPLOYEE NAME
AMOUNT
wf
104402
03110106
WILLY, JOHN
156.75
wf
104403
03110106
WITSCHEN,
120.00
wf
104404
03110106
ZACHO, KAREN
120.00
wf
104405
03110106
PALANK, MARY
1,711.66
wf
104406
03110106
SVENDSEN, JOANNE
1,855.39
wf
104407
03110106
SHORTREED, MICHAEL
3,268.81
wf
104408
03110106
WELCHLIN, CABOT
2,537.23
wf
104409
03110/06
BAUMAN, ANDREW
192.00
wf
104410
03110106
FREBERG, RONALD
1,932.28
wf
104411
03110106
EDSON, DAVID
1,934.44
wf
104412
03110106
HELEY, ROLAND
1,932.28
wf
104413
03110106
HINNENKAMP, GARY
2,178.03
wf
104414
03110106
LINDORFF, DENNIS
1,897.97
wf
104415
03110106
NOVAK, MICHAEL
1,857.35
wf
104416
03110106
GERNES, CAROLE
672.63
wf
104417
03110106
SOUTTER, CHRISTINE
178.44
wf
104418
03110106
ABRAHAMSON, TYLER
32.50
wf
104419
03110106
BERGER, STEPHANIE
342.13
wf
104420
03110106
BROZAK, ANNA
82.50
wf
104421
03110106
BROZAK, KATHERINE
57.75
wf
104422
03110106
BURNS, BETH
19.50
wf
104423
03110106
CICCHESE, JOHNATHAN
21.00
wf
104424
03110106
DEVANEY, KRISTI
19.50
wf
104425
03110106
GOODRICH, DANIELLE
200.00
wf
104426
03110106
GREENER, DOUGLAS
45.00
wf
104427
03110106
HANNIGAN, BRADY
33.00
wf
104428
03110106
HANNIGAN, TYLER
31.50
wf
104429
03110106
HELKAMP, KAYLA
226.00
wf
104430
03110106
KLEIN, AARON
52.50
wf
104431
03110106
KLEM, JOSH
90.00
wf
104432
03110106
KOHLMAN, JENNIFER
158.00
wf
104433
03110106
LANCETTE, JOSHUA
43.00
wf
104434
03110106
LUKIN, CASSANDRA
24.00
wf
104435
03110106
MILTON, ZACHARY
21.00
wf
104436
03110106
MORRISETTE, WILLIAM
39.00
wf
104437
03110106
MORRISETTE, ZACHARY
31.50
wf
104438
03110106
MUELLNER, CHRISTOPHER
150.00
wf
104439
03110106
NICHOLS, SAMUEL
33.75
wf
104440
03110106
O'SHEA, CASSANDRA
22.50
wf
104441
03110106
ROBBINS, EMERALD
138.00
wf
104442
03110106
RUNNING, DUSTIN
371.25
21
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS REPORT
FOR THE CURRENT PAY PERIOD
22
CHECK 9
CHECK DATE
EMPLOYEE NAME
AMOUNT
wf
104443
03110106
SERGOT, COLLIN
255.00
wf
104444
03110106
SHOBERG, KARI
169.13
wf
104445
03110106
SIKORA, NATHAN
1 5.00
wf
104446
03110106
SIKORA, PAUL
74.00
wf
104447
03110106
STACKPOLE, QUINN
33.75
wf
104448
03110106
TARR -JR, GUS
66.00
wf
104449
03110106
YORKOVICH, BENJAMIN
130.00
wf
104450
03110106
HAAG, MARK
1,903.53
wf
104451
03110106
NADEAU, EDWARD
3,061.98
wf
104452
03110106
GLASS, JEAN
1,868.83
wf
104453
03110106
HER, PHENG
158.65
wf
104454
03110106
NAGEL, BROOKE
273.35
wf
104455
03110106
SIMPSON, JOSEPH
187.85
wf
104456
03110106
TOLBERT, FRANCINE
237.13
wf
104457
03110106
VELASQUEZ, ANGELA
216.00
wf
104458
03110106
ANDERSON, CALEB
33.25
wf
104459
03110106
ANDERSON, JOSHUA
68.50
wf
104460
03110106
ANDERSON, JUSTIN
47.95
wf
104461
03110106
ARNEVIK, ERICA
35.00
wf
104462
03110106
BRENEMAN, SEAN
28.80
wf
104463
03110106
CLARK, PAMELA
165.11
wf
104464
03110106
COSTA, JOSEPH
352.10
wf
104465
03110106
DEMPSEY, BETH
116.50
wf
104466
03110106
FENGER, JUSTIN
148.81
wf
104467
03110106
GRANT, MELISSA
359.25
wf
104468
03110106
GRUENHAGEN, LINDA
551.85
wf
104469
03110106
HAGSTROM, EMILY
143.98
wf
104470
03110106
IRISH, PETER
123.75
wf
104471
03110106
KROLL, MARK
173.25
wf
104472
03110106
LEMAY, KATHERINE
37.28
wf
104473
03110106
LUTZ, CHRISTINA
13.50
wf
104474
03110106
MELLEN, CHRISTOPHER
40.50
wf
104475
03110106
NWANOKWALE, MORDY
42.25
wf
104476
03110106
PEHOSKI, JOEL
113.40
wf
104477
03110106
PETERSON, ANNA
105.40
wf
104478
03110106
RICHTER, NANCY
238.00
wf
104479
03110106
RYDEEN, ARIEL
193.38
wf
104480
03110106
SCHMIDT, EMILY
111.33
wf
104481
03110106
SCHMIDT, JOHN
146.50
wf
104482
03110106
SCHOENECKER, SAMANTHA
44.20
wf
104483
03110106
SCHRAMM, BRITTANY
86.25
22
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS REPORT
FOR THE CURRENT PAY PERIOD
23
CHECK 9
CHECK DATE
EMPLOYEE NAME
AMOUNT
wf
104484
03110106
SCHREINER, MICHELLE
160.44
wf
104485
03110106
SMITLEY, SHARON
407.15
wf
104486
03110106
STAHNKE, AMY
192.60
wf
104487
03110106
WARNER, CAROLYN
239.50
wf
104488
03110106
WEDES, CARYL
140.10
wf
104489
03110106
WENZEL, SHANNON
52.00
wf
104490
03110106
WILLIAMS, KRISTINE
68.25
wf
104491
03110106
WOODMAN, ALICE
197.60
wf
104492
03110106
ZALK, IDA
58.75
wf
104493
03110106
BOSLEY, CAROL
359.10
wf
104494
03110106
BREITBACH, GARY
420.00
wf
104495
03110106
LEWIS, AMY
140.60
wf
104496
03110106
ODDEN, JESSICA
137.81
wf
104497
03110106
OIE, REBECCA
172.91
wf
104498
03110106
PARAYNO, GUAI
311.23
wf
104499
03110106
SATTLER, CASSANDRA
46.13
wf
104500
03110106
SATTLER, MELINDA
186.30
wf
104501
03110106
STODGHILL, AMANDA
109.69
wf
104502
03110106
VAN HALE, PAULA
186.75
wf
104503
03110106
ZAGER, LINNEA
101.48
wf
104504
03110106
BALDWIN, JANA
51.80
wf
104505
03110106
BERLIN, SARAH
66.50
wf
104506
03110106
DOUGLASS, TOM
1,310.47
wf
104507
03110106
EVERSON, KYLE
109.54
wf
104508
03110106
GADOW, ANNA
60.33
wf
104509
03110106
O'GRADY, VICTORIA
118.15
wf
104510
03110106
OLSON, CHRISTINE
63.18
wf
104511
03110106
THEESFELD, CALEB
27.80
wf
104512
03110106
YANG, HUE
66.50
wf
104513
03110106
YANG, KAY
233.28
wf
104514
03110106
YANG, TIM
43.95
wf
104515
03110106
VUE, LOR PAO
269.33
491,050.97
23
M=
*WW wo illaroivfgl 11 1z;
I T S - I ff'61 94 11 TV'
-vF=ZL-FM§11A11ff19==i
Projects scheduled for 2006 include the completion of the Highline Trail from Walter Street to Century
Avenue and installation of new playground equipment at Sterling Oaks, Applewood and Maplewood
Heights Parks, Additionally we will be working to make capital improvements to the Maplewood
Community Center including expansion of the exercise area, childcare area, and physical improvements
to the pool and gymnasium area.
kphI05 Ietter.annLaf 'epG'l COMM
PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT 651-249-2101 FAX: 651
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
MAPLEWOOD PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSIO1
ANNUAL REPORT FOR 2005
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
The mission of the Maplewood Parks and Recreation Department is� To provide a community
environment for a// citizens to participate in and enjoy cultural and recreational activities on an
equitable basis.
nii "EMON110MME=
The final position statement by the Parks and Recreation Commission regarding development on
the open space reads as follows:
The commission focused the vast majority of our time on the Gladstone redevelopment planning
*rocessing in 2005, The commission is pleased to also have been involved in coordinating a
number of major park improvement projects, as well as hosting a series • neighborhood park
planning meetings and community surveys.
program in February. We had five members enrolled in this program before we even started
advertising it. It's =r- start to a new program. We are hoping to start the Medica
reimbursement program by April 2006.
It has been a very busy year at the community center. The large number of users and the age of
the facility really wear on the facility, The community center will be facing some of its largest
maintenance projects in 2006 including painting and repairs to pool ceiling and support beams,
reconstruction of pool slide steps, and determining a long-term solution and repair ♦ the gym
floor.
The Recreation Division was very active in 2005 offering new programs and increasing program
participation numbers. Summer Kick Off, held at the MCC, was extremely successful, This event is
the official start to the summer for recreation.
Youth preschool gymboree was a total success in 2005. On average, there were 20 to 25 families
that attended each session. The summer day camp program was bigger and better than ever, We
averaged 45 to 50 participants per week for 12 weeks. The participants took on the extra task to
plant a garden and remove buckthorn from the MCC. Our adult Lunch Bunch program is new and
very exciting. We toured and dined at many eateries in and around St. Paul, This program is
always full and maintains a waiting list.
No] 2_11 1111 IOWA 1111141 SpM.-If RA W71111API SM-11 VA
The marketing division was very successful in 2005. There were four Parks and Recreation
Brochures produced, twelve City News, four MCC member newsletters, 24 email blasts, MCC
banquet room and theater promotions, several promotions for the MCC and working closely with
the National Night Out event to ensure success.
One of the highlights in 2005 was the Twelve Days of Fitness promotion offered in December at
the MCC, Over 3,500 participated in this event.
2. Promote and market nature
Vadnais Heights Festival
Lions Club presentation
Monarch Garden Party/fu nd raiser
0
• Coordinated Earth Day with environmental committee
• Rainwater garden presentations to national conferences
• 3M Science Fair
Watershed watchers and rain gardens planted
Priory bridges installed
KI
One of the major undertakings of the park maintenance division is graffiti elimination and
reduction. The park maintenance division has a policy to remove all graffiti reported within a
24-hour time period,
KhT5 annual report comm
al
W41DIMMYA IRIM
KhT6 goo's pno6lies ann,iai report corr.rr.
Agenda Item H3
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Manager
FROM: Chuck Ahl, Public Works Director /City Engineer
Erin Laberee, Assistant City Engineer
SUBJECT: County Road D Realignment (West) Improvements (TH 61 to Walter
Street), City Project 02 -08: Resolution for Modification of the Existing
Construction Contract, Change Order Nos. 5 -16 (T.A. Schifsky Contract)
DATE: March 17, 2006
INTRODUCTION
The city council will consider approving the attached resolution directing the modification of the
existing construction contract, Change Order Nos. 5 -16 (T.A. Schifsky contract).
Background
In September 2004, the City Council approved the award of a construction contract for this project to
Palda & Sons, Inc. The project included construction of utilities and roadway for the entire County
Road D West improvement. Unfortunately, the County Road D West project did not begin as
anticipated due to problems coordinating the various area improvements. Palda & Sons, Inc.
requested an increase in the bid in excess of $300,000 to have the delays extended into 2005.
Negotiations with the contractor resulted in the elimination of the street construction portion of the
contract. The eliminated roadway construction was then rebid last spring, and a construction
contract for the roadway was awarded to T. A. Schifsky & Sons in the amount of $668,162.93,
resulting in a $40,000 cost savings to the city.
During construction there are often many unforeseen changes and conditions that require changes
to the original plan. The contractor did not request payment for these items during the project as
normally occurs, so the staff did not push to pay them for the extra work. A brief summary of each
change order is provided below.
Change Order No. 5 - $3,864.08. Detour signage for the County Road D detour remained in place
72 days longer than expected. Additional signs required by the City were also installed which were
not included in the original bid amount. State Aid will cover $2,704.85 and the remaining cost is the
city's responsibility.
Change Order No. 6 - $74,821.72. Excavation was required at LaMettry's pond to restore the
original capacity due to sediment that entered the pond during construction activities. State Aid will
finance 100% of the cost of this change order.
Change Order No. 7 - $4,107.95. Geotextile fabric was placed on County Road D Court to help
strengthen the roadway base due to the poor existing soils. All of the costs for Change Order 7 will
be paid by State Aid.
Change Order No. 8 - $3,562.39. The City delayed the final wear course of pavement until the
summer of 2006 due to ongoing construction activities. Pavement striping was placed to open the
road up the public. State Aid is responsible for $1,336.50 for the pavement striping while the city is
responsible for the remaining portion.
Change Order No. 9 - $5,433.94. Additional drainage improvements were necessary along the
north side of County Road D to provide manageable front yards to residents. State Aid participation
will be 100% of the cost.
Agenda Item H3
Change Order No. 10 - $5,734.23. Revisions were made to the hydrant stubs due to requirements
of Saint Paul Regional Water Services. The City is responsible for the entire cost of Change Order
10, which will be paid from the WAC Fund.
Change Order No. 11 - $13,912.93. Storm sewer modifications were made to fit the new curb line
due to an oversight during the design process. 100% of the cost will be paid by the City, but has
been recovered from the design engineer.
Change Order No. 12 - $824.74. Two storm sewer structures required lowering to fit the
surrounding grade. The City is responsible for the cost of the storm sewer revisions.
Change Order No. 13 - $1,699.81. Over the winter of 2005, some curb on the Venburg Guldens site
was damaged. The city agreed to replace sixty feet of damaged curb and the cost is the City's
financial obligation, but is being recovered from the developer and utility company.
Change Order No. 14 - $792.00. Jersery barriers were installed between LaMettry's parking lot and
the haul road used by the contractor when the pond excavation occurred. The cost of the barriers
are the City's responsibility.
Change Order No. 15 - $5,005.90. Dewatering the storm pond behind LaMettry's was required to
excavate sediment from the pond and perform the necessary grading. State Aid is responsible for
100% of the cost of the dewatering.
Change Order No. 16 - $22,785.29. Permanent turf restoration along County Road D was delayed
due to ongoing construction activities. The contractor was directed to temporary seed along the
boulevards and permanent seed in areas with no further disruption. These items were not originally
included in the bid. State Aid will be responsible for 100% of Change Order 16.
Budget Impact
Approval of this resolution will increase the construction contract by $142,544.98. Change Orders 5
through 16 fall within the revised project budget approved by the city council at the December 12,
2005 meeting. No budget revisions are required at this time.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the city council approve the attached resolution directing the modification of
the existing construction contract, Change Order Nos. 5 through 16 (T.A. Schifsky Contract) for the
County Road D West Improvements (TH 61 to Walter Street), City Project 02 -08.
Attachments:
1. Resolution
2. Change Order No. 5 -16
3. Location Map
Agenda Item H3
RESOLUTION
DIRECTING MODIFICATION OF EXISTING CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
PROJECT 02 -08, CHANGE ORDER Nos. 5 - 16
(T.A. Schifsky Contract)
WHEREAS, the City Council of Maplewood, Minnesota has heretofore ordered made
Improvement Project 02 -08, County Road D Realignment (West) Improvements (TH 61 to
Walter Street), and has let a construction contract pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter
429, and
WHEREAS, the City Engineer has reported that it is now necessary and expedient
that said contract be modified and designated as Improvement Project 02 -08, Change Order
No. 5 -16, (T.A. Schifsky Contract), as an increase to said contract by an amount of
$142,544.98, such that the new contract amount is now and hereby established as
$866,868.91.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA that the mayor and city manager are hereby authorized to
sign on behalf of the City of Maplewood to signify and show that the existing contract is
hereby modified through said Change Order No. 5 -16 as a contract increase in the amount
of $142,544.98. The revised contract amount is $866,868.91.
No revisions to the project budget are proposed at this time, as these
changes fall within the revised project budget approved by the city council on December 12,
2005.
CHANGE ORDER NO. 5
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Project Name: County Road D Improvements
S.A.P. 62- 619 -0261 138- 020 -30
Project No. City Project 02 -08
Contractor: T.A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc.
Date: 1116106
In accordance with the terms of this Contract, you are hereby authorized and instructed to perform the Work as altered by the following provisions:
Detour signage was placed on Beam Avenue and Walter Street between July 20, 2005 and November 28, 2005 for the
County Road D road closure. United Rentals, Inc. placed the detour for a lump sum price of $ 1,500.00 with the
understanding the signs would be in place for sixty days or less. The detour remained in place for 132 days.
Additionally, the City of Maplewood ordered extra stop signs and speed limit signs that were not included in the
original detour bid. Additional traffic control devices are paid at Mn /DOT predetermined unit prices. After ninety
days, detour and additional signage is paid at forty percent of the unit price. A ten percent prime contractor's markup is
included in the cost of this change order. The value of this change order is $ 3,864.08.
Approved Revised Contract: $ 724,323.93
Change this Change Order: $ 3,864.08
Possible Revised Contract: $ 728,188.01
Approval
C.O. 45, Page 1 of 2
Mayor
Approval
Engineer
Agreed to by Contractor
By
Its
Title
Approval
Assistant State Aid Engineer (For Funding Approval Only)
C.O. 45, Page 1 of 2
CHANGE ORDER NO. 6
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Project Name: County Road D Improvements
S.A.P. 62- 619 -0261 138- 020 -30
Project No. City Project 02 -08
Contractor: T.A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc.
Date: 1117106
In accordance with the terms of this Contract, you are hereby authorized and instructed to perform the work as altered by the following provisions:
Excavation of the LaMettry Pond, originally included in Palda & Sons, Inc. S.A.P. 62- 619 -025 J 138 - 020 -29 contract,
occurred under T.A. Schifsky's contract The work was performed under force account during the last three months of
2005 and was necessary to remove sedimentation and restore the drainage capacity of the pond. This change order
covers most work associated with the pond excavation. Pump rental to drain the pond and jersey barriers placed in
LaMettrys parking lot to isolate the work area are not included in this change order. 2006 repair work on the access
road between LaMettry's and Toyota's new parking area and final turf restoration are not included in this change order.
All work is subject to a ten percent prime contractor's markup. The value of this change order is $ 74,821,72.
Approved Revised Contract: S 724,323.93
Net Change of Prior Pending Change Order No.: 5 $ 3,864.08
Change this Change Order: $ 74,821.72
Possible Revised Contract: $ 803,009.73
Approval
C.O. 46, Page 1 of 6
Mayor
Approval
Engineer
Agreed to by Contractor
By
Its
Title
Approval
Assistant State Aid Engineer (For Funding Approval Only)
C.O. 46, Page 1 of 6
CHANGE ORDER NO. 7
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Project Name: County Road D Improvements
S.A.P. 62- 619 -0261 138- 020 -30
Project No. City Project 02 -08
Contractor: T.A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc.
Date: 1/20/06
In accordance with the terms of this Contract, you are hereby authorized and instructed to perform the Work as altered by the following provisions:
Geotextile fabric, Type V, nonwoven, was placed on D -Court and at the intersection of County Road D and D -Court
due to poor soils. Use of the fabric was approved by the City of Maplewood to stabilize the roadway and provide
separation of subgrade and aggregate base. Separation prevents mixing of subgrade and aggregate base, maintains the
design thickness and strength of the roadway and facilitates compaction of the base materials. Mn /DOT Estimating
approved the cost of the fabric. A prime contractor's ten percent markup is included in this change order.
The value of this change order is $ 4,107.95.
Approved Revised Contract: S 724,323.93
Net Change of Prior Pending Change Order No. 5, $ 78,685.80
Change this Change Order: $ 4,107.95
Possible Revised Contract: $ 807,117.68
Approval
C.O. 47, Page 1 of 2
Mayor
Approval
Engineer
Agreed to by Contractor
By
Its
Title
Approval
Assistant State Aid Engineer (For Funding Approval Only)
C.O. 47, Page 1 of 2
CHANGE ORDER NO. 8
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Project Name: County Road D Improvements
S.A.P. 62- 619 -0261 138- 020 -30
Project No. City Project 02 -08
Contractor: T.A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc.
Date: 1127106
In accordance with the terms of this Contract, you are hereby authorized and instructed to perform the work as altered by the following provisions:
Due to ongoing construction adjacent to project roadways and impending wintry weather, the City of Maplewood
suspended placement of bituminous wear course until 2006. Seasonal striping was placed in order to open the road to
traffic over the winter. This change order covers the cost of pavement markings placed in October 2005 for which there
are no contract bid items. Payment items, reviewed and approved by Mn/DOT Estimating, are listed on page two of this
document. This change order includes a prime contractor's ten percent markup.
The value of this change order is $ 3,562.39.
Approved Revised Contract: S 724,323.93
Net Change of Prior Pending Change Order No. 5, 6, 7 $ 82,793.75
Change this Change Order: $ 3,562.39
Possible Revised Contract: $ 810,680.07
Approval
C.O. 48, Page 1 of 2
Mayor
Approval
Engineer
Agreed to by Contractor
By
Its
Title
Approval
Assistant State Aid Engineer (For Funding Approval Only)
C.O. 48, Page 1 of 2
CHANGE ORDER NO. 9
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Project Name: County Road D Improvements
S.A.P. 62 -619 -0261 138- 020 -30
Project No. City Project 02 -08
Contractor: T.A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc.
Date: 1/31/06
In accordance with the terms of this Contract you are hereby authorized and instructed to perform the Work as altered by the following
provisions:
Residential drainage improvements were necessary on the north side of County Road D at 1227 and 1233 County
Road D in order to provide a maintainable front yard for the resident Planned construction and inplace ditch
topography did not present a manageable or buildable situation. Improvements include removal of driveway
corrugated metal pipe, installation of a catch basin, HDPE pipe and flared end section with a trashguard and riprap,
as well as site grading. The City of Vadnais Heights conveyed approval of this extra work to the City of
Maplewood. The work was performed in accordance with Mn /DOT Specification (1904) and includes a prime
contractor's ten percent markup.
Approved Revised Contract: $ 724,323.93
Net Change of Prior Pending Change Order No. 5 6, 8 $ 86,356.14
Change this Change Order: $ 5,433.94
Possible Revised Contract: $ 816,114.01
Approval
Mayor
Approval
Engineer
Agreed to by Contractor
By
Its
Title
Approval
Assistant State Aid Engineer (For Funding Approval Only)
C.O. 49, Page 1 of 3
CHANGE ORDER NO. 10
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Project Name: County Road D Improvements
S.A.P. 62- 619 -0261 138- 020 -30
Project No. City Project 02 -08
Contractor: T.A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc.
Date: 1/31/06
In accordance with the terms of this Contract, you are hereby authorized and instructed to perform the Work as altered by the following provisions:
Several inplace hydrants, as well as some gate valve boxes, required extensions to fit the grade on this project. Saint
Paul Regional Water Services do not allow bends on hydrant stubs, thus necessitating hydrant and valve box extensions.
Hydrant stubs and elevations were determined in 2004 under Palda & Sons, Inc. 02-08 contract. Water main work on
this project is not eligible for state aid funding. Work was performed in accordance with Mn1DOT Specification (1904)
and includes a prime contractor's ten percent markup. The value of this change order is $ 5,734.23.
Approved Revised Contract: S 724,323.93
Net Change of Prior Pending Change Order No. 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 $ 91,790.08
Change this Change Order: $ 5,734.23
Possible Revised Contract: $ 821,848.24
Approval
Mayor
Approval
Engineer
Agreed to by Contractor
By
Its
Title
Approval
100% Local Funding
Assistant State Aid Engineer (For Funding Approval Only)
C.O. 910, Page 1 of 2
CHANGE ORDER NO. 11
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Project Name: County Road D Improvements
S.A.P. 62- 619 -0261 138- 020 -30
Project No. City Project 02 -08
Contractor: T.A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc.
Date: 1/31/06
In accordance with the terms of this Contract, you are hereby authorized and instructed to perform the Work as altered by the following provisions:
Storm sewer and sanitary sewer revisions were necessary on some structures located within this project because the
inplace manholes or catchbasins did not fit the proposed curbline. The City's engineering consultants agree to pay for
these revisions through a reduction in engineering service fees. Payment to Friedges Contracting Co. for completing
the work is recommended. The work was performed in accordance with NWDOT Specification (1904) and includes a
prime contractor's ten percent markup. The value of this change order is $ 13,912.93.
Approved Revised Contract: S 724,323.93
Net Change of Prior Pending Change Order No. 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 $ 97,524.31
Change this Change Order: $ 13,91293
Possible Revised Contract: $ 835,761.17
Approval
Mayor
Approval
Engineer
Agreed to by Contractor
By
Its
Title
Approval
100% Local Funding
Assistant State Aid Engineer (For Funding Approval Only)
C.O. 911, Page 1 of 3
CHANGE ORDER NO. 12
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Project Name: County Road D Improvements
S.A.P. 62- 619 -0261 138- 020 -30
Project No. City Project 02 -08
Contractor: T.A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc.
Date: 1/31/06
In accordance with the terms of this Contract, you are hereby authorized and instructed to perform the Work as altered by the following provisions:
Two storm sewer structures, located on the north side of County Road D, required lowering to fit the gradc. The City's
engineering consultants agree to pay the City of Maplewood for these revisions through a reduction in engineering
service fees. Paymcnt to Fricdgcs Contracting Co. for completing the work is recommended. The work was performed
in accordance with Mn/DOT Specification (1904) and includes a prime contractor's ten percent markup.
The value of this change order is $ 824.74.
Approved Revised Contract: S 724,323.93
Net Change of Prior Pending Change Order No. 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 $ 111,437.24
Change this Change Order: $ 824.74
Possible Revised Contract: $ 836,585.91
Approval
Mayor
Approval
Engineer
Agreed to by Contractor
By
Its
Title
Approval
100% Local Funding
Assistant State Aid Engineer (For Funding Approval Only)
C.O. 912, Page 1 of 2
CHANGE ORDER NO. 13
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Project Name: County Road D Improvements
S.A.P. 62- 619 -0261 138- 020 -30
Project No. City Project 02 -08
Contractor: T.A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc.
Date: 3/1/06
In accordance with the terms of this Contract, you are hereby authorized and instructed to perform the Work as altered by the following provisions:
Some concrete curb and gutter installed under Venburg 1 Gulden's City Project 02 -08 (04 -04) was removed and
replaced under T.A. Schifsky & Son's contract. The damaged curb was located on the frontage road, close to an
entrance to Venburg Tire. Schifsky's subcontractor, North Country Concrete, replaced fourteen lineal feet of B612
curb and gutter and forty -six lineal feet of modified B612 curb and gutter. The work was performed in accordance
with Mn /DOT Specification (1904) Extra and Force Account Work and includes a prime contractor ten percent
allowance. The value of this change order is $ 1,699.81.
Approved Revised Contract: S 724,323.93
Net Change of Prior Pending Change Order No. 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 $ 112,26198
Change this Change Order: $ 1,699.81
Possible Revised Contract: $ 838,285.72
Approval
Mayor
Approval
Engineer
Agreed to by Contractor
By
Its
Title
Approval
100% Local Funding
Assistant State Aid Engineer (For Funding Approval Only)
C.O. 913, Page 1 of 2
CHANGE ORDER NO. 14
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Project Name: County Road D Improvements
S.A.P. 62- 619 -0261 138- 020 -30
Project No. City Project 02 -08
Contractor: T.A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc.
Date: 3/1/06
In accordance with the terms of this Contract, you are hereby authorized and instructed to perform the work as altered by the following provisions:
The City of Maplewood requested a barrier be placed between LaMetlry's rear parking lot and the haul road used
during excavation and grading of the storm pond located directly behind LaMettry's Collision. Sixty lineal feet of
jersey barrier were installed to delineate the work area and protect adjacent property. The $12.00 l if cost of the barrier,
approved by the Mn/DOT Estimating Office, includes placement and removal. A prime contractor's ten percent
allowance is included in this change order. The value of this change order is $ 792.00.
Approved Revised Contract: S 724,323.93
Net Change of Prior Pending Change Order No. 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, $ 113,961.79
12,13
Change this Change Order: $ 792.00
Possible Revised Contract: $ $39,077.72
Approval
Mayor
Approval
Engineer
Agreed to by Contractor
By
Its
Title
Approval
100% Local Funding
Assistant State Aid Engineer (For Funding Approval Only)
C.O. 914, Page I of 1
CHANGE ORDER NO. 15
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Project Name: County Road D Improvements
S.A.P. 62- 619 -0261 138- 020 -30
Project No. City Project 02 -08
Contractor: T.A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc.
Date: 3/1/06
In accordance with the terms of this Contract, you are hereby authorized and instructed to perform the Work as altered by the following provisions:
This change order provides compensation for dewatering the storm pond located behind LaMettry's Collision prior to,
and during, excavation. Each side of the pond was drained into the other in order to remove sediment and grade the
pond bottom and slopes. The cost of the pump includes rental and service from October 27, 2005 to December 2, 2005.
A prime contractor's ten percent allowance is included in this change order. The value of this change order is $ 5,005.90.
Contract Status Cost
Original Contract: $ 668,16293
Net Change of Prior Approved
Change Order No.: 1, 2, 3, 4 $ 56,161.00
Approved Revised Contract: $ 724,323.93
Net Change of Prior Pending Change Order No. 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, $ 114,753.79
12, 13, 14
Change this Change Order: $ 5,005.90
Possible Revised Contract: $ $44,0$3.62
Approval
C.O. 915, Page 1 of 2
Mayor
Approval
Engineer
Agreed to by Contractor
By
Its
Title
Approval
Assistant State Aid Engineer (For Funding Approval Only)
C.O. 915, Page 1 of 2
CHANGE ORDER NO. 16
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Project Name: County Road D Improvements
S.A.P. 62- 619 -0261 138- 020 -30
Project No. City Project 02 -08
Contractor: T.A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc.
Date: 3/1/06
In accordance with the terms of this Contract, you are hereby authorized and instructed to perform the Work as altered by the following provisions:
Due to ongoing adjacent development, and upcoming installation of underground public utilities, the City of
Maplewood postponed permanent turf restoration along all boulevards Frith planned trail construction and 1 or
continuing construction activities. This change order compensates the contractor for temporary seeding along
boulevards, permanent seeding where no disruptions are expected and native seeding at the North Pond. Because
seeding pay items are not included in this contract, the work was performed in accordance with Mn/DOT Specification
(1904) Extra and Force Account Work A prime contractor's ten percent allowance is included.
The value of this change order is $ 22,785.29.
Approved Revised Contract: $ 724,32393
Net Change of Prior Pending Change Order No. 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, $ 119,759.69
12,13,14,15
Change this Change Order: $ 22,785.29
Possible Revised Contract: $ 866,86891
Approval
C.O. 916, Page I of 5
Mayor
Approval
Engineer
Agreed to by Contractor
By
Its
Title
Approval
Assistant State Aid Engineer (For Funding Approval Only)
C.O. 916, Page I of 5
I
Agenda Item H4
AGENDA REPORT
TO: Richard Fursman, City Manager
FROM: Charles Ahl, Public Works Director /City Engineer
Erin Laberee, Assistant City Engineer
SUBJECT: Kenwood Area Street Improvements, City Project 05 -16
Resolution Approving Application for Easement across State Land
DATE: March 24, 2006
INTRODUCTION
As part of the Kenwood Area Street Improvements, storm sewer pipe is being replaced and extended. A
DNR permit is required to allow for the ponding of runoff during large storm events on their property. The
DNR requires the city to make application for an easement across state land. The easement application
requires a resolution from the city council approving the application for easement across state land.
The city council will consider a resolution approving the application for the DNR easement.
Background
Currently existing storm sewer on the streets south of Roselawn Avenue, within the Kenwood
neighborhood, discharge at a low area adjacent to the DNR trail. While the city owns right of way in this low
area, it is not adequately sized to allow for ponding of runoff. The city does not intend to disturb this low
lying area, only to reconstruct the storm sewer pipe that discharges to it. The city needs to formalize a
ponding easement with the affected property owners who include the DNR. The ponding easement needed
within the DNR property will not encroach on the existing Gateway Trail as the trail sits 14 feet higher than
the proposed ponding easement.
The DNR requires the city council pass a resolution approving the Application for Easement across State
Land as part of the application process. A schematic of the proposed easement in relationship to the trail
location has been enclosed.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the city council approve the attached resolution Approving Application for
Easement across State Land.
Attachments — Resolution
Location Map (Color copy provided to City Council)
Application for Easement across State Land
Agenda Item H4
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION APPROVING APPLICATION FOR EASEMENT ACROSS STATE LAND
WHEREAS, the City of Maplewood wishes to obtain a ponding easement within state land,
WHEREAS, the pond will be located within the corporate limits of Maplewood,
WHEREAS, the City of Maplewood will be granted a permanent ponding easement for the purpose
of ponding runoff pending the receipt of a Resolution Approving the Application for Easement across State
Land.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESTOA
THAT:
The City of Maplewood approves the Application for Easement across State Land.
Adopted by the City Council of Maplewood this 27 day of March, 2006
Agenda Item H4
----- -------
---------- 7 .. . .................. . ----------
r .
- ---
- - -------------------
- --------- -------- --- -
-
- -------------
- - - - - ---- ----------------- - ---------- ----- -------- ---
- - - - - - -
----------
-
----- -------
Agenda Item H4
Easement No. 133 -
Project Number 05_16
STATE OF MINNESOTA
APPLICATION FOR EASEMENT
ACROSS STATE LAND
(SUBMIT 4 COPIES OF THE APPLICATION AND ATTACHMENTS)
It is permissible for the agency /governmental unit/individual requesting an easement to make preliminary contact with the Area or
Region (local unit manager) concerning land ownership, planned routes, or other matters affecting such an easement. These should be
handled in the best routine manner, but this official application must come to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Division
of Lands and Minerals, 500 Lafayette Road, St. Paul, MN 55155 -4045. For additional information, call (651) 296 -4097.
Name of Applicant (PRINT OR TYPE) i of Maplewood
Address (Mailing and Location)
19 02 County Roa d B East
7 e,son Erin Lca beree Telephone No 651-249-2404
The applicant herein applies pursuant to M.S. 84.63, M.S. 84.631 and other applicable statutes for an Easement to Cross State Land
described below, in accordance with all maps, plans, specifications and other supporting data submitted with this application and made
a part hereof.
EASEMENT: (mark appropriate box) ❑ Construction ❑ Reconstruction❑ Other
Number consecutively and identifyfully each easement applied for.
Please specify
No.
Govt. Lot or 114 114
Sec
Twp
Rge
County
Type of Easement
(Permanent or Temporary)
Total Acres
Date of Completion
(if Temporary)
1
5E 114
17
29
22
Ramsey
Permanent
0.20
3
4
Provide a detailed legal description and map for each easement applied for. For construction or re- construction easement
applications, include construction plans and profiles.
4. If government entity, attach County Board or Township resolution.
Minimum Fee: ❑ $500.00 attached.
If the easement is denied prior to field review and appraisal, the entire application fee will be refunded.
If the easement is denied after field review and appraisal, $400.00 will be refunded.
No action will be taken on this application until the fee is submitted.
Minimum fees will be credited to the actual easement cost.
Make check payable to the Department of Natural Resources.
Any written correspondence from the Department of Natural Resources relating to this proposed project must be included with this application and will
become a part of this easement record. Environmental and archeological reviews must be completed before easement can be acted on.
Agenda Item H5
Amended 03 -23 -06
AGENDA REPORT
TO: Richard Fursman, City Manager
FROM: Charles Ahl, Public Works Director /City Engineer
Erin Laberee, Assistant City Engineer
SUBJECT: Kenwood Area Street Improvements, Project 05 -16 — Resolution Ordering
Assessment Hearing
DATE: March 20, 2006
INTRODUCTION
At the March 13, 2006, city council meeting, the city council approved the final plans and advertising for
bids for the Kenwood Area Street Improvement project, as well as ordered the preparation of the
assessment roll. The assessment roll has been prepared and the next step in the improvement
process is to order the assessment hearing.
The city council shall consider approving the attached resolution ordering the assessment hearing for
the Kenwood Area Street Improvements, Project 05 -16.
Background
The amounts proposed to be assessed for the Kenwood Area Street Improvements, Project 05 -16, are
not directly dependent on the actual amount of the bid, rather on a predetermined assessment rate
established in the city's pavement management policy. The method of assessment is the same as had
been outlined in the feasibility study.
An abridged version of the assessment roll will be provided at the March 27, 2006, city council meeting.
A complete detailed version of the assessment roll is available in the office of the city engineer.
It is recommended that the assessment hearing for the Kenwood Area Street Improvements, Project
05 -16, be scheduled for 7:00 p.m., Monday, April 24th, 2006.
Budget Impact
The current action will not affect the approved project budget. Below is a summary of the project
funding as approved by the city council following the public hearing on November 22, 2005.
Approved budget for Kenwood Area Street Improvements, Project 05 -16:
Street assessments:
Storm assessments:
Sanitary Sewer utility Fund:
SPRWS Obligation:
WAC Fund
Environmental Utility Fund
City general tax levy:
Total
$ 1,356,608
(29 %)
$ 218,850
(5 %)
$ 443,245
(9 %)
$ 72,490
(2 %)
$ 50,000
(1 %)
$ 303,500
(6 %)
$ 2,252,447
(48 %)
$ 4,727,140
(100 %)
Agenda Item H5
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the city council approve the attached resolution for the Gladstone North Area
Street Improvements, Project 05 -16 — Ordering the Assessment Hearing for 7:00 p.m., Monday, April
24th, 2006.
Attachments: Resolution Ordering Assessment Roll Hearing
Location Map
Agenda Item H5
RESOLUTION
ORDERING ASSESSMENT ROLL HEARING
WHEREAS, the clerk and the city engineer have, at the direction of the council, prepared an
assessment roll for the Kenwood Area Street Improvements, City Project 05 -16, and the said
assessment roll is on file in the office of the city engineer.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD,
MINNESOTA:
1. A hearing shall be held on the 24th day of April 2006, at the city hall at 7:00 p.m. to pass
upon such proposed assessment and at such time and place all persons owning property affected by
such improvement will be given an opportunity to be heard with reference to such assessment.
2. The city clerk is hereby directed to cause a notice of the hearing on the proposed
assessment to be published in the official newspaper, at least two weeks prior to the hearing, and to
mail notices to the owners of all property affected by said assessment.
3. The notice of hearing shall state the date, time and place of hearing, the general nature
of the improvement the area to be assessed, that the proposed assessment roll is on file with the clerk
and city engineer and that written or oral objections will be considered.
enda Item H5
I I
ry
w
VIKING DR.
n
w
0
ry
< Li
3: 0
LAURIE CT.
4 z- ,
< n
ui
BURKI
u�
7
'
ELDRIDGE
1
cn
Oehrline
BELMONT
La ke
AVE.
SKILLMAN
AV.
0 2�
<
(Y
ry
CK,
M
C/)
M
z
W
Edgerton
Park
A
W
z >- >- W
< w
Li
ry
n -1
0
ROSELAWN AV. -i I
BELLWOOD n
0
C
SUMMER °o C
CT. i, i -
D
ry ui
Lu
<
A Y TRAIL
RIP LEY AV- GATE
® PROPOSED STREET IMPROVEMENT
BURKE CT
Maplecrest
Park
AVE.
F 4�
N
KEW' OOD
LN.
0
�D
Keller
La ke
61
11-1
Exhibit 1: Project Location
Kenwood Area Street Improvements
City Project 05-16
Item H -6
MEMORANDUM
TO: Richard Fursman, City Manager
FROM: Karen Guilfoile, City Clerk
DATE: March 21, 2006
RE: Council- Manager - Management Staff Retreat
As you are aware the city council, city manager and management team staff will be
having a retreat on April 28, 2006 from 8:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.
The retreat will be held at the Maplewood Best Western for the purpose of discussing and
developing a shared practical vision and set goals for the City's future.
Final details are being firmed up and will be presented to the city council at future
council meetings.
Agenda Item 11
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Manager
FROM: Ken Roberts, Planner
SUBJECT: Tax - Exempt Revenue Financing — Lakeview Commons
LOCATION: 1200 Lakewood Drive North
DATE: March 16, 2006
INTRODUCTION
Ecumen, a senior housing development company, is requesting that the city council give host
approval for up to $9.0 million in tax - exempt revenue note financing. They would use this
financing to cover the costs of recent and upcoming purchases for their facilities, including the
purchase of the property at 1200 Lakeview Drive North. Ecumen is a non - profit senior housing
operator that runs independent and assisted living housing facilities in more than 100
communities.
Ecumen is requesting that the city approve this financing so the bond interest would be
tax - exempt. The state and federal governments require the local government in which the
company or corporation will spend the bond proceeds to approve the tax- exempt financing.
BACKGROUND
On December 13, 1993, the city council approved a parking reduction authorization, a floor area
variance, the project design plans and gave preliminary approval for tax - exempt bond financing for
the development of a 100 -unit senior housing building at 1200 Lakewood Drive North.
DISCUSSION
This request should meet the city's requirements for tax - exempt financing. Maplewood will not be
liable for this financing. The City of Pine City will be issuing this financing and Ecumen expects to
use this money to buy the existing 100 -unit apartment building at 1200 Lakewood Drive North.
RECOMMENDATION
Approve the attached resolution starting on page six. This approves Maplewood giving host
approval for up to $9.0 million in tax - exempt revenue financing for Ecumen for use at the property
at 1200 Lakewood Drive North.
p /Sec 25/Lakeview Commons tax - exempt fin - 2006
Attachments:
1. Location Map
2. Property Line /Zoning Map
3. Site Plan
4. Financing Host Approval Resolution
5. Joint Powers Agreement
1881554v1
Location Map
Lakeview Commons
1200 Lakewood N
4
OC
a
a
o
o�
Q
J�
Property Line /Zoning Map
Lakeview Commons
1200 Lakewood N
Attachment 3
L � i
e��
MAR YLAND AV ENUE
•56 °1 • E
586XS' -'
1
r- - - - - -- - -- -
6
a
JI
r
WE TLAND
w_: y
POND
L
- --------------- -
°'
f
se
NOV 0 9 1993
7
LIT PLA
M.g� -m°
L � i
e��
Attachment 4
Extract of Minutes of a Meeting of the
City Council of the
City of Maplewood, Minnesota
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Maplewood, Minnesota, was duly held at the City Hall in said City on Monday, the 27 day of March,
2006, at 7:00 P.M.
The following members were present:
and the following were absent:
Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION GIVING HOST APPROVAL TO THE
ISSUANCE OF REVENUE REFUNDING BONDS
AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member
, and after full discussion thereof and upon 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.
1881554v1 2
5
Attachment 4
RESOLUTION GIVING HOST APPROVAL TO THE
ISSUANCE OF REVENUE REFUNDING BONDS
AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT
BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council (the "Council') of the City of Maplewood, Ramsey
County, Minnesota (the "City ") as follows:
1. General Recitals Minnesota Statutes, Chapter462C (the "Act ") confers upon cities the power
to issue revenue bonds to finance and refinance multifamily housing developments.
2. Description of the Proiect
(a) A Minnesota limited liability company to be formed with Ecumen, a Minnesota nonprofit
corporation, as its sole member (the 'Borrower ") has proposed the issuance of revenue Bonds under
the Act, in one or more series, in an amount not to exceed $9,000,000 (the "Bonds ") by the City of
Pine City, Minnesota (the "Issuer ") to finance the costs of a project (the "Project ") consisting of the
refunding in advance of maturity of the City's $11,830,000 Elder Care Facility Revenue Bonds (Care
Institute, Inc. - Maplewood Project) Series 1994 issued to finance the acquisition, construction and
equipping of a 100 -unit senior multifamily rental housing development located in the City of
Maplewood. The Borrower will own and operate the Project.
3. Joint Powers Agreement In connection with the issuance of the Bonds it is proposed that a
Joint Powers Agreement be entered into by and among the City of Pine City, Minnesota and the City,
pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 471.59 and 471.656 (the "Joint Powers Agreement "). The
Joint Powers Agreement is hereby approved in substantially the form now on file with the City; and the
Mayor and City Clerk are authorized to execute the same in the name of and on behalf of the City. In
the event of the disability or the resignation or other absence of the Mayor or City Clerk of the City,
such other officers of the City who may act in their behalf shall without further act or authorization of
the City do all things and execute all instruments and documents required to be done or to be
executed by such absent or disabled officials. The approval hereby given to the Joint Powers
Agreement includes approval of such additional details therein as may be necessary and appropriate
and such modifications thereof, deletions therefrom and additions thereto as may be necessary and
appropriate and approved by the City officials authorized herein to execute the Joint Powers
Agreement before its execution; and said City officials are hereby authorized to approve said changes
on behalf of the City.
4. Recital of Representations Made by the Borrower
(a) The Borrower has agreed to pay any and all costs incurred by the City in connection
with the issuance of the Bonds, whether or not such issuance is carried to completion.
(b) The Borrower has represented to the City that no public official of the City has either a
direct or an indirect financial interest in the Project nor will any public official either directly or indirectly
benefit financially from the Project.
5. Public Hearing
(a) Section 147(f) of the Internal Revenue Code, as amended (the "Code "), requires that
each governmental unit in which Facilities to be financed by the Bonds are located must approve the
issuance of the Bonds following a public hearing.
1881554v1 3
6
(b) A public hearing on the issuance of the Bonds was held by the City on the date hereof.
6. Host Approval The City hereby gives the host approval required under the Internal Revenue
Code to the issuance of the Bonds.
1881554v1 4
7
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
1, the undersigned, being the duly qualified Clerk of the City of Maplewood, Minnesota, DO
HEREBY CERTIFY that I have compared the attached and foregoing extract of minutes with the
original thereof on file in my office, and that the same is a full, true and complete transcript of the
minutes of a meeting of the Maplewood City Council duly called and held on the date therein
indicated, insofar as such minutes relate to granting host approval to the issuance of revenue
refunding Bonds for a project in the City.
WITNESS my hand this day of 1 2006.
Clerk
1881554v1 J
8
Attachment 5
JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT
This Joint Powers Agreement, dated as of , 2006 (the "Agreement "), is made by
and between the CITY OF PINE CITY, MINNESOTA ( "Pine City ") and the CITY OF MAPLEWOOD,
MINNESOTA ( "Maplewood ").
RECITALS
WHEREAS, each of Pine City and Maplewood is a municipal corporation and a "municipality"
as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.152 to 469.1651 (the "Industrial Development Act "),
with the power thereunder to issue bonds and loan the proceeds thereof for certain projects; and
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59 and 471.656, as amended (collectively, the
"Joint Powers Act "), provides that two or more governmental units, by agreement entered into through
action of their governing bodies, may jointly or cooperatively exercise any power common to the
contracting parties or any similar powers, and that the agreement may provide for the exercise of such
powers by one or more of the participating governmental units on behalf of the other participating
units; and
WHEREAS, A Minnesota limited liability company to be formed with Ecumen, a Minnesota
nonprofit corporation, as its sole member (the "Borrower") has requested Pine City to issue its Senior
Housing Revenue Refunding Bonds, (Lakeview Commons Project) Series 2006 in an amount not to
exceed $9,000,000 (the "Bonds "), on behalf of itself and Maplewood, and to loan the proceeds of the
Bonds to the Borrower so that the Borrower may finance a project consisting of the refunding in
advance of maturity certain tax exempt bonds of Maplewood issued to finance the acquisition,
construction and equipping of a 100 -unit senior multifamily rental housing development located at
1200 Lakewood Drive North in Maplewood (the "Project "); and
WHEREAS, the governing bodies of Pine City and Maplewood have authorized the execution
and delivery of this Agreement and consented to the issuance of the Bonds as contemplated herein;
NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto hereby agree as follows:
7. In order to finance the Project, Pine City shall issue the Bonds pursuant to the Joint
Powers Act, the Industrial Development Act, and the terms of a bond resolution (the "Bond
Resolution ") adopted by Pine City on April 5, 2006. The proceeds of the Bonds will be loaned to the
Borrower pursuant to a financing agreement, and the Borrower will apply such proceeds to payment of
costs of the Project.
8. The liability of Pine City and Maplewood with respect to the Bonds shall be limited as
provided in the Industrial Development Act and the Bond Resolution. Except to the extent specifically
provided herein, Pine City and Maplewood shall not incur any obligations or liabilities to each other
because of the issuance of the Bonds or the use of the Project by the Borrower. The Bonds shall be a
special, limited obligation of Pine City payable solely from proceeds, revenues and other amounts
pledged thereto and more fully described in the Bond Resolution. The Bonds and the interest thereon
shall neither constitute nor give rise to a pecuniary liability, general or moral obligation or a pledge of
the full faith and credit of Pine City, Maplewood, the State of Minnesota, or any political subdivision of
the above, within the meaning of any constitutional or statutory provisions.
1881554v1 6
9
Attachment 5
9. All costs incurred by Pine City and Maplewood in the authorization, execution, delivery
and performance of this Agreement shall be paid by the Borrower out of proceeds of the Bonds or
other funds legally available to the Borrower.
10. Any property acquired because of this Agreement shall be and remain the property of
Pine City, to be disposed of pursuant to the terms of the loan agreement and the Bond Resolution.
Any surplus moneys remaining after the purpose of this Agreement has been completed, unless
otherwise provided for in the agreements related to the Bonds shall belong to Pine City.
11. This Agreement may not be terminated by any party so long as any portion of the
Bonds is outstanding.
12. This Agreement may be amended by Pine City and Maplewood at any time. No
amendment may impair the rights of the holders of the Bonds, unless they have consented to such
amendment in the manner provided for an amendment of the Indenture.
13. This Agreement may be executed in several counterparts, each of which shall be
regarded as an original and all of which shall constitute but one and the same Agreement.
1881554v1 7
10
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, duly authorized officers of the CITY OF PINE CITY, MINNESOTA
and the CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA, have executed this Agreement as of the date set
forth above.
1881554v1
CITY OF PINE CITY, MINNESOTA
By
Its Mayor
By
Its City Administrator
11
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA
By
Its Mayor
By
Its City Clerk
1881554v1 9
12
Agenda Item K1
AGENDA REPORT
TO: Richard Fursman, City Manager
FROM: Charles Ahl, Public Works Director /City Engineer
SUBJECT: TH 5 and TH 120 Vacant MnDOT Property, City Project 03-20- -
Review Finding of Public Purpose for Wetland Restoration Process
DATE: March 21, 2006
INTRODUCTION
The excess right of way on the western side of TH 120 at the intersection with TH 5 was discussed by the
City Council on March 13, 2006. The Council directed staff to investigate the issue of Public Purpose for
the Wetland Restoration process on this property. Staff has checked with a number of agencies as well as
the City Attorney and found that wetland restoration is a public purpose.
Background
The City Council considered this item on January 23, 2006, when the bus garage proposal was presented
and again on March 13, 2006 when Marsh 212 and Hill- Murray made a presentation. The Council passed
a motion to investigate whether a wetland restoration project constitutes a public purpose for the property.
MnDOT representative Chris Roy reported that MnDOT would agree to convey the property for a wetland
restoration project as a public purpose. MnDOT is very interested in participating in a coalition that would
explore the wetland creation efforts and would likely request wetland credits as part of the process because
wetland credits are at a premium in Ramsey County. It would likely be many years if the property is left to
MnDOT to just create wetlands, as they would wait for a major project in Ramsey County that needed
wetland creation for mitigation. Mr. Roy could not think of any projects currently being planned that would
need that amount of wetlands. He also noted that their maintenance needs on the site need to continue to
be explored
Ramsey Washington Metro Watershed District representative Cliff Aichinger reported that they are very
interested in participating in a coalition that would develop a wetland restoration project. Cliff reported that
RWMWD acquires property and proceeds along a legal basis that wetland uses, classified as open space
properties and drainage facilities meet the provisions of the Wetland Conservation Act and that they could
participate in the project because it has a public purpose.
Ramsey County Soil and Water Conservation District representative Tom Pederson reported that they are
very interested in participating in a coalition that would develop the wetland restoration project. Tom
recommends the "public purpose" requirement for the use of MNDot property be linked to the preamble of
the Water Conservation Act (WCA) legislation. Also, WCA's requirements on MNDot to replace wetland
impacts should be linked to the pubic purpose of the wetlands restoration activity on this site.
City Attorney David Ramberg provided the attached memo regarding the public purpose determination.
Mr. Ramberg concluded in his memorandum that the City has a clear public purpose in creating wetlands
and in maintaining and potentially owning the property.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council direct city staff to investigate a coalition of uses for the TH 5 and
TH 120 excess MnDOT property generally in alignment with the presentation from Marsh 212 and Hill -
Murray for use of the property, although it shall be stressed that Maplewood's top priority for the site is the
restoration of the wetland complex as the overriding public purpose.
Attachment: Memo from City Attorney David Ramberg
Agenda Item K1
Memorandum
To: Chuck Ahl
From: Dave Ramberg
Date: March 20, 2006
RE: Public Purpose and Wetland Preservation
Th 1201 TH 5 Property
You have inquired as to whether there exists a proper public purpose to create or restore a
significant wetland complex as once existed on the above - referenced property. By the nature
of this question, I assume it is based on an anticipated public expenditure associated with an
action such as, holding, managing or condemning the land.
Having researched the matter, I believe clear and sufficient public purposes exist, to justify
the creation, restoration, or preservation of wetlands within the City.
The "Background" section of this memorandum is taken directly from a League of
Minnesota Cities Memo entitled Public Purpose Expenditures. The "Authority" and "Public
Purpose" sections provide support for possible actions by the City, but are not exhaustive.
Background
In order for an expenditure of public funds to be lawful, it should meet
BOTH of the following standards:
• Public purpose. There must be a public purpose for the expenditure.
• Authority. There must be specific or implied authority for the expenditure in statute
or in the city's charter. Specific authority is usually fairly clear. In contrast, whether
authority is implied by a particular statute or charter provision is subject to
interpretation. Cities should consult with their city attorneys as to whether authority
for a specific expenditure is implied.
Minn. Const. Art. X, § I The Minnesota Constitution requires that taxation must be for a
public purpose. It also generally prohibits giving or loaning the credit of the state to aid any
individual, association or corporation. Minn. Const. Art. XII, § I Although a state law may
be passed to give a city authority to spend money on various purposes, the Minnesota
Constitution prohibits the Legislature from passing any local or special law that authorizes
Agenda Item K1
public taxation for a private purpose. Thus, a public expenditure must always be for a public
purpose.
This leads to the question of what is meant by "public purpose." The meaning of "public
purpose" is constantly evolving. The Minnesota Supreme Court has followed a liberal
approach, and has generally concluded that "public purpose" means an activity that meets
ALL of the following standards:
• The activity will benefit the community as a body.
• The activity is directly related to functions of government.
• The activity does not have as its primary objective the benefit of a
private interest.
The Minnesota Supreme Court has also held that the general objective of a public purpose is
to promote the following for all of a city's residents:
• Public health
• Safety
• General welfare
• Security
• Prosperity
• Contentment
Authority
The City of Maplewood is a Statutory City of the second class. Minn. Stat. § 412.211
provides for the general statutory city powers. It provides:
Every city shall be a municipal corporation having the powers and rights
and being subject to the duties of municipal corporations at common law. Each
shall have perpetual succession, may sue and be sued, may use a corporate seal,
may acquire, either within or without its corporate limits, such real and personal
property as the purposes of the city may require, by purchase, gift, devise,
condemnation, lease or otherwise, and may hold, manage, control, sell, convey,
lease, or otherwise dispose of such property as its interests require. The
powers listed in this act are not exclusive and other provisions of law granting
additional powers to cities or to classes of cities shall apply except where
inconsistent with this chapter.
(emphasis added). Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462 further sets forth a municipality's
authority to regulate planning and development. § 462.357 addresses official controls, and
provides in part:
Agenda Item K1
Subdivision 1. Authority for zoning. For the purpose
of promoting the public health, safety, morals, and general
welfare, a municipality may by ordinance regulate on the earth's
surface, in the air space above the surface, and in subsurface
areas, the location, height, width, bulk, type of foundation,
number of stories, size of buildings and other structures, the
percentage of lot which may be occupied, the size of yards and
other open spaces, the density and distribution of population,
the uses of buildings and structures for trade, industry,
residence, recreation, public activities, or other purposes, and
the uses of land for trade, industry, residence, recreation,
agriculture, forestry, soil conservation, water supply
conservation, conservation of shorelands, as defined in sections
103F.201 to 103F.221, access to direct sunlight for solar energy
systems as defined in section 2160.06, flood control or other
purposes, and may establish standards and procedures regulating
such uses. To accomplish these purposes, official controls may
include provision for purchase of development rights by the
governing body in the form of conservation easements under
chapter 84C in areas where the governing body considers
preservation desirable and the transfer of development rights
from those areas to areas the governing body considers more
appropriate for development. No regulation may prohibit earth
sheltered construction as defined in section 2160.06,
subdivision 14, relocated residential buildings, or manufactured
homes built in conformance with sections 327.31 to 327.35 that
comply with all other zoning ordinances promulgated pursuant to
this section. The regulations may divide the surface, above
surface, and subsurface areas of the municipality into districts
or zones of suitable numbers, shape, and area. The regulations
shall be uniform for each class or kind of buildings,
structures, or land and for each class or kind of use throughout
such district, but the regulations in one district may differ
from those in other districts. The ordinance embodying these
regulations shall be known as the zoning ordinance and shall
consist of text and maps. A city may by ordinance extend the
application of its zoning regulations to unincorporated
territory located within two miles of its limits in any
direction, but not in a county or town which has adopted zoning
regulations; provided that where two or more noncontiguous
municipalities have boundaries less than four miles apart, each
Agenda Item K1
is authorized to control the zoning of land on its side of a
line equidistant between the two noncontiguous municipalities
unless a town or county in the affected area has adopted zoning
regulations. Any city may thereafter enforce such regulations
in the area to the same extent as if such property were situated
within its corporate limits, until the county or town board
adopts a comprehensive zoning regulation which includes the area.
Article VII of the Maplewood City Code addresses certain environmental protection issues
such as erosion controls and wetland preservation in § § 12.24'7 -310. Minnesota Statutes
Chapters 103E -G may provide additional authority for such actions by the City.
Public Purpose
Minn. Stat. § 103A.201, subdivision 2 (b) provides legislative authority for the preservation
of wetlands:
(b) The legislature finds that the wetlands of Minnesota
provide public value by conserving surface waters, maintaining
and improving water quality, preserving wildlife habitat,
providing recreational opportunities, reducing runoff, providing
for floodwater retention, reducing stream sedimentation,
contributing to improved subsurface moisture, helping moderate
climatic change, and enhancing the natural beauty of the
landscape, and are important to comprehensive water management,
and that it is in the public interest to:
(1) achieve no net loss in the quantity, quality, and
biological diversity of Minnesota's existing wetlands;
(2) increase the quantity, quality, and biological
diversity of Minnesota's wetlands by restoring or enhancing
diminished or drained wetlands;
(3) avoid direct or indirect impacts from activities that
destroy or diminish the quantity, quality, and biological
diversity of wetlands; and
(4) replace wetland values where avoidance of activity is
not feasible and prudent.
Agenda Item K1
Section 103A.202 further states:
The legislature finds that it is in the public interest to
preserve the wetlands of the state to conserve surface waters,
maintain and improve water quality, preserve wildlife habitat,
reduce runoff, provide for floodwater retention, reduce stream
sedimentation, contribute to improved subsurface moisture,
enhance the natural beauty of the landscape, and promote
comprehensive and total water management planning.
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Richard Fursman, City Manager
FROM:
Shann Finwall, AICP, Planner
SUBJECT:
Reduced Front Yard Setback
APPLICANT:
Josh Clendenen, Delaney Company LLC
LOCATION:
2413 Linwood Avenue
DATE:
March 21, 2006
Agenda Item K.2
On February 27, 2006, a public hearing was scheduled for a reduced front yard setback
request by Josh Clendenen. Mr. Clendenen is the owner and builder of a vacant lot at
2413 Linwood Avenue. Mr. Clendenen requested the hearing after the city received an
appeal by an adjacent property owner of his plans to construct a single- family house on
the vacant lot which was 37.7 feet closer to the right -of -way than allowed by code. Refer
to Attachments 1 through 3. The adjacent property owner at 2424 Linwood Avenue,
Fred Nazarian, appealed the reduced front yard setback stating concerns about the
location of an existing infiltration basin and the location of the house 11 feet from his
property line.
During the meeting Mr. Clendenen requested the public hearing be continued until
March 27, 2006, in order to allow him time to redesign the infiltration basin and redraft a
site plan with the house located to meet city code front yard setback requirements and
located further to the west to address Mr. Nazarian's concerns.
DISCUSSION
Since February 27, 2006, Mr. Clendenen has submitted a preliminary grading and
drainage plan showing the infiltration basin relocated to the southwest corner of the lot
(Attachment 4). Based on the new grading and drainage plan, Mr. Clendenen worked
with a prospective buyer to locate a new style of house on the lot that maintains a 68.2 -
foot front yard setback and a 42 -foot side yard setback from the western property line
(Attachment 5).
The preliminary plan submitted addresses Mr. Nazarian's concerns about the location of
the infiltration basin and the location of the house too close to his property. It also
complies with the city's front yard setback requirement and will save several mature oak
trees, which would have been removed with the original plan.
SUMMARY
The reduced front yard setback request is not needed because it meets city code
requirements and the appealing party's concerns. No city council action is required at
this time. However, in order for Mr. Clendenen to obtain a building permit for this house
the city council must approve the vacation of the existing drainage and utility easement
and the relocation of a new easement for the relocated infiltration basin. Mr. Clendenen
will be submitting a vacation request for city council review once a new survey is drafted.
P:com- devl12- 28\Hillside Estates12413 Linwood Ave. 3 -27 -06 Report
Attachments
1. Location Map
2. Site Plan
3. Elevations
4. Preliminary Grading and Drainage Plan
5. Preliminary Site Plan
Attachment 2
} A K
t
US
'a4*1?
1,27
U9
NK 8
IP023300 '4
13A, is
0
1010AS 13
FND
IK 03
K �6 XIOZ9
XI0O6,71 x 102.13
101 s1 1016.13
02"3
C
X lot ;.%
0 CL-xAmrg�
00 ip
C�
f.74 /x lot
zo
101
x
X1011AS 0
14 I 101150 i X1
o r�
XIOM.30.-
7
X100 it) Z�- 10 0bg - 1 .1 1 1(116,116,
16074 0 ) (03 5 0.7
0b &2 it Oi ........
x
00
0 - .24.00
0 0 (:) . 11.25
(0 OA-K 12
Proposed
House X6 553 i�sS7:90. c
!
V
1009' 3 1c - PIT
'0 % U) AX 110
taloa 007.S9
22-00 35.04 1 OAX 14
1 CO&
+4.36 p ED
x M :-
1007.91
AC aAK 9,
(A
0079
No x1ol 7,
19 6 XIM. a x i0i M 007.90
1007a6
.9
123.8 1023
FNDIPK23= N�8,8 ft,' VNDIP"
to!6,4a
1011.5
--X 1007 q1 9.
x10 7
10=0 .......
I00S2S 1007.03 +'. o X10IM6
1015 LINWO-0-0 AVENUE.
Aft it
IMIZ
Lt-FT
- RI lUti
a Ak 0
•
w T4.
;IFS r 7 f; f
r�
Attachment 4
t ,
t
k � .
}
i � f
M
i
I I.
i
G f
r
7 "
Pre
liminarXite_PLa _.
Item K -3
MEMORANDUM
TO: Richard Fursman, City Manager
FROM: Karen Guilfoile, City Clerk
Police Chief David Thomalla
DATE: March 21, 2006
RE: Predatory Offender Ordinance
The City currently has no ordinance in place directing what areas sexual offenders and
sexual predators are prohibited from establishing temporary or permanent residence
within the City limits. A draft of an ordinance was submitted at the March 13, 2006
council meeting for consideration and discussion.
Following is a memo from Assistant City Attorney Trevor Oliver that addresses questions
and concerns that were raised by council at the meeting. Also, following the memo from
Mr. Oliver are copies of Minnesota State Statutes that define first degree through fourth
degree criminal sexual conduct and other offensives for which predatory offenders are
required to register. The Statutes outlining assessment and registration are also included.
DATE: 312212006
TO: Richard Fursman, City Manager
FROM: City Attorney
RE: Sex offender residence restrictions
Summary The proposed ordinance to restrict certain sex offenders from establishing
residence near places where children congregate is constitutional under the recent holding
of the 81h Circuit Court of Appeals in Doe v. Miller 405 F. 3 rd 700 (8 Cir. 2005)(cert.
denied). Doe upheld an Iowa state statute which created a similar 2000' area around
schools, parks, and day care centers, and is the leading case on the constitutionality of
similar statutes and ordinances. In our opinion, the proposed ordinance complies with the
guidelines of the Doe case and takes some steps to address areas where the court
criticized the Iowa statute.
Several policy questions remain for the Council to debate in reaching the final text of the
ordinance. This memorandum starts with a general legal discussion of the ordinance, and
then goes through the proposed ordinance with our guidance on the issues for the
Council.
General Discussion
The ordinance is proposed as a public safety measure, using the City's inherent power to
protect the health, safety and welfare of its citizens to create a zone around child
gathering spots in which potentially predatory offenders may not live. The ordinance
focuses on those places where children may often gather without their own parents —
schools, parks, playgrounds, day care centers, Sunday school, and bus stops — as these
places present the points of greatest opportunity for someone to lure a child away or
otherwise do harm_
Thirteen states and numerous cities have similar laws creating zones around schools and
other child gathering spots. The leading constitutional review of any sex offender
residence restriction is the 81h Circuit case of Doe v. Miller 405 F. 3 rd 700 (8 Cir. 2005).
Doe found the Iowa statute imposing residence restrictions constitutional, overruling the
Federal District Court. The Supreme Court denied cent in the fall, making Doe v. Miller
the current leading case on this subject. Based on the holdings of this case, some issues:
Coverage The Doe court did not find that sex offender residence restrictions impacted a
"fundamental right" under the Constitution, and declined to Find that the 2000' radius
made the law unconstitutional, even if 77% of the state's housing stock was off - limits.
Absent a "fundamental right," the courts will only look to whether the restrictions are
rationally related to a legitimate government purpose, which is discussed below. The
Court found no fundamental right to "live where you want," or otherwise to establish a
residence in the place of your choosing. A fundamental right to travel does exist, but the
statute, in the Court's opinion, did not create real barriers to movement within the state or
between states that would affect the fundamental right to travel between states.
The Court also decided, by a 2 -1 margin, that while the statute made life very
inconvenient for offenders, but was not equivalent to "banishment" which would make it
an ex post facto law.
Rational relationship As stated above, the City's actions must have a rational
relationship to a valid public purpose. In general, the ordinance should comply with this
requirement. The City has a vital interest in protecting the health and safety of its
citizens. Research shows that sex offenders are particularly prone to re- offense,
particularly if their original victims were children, and it is reasonable to assume that
proximity to children is significantly related to the risk of re- offense.
In making some of the policy choices discussed below, the Council should keep their
public purpose — protecting areas where children gather — in mind. So long as the policy
choices are aimed at that public safety purpose, and not at punishing any particular
offender or category of offenders, the policy choice should be constitutionally valid. The
Council may act on its reasonable assumptions and any evidence it may collect to support
an ordinance aimed at protecting public safety_
Breakdown of Ordinance:
Ordinance: Offenses and Miscellaneous Provisions
SEXUAL OFFENDERS AND SEXUAL PREDATORS
Sec 1. Findings and intent.
(a) Repeat sexual offenders, sexual offenders who use physical violence, and
sexual offenders who prey on children are sexual predators who present an extreme
threat to the public safety. Sexual offenders are extremely likely to use physical
violence and to repeat their offenses, and most sexual offenders commit many
offenses, have many more victims than are ever reported, and are prosecuted for
only a fraction of their crimes. This makes the cost of sexual offender victimization
to society at large, while incalculable, clearly exorbitant.
(b) It is the intent of this article to serve the city's compelling interest to promote,
protect and improve the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of the city by
creating areas around locations where children regularly congregate in
concentrated numbers wherein certain sexual offenders and sexual predators are
prohibited from establishing temporary or permanent residence.
Comment The legislative findings support the public purpose of the ordinance,
and stating them in the text serves as a statement of the Council's legislative
intent_
Sec. 2. Definitions.
The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this article, shall have the
meanings ascribed to them in this section, except where the context clearly indicates
a different meaning:
Designated offender means any person who has been convicted of a designated
sexual offense, regardless of whether adjudication has been withheld.
Designated sexual offense means a conviction, adjudication of delinquency,
commitment under Minn. Stat. §§ 253B, or admission of guilt under oath without
adjudication involving any of the following offenses: 609.342; 649.343; 609.344;
609.345; 609.352; 609.365; 617.23; 617.246; 617.247; 617.293; successor statutes; or
a similar offense from another state.
Permanent residence means a place where the person abides, lodges, or resides for
14 or more consecutive days.
Temporary residence means a place where the person abides, lodges, or
resides for a period of 14 or more days in the aggregate during any calendar
year and which is not the person's permanent address, or a place where the
person routinely abides, lodges, or resides for a period of four or more
consecutive or nonconsecutive days in any month and which is not the
person's permanent residence.
Comment Offenders included The statutes included in our definition are:
609.342
Criminal Sexual Conduct in the First Degree.
609.343
Criminal Sexual Conduct in the Second Degree.
609.344
Criminal Sexual Conduct in the Third Degree.
609.345
Criminal Sexual Conduct in the Fourth Degree.
609.352
Solicitation of Children to Engage in Sexual Conduct.
609.365
Incest.
617.23
Indecent Exposure.
617.246
Use of Minors in Sexual Performance.
617.247
Possession of child pornography.
617.293
Sale of pornography to minors.
The Council should amend the list to include 609.3543_ Criminal Sexual
Predatory Conduct a new statute passed after the first draft of the ordinance was
written. The Council may also wish to discuss whether to include 609.345 1,
Criminal Sexual Conduct in the 5 th Degree, which we omitted from the definition
to reduce the possibility of sweeping up "minimal" offenders (i.e. streakers, etc.).
Which statutes to include or omit is strictly a policy decision, however, and the
Council should make the final list.
The Iowa statute places restrictions upon those whose crimes were perpetrated
against minors. The categorization of offenders included in the statute was not
challenged in Doe The level of offender covered is a contentious subject, in
which the Council has broad discretion. As with all other components of this
ordinance, the category of offenders included in the residence restriction should
be the smallest necessary to protect the health and welfare of citizens.
The most inclusive definition which we can recommend to the Council would
include all offenders whose crimes involved children 16 or younger, and those
offenders categorized as Level 1I (moderate risk of re- offense) and Level III (high
risk of re- offense). The broad inclusion of any person with a prior offense against
a minor is consistent with Iowa and other states, and the connection to the City's
purpose is evident.
Including Level III and/or Level II offenders is a recognition of the threat of re-
offense presented by these categories of offenders, regardless of the age of prior
victims. The Department of Corrections is required to assign all sex offenders to
Level I (low risk of re- offense), Level II (moderate risk of re- offense), or Level III
(high risk of re- offense) at the end of the offender's commitment to the
Commissioner of Corrections. The determination of level is based on many
factors, which include the severity of offense, the type of victim, and the degree to
which it appears that the offender has been amenable to treatment. We believe
that it is reasonable and fair to consider a person a risk to the community if the
State finds them, after their time in confinement and/or treatment, to present a
moderate or greater risk of re- offense. However, to date we are not aware of any
other ordinance which includes Level II offenders (or their equivalents in other
states) regardless of the age of victim.
Using a definition which includes Level II offenders is the broadest scope of the
ordinance which is defensible in court. We have a high degree of confidence that
including Level III offenders will withstand court scrutiny, and a definition only
targeting offenders who have previously victimized children has already passed
review in the Doe case.
The current definition of "designated sexual offense" lacks a restriction. This was
an oversight in the re-drafting process. We recommend adding language to the
end of that definition, to the effect of:
"in which the victim of the offense was less than 16 years of age, or has been
assessed and assigned to Level II or III under Minn. Stat. 244.052 or successor
statute." (Most broad version)
"in which the victim of the offense was less than 16 years of age, or has been
assessed and assigned to Level III under Minn. Stat. 244.052 or successor
statute."
"in which the victim of the offense was less than 16 years of age."
See. 3. Sexual offender and sexual predator residence prohibition; penalties;
exceptions.
(a) Prohibited location of residence. It is unlawful for any designated offender to
establish a permanent residence or temporary residence: a) within 2,440 feet of any
school, licensed day care center, park, or playground; or b) within 1,000 feet of any
designated public school bus stop, place of worship which provides regular
educational programs (i.e. Sunday school), or other places where children are
known to congregate.
Comment 2,000 feet is proposed as the primary distance, as that is the distance
used in the Iowa statute upheld by the 8 1h Circuit in Doe v. Miller Several cities,
such as the City of Miami Beach, Florida, have gone up to 2,500 feet, but we have
yet to see those ordinances undergo court review. The final distance is
completely within the discretion of the Council, based upon what the Council
finds and believes is the distance necessary to protect the public For reference,
here are the distances used by the 13 states that have similar statutes:
Alabama: 2000'
Georgia: 1040'
Louisiana: 1040'
Arkansas: 2000'
Iowa: 2000'
Ohio: 1000'
Tennessee: 1000'
Illinois: 500'
Oklahoma: 2000'
Florida: 1000'
Kentucky: 1000'
Oregon: no set dist.
California: 1 l4 mi 1350'
No studies exist, to our knowledge, which establish a certain distance as
"necessary" to deter re- offense. The Council may make reasonable assumptions
as to what distance is necessary to protect these child gathering spots (i.e.
prevents offenders from living next door to a gathering point, across the street, on
the same block, etc.). Based on the analysis of Doe v. Miller a decision based
upon a rational discussion of distances should withstand constitutional scrutiny.
(b) Prohibited activity. It is unlawful for any designated offender to participate in a
holiday event involving children under 18 years of age, such as distributing candy or other
items to children on Halloween, wearing a Santa Claus costume on or preceding Christmas,
or wearing an Easter Bunny costume on or preceding Easter. Holiday events in which the
offender is the parent or guardian of the children involved, and no non - familial children are
present, are exempt from this paragraph.
Comment This portion of the statute was added in the process of drafting the
ordinance, and is adapted from Illinois statutes. Similar to the rest of the
ordinance, this restriction is rationally related to the purpose of protecting children
in the City, and does not impact any protected classes or fundamental rights of
offenders. This provision does not appear to conflict with current Minnesota
Statutes or Rules, which contain no mention of offenders' holiday activities.
(c) Measurement of distance.
1. For purposes of determining the minimum distance separation, the requirement
shall be measured by following a straight line from the outer property line of the permanent
residence or temporary residence to nearest outer property line of a school, designated
public school bus stop, day care center, park, playground, place of worship, or other place
where children regularly congregate.
2. The City Clerk shall maintain an official map showing prohibited locations as
defined by this Ordinance. The Clerk shall update the map at least annually to reflect any
changes in the location of prohibited zones.
Comment This section is intended to alleviate a problem Iowa has had with their
ordinance (measurement of distance), and also to prevent a challenge to the
ordinance for vagueness. The 8"' Circuit considered and rejected the contention
that the Iowa state statute was void for vagueness because some cities could not
provide decent information about prohibited zones. The Court declared that the
lack of information did not make the statute itself unconstitutional, but appeared
to leave the door open for as- applied challenges using unclear information.
To avoid even the "as- applied" challenge, the ordinance includes a requirement
that the City maintain a map of prohibited areas. This map does not need to be an
attachment to the ordinance, as the only thing necessary to avoid the vagueness
challenge is the availability of official information.
(d) Penalties A person who violates this section shall be punished by a fine not
exceeding $1,000.00 or by confinement for a term not exceeding 90 days, or by both
such fine and confinement. Each day a person maintains a residence in violation of
this ordinance constitutes a separate violation.
Comment The maximum penalty a City may impose by ordinance is a
misdemeanor, currently 90 days' confinement and $1,000.00 fine. The Council
may set penalties at any point below these maximums if it wishes to do so.
(e) Exceptions. A designated offender residing within a prohibited area as
described in (a) does not commit a violation of this section if any of the following
apply:
(1) The person established the permanent residence or temporary
residence and reported and registered the residence pursuant to Minn. Stat.
§ 243.166, § 243.167, or successor statute, prior to January 1, 2006, or, if not
required to register under those statutes, registers their residence with the
City within ten (10) days after the effective date of this Ordinance.
(2) The person was a minor when he/she committed the offense and was
not convicted as an adult.
(3) The person is a minor.
(4) The school, designated public school bus stop, day care center, or other
point described in (a) was opened after the person established the permanent
residence or temporary residence and reported and registered the residence
pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 243.166 or § 243.167 or with the City if not
required to register under those statutes.
(5) The residence is also the primary residence of the person's parents,
grandparents, siblings, spouse, or children.
(6) The residence is a property owned or leased by the Minnesota
Department of Corrections.
Comment The exceptions to the ordinance's residence restrictions exist to
address likely areas where the ordinance may be challenged. The ordinance is
designed to deter people from willingly establishing residence near a child
gathering place, so the exemptions for residences established before the ordinance
goes into effect or before a new prohibited location is built are necessary to keep
the ordinance true to its purpose. Also, we view the exceptions as only applying
to the residence prohibition in (a) and not the holiday activities prohibition in (b).
Family Exception (5) The residence is also the primary residence of the
person's parents, grandparents, siblings, spouse, or children.
A leading criticism of other statue and city statutes which we have reviewed is
that offenders are effectively cut off from all support structures, particularly
family, potentially making the ordinance counterproductive. To address this
concern, we created an exception for family residences. While the Doe court
found the Iowa statute valid without a similar exception, we propose it as a policy
improvement and a way to lessen the possibility of the ordinance being
overturned.
The positives of a family exception are that the offender can have access to their
family support if they wish, it requires the offender to live with other people
(which has been shown to lower the risk of re- offense), and it reduces the strength
of any argument that the ordinance "banishes" offenders.
However, the broad family exception, which we include as a starting point for the
Council, creates an opening for offenders to establish residence in protected
zones. How broad to make this exception is a difficult policy issue for the
Council — there are good policy arguments for the exception, but it is also the
single greatest loophole. For instance, we drafted the exception on the idea that
an offender should be allowed to live with a spouse who maintained a residence in
Maplewood, to promote their re- integration into society. On the other hand, an
offender could use a spouse to establish a residence in Maplewood — if the
offender moves in a week later, there is no ordinance violation.
Again, we proposed a broad family exception. The Council may limit the
exception by deleting some types of family members in the exception, or by
requiring the "family residence" to be established by a certain point (such as six
months prior to the offender taking up residence at the family address). Finally,
while we are more comfortable recommending an ordinance that contains an
exception for bona fide family residences, the 8 th Circuit upheld the Iowa statute
without any exception.
Minors (2) The person was a minor when he/she committed the offense
and was not convicted as an adult.
(3) The person is a minor.
Minors present another tough policy decision for the Council. The primary
reason behind the two minors exceptions were: a) to recognize our State's general
policy on juvenile punishment (i.e. clean record at adulthood); and b) minors
cannot sign leases, buy property, or otherwise provide for their own shelter. We
believe that the simple fact that minors cannot provide for their own residences
requires the exception at (3) to stand as is.
An exception to the general policy rule regarding juveniles is that some juvenile
sex offenders are still required to register under Minn. Stat. 243.166. A possible
change to the exception at (2) would be:
"The person was a minor when he /she committed the offense and was not
convicted as an adult, unless the person is currently required to register under
Minn. Stat. 243.166, 243.167, or successor statutes."
Under 243.166, most offenders are required to register for 10 years after release
from confinement, though some offenders are subject to lifetime registration.
This change would require some additional work on the part of the City to
determine the person's category, release date, and other details. It would
accomplish the goal of including the most dangerous juvenile offenders in the
ordinance, regardless of adult status at trial.
DOC Exception: (6) The residence is a property owned or leased by the
Minnesota Department of Corrections.
When we drafted this exception, the intent was simply to avoid the conflict that
has arisen in other jurisdictions about jails, prisons, and other correctional
facilities, mainly to avoid confusion.
However, group homes and halfway houses licensed, but not owned or leased, by
the State are not included in the exception. The Council may choose to leave it
this way, which is legally defensible but may lead to conflict with the Department
of Corrections. State law (Minn. Stat. 244.052, subd. 4) already prevents local
police departments from releasing information about Level 11 and III offenders in
licensed group care facilities until a week or so before the offender's release.
Though there is no real legal connection, DOC may use this exception to the
notification rule as a means to prevent the application of this ordinance to
offenders in the licensed group homes.
Additionally, the Council should consider the original purpose of the ordinance,
which is to prevent offenders from choosing a residence near children. While
cities throughout Minnesota are unhappy with the way the State has foisted group
homes upon them, the residents are not choosing the location as their residence.
The burden is upon the DOC and the facility licensee to ensure the public's
safety, if for some reason they see fit to place offenders in a facility near a child
gathering area.
While this is a potential opportunity for the City to make a stand about the
placement of group homes in the City, it may be an unnecessary conflict that
ultimately does not impact the end of the ordinance. If the Council chooses to
amend the exception to encompass the licensed facilities, we suggest the
following language:
"The residence is a property owned or leased by the Minnesota Department of
Corrections, or is a "residential facility" as defined by Minn. Stat. 244.052, subd.
14."
"Residential facility" in this clause refers to facilities licensed by either DHS or
DOC whose staff are trained in the supervision of sex offenders. Accordingly,
not every group home in the city is exempt, just those that specialize in sex
offender treatment, which should already be a safe distance away from places
where children gather unsupervised. Other group homes remain subject to the
ordinance.
Sec. 4. Property owners prohibited from renting real property to certain sexual
offenders and sexual predators; penalties.
(a) It is unlawful to let or rent any place, structure, or part thereof, trailer or
other conveyance, with the knowledge that it will be used as a permanent residence
or temporary residence by any person prohibited from establishing such permanent
residence of temporary residence pursuant to this Article, if such place, structure,
or part thereof, trailer or other conveyance, is located within a prohibited location
zone as described in Sec. 3(a).
(b) A property owner's failure to comply with provisions of this section shall
constitute a violation of this section, and shall subject the property owner to the
code enforcement provisions and procedures as provided in Chapter 1 of this Code,
including the provisions of Chapter 1 that allow the city to seek relief as otherwise
provided by law.
(c) If a property owner discovers or is informed that a tenant is a designated
offender after signing a lease or otherwise agreeing to let the offender reside on the
property, the owner or property manager may evict the offender.
Comment This section is included because we feel that the ordinance will lose
much of its effectiveness if there is no leverage against landlords or other owners
who may be tempted to circumvent the ordinance. First, note that the ordinance
requires that the property owner must have knowledge that the property is being
rented by or used by a sex offender before a violation occurs. This requirement of
knowledge should, by itself, prevent any "surprises" that subject a landowner to
criminal or administrative penalties. Also, enforcement of the ordinance against
property owners should resemble enforcement of our nuisances code. The focus
on administrative action should give the City the ability to effectively separate
truly accidental violations of the ordinance from intentional violations in the
process of investigating them.
Recommendation
It is requested that the city council decide on passage of a predatory offender ordinance,
the parameters regarding what levels of offenders will be included and the distance the
predators can reside where children congregate.
Minnesota Statutes 2005, 609.342
Minnesota Statutes 2005. Table of Cha ters
R—L.-
Table of contents for C_ haDtei 609
609,342 Criminal sexual conduct in the first degree.
Subdivision 1. Crime defined. A person who engages
in sexual penetration with another person, or in sexual contact
with a person under 13 years of age as defined in section
609.341, subdivision 11, paragraph (c), is guilty of criminal
sexual conduct in the first degree if any of the following
circumstances exists:
(a) the complainant is under 13 years of age and the actor
is more than 36 months older than the complainant. Neither
mistake as to the complainant's age nor consent to the act by
the complainant is a defense;
(b) the complainant is at least 13 years of age but less
than 16 years of age and the actor is more than 48 months older
than the complainant and in a position of authority over the
complainant. Neither mistake as to the complainant's age nor
consent to the act by the complainant is a defense;
(c) circumstances existing at the time of the act cause the
complainant to have a reasonable fear of imminent great bodily
harm to the complainant or another;
(d) the actor is armed with a dangerous weapon or any
article used or fashioned in a manner to lead the complainant to
reasonably believe it to be a dangerous weapon and uses or
threatens to use the weapon or article to cause the complainant
to submit,
(a) the actor causes personal injury to the complainant,
and either of the following circumstances exist:
(i) the actor uses force or coercion to accomplish sexual
penetration; or
(ii) the actor knows or has reason to know that the
complainant is mentally impaired, mentally incapacitated, or
physically helpless;
(f) the actor is aided or abetted by one or more
accomplices within the meaning of section 609.05, and either of
the following circumstances exists:
(i) an accomplice uses force or coercion to cause the
complainant to submit; or
(ii) an accomplice is armed with a dangerous weapon or any
article used or fashioned in a manner to lead the complainant
reasonably to believe it to be a dangerous weapon and uses or
threatens to use the weapon or article to cause the complainant
to submit;
(g) the actor has a significant relationship to the
Page I of 3
http://www,revisor.Ieg-state.mn.us/stats/609/342-html 3/10/2006
Minnesota Statutes 2005, 609.342
complainant and the complainant was under 16 years of age at the
time of the sexual penetration., Neither mistake as to the
complainant's age nor consent to the act by the complainant is a
defense; or
(h) the actor has a significant relationship to the
complainant, the complainant was under 16 years of age at the
time of the sexual penetration, and:
(i) the actor or an accomplice used force or coercion to
accomplish the penetration;
(ii) the complainant suffered personal injury; or
(iii) the sexual abuse involved multiple acts committed
over an extended period of time. ,
Neither mistake as to the complainant's age nor consent to
the act by the complainant is a defense.
Subd.. 2. Penalty, (a) Except as otherwise provided
in section 609.109 or 609.3455, a person convicted under
subdivision 1 may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than
30 years or to a payment of a fine of not more than $40,000, or
both,
(b) Unless a longer mandatory minimum sentence is otherwise
required by law or the Sentencing Guidelines provide for a
longer presumptive executed sentence, the court shall presume
that an executed sentence of 144 months must be imposed on an
offender convicted of violating this section. Sentencing a
person in a manner other than that described in this paragraph
is a departure from the Sentencing Guidelines.
(c) A person convicted under this section is also subject
to conditional release under section 609.3455..
Subd. 3. Stay. Except when imprisonment is required
under section 609.109 or 609.3455., if a person is convicted
under subdivision 1, clause (g), the court may stay imposition
or execution of the sentence if it finds that:
(a) a stay is in the best interest of the complainant or
the family unit; and
(b) a professional assessment indicates that the offender
has been accepted by and can respond to a treatment program.
If the court stays imposition or execution of sentence, it
shall include the following as conditions of probation:
(1) incarceration in a local jail or workhouse;
(2) a requirement that the offender complete a treatment
program; and
(3) a requirement that the offender have no unsupervised
contact with the complainant until the offender has successfully
completed the treatment program unless approved by the treatment
program and the supervising correctional agent.
Page 2 of 3
littp://www,revisor.lea.,state,mn,us/stats/609/342.htn 3/10/2006
Minnesota Statutes 2005, 609,342
HIST: 1975 c 374 s 3; 1981 c 51 s 2; 1983 c 204 s 1; 1984 c
628 art 3 s 11; 1985 c 24 s 5; 1985 c 286 s 15; 1986 c 444; 1989
c 290 art 4 s 12; 1992 c 571 art 1 s 14; 1994 c 636 art 2 s 34;
1995 c 186 s 99; 1998 c 367 art 3 s 7; art 6 s 15; 2000 c 311
art 4 s 2; 2000 c 437 s 10; 2005 c 136 art 2 s 12,13
Copyright 200,5 by the Office of Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota.
Page 3 of 3
http 3/10/2006
Minnesota Statutes 2005, 609,343
Minnesota Statutes 2005. Table of Cha)tets
Table of contents for Chanter 609
609,343 Criminal sexual conduct in the second degree.
Subdivision 1., Crime defined, A person who engages
in sexual contact with another person is guilty of criminal
sexual conduct in the second degree if any of the following
circumstances exists:
(a) the complainant is under 13 years of age and the actor
is more than 36 months older than the complainant., Neither
mistake as to the complainant's age nor consent to the act by
the complainant is a defense. In a prosecution under this
clause, the state is not required to prove that the sexual
contact was coerced;
(b) the complainant is at least 13 but less than 16 years
of age and the actor is more than 48 months older than the
complainant and in a position of authority over the complainant.
Neither mistake as to the complainant's age nor consent to the
act by the complainant is a defense;
(c) circumstances existing at the time of the act cause the
complainant to have a reasonable fear of imminent great bodily
harm to the complainant or another;
(d) the actor is armed with a dangerous weapon or any
article used or fashioned in a manner to lead the complainant to
reasonably believe it to be a dangerous weapon and uses or
threatens to use the dangerous weapon to cause the complainant
to submit;
(a) the actor causes personal injury to the complainant,
and either of the following circumstances exist:
(i) the actor uses force or coercion to accomplish the
sexual contact; or
(ii) the actor knows or has reason to know that the
complainant is mentally impaired, mentally incapacitated, or
physically helpless;
(f) the actor is aided or abetted by one or more
accomplices within the meaning of section 609.05, and either of
the following circumstances exists:
(i) an accomplice uses force or coercion to cause the
complainant to submit; or
(ii) an accomplice is armed with a dangerous weapon or any
article used or fashioned in a manner to lead the complainant to
reasonably believe it to be a dangerous weapon and uses or
threatens to use the weapon or article to cause the complainant
to submit;
(g) the actor has a significant relationship to the
Page I of')
http://w\vw.revisor.leg.state.,nin,us/stats/609/343.htn 3/10/2006
Minnesota Statutes 2005, 609.343
complainant and the complainant was under 16 years of age at the
time of the sexual contact. Neither mistake as to the
complainant's age nor consent to the act by the complainant is a
defense; or
(h) the actor has a significant relationship to the
complainant, the complainant was under 16 years of age at the
time of the sexual contact, and:
(i) the actor or an accomplice used force or coercion to
accomplish the contact;
(ii) the complainant suffered personal injury; or
(iii) the sexual abuse involved multiple acts committed
over an extended period of time,
Neither mistake as to the complainant's age nor consent to
the act by the complainant is a defense.
Subd, 2. Penalty. (a) Except as otherwise provided
in section 609.109 or 609.3455, a 'person convicted under
subdivision 1 may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than
25 years or to a payment of a fine of not more than $35,000, or
both.
(b) Unless a longer mandatory minimum sentence is otherwise
required by law or the Sentencing Guidelines provide for a
longer presumptive executed sentence, the court shall presume
that an executed sentence of 90 months must be imposed on an
offender convicted of violating subdivision 1, clause (c), (d),
(e), (f), or (h), Sentencing a person in a manner other than
that described in this paragraph is a departure from the
Sentencing Guidelines.
(c) A person convicted under this section is also subject
to conditional release under section 609.3455-
Subd. 3. stay,, Except when imprisonment is required
under section 609.109 or 609.3455, if a person is convicted
under subdivision 1, clause (g), the court may stay imposition
or execution of the sentence if it finds that:
(a) a stay is in the best interest of the complainant or
the family unit; and
(b) a professional assessment indicates that the offender
has been accepted by and can respond to a treatment program.,
If the court stays imposition or execution of sentence, it
shall include the following as conditions of probation:
(1) incarceration in a local jail or workhouse;
(2) a requirement that the offender complete a treatment
program; and
(3) a requirement that the offender have no unsupervised
contact with the complainant until the offender has successfully
completed the treatment program unless approved by the treatment
Page .2 of 3
http://www.revisoi 3/10/2006
Minnesota Statutes 2005, 609A34.3
program and the supervising correctional agent. ,
HIST: 1975 c 374 s 4; 1979 c 258 s 12; 1.981 c 51 s 3; 1983 c
204 s 2; 1984 c 628 art 3 s 11; 1985 c 24 s 6; 1.985 c 286 s 16;
1986 c 444, 19B9 c 290 art 4 s 13; 1992 c 571 art 1 s 15; 1998 c
367 art 3 s 8; art 6 s 15; 2000 c 437 s 11; 2002 c 381 s 2; 2005
c 136 art 2 s 14,15
Copyright 2005 by the Office of Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota.
Page 3 of 3
htip://www.revisoT,Ieg,,state.,nui.us/stats/609/343-html 3/10/2006
Minnesota Statutes 2005, 609.344
Minnesota Statutes 2005.3ab of ChaptqLs
Table of contents for Cha pter 609
— Tq—
609,344 Criminal sexual conduct in the third degree.
Subdivision 1. Crime defined. A person who engages
in sexual penetration with another person is guilty of criminal
sexual conduct in the third degree if any of the following
circumstances exists:
(a) the complainant is under 13 years of age and the actor
is no more than 36 months older than the complainant. Neither
mistake as to the complainant's age nor consent to the act by
the complainant shall be a defense;
(b) the complainant is at least 13 but less than 16 years
of age and the actor is more than 24 months older than the
complainant. In any such case it shall be an affirmative
defense, which must be proved by a preponderance of the
evidence, that the actor believes the complainant to be 16 years
of age or older. If the actor in such a case is no more than 48
months but more than 24 months older than the complainant, the
actor may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than five
years. Consent by the complainant is not a defense;
(c) the actor uses force or coercion to accomplish the
penetration;
(d) the actor knows or has reason to know that the
complainant is mentally impaired, mentally incapacitated, or
physically helpless;
(e) the complainant is at least 16 but less than 18 years
of age and the actor is more than 48 months older than the
complainant and in a position of authority over the complainant.
Neither mistake as to the complainant's age nor consent to the
act by the complainant is a defense;
(f) the actor has a significant relationship to the
complainant and the complainant was at least 16 but under 18
years of age at the time of the sexual penetration. Neither
mistake as to the complainant's age nor consent to the act by
the complainant is a defense;
(g) the actor has a significant relationship to the
complainant, the complainant was at least 16 but under 18 years
of age at the time of the sexual penetration, and:
(i) the actor or an accomplice used force or coercion to
accomplish the penetration;
(ii) the complainant suffered personal injury; or
(iii) the sexual abuse involved multiple acts committed
over an extended period of time.,
Neither mistake as to the complainant's age nor consent to
Page I of 3
http://vvwAy.revisor,le,p,�ate.,mn,,us/stats/609/344.lilml 3/10/2006
Minnesota Statutes 2005, 609, )44
the act by the complainant is a defense;
(h) the actor is a psychotherapist and the complainant is a
patient of the psychotherapist and the sexual penetration
occurred:
(i) during the psychotherapy session; or
(ii) outside the psychotherapy session if an ongoing
psychotherapist-patient relationship exists,,
Consent by the complainant is not a defense;
(i) the actor is a psychotherapist and the complainant is a
former patient of the psychotherapist and the former patient is
emotionally dependent upon the psychotherapist;
(j) the actor is a psychotherapist and the complainant is a
patient or former patient and the sexual penetration occurred by
means of therapeutic deception. Consent by the complainant is
not a defense;
(k) the actor accomplishes the sexual penetration by means
of deception or false representation that the penetration is for
a bona fide medical purpose. Consent by the complainant is not
a defense;
(1) the actor is or purports to be a member of the clergy,
the complainant is not married to the actor, and:
(i) the sexual penetration occurred during the course of a
meeting in which the complainant sought or received religious or
spiritual advice, aid, or comfort from the actor in private; or
(ii) the sexual penetration occurred during a period of
time in which the complainant was meeting on an ongoing basis
with the actor to seek or receive religious or spiritual advice,
aid, or comfort in private. Consent by the complainant is not a
defense;
(m) the actor is an employee, independent contractor, or
volunteer of a state, county, city, or privately operated adult
or juvenile correctional system, including, but not limited to,
jails, prisons, detention centers, or work release facilities,
and the complainant is a resident of a facility or under
supervision of the correctional system. Consent by the
complainant is not a defense; or
(n) the actor provides or is an agent
provides special transportation service,
the special transportation service, and
occurred during or immediately before or
transported the complainant. Consent by
a defense.
of an entity that
the complainant used
the sexual penetration
after the actor
the complainant is not
Subd. 2. Penalty. , Except as otherwise provided in
section 609.3455, a person convicted under subdivision 1 may be
sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 15 years or to a
payment of a fine of not more than $30,000, or both. A person
convicted under this section is also subject to conditional
Page 2 of 3
htip://www,,revisor.leg.state.mn.us/stats/609/344.htn 3/10/2006
Mirmesota Statutes 2005, 609,344
release under section 609.3455.
Subd- 3. stay. Except when imprisonment is required
under section 609.109 or 609.3455, if a Person is convicted
under subdivision 1, clause (f), the court may stay imposition
or execution of the sentence if it finds that:
(a) a stay is in the best interest of the complainant or
the family unit; and
(b) a professional assessment indicates that the offender
has been accepted by and can respond to a treatment program.
If the court stays imposition or execution of sentence, it
shall include the following as conditions of probation:
(1) incarceration in a local jail or workhouse;
(2) a requirement that the offender complete a treatment
program; and
(3) a requirement that the offender have no unsupervised
contact with the complainant until the offender has successfully
completed the treatment program unless approved by the treatment
program and the supervising correctional agent.
HIST: 1975 c 374 s 5; 1979 c 258 s 13; 1983
588 s 7; 1984 c 628 art 3 s 11; 1985 c 24 s 7;
1985 c 297 s 6; 1986 c 351 s 8; 1986 c 444; 1S
80; 1.987 c 94 s 1; 1989 c 290 art 4 s 14; 1992
16,17; 1993 c 326 art 4 s 20; 1994 c 636 art 2
art 3 s 9; art 6 s 15; 2000 c 437 s 12; 2001 c
381 s 3; 2005 c 136 art 2 s 16,17
c 204 s 3; 1984 c
1985 c 286 s 17;
D1986 c 3 art 1 s
* 571 art I s
* 35; 1998 c 367
210 s 22; 2002 c
Copyright 2005 by the Office of Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota,
Page 3 of .3
Z1.1)
littp://ww 3/10/2006
Minnesota Statutes 2005, 6093 )45
Mirmesota Statutes. 2.QO,5.-!4h!,e�-gt-Cli—ap-tq-T5
Table d—contents for (Jiapter 609
609.345 Criminal sexual conduct in the fourth degree.
Subdivision 1. Crime defined. A person who engages
in sexual contact with another person is guilty of criminal
sexual conduct in the fourth degree if any of the following
circumstances exists:
(a) the complainant is
is no more than 36 months
mistake as to the complai
complainant is a defense,,
the state is not required
coerced;
under 13 years of age and the actor
older than the complainant. Neither
cant's age or consent to the act by the
In a prosecution under this clause,
to Drove that the sexual contact was
(b) the complainant is at least 13 but less than 16 years
of age and the actor is more than 48 months older than the
complainant or in a position of authority over the complainant_
Consent by the complainant to the act is not a defense., In any
such case, it shall be an affirmative defense which must be
proved by a preponderance of the evidence that the actor
believes the complainant to be 16 years of age or older;
(c) the actor uses force or coercion to accomplish the
sexual contact;
(d) the actor knows or has reason to know that the
complainant is mentally impaired, mentally incapacitated, or
physically helpless;
(e) the complainant is at least 16 but less than 18 years
of age and the actor is more than 48 months older than the
complainant and in a position of authority over the complainant..
Neither mistake as to the complainant's age nor consent to the
act by the complainant is a defense;
(f) the actor has a significant relationship to the
complainant and the complainant was at least 16 but under IS
years of age at the time of the sexual contact. Neither mistake
as to the complainant's age nor consent to the act by the
complainant is a defense;
(g) the actor has a significant relationship to the
complainant, the complainant was at least 16 but under 18 years
of age at the time of the sexual contact, and:
(i) the actor or an accomplice used force or coercion to
accomplish the contact;
(ii) the complainant suffered personal injury; or
(iii) the sexual abuse involved multiple acts committed
over an extended period of time.
Neither mistake as to the complainant's age nor consent to
Page 1 of 3
btip://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/stats/609/345.html 3/10/2006
Minnesota Statutes 2005, 609-345
the act by the complainant is a defense;
(h) the actor is a psychotherapist and the complainant is a
patient of the psychotherapist and the sexual contact occurred:
(i) during the psychotherapy session; or
(ii) outside the psychotherapy session if an ongoing
psychotherapist--patient relationship exists. Consent by the
complainant is not a defense;
(i) the actor is a psychotherapist and the complainant is a
former patient of the psychotherapist and the former patient is
emotionally dependent upon the psychotherapist;
(j) the actor is a psychotherapist and the complainant is a
patient or former patient and the sexual contact occurred by
means of therapeutic deception. Consent by the complainant is
not a defense;
(k) the actor accomplishes the sexual contact by means of
deception or false representation that the contact is for a bona
f ide ide medical purpose. Consent by the complainant is not a
defense;
(1) the actor is or purports to be a member of the clergy,
the complainant is not married to the actor, and:
(i) the sexual contact occurred during the course of a
meeting in which the complainant sought or received religious or
spiritual advice, aid, or comfort from the actor in private; or
(ii) the sexual contact occurred during a period of time in
which the complainant was meeting on an ongoing basis with the
actor to seek or receive religious or spiritual advice, aid, or
comfort in private. Consent by the complainant is not a
defense;
(m) the actor is an employee, independent contractor, or
volunteer of a state, county, city, or privately operated adult
or juvenile correctional system, including, but not limited to,
jails, prisons, detention centers, or work release facilities,
and the complainant is a resident of a facility or under
supervision of the correctional system. Consent by the
complainant is not a defense; or
(n) the actor provides or is an agent of an entity that
provides special transportation service, the complainant used
the special transportation service, the complainant is not
married to the actor, and the sexual contact occurred during or
immediately before or after the actor transported the
complainant. Consent by the complainant is not a defense,
Subd- 2. Penalty. Except as otherwise provided in
section 609.3455, a person convicted under subdivision 1 may be
sentenced to imprisonment for not more than ten years or to a
payment of a fine of not more than $20,000, or both, A person
convicted under this section is also subject to conditional
release under section 609.3455,
Page 2 of 3
http-://www,,i 3/10/2006
Minnesota Statutes 2005, 609345
Subd., 3, stay. Except when imprisonment is required
under section 609.10 9 or 609.3455, if a person is convicted
under subdivision 1, clause (f), the court may stay imposition
or execution of the sentence if it finds that:
(a) a stay is in the best interest of the complainant or
the family unit; and
(b) a professional assessment indicates that the offender
has been accepted by and can respond to a treatment program.
If the court stays imposition or execution of sentence, it
shall include the following as conditions of probation:
(1) incarceration in a local - jail or workhouse;
(2) a requirement that the offender complete a treatment
program, and
(3) a requirement that the offender have no unsupervised
contact with the complainant until the offender has successfully
completed the treatment program unless approved by the treatment
program and the supervising correctional agent.
HIST: 1915 c 374 s 6; 1976 c 124 s 9; 1979 c 258 s 14; 1981 c
51 s 4; 1983 c 204 s 4; 1984 c 588 s 8; 1984 c 628 art 3 s 11;
1.985 c 24 s 8; 1985 c 286 s 18; 1985 c 297 s 7; 1986 c 351 s 9;
1986 c 444; 1Spl986 c 3 art 1 s 81; 1987 c 94 3 2; 1.989 c 290
art 4 s 15; 1992 c 571 art I s 18,19; 1993 c 326 art 4 s 21;
1994 c 636 art 2 s 36; 1998 c 367 art 3 s 10; art 6 s 15; 2000 c
4 37 s 13; 2001 c 210 s 23; 2002 c 381 s 4; 2005 c 136 art 2 s
18,19
Copyright 2003 by the Office of Revisor of -Statutes, State of Minnesota,
Page 3 of 3
http://www.revisor,leg.state.n 3/10/2006
Minnesota Statutes 2005, 609,352
Minnesota Statutes 2005. Table of C ter s
Table of contents for Cl aDter° 609
609.352 Solicitation of children to engage in sexual
conduct.
Subdivision I. Definitions. As used in this section:
(a) "child" means a person 15 years of age or younger;
(b) "sexual conduct" means sexual contact of the
individual's primary genital area, sexual penetration as defined
in section 609.341, or sexual performance as defined in section
617.246; and
(c) "solicit" means commanding, entreating, or attempting
to persuade a specific person in person, by telephone, by
letter, or by computerized or other electronic means.
Subd. 2, Prohibited act. A person 18 years of age or
older who solicits a child or someone the person reasonably
believes is a child to engage in sexual conduct with intent to
engage in sexual conduct is guilty of a felony and may be
sentenced to imprisonment for not more than three years, or to
payment of a fine of not more than $5,000, or both,
Subd. 3. Defenses. Mistake as to age is not a
defense to a prosecution under this section.
HIST: 1986 c 445 s 3; 2000 c 311 art 4 s 3,4
Copyright .2005 by the Office of Revisor of Statutes, State Of Minnesota,
Page I of 1
htip://www.revisor-leg.state,,mn.us/stats/609/352.html 3/10/2006
Minnesota Statutes 2005, 609,365
Miruiesota Statutes 2005. Table of Chai)ters
Table of contents for Clinte.009
609.365 Incest.
Whoever has sexual intercourse with another nearer of kin
to the actor than first cousin, computed by rules of the civil
law, whether of the half or the whole blood, with knowledge of
the relationship, is guilty of incest and may be sentenced to
imprisonment for not more than ten years.
HIST: 1963 c 753 art I s 609,,365; 1986 c 444
Copyright 2005 by the Office of Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota.
Page I of I
Z:�
hitp://wN 3/10/2006
Minnesota Statutes 2005, 617.23
Minnesota Statutes 2005. Table of Chap lers
Table of contents for Chapter 617
617,23 indecent exposure; penalties.
Subdivision I. Misdemeanor, A person who commits any
of the following acts in any public place, or in any place where
others are present, is guilty of a misdemeanor:
(1) willfully and lewdly exposes the person's body, or the
private parts thereof;
(2) procures another to expose private parts; or
(3) engages in any open or gross lewdness or lascivious
behavior, or any public indecency other than behavior specified
in this subdivision.
Subd. 2. gross misdemeanor. A person who commits any
of the following acts is guilty of a gross misdemeanor:
(1) the person violates subdivision 1 in the presence of a
minor under the age of 16; or
(2) the person violates subdivision I after having been
previously convicted of violating subdivision 1, sections
609. to 609.3451, or a statute from another state in
conformity with any of those sections,.
Subd. 3. Felony. A person is guilty of a felony and
may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than five years or
to payment of a fine of not more than $10,000, or both, if:
(1) the person violates subdivision 2, clause (1), after
having been previously convicted of or adjudicated delinquent
for violating subdivision 2, clause (1); section 609.3451,
subdivision 1, clause (2); or a statute from another state in
conformity with subdivision 2, clause (1), or section 609.3451.,
subdivision 1, clause (2); or
(2) the person commits a violation of subdivision 1, clause
(1), in the presence of another person while intentionally
confining that person or otherwise intentionally restricting
that person's freedom to move.
Subd, 4. Breast-feeding. It is not a violation of
this section for a woman to breast-feed.
MIST: (10186) RL s 4953; 1931 c 321; 1.986 c 444; 1994 c 636
art 2 s 54; 1,995 c 226 art 2 s 31; 1996 c 408 art 3 s 37; 1998 c
367 art 3 s 14; 1998 c 369 s 2
Copyright 2005 by the Office of Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota.
Page I of I
http: / /www. revisor. leg. state .mn..us /stats /617/2.3,htrnl 3/10/2006
Minnesota Statutes 2005, 617_246
Mimiesota Statutes 2005. Table of Chapters
Table of contents for Cha 617
617,246 Use of minors in sexual performance prohibited.
Subdivision I. Definitions. (a) For the purpose of
this section, the terms defined in this subdivision have the
meanings given them.
(b) "Minor" means any person under the age of IS.
(c) "Promote" means to produce, direct, publish,
manufacture, issue, or advertise,
(d) "Sexual performance" means any play, dance or other
exhibition presented before an audience or for purposes of
visual or mechanical reproduction that uses a minor to depict
actual or simulated sexual conduct as defined by clause (e).
(e) "Sexual conduct" means any of the following:
(1) an act of sexual intercourse, normal or perverted,
including genital-genital, anal-genital, or oral-genital
intercourse, whether between human beings or between a human
being and an animal;
(2) sadomasochistic abuse, meaning flagellation, torture,
or similar demeaning acts inflicted by or upon a person who is
nude or clad in undergarments or in a revealing costume, or the
condition of being fettered, bound or otherwise physically
restrained on the part of one so clothed;
(3) masturbation;
(4) lewd exhibitions of the genitals; or
(5) physical contact with the clothed or unclothed pubic
areas or buttocks of a human male or female, or the breasts of
the female, whether alone or between members of the same or
opposite sex or between humans and animals in an act of apparent
sexual stimulation or gratification.
(f) "Pornographic work" means:
(1) an original or reproduction of a picture, film,
photograph, negative, slide, - videotape, videodisc, or drawing of
a sexual performance involving a minor; or
(2) any visual depiction, including any photograph, film,
video, picture, drawing, negative, slide, or computer-generated
image or picture, whether made or produced by electronic,
mechanical, or other means that:
(i) uses a minor to depict actual or simulated sexual
conduct;
(ii) has been created, adapted, or modified to appear that
Page I of2
littp://www.r leg,state.mn,us/stats/617/246.hiniI 3/10/2006
Minnesota Statutes 2005, 617.246
an identifiable minor is engaging in sexual conduct; or
(iii) is advertised, promoted, presented, described, or
distributed in such a manner that conveys the impression that
the material is or contains a visual depiction of a minor
engaging in sexual conduct.
For the purposes
is a person who was
created or altered,
depiction.
of this paragraph, an identifiable minor
a minor at the time the depiction was
whose image is used to create the visual
Subd. 2. Use of minor. It is unlawful for a person
to promote, employ, use or permit a minor to engage in or assist
others to engage minors in posing or modeling alone or with
others in any sexual performance or pornographic work if the
person knows or has reason to know that the conduct intended is
a sexual performance or a pornographic work,,
Any person who violates this subdivision is guilty of a
felony and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than
ten years or to payment of a fine of not more than $20,000 for
the first offense and $40,000 for a second or subsequent
offense, or both.
Subd. 3. operation or ownership of business. A
person who owns or operates a business in which a pornographic
work, as defined in this section, is disseminated to an adult or
a minor or is reproduced, and who knows the content and
character of the pornographic work disseminated or reproduced,
is guilty of a felony and may be sentenced to imprisonment for
not more than ten years, or to payment of a fine of not more
than $20,000 for the first offense and $40,000 for a second or
subsequent offense, or both.
Subd. 4. Dissemination. A person who, knowing or
with reason to know its content and character, disseminates for
profit to an adult or a minor a pornographic work, as defined in
this section, is guilty of a felony and may be sentenced to
imprisonment for not more than ten years, or to payment of a
fine of not more than $20,000 for the first offense and $40,000
for a second or subsequent offense, or both.
Subd., 5., Consent; mistake. Neither consent to sexual
performance by a minor or the minor's parent, guardian, or
custodian nor mistake as to the minor's age is a defense to a
charge of violation of this section,
Subd. 6. Affirmative defense. It shall be an
affirmative defense to a charge of violating this section that
the sexual performance or pornographic work was produced using
only persons who were 18 years or older.
HIST: 1977 c 371 s 1; 1982 c 604 s 2; 1983 c 204 s 11; 1984 c
628 art 3 s 7-9; 1986 c 444, 1999 c 217 s 1-5
Copyright 2005 by the Office of Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota.
Page 2 of 2
htip://www.revisor.leg.state.nin.,us/stats/617/246.htnl 3/10/2006
Minnesota Statutes 2005, 617.247
Minnesota Statutes 2005. Table of Chai)ters
Table of contents for Chamer 617
617.247 Possession of pornographic work involving minors.,
Subdivision 1. Policy; purpose, It is the policy of
the legislature in enacting this section to protect minors from
the physical and psychological damage caused by their being used
in pornographic work depicting sexual conduct which involves
minors. It is therefore the intent of the legislature to
penalize possession of pornographic work depicting sexual
conduct which involve minors or appears to involve minors in
order to protect the identity of minors who are victimized by
involvement in the pornographic work, and to protect minors from
future involvement in pornographic work depicting sexual conduct.
Subd. 2, Definitions, For purposes of this section,
the following terms have the meanings given them:
(a) "Pornographic work" has the meaning given to it in
section 61
(b) "Sexual conduct" has the meaning given to it in section
61'7.246.
Subd. 3, Dissemination prohibited. (a) A person who
disseminates pornographic work to an adult or a minor, knowing
or with reason to know its content and character, is guilty of a
felony and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than
seven years and a fine of not more than $10,000 for a first
offense and for not more than 15 years and a fine of not more
than $20,000 for a second or subsequent offense,
(b) A person who violates paragraph (a) is guilty of a
felony and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 15
years if the - violation occurs when the person is a registered
predatory offender under section 243.166.
Subd. 4. Possession prohibited. (a) A person who
possesses a pornographic work or a computer disk or computer or
other electronic, magnetic, or optical storage system or a
storage system of any other type, containing a pornographic
work, knowing or with reason to know its content and character,
is guilty of a felony and may be sentenced to imprisonment for
not more than five years and a fine of not more than $5,000 for
a first offense and for not more than ten years and a fine of
not more than $10,000 for a second or subsequent offense.
(b) A person who violates paragraph (a) is guilty of a
felony and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than
ten years if the violation occurs when the person is a
registered predatory offender under section 243.166.
Subd.. 5. Exception. This section does not apply to
the performance of official duties by peace officers, court
personnel, or attorneys, nor to licensed physicians,
psychologists, or social workers or persons acting at the
Page I of
http: //www.revisor. leg. state, mn,us/stats/617/247.htryd 3/10/2006
Minnesota Statutes 2005, 617.247
direction of a licensed physician, psychologist, or social
worker in the course of a bona fide treatment or professional
education program.
Subd. 6. Consent. Consent to sexual performance by a
minor or the minor's parent, guardian, or custodian is not a
defense to a charge of violation of this section,
Subd. 7. Second offense. If a person is convicted of
a second or subsequent violation of this section within 15 years
of the prior conviction, the court shall order a mental
examination of the person. The examiner shall report to the
court whether treatment of the person is necessary.
Subd., 8. Affirmative defense, It shall be an
affirmative defense to a charge of violating this section that
the pornographic work was produced using only persons who were
18 years or older.
HIST: 1982 c 604 s 3; 1983 c 204 s 12; 1986 c 444; 1.995 c 217
6-10; 2001 c 197 s 4,5; 1Sp2001 c 8 art 8 s 28
Copyright 200.5 by the Office of Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota.
Page 2 of 2
http://www.i 3/10/2006
Minnesota Statutes 2005, 617,293
Minnesota Statutes 2005. Table of ChaMers
Table of contents fo Chaoter 6 17
t U_jW_L_o
617.293 Harmful materials; dissemination and display to
minors prohibited.
Subdivision 1, Dissemination. It is unlawful for any
person knowingly to sell or loan for monetary consideration to a
minor:
(a) any picture, photograph, drawing, sculpture, motion
picture film, or similar visual representation or image of a
person or portion of the human body which depicts nudity, sexual
conduct, or sadomasochistic abuse and which is harmful to
minors, or
(b) any book, pamphlet, magazine, printed matter however
reproduced, or sound recording which contains any matter
enumerated in clause (a), or which contains explicit and
detailed verbal descriptions or narrative accounts of sexual
excitement, sexual conduct, or sadomasochistic abuse which,
taken as a whole, is harmful to minors.,
Subd. 2,, Display, (a) It is unlawful for any person
commercially and knowingly to exhibit or display any material
which is harmful to minors in its content in any place of public
accommodation where minors are or may be present and where
minors are able to view the material unless each item is kept in
a sealed wrapper all all times.
(b) It is unlawful for any person commercially and
knowingly to exhibit or display any material the cover or
packaging of which, standing alone, is harmful to minors in any
place of public accommodation where minors are or may be present
or allowed to be present and where minors are able to view the
material unless each item is blocked from view by an opaque
cover. The opaque cover requirement is satisfied if those
portions of the cover or packaging containing the material
harmful to minors are blocked from view by an opaque cover.
(c) The provisions of this subdivision do not apply to the
exhibition or display of materials harmful to minors under
circumstances where minors are not present or are not able to
view the material or the material's cover or packaging. A
person may comply with the requirements of this paragraph by (1)
physically segregating the material in a manner that physically
prohibits access to and view of the material by minors, (2)
prominently posting at the entrance to the restricted area:
"Adults only--you must be 18 to enter," and (3) enforcing the
restriction.
HIST: 1969 c 1071 s 3; 1.971 c 25 a 95; 1988 c 452 s 1
Copyright 2005 by the Office of Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota.
Page I of'l
C�
htip: / /www. revisor .leg.state.mn.us /stats /617/293. t l 3/10/2006
Minnesota Statutes 2005, 244,052
Minnesota Statutes ?005. Table of CliaDters
.... .......
Table of contents for Chal&i-244
244.052 Predatory offenders; notice.
Subdivision 1. Definitions. As used in this section:
(1) "confinement" means confinement in a state correctional
facility or a state treatment facility;
(2) "immediate household" means any and all individuals who
live in the same household as the offender;
(3) "law enforcement agency" means the law enforcement
agency having primary jurisdiction over the location where the
offender expects to reside upon release;
(4) "residential facility" means a facility that is
Licensed as a residential program, as defined in section
,245A.O , subdivision 14, by the commissioner of human services
under chapter 245A, or the commissioner of corrections under
section 241.021, whose staff are trained in the supervision of
sex offenders; and
(5) "predatory offender" and "offender" mean a person who
is required to register as a predatory offender under section
243.166. However, the terms do not include persons required to
register based solely on a delinquency adjudication.
Subd, 2. Risk assessment scale. By January 1, 1997,
the commissioner of corrections shall develop a risk assessment
scale which assigns weights to the various risk factors listed
in subdivision 3, paragraph (g), and specifies the risk level to
which offenders with various risk assessment scores shall be
assigned. In developing this scale, the commissioner shall
consult with county attorneys, treatment professionals, law
enforcement officials, and probation officers.
Subd. 3. End-of-confinement review committee, (a)
The commissioner of corrections shall establish and administer
end-of-confinement review committees at each state correctional
facility and at each state treatment facility where predatory
offenders are confined. The committees shall assess on a
case-by-case basis the public risk posed by predatory offenders
who are about to be released from confinement.
(b) Each committee shall be a standing committee and shall
consist of the following members appointed by the commissioner:
(1) the chief executive officer or head of the correctional
or treatment facility where the offender is currently confined,
or that person's designee;
(2) a law enforcement officer;
(3) a treatment professional who is trained in the
assessment of sex offenders;
Page I of 12
http://www,revisoi, leg,.state,mn.,us/stats/244/052.htinI 3/13/2006
Minnesota Statutes 2005, 244,052
(4) a caseworker experienced in supervising sex offenders;
and
(5) a victim's services professional.
Members of the committee, other than the facility's chief
executive officer or head, shall be appointed by the
commissioner to two-year terms. The chief executive officer or
head of the facility or designee shall act as chair of the
committee and shall use the facility's staff, as needed, to
administer the committee, obtain necessary information from
outside sources, and prepare risk assessment reports on
offenders
(c) The committee shall have access to the following data
on a predatory offender only for the purposes of its assessment
and to defend the committee's risk assessment determination upon
administrative review under this section:
(1) private medical data under section 13.384 or 144.335,
or welfare data under section 13.46 that relate to medical
treatment of the offender;
(2) private and confidential court services data under
section 13.84;
(3) private and confidential corrections data under section
13.85; and
(4) private criminal history data under section . 13-87.
Data collected and maintained by the committee under this
paragraph may not be disclosed outside the committee, except as
provided under section 13.05, subdivision 3 or 4. The predatory
offender has access to data on the offender collected and
maintained by the committee, unless the data are confidential
data received under this paragraph.
(d)(i) Except as otherwise provided in items (ii), (iii),
and (iv), at least 90 days before a predatory offender is to be
released from confinement, the commissioner of corrections shall
convene the appropriate end-of-confinement review committee for
the purpose of assessing the risk presented by the offender and
determining the risk level to which the offender shall be
assigned under paragraph (e). The offender and the law
enforcement agency that was responsible for the charge resulting
in confinement shall be notified of the time and place of the
committee's meeting. The offender has a right to be present and
be heard at the meeting. The law enforcement agency may provide
material in writing that is relevant to the offender's risk
level to the chair of the committee. The committee shall use
the risk factors described in paragraph (g) and the risk
assessment scale developed under subdivision 2 to determine the
offender's risk assessment score and risk level. offenders
scheduled for release from confinement shall be assessed by the
committee established at the facility from which the offender is
to be released.
(ii) If an offender is received for confinement in a
Page 2 of 12
http://www.revisor,,Ieg.state.inn..us/stats/244/052.htlnl 3/1312006
Mirmesota Statutes 2005, 244,052
facility with less than 90 days remaining in the offender's term
of confinement, the offender's risk shall be assessed at the
first regularly scheduled end of confinement review committee
that convenes after the appropriate documentation for the risk
assessment is assembled by the committee. The commissioner
shall make reasonable efforts to ensure that offender's risk is
assessed and a risk level is assigned or reassigned at least 30
days before the offender's release date,
(iii) If the offender is subject to a mandatory life
sentence under section 609.3455 , subdivision 3 or 4, the
commissioner of corrections shall convene the appropriate
end-of-confinement review committee at least nine months before
the offender's minimum term of imprisonment has been served.. If
the offender is received for confinement in a facility with less
than nine months remaining before the offender's minimum term of
imprisonment has been served, the committee shall conform its
procedures to those outlined in item (ii) to the extent
practicable.
(iv) If the offender is granted supervised release, the
commissioner of corrections shall notify the appropriate
end-of-confinement review committee that it needs to review the
offender's previously determined risk level at its next
regularly scheduled meeting. The commissioner shall make
reasonable efforts to ensure that the offender's earlier risk
level determination is reviewed and the risk level is confirmed
or reassigned at least 60 days before the offender's release
date, The committee shall give the report to the offender and
to the law enforcement agency at least 60 days before an
offender is released from confinement.
(e) The committee shall assign to risk level I a predatory
offender whose risk assessment scare indicates a low risk of
reoffense. The committee shall assign to risk level II an
offender whose risk assessment score indicates a moderate risk
of reoffense. The committee shall assign to risk level III an
offender whose risk assessment score indicates a high risk of
reoffense,
(f) Before the predatory offender is released from
confinement, the committee shall prepare a risk assessment
report which specifies the risk level to which the offender has
been assigned and the reasons underlying the committee's risk
assessment decision, Except for an offender subject to a
mandatory life sentence under section 609.3455, subdivision 3 or
4, who has not been granted supervised release, the committee
shall give the report to the offender and to the law enforcement
agency at least 60 days before an offender is released from
confinement. If the offender is subject to a mandatory life
sentence and has not yet served the entire minimum term of
imprisonment, the committee shall give the report to the
offender and to the commissioner at least six months before the
offender is first eligible for release. If the risk assessment
is performed under the circumstances described in paragraph (d),
item (ii), the report shall be given to the offender and the law
enforcement agency as soon as it is available. The committee
also shall inform the offender of the availability of review
under subdivision 6.
Page 3 of 12
littp:Hwww, revisor leg,state,mmus/stats/244/05 2, h 3/1312006
Minnesota Statutes 2005, 244052
(g) As used in this subdivision, "risk factors" includes,
but is not limited to, the following factors:
(1) the seriousness of the offense should the offender
reoffend., This factor includes consideration of the following:
(i) the degree of likely force or harm;
(ii) the degree of likely physical contact; and
(iii) the age of the likely victim;
(2) the offender's prior offense history. This factor
includes consideration of the following:
W the relationship of prior victims to the offender;
(ii) the number of prior offenses or victims;
(iii) the duration of the offender's prior offense history;
(iv) the length of time since the offender's last prior
offense while the offender was at risk to commit offenses, and
(v) the offender's prior history of other antisocial acts;
(3) the offender's characteristics. This factor includes
consideration of the following:
(i) the offender's response to prior treatment efforts; and
(ii) the offender's history of substance abuse;
(4) the availability of community supports to the offender.
This factor includes consideration of the following:
(i) the availability and likelihood that the offender will
be involved in therapeutic treatment,
(ii) the availability of residential supports to the
offender, such as a stable and supervised living arrangement in
an appropriate location;
(iii) the offender's familial and social relationships,
including the nature and length of these relationships and the
level of support that the offender may receive from these
persons; and
(iv) the offender's lack of education or employment
stability;
(5) whether the offender has indicated or credible evidence
in the record indicates that the offender will reoffend if
released into the community; and
(6) whether the offender demonstrates a physical condition
that minimizes the risk of reoffense, including but not limited
to, advanced age or a debilitating illness or physical condition,
(h) Upon the request of the law enforcement agency or the
Page 4 of'1.2
littp:/hvww.revisoi ,leg,state,,inn-us/stats/244/052.litinl 3/13/2006
Minnesota Statutes 2005, 244,052
offender's corrections agent, the commissioner may reconvene the
end-of-confinement review committee for the purpose of
reassessing the risk level to which an offender has been
assigned under paragraph (a), In a request for a reassessment,
the law enforcement agency which was responsible for the charge
resulting in confinement or agent shall list the facts and
circumstances arising after the initial assignment or facts and
circumstances known to law enforcement or the agent but not
considered by the committee under paragraph (e) which support
the request for a reassessment. The request for reassessment by
the law enforcement agency must occur within 30 days of receipt
of the report indicating the offender's risk level assignment,
The offender's corrections agent, in consultation with the chief
law enforcement officer in the area where the offender resides
or intends to reside, may request a review of a risk level at
any time if substantial evidence exists that the offender's risk
level should be reviewed by an end-of-confinement review
committee. This evidence includes, but is not limited to,
evidence of treatment failures or completions, evidence of
exceptional crime-free community adjustment or lack of
appropriate adjustment, evidence of substantial community need
to know more about the offender or mitigating circumstances that
would narrow the proposed scope of notification, or other
practical situations articulated and based in evidence of the
offender's behavior while under supervision. Upon review of the
request, the end-of-confinement review committee may reassign an
offender to a different risk level., If the offender is
reassigned to a higher risk level, the offender has the right to
seek review of the committee's determination under subdivision 6,
(i) An offender may request the end-of-confinement review
committee to reassess the offender's assigned risk level after
three years have elapsed since the committee's initial risk
assessment and may renew the request once every two years
following subsequent denials. In a request for reassessment,
the offender shall list the facts and circumstances which
demonstrate that the offender no longer poses the same degree of
risk to the community. In order for a request for a risk 'Level
reduction to be granted, the offender must demonstrate full
compliance with supervised release conditions, completion of
required post-release treatment programming, and full compliance
with all registration requirements as detailed in section
243,166. The offender must also not have been convicted of any
felony, gross misdemeanor, or misdemeanor offenses subsequent to
the assignment of the original risk level. The committee shall
follow the process outlined in paragraphs (a) to (c) in the
reassessment., An offender who is incarcerated may not request a
reassessment under this paragraph.
(j) Offenders returned to prison as release violators shall
not have a right to a subsequent risk reassessment by the
end-of-confinement review committee unless substantial evidence
indicates that the offender's risk to the public has increased.
(k) If the committee assigns a predatory offender to risk
level III, the committee shall determine whether residency
restrictions shall be included in the conditions of the
offender's release based on the offender's pattern of offending
behavior.
littp://Nvww-revisor,leg,state,ii html
Page 5 of 12
3 /1.3/2006
Mirmesota Statutes 2005, 244,052
Subd, 3a. Offenders from other states and offenders
released from federal facilities, (a) Except as provided in
paragraph (b), the commissioner shall establish an
end-of-confinement review committee to assign a risk level.
(1) to offenders who are released from a federal
correctional facility in Minnesota or a federal correctional
facility in another state and who intend to reside in Minnesota;
(2) to offenders who are accepted from another state under
the interstate compact authorized by section 243.16 or 243,1605
or any other authorized interstate agreement; and
(3) to offenders who are referred to the committee by local
law enforcement agencies under paragraph (f).
(b) This subdivision does not require the commissioner to
convene an end-of-confinement review committee for a person
coming into Minnesota who is subject to probation under another
state's law. The probation or court services officer and law
enforcement officer shall manage such cases in accordance with
section 244, 10, subdivision 8.
(c) The committee shall make reasonable efforts to conform
to the same timelines applied to offenders released from a
Minnesota correctional facility and shall collect all relevant
information and records on offenders assessed and assigned a
risk level under this subdivision.. However, for offenders who
were assigned the most serious risk level by another state, the
committee must act promptly to collect the information required
under this paragraph..
The end-of-confinement review committee must proceed in
accordance with all requirements set forth in this section and
follow all policies and procedures applied to offenders released
from a Minnesota correctional facility in reviewing information
and assessing the risk level of offenders covered by this
subdivision, unless restrictions caused by the nature of federal
or interstate transfers prevent such conformance.. All of the
provisions of this section apply to offenders who are assessed
and assigned a risk level under this subdivision..
(d) If a local law enforcement agency learns or suspects
that a person who is subject to this section is living in
Minnesota and a risk level has not been assigned to the person
under this section, the law enforcement agency shall provide
this information to the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension and the
commissioner of corrections within three business days.
(e) If the commissioner receives reliable information from
a local law enforcement agency or the bureau that a person
subject to this section is living in Minnesota and a local law
enforcement agency so requests, the commissioner must determine
if the person was assigned a risk level under a law comparable
to this section. If the commissioner determines that the law is
comparable and public safety warrants, the commissioner, within
three business days of receiving a request, shall notify the
local law enforcement agency that it may, in consultation with
the department, proceed with notification under subdivision 4
based on the person's out-of-state risk level, However, if the
http://www.revisoi leg, st
Page 6 of I
3/13/2006
Miiu - lesota Statutes 2005, 244,052
commissioner concludes that the offender is from a state with a
risk level assessment law that is not comparable to this
section, the extent of the notification may not exceed that of a
risk level II offender under subdivision 4, paragraph (b),
unless the requirements of paragraph (f) have been met. If an
assessment is requested from the end-of-confinement review
committee under paragraph (f), the local law enforcement agency
may continue to disclose information under subdivision 4 until
the committee assigns the person a risk level.. After the
committee assigns a risk level to an offender pursuant to a
request made under paragraph (f), the information disclosed by
law enforcement shall be consistent with the risk level assigned
by the end-of-confinement review committee. The commissioner of
corrections, in consultation with legal advisers, shall
determine whether the law of another state is comparable to this
section,
(f) If the local law enforcement agency wants to make a
broader disclosure than is authorized under paragraph (e), the
law enforcement agency may request that an end-of-confinement
review committee assign a risk level to the offender. The local
law enforcement agency shall provide to the committee all
information concerning the offender's criminal history, the risk
the offender poses to the community, and other relevant
information. The department shall attempt to obtain other
information relevant to determining which risk level to assign
the offender. committee shall promptly assign a risk level
to an offender referred to the committee under this paragraph.
Subd- 4, Law enforcement agency; disclosure of
information to public, (a) The law enforcement agency in the
area where the predatory offender resides, expects to reside, is
employed, or is regularly found, shall disclose to the public
any information regarding the offender contained in the report
forwarded to the agency under subdivision 3, paragraph (f), that
is relevant and necessary to protect the public and to
counteract the offender's dangerousness, consistent with the
guidelines in paragraph (b), The extent of the information
disclosed and the community to whom disclosure is made must
relate to the level of danger posed by the offender, to the
offender's pattern of offending behavior, and to the need of
community members for information to enhance their individual
and collective safety.
(b) The law enforcement agency shall employ the following
guidelines in determining the scope of disclosure made under
this subdivision:
(1) if the offender is assigned to risk level I, the agency
may maintain information regarding the offender within the
agency and may disclose it to other law enforcement agencies.
Additionally, the agency may disclose the information to any
victims of or witnesses to the offense committed by the
offender. The agency shall disclose the information to victims
of the offense committed by the offender who have requested
disclosure and to adult members of the offender's immediate
household;
(2) if the offender is assigned to risk level 11, the
agency also may disclose the information to agencies and groups
litip://Nvww,revisor,leg.state,mn.us/stats/244/052,litml
Page 7 of T
.3/13/2006
Minnesota Statutes 2005, 244,052
that the offender is likely to encounter for the purpose of
securing those institutions and protecting individuals in their
care while they are on or near the premises of the institution.
These agencies and groups include the staff members of public
and private educational institutions, day care establishments,
and establishments and organizations that primarily serve
individuals likely to be victimized by the offender. The agency
also may disclose the information to individuals the agency
believes are likely to be victimized by the offender. The
agency's belief shall be based an the offender's pattern of
offending or victim preference as documented in the information
provided by the department of corrections or human services;
(3) if the offender is assigned to risk level III, the
agency shall disclose the information to the persons and
entities described in clauses (1) and (2) and to other members
of the community whom the offender is likely to encounter,
unless the law enforcement agency determines that public safety
would be compromised by the disclosure or that a more limited
disclosure is necessary to protect the identity of the victim,
Notwithstanding the assignment of a predatory offender to
risk level II or III, a law enforcement agency may not make the
disclosures permitted or required by clause (2) or (3), if: the
offender is placed or resides in a residential facility_
However, if an offender is placed or resides in a residential
facility, the offender and the head of the facility shall
designate the offender's likely residence upon release from the
facility and the head of the facility shall notify the
commissioner of corrections or the commissioner of human
services of the offender's likely residence at least 14 days
before the offender's scheduled release date. The commissioner
shall give this information to the law enforcement agency having
jurisdiction over the offender's likely residence. The head of
the residential facility also shall notify the commissioner of
corrections or human services within 48 hours after finalizing
the offender's approved relocation plan to a permanent
residence, Within five days after receiving this notification,
the appropriate commissioner shall give to the appropriate law
enforcement agency all relevant information the commissioner has
concerning the offender, including information on the risk
factors in the offender's history and the risk level to which
the offender was assigned. After receiving this information,
the law enforcement agency shall make the disclosures permitted
or required by clause (2) or (3), as appropriate,,
(c) As used in paragraph (b), clauses (2) and (3), "likely
to encounter" means that:
(1) the organizations or community members are in a
location or in close proximity to a location where the offender
lives or is employed, or which the offender visits or is likely
to visit on a regular basis, other than the location of the
offender's outpatient treatment program; and
(2) the types of interaction which ordinarily occur at that
location and other circumstances indicate that contact with the
offender is reasonably certain.,
(d) A law enforcement agency or official who discloses
http://w
Page 8 of 12
3/13/2006
Miruiesota Statutes 2005, 244.052
information under this subdivision shall make a good faith
effort to make the notification within 14 days of receipt of a
confirmed address from the Department of Corrections indicating
that the offender will be, or has been, released from
confinement, or accepted for supervision, or has moved to a new
address and will reside at the address indicated. If a change
occurs in the -release plan, this notification provision does not
require an extension of the release date.
(e) A law enforcement agency or official who discloses
information under this subdivision shall not disclose the
identity or any identifying characteristics of the victims of or
witnesses to the offender's offenses,
(f) A law enforcement agency shall continue to disclose
information on an offender as required by this subdivision for
as long as the offender is required to register under section
243.166. This requirement on a law enforcement agency to
continue to disclose information also applies to an offender who
lacks a primary address and is registering under section
subdivision 3a.
(g) A law enforcement agency that is disclosing information
on an offender assigned to risk level III to the public under
this subdivision shall inform the commissioner of corrections
what information is being disclosed and forward this information
to the commissioner within two days of the agency's
determination. The commissioner shall post this information on
the Internet as required in subdivision 4b.
(h) A city council may adopt a policy that addresses when
information disclosed under this subdivision must be presented
in languages in addition to English. The policy may address
when information must be presented orally, in writing, or both
in additional languages by the law enforcement agency disclosing
the information, The policy may provide for different
approaches based on the prevalence of non-English languages in
different neighborhoods,
(i) An offender who is the subject of a community
notification meeting held pursuant to this section may not
attend the meeting.
Subd. 4a. Level III offenders; location of residence.
(a) When an offender assigned to risk level III is released
from confinement or a residential facility to reside in the
community or changes residence while on supervised or
conditional release, the agency responsible for the offender's
supervision shall take into consideration the proximity of the
offender's residence to that of other level III offenders and
proximity to schools and, to the greatest extent feasible, shall
mitigate the concentration of level III offenders and
concentration of level III offenders near schools.
(b) If the owner or property manager of a hotel, motel,
lodging establishment, or apartment building has an agreement
with an agency that arranges or provides shelter for victims of
domestic abuse, the owner or property manager may not knowingly
rent rooms to both level III offenders and victims of domestic
abuse at the same time. If the owner or property manager has an
Page 9 of 12
http:Hwww revisor, leg, state. nm.us/stats/244/05 2, htinl 3/1 . )/2006
Mhuiesota Statutes 2005, 244,052
agreement with an agency to provide housing to domestic abuse
victims and discovers or is informed that a tenant is a level
III offender after signing a lease or otherwise renting to the
offender, the owner or property manager may evict the offender.
Subd, 4b. Level III offenders; mandatory posting of
information on Internet. The commissioner of corrections
shall create and maintain an Internet Web site and post on the
site the information about offenders assigned to risk level III
forwarded by law enforcement agencies under subdivision 4,
paragraph (g), This information must be updated in a timely
manner to account for changes in the offender's address and
maintained for the period of time that the offender remains
subject to community notification as a level III offender.
Subd.. 4c. Law enforcement agency; disclosure of
information to a health care facility, (a) The law
enforcement agency in the area where a health care facility is
located shall disclose the registrant status of any predatory
offender registered under section 24 " 3 '.- I 6 " 6 ' to the health care
facility if the registered offender is receiving inpatient care
in that facility,
(b) As used in this section, "health care facility" means a
hospital or other entity licensed under sections - 144-50 to
144.58, a nursing home licensed to serve adults under section
144A.02, or a group residential housing facility or an
intermediate care facility for the mentally retarded licensed
under chapter 245A.
Subd, 5. Relevant information provided to law
enforcement, At least 60 days before a predatory offender is
released from confinement, the Department of Corrections or the
Department of Human Services, in the case of a person who was
committed under section 1 53B.185 or Minnesota Statutes 1992,
section 526.10, shall give to the law enforcement agency that
investigated the offender's crime of conviction or, where
relevant, the law enforcement agency having primary jurisdiction
where the offender was committed, all relevant information that
the departments have concerning the offender, including
information on risk factors in the offender's history. Within
five days after receiving the offender's approved release plan
from the hearings and release unit, the appropriate department
shall give to the law enforcement agency having primary
jurisdiction where the offender plans to reside all relevant
information the department has concerning the offender,
including information on risk factors in the offender's history
and the risk level to which the offender was assigned- If the
offender's risk level was assigned under the circumstances
described in subdivision 3, paragraph (d), item (ii), the
appropriate department shall give the law enforcement agency all
relevant information that the department has concerning the
offender, including information on the risk factors in the
offender's history and the offender's risk level within five
days of the risk level assignment or reassignment_
Subd.. 6. Administrative review, (a) An offender
assigned or reassigned to risk level II or III under subdivision
3, paragraph (e) or (h), has the right to seek administrative
review of an end-of-confinement review committee's risk
littp://www,revisoi,leg,state,.mn.us/stats/244/052,litml
Page 10 of E)
3/13/2006
Mien - iesota Statutes 2005, 244,052
assessment determination. The offender must exercise this right
within 14 days of receiving notice of the committee's decision
by notifying the chair of the committee, Upon receiving the
request for administrative review, the chair shall notify: (1)
the offender; (2) the victim or victims of the offender's
offense who have requested disclosure or their designee; (3) the
law enforcement agency that investigated the offender's crime of
conviction or, where relevant, the law enforcement agency having
primary jurisdiction where the offender was committed; (4) the
law enforcement agency having jurisdiction where the offender
expects to reside, providing that the release plan has been
approved by the hearings and release unit of the department of
corrections; and (5) any other individuals the chair may
select. The notice shall state the time and place of the
hearing. A request for a review hearing shall not interfere
with or delay the notification process under subdivision 4 or 5,
unless the administrative law judge orders otherwise for good
cause shown.
(b) An offender who requests a review hearing must be given
a reasonable opportunity to prepare for the hearing. The review
hearing shall be conducted on the record before an
administrative law judge.. The review hearing shall be conducted
at the correctional facility in which the offender is currently
confined. If the offender no longer is incarcerated, the
administrative law judge shall determine the place where the
review hearing will be conducted, The offender has the burden
of proof to show, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the
end-of-confinement review committee's risk assessment
determination was erroneous. The attorney general or a designee
shall defend the end-of-confinement review committee's
determination. The offender has the right to be present and be
represented by counsel at the hearing, to present evidence in
support of the offender's position, to call supporting witnesses
and to cross-examine witnesses testifying in support of the
committee's determination Counsel for indigent offenders shall
be provided by the Legal Advocacy Project of the state public
defender's office.
(c) After the hearing is concluded, the administrative law
judge shall decide whether the end-of-confinement review
committee's risk assessment determination was erroneous and,
based on this decision, shall either uphold or modify the review
committee's determination. The judge's decision shall be in
writing and shall include the judge's reasons for the decision.
The - j udge's decision shall be final and a copy of it shall be
given to the offender, the victim, the law enforcement agency,
and the chair of the end-of-confinement review committee.
(d) The review hearing is subject to the contested case
provisions of chapter 14,
(e) The administrative law judge may seal any portion of
the record of the administrative review hearing to the extent
necessary to protect the identity of a victim of or witness to
the offender's offense
Subd. 7. Immunity ftom liability, (a) A state or
local agency or official, or a private organization or
individual authorized to act on behalf of a state or local
littp://www.i-evisor,leg.state,inn,us/stats/244/052.htinl
Page I I of U
3/13/2006
Minnesota Statutes 2005, 244 052
agency or official, is not criminally liable for disclosing or
failing to disclose information, as permitted by this section.,
(b) A state or local agency or official, or a private
organization or individual authorized to act on behalf of a
state or local agency or official, is not civilly liable for
failing to disclose information under this section.
(c) A state or local agency or official, or a private
organization or individual authorized to act on behalf of a
state or local agency or official, is not civilly liable for
disclosing information as permitted by this section., However,
this paragraph applies only to disclosure of information that is
consistent with the offender's conviction history. It does not
apply to disclosure of information relating to conduct for which
the offender was not convicted.
Subd, 8, Limitation on scope. Nothing in this
section imposes a duty upon a person licensed under chapter 82,
or an employee of the person, to disclose information regarding
an offender who is required to register under section 243.166,
or about whom notification is made under this section.
HIST: 1996 c 408 art 5 s 4; 1997 c 239 art 5 s 4-7; 1998 c 396
s 3-6; 1.999 c 86 art I s 82; 1999 c 216 art 6 s 2-5; 1999 c 227
s 22; 1999 c 233 s 4,5; 2000 c 311 art 2 s 12; 2001 c 210 s 15;
2002 c 385 s 1-3; 2005 c 136 art 3 s 12-15; art 16 s 13
Cpr>yright 2005 by the Office of Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota,
Page 12 of 12
http://www,revisoy,,leg,state,,inn.tis/stats/2444/052,html 3/13 /2006
Minnesota Statutes 2005, 243,166
Minnesota Statutes 2005, 'Fable of Chapters
...........
Table of contents fbr_CLiqp _L er 243
_
243.166 Registration of predatory offenders.
Subdivision 1,, Repealed, 2005 c 136 art 3 s 31
Subd. la. Definitions. (a) As used in this section,
unless the context clearly indicates otherwise, the following
terms have the meanings given them.
(b) "Bureau" means the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension.
(c) "Dwelling" means the building where the person lives
under a formal or informal agreement to do so,
(d) "Incarceration" and "confinement" do not include
electronic home monitoring.
(e) "Law enforcement authority" or "authority" means, with
respect to a home rule charter or statutory city, the chief of
police, and with respect to an unincorporated area, the county
sheriff.
(f) "Motor vehicle" has the meaning given in section
169.01, subdivision 2,
(g) "Primary address" means the mailing address of the
person's dwelling. If the mailing address is different from the
actual location of the dwelling, primary address also includes
the physical location of the dwelling described with as much
specificity as possible,
(h) "School" includes any public or private educational
institution, including any secondary school, trade, or
professional institution, or institution of higher education,
that the person is enrolled in on a full-time or part-time basis.
(i) "Secondary address" means the mailing address of any
place where the person regularly or occasionally stays overnight
when not staying at the person's primary address. If the
mailing address is different from the actual location of the
place, secondary address also includes the physical location of
the place described with as much specificity as possible.
(j) "Treatment facility" means a residential facility, as
defined in section 244.052, subdivision 1, and residential
chemical dependency treatment programs and halfway houses
licensed under chapter 245A, including, but not limited to,
those facilities directly or indirectly assisted by any
department or agency of the United States.
(k) "Work" includes employment that is full time or part
time for a period of time exceeding 14 days or for an aggregate
period of time exceeding 30 days during any calendar year,
whether financially compensated, volunteered, or for the purpose
of government or educational benefit,
Page I of 14
http://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/stats/243/166.,html 3/10/2006
Minnesota Statutes 2005, 243,166
Subd. lb. Registration recpaired. (a) A person shall
register under this section if:
(1) the person was charged with or petitioned for a felony
violation of or attempt to violate, or aiding, abetting, or
conspiracy to commit, any of the following, and convicted of or
adjudicated delinquent for that offense or another offense
arising out of the same set of circumstances:
(i) murder under section 609.185, clause (4 2 );
(ii) kidnapping under section 609.25;
(iii) criminal sexual conduct under section 609.342;
609.343; 609.344; 609.345; 609.3451, subdivision 3; or 609.3453;
or
(iv) indecent exposure under section 617.23, subdivision 3;
(2) the person was charged with or petitioned for a
violation of, or attempt to violate, or aiding, abetting, or
conspiracy to commit false imprisonment in violation of section
609.255, subdivision 2; soliciting a minor to engage in
prostitution in violation of section 609.322 or 609.324;
soliciting a minor to engage in sexual conduct in violation of
section 609.352; using a minor in a sexual performance in
violation of section 617.246; or possessing pornographic work
involving a minor in violation of section 617.247, and convicted
of or adjudicated delinquent for that offense or another offense
arising out of the same set of circumstances;
(3) the person was sentenced as a patterned sex offender
under section 609.108; or
(4) the person was convicted of or adjudicated delinquent
for, including pursuant to a court martial, violating a law of
the United States, including the Uniform Code of Military
Justice, similar to the offenses described in clause (1), (2),
or (3) .
(b) A person also shall register under this section if:
(1) the person was convicted of or adjudicated delinquent
in another state for an offense that would be a violation of a
law described in paragraph (a) if committed in this state;
(2) the person enters this state to reside, work, or attend
school, or enters this state and remains for 14 days or longer;
and
(3) ten years have not elapsed since the person was
released from confinement or, if the person was not confined,
since the person was convicted of or adjudicated delinquent for
the offense that triggers registration, unless the person is
subject to lifetime registration, in which case the person shall
register for life regardless of when the person was released
from confinement, convicted, or adjudicated delinquent.
(c) A person also shall register under this section if the
Page 2 of 14
http://www,revisor,leg.state.mn.us/stats/243/166.litml 3/10/2006
Minnesota Statutes 2005, 243,166
person was committed pursuant to a court commitment order under
section 253B.1 or Minnesota Statutes 1992, section 526.10, or
a similar law of another state or the United States, regardless
of whether the person was convicted of any offense.,
(d) A person also shall register under this section if:
(1) the person was charged with or petitioned for a felony
violation or attempt to violate any of the offenses listed in
paragraph (a), clause (1), or a similar law of another state or
the United States, or the person was charged with or petitioned
for a violation of any of the offenses listed in paragraph (a),
clause (2), or a similar law of another state or the United
States;
(2) the person was found not guilty by reason of mental
illness or mental deficiency after a trial for that offense, or
found guilty but mentally ill after a trial for that offense, in
states with a guilty but mentally ill verdict; and
(3) the person was committed pursuant to a court commitment
order under section 253B.18 or a similar law of another state or
the United States.
Subd. 2. Notice. When a person who is required to
register under subdivision lb, paragraph (a), is sentenced or
becomes subject to a juvenile court disposition order, the court
shall tell the person of the duty to register under this section
and that, if the person fails to comply with the registration
requirements, information about the offender may be made
available to the public through electronic, computerized, or
other accessible means. The court may not modify the person's
duty to register in the pronounced sentence or disposition
order. The court shall require the person to read and sign a
form stating that the duty of the person to register under this
section has been explained,, The court shall forward the signed
sex offender registration form, the complaint, and sentencing
documents to the bureau. If a person required to register under
subdivision 1b, paragraph (a), was not notified by the court of
the registration requirement at the time of sentencing or
disposition, the assigned corrections agent shall notify the
person of the requirements of this section.. When a person who
is required to register under subdivision lb, paragraph (c) or
(d), is released from commitment, the treatment facility shall
notify the person of the requirements of this section. The
treatment facility shall also obtain the registration
information required under this section and forward it to the
bureau.
Subd. 3. Registration procedure. (a) Except as
provided in subdivision 3a, a person required to register under
this section shall register with the corrections agent as soon
as the agent is assigned to the person.. If the person does not
have an assigned corrections agent or is unable to locate the
assigned corrections agent, the person shall register with the
law enforcement authority that has jurisdiction in the area of
the person's primary address,
(b) Except as provided in subdivision 3a, at least five
days before the person starts living at a new primary address,
bttp://www,revisor-leg.state.nm-us/stats/243/166,html
Page 3 of 14
3/10/2006
Minnesota Statutes 2005, 243,166
including living in another state, the person shall give written
notice of the new primary address to the assigned corrections
agent or to the law enforcement authority with which the person
currently is registered. If the person will be living in a new
state and that state has a registration requirement, the person
shall also give written notice of the new address to the
designated registration agency in the new state. A person
required to register under this section shall also give written
notice to the assigned corrections agent or to the law
enforcement authority that has jurisdiction in the area of the
person's primary address that the person is no longer living or
staying at an address, immediately after the person is no longer
living or staying at that address,, The corrections agent or law
enforcement authority shall, within two business days after
receipt of this information, forward it to the bureau,, The
bureau shall, if it has not already been done, notify the law
enforcement authority having primary jurisdiction in the
community where the person will live of the new address. If the
person is leaving the state, the bureau shall notify the
registration authority in the new state of the new address. The
person's registration requirements under this section terminate
after the person begins living in the new state and the bureau
has confirmed the address in the other state through the annual
verification process on at least one occasion.
(c) A person required to register under subdivision 1b,
paragraph (b), because the person is working or attending school
in Minnesota shall register with the law enforcement authority
that has jurisdiction in the area where the person works or
attends school. In addition to other information required by
this section, the person shall provide the address of the school
or of the location where the person is employed. A person shall
comply with this paragraph within five days of beginning
employment or school. A person's obligation to register under
this paragraph terminates when the person is no longer working
or attending school in Minnesota.
(d) A person required to register under this section who
works or attends school outside of Minnesota shall register as a
predatory offender in the state where the person works or
attends school. The person's corrections agent, or if the
person does not have an assigned corrections agent, the law
enforcement authority that has jurisdiction in the area of the
person's primary address shall notify the person of this
requirement.
Subd, 3a, Registration procedure when person lacks
primary address, (a) If a person leaves a primary address and
does not have a new primary address, the person shall register
with the law enforcement authority that has jurisdiction in the
area where the person is staying within 24 hours of the time the
person no longer has a primary address.
(b) A person who lacks a primary address shall register
with the law enforcement authority that has jurisdiction in the
area where the person is staying within 24 hours after entering
the jurisdiction, Each time a person who lacks a primary
address moves to a new jurisdiction without acquiring a new
primary address, the person shall register with the law
enforcement authority that has jurisdiction in the area where
Page 4 of 14
http: / /www.revisor.. leg.. state .nin.us /stats1243 /166.1itml 3110/2006
Minnesota Statutes 2005, 243,166
the person is staying within 24 hours after entering the
jurisdiction.,
(c) Upon registering under this subdivision, the person
shall provide the law enforcement authority with all of the
information the individual is required to provide under
subdivision 4a, However, instead of reporting the person's
primary address, the person shall describe the location of where
the person is staying with as much specificity as possible.
(d) Except as otherwise provided in paragraph (a), if a
person continues to lack a primary address, the person shall
report in person on a weekly basis to the law enforcement
authority with jurisdiction in the area where the person is
staying. This weekly report shall occur between the hours of
9:00 a.m, and 5:00 p.m. The person is not required to provide
the registration information required under subdivision 4a each
time the offender reports to an authority, but the person shall
inform the authority of changes to any information provided
under this subdivision or subdivision 4a and shall otherwise
comply with this subdivision.
(e) If the law enforcement authority determines that it is
impractical, due to the person's unique circumstances, to
require a person lacking a primary address to report weekly and
in person as required under paragraph (d), the authority may
authorize the person to follow an alternative reporting
procedure,, The authority shall consult with the person's
corrections agent, if the person has one, in establishing the
specific criteria of this alternative procedure, subject to the
following requirements:
(1) the authority shall document, in the person's
registration record, the specific reasons why the weekly
in-person -reporting process is impractical for the person to
follow;
(2) the authority shall explain how the alternative
reporting procedure furthers the public safety objectives of
this section;
(3) the authority shall require the person lacking a
primary address to report in person at least monthly to the
authority or the person's corrections agent and shall specify
the location where the person shall report. If the authority
determines it would be more practical and would further public
safety for the person to report to another law enforcement
authority with jurisdiction where the person is staying, it may,
after consulting with the other law enforcement authority,
include this requirement in the person's alternative reporting
process;
(4) the authority shall require the person to comply with
the weekly, in-person reporting process required under paragraph
(d), if the person moves to a new area where this process would
be practical;
(5) the authority shall require the person to report any
changes to the registration information provided under
subdivision 4a and to comply with the periodic registration
Page 5 of 14
http://www,revisor,leg-state.iiui,.us/statsl243/166..htnil 3/10/2006
Minnesota Statutes 2005, 243.166
requirements specified under paragraph (f); and
(6) the authority shall require the person to comply with
the requirements of subdivision 3, paragraphs (b) and (c), if
the person moves to a primary address.
(f) If a person continues to lack a primary address and
continues to report to the same law enforcement authority, the
person shall provide the authority with all of the information
the individual is required to provide under this subdivision and
subdivision 4a at least annually, unless the person is required
to register under subdivision lb, paragraph (c), following
commitment pursuant to a court commitment under section 253B.185
or a similar law of another state or the United States. If the
person is required to register under subdivision lb, paragraph
(c), the person shall provide the law enforcement authority with
all of the information the individual is required to report
under this subdivision and subdivision 4a at least once every
three months.
(g) A law enforcement authority receiving information under
this subdivision shall forward registration information and
changes to that information to the bureau within two business
days of receipt of the information.
(h) For purposes of this subdivision, a person who fails to
report a primary address will be deemed to be a person who lacks
a primary address, and the person shall comply with the
requirements for a person who lacks a primary address.
Subd- 4. Contents of registration. (a) The
registration provided to the corrections agent or law
enforcement authority, must consist of a statement in writing
signed by the person, giving information required by the bureau,
a fingerprint card, and photograph of the person taken at the
time of the person's release from incarceration or, if the
person was not incarcerated, at the time the person initially
registered under this section. The registration information
also must include a written consent form signed by the person
allowing a treatment facility or residential housing unit or
shelter to release information to a law enforcement officer
about the person's admission to, or residence in, a treatment
facility or residential housing unit or shelter. Registration
information on adults and juveniles may be maintained together
notwithstanding section 260B.171 subdivision 3.
(b) For persons required to register under subdivision 1b,
paragraph (c), following commitment pursuant to a court
commitment under section 253B.185 or a similar law of another
state or the United States, in addition to other information
required by this section, the registration provided to the
corrections agent or law enforcement authority must include the
person's offense history and documentation of treatment received
during the person's commitment. This documentation is limited
to a statement of how far the person progressed in treatment
during commitment.,
(c) Within three days of receipt, the corrections agent or
law enforcement authority shall forward the registration
information to the bureau. The bureau shall ascertain whether
Page 6 of 14
http://www,,revisor.leg.state.rnn.us/stats/243/166.html 3/10/2006
Minnesota Statutes 2005, 243,166
the person has registered with the law enforcement authority in
the area of the person's primary address, if any, or if the
person lacks a primary address, where the person is staying, as
required by subdivision 3a. If the person has not registered
with the law enforcement authority, the bureau shall send one
copy to that authority.
(d) The corrections agent or law enforcement authority may
require that a person required to register under this section
appear before the agent or authority to be photographed. The
agent or authority shall forward the photograph to the bureau.
The agent or authority shall require a person required to
register under this section who is classified as a level III
offender under section 244.G5? to appear before the agent or
authority at least every six months to be photographed.
(e) During the period a person is required to register
under this section, the following provisions apply:
(1) Except for persons registering under subdivision 3a,
the bureau shall mail a verification form to the person's last
reported primary address., This verification form must provide
notice to the offender that, if the offender does not return the
verification form as required, information about the offender
may be made available to the public through electronic,
computerized, or other accessible means. For persons who are
registered under subdivision 3a, the bureau shall mail an annual
verification form to the law enforcement authority where the
offender most recently reported. The authority shall provide
the verification form to the person at the next weekly meeting
and ensure that the person completes and signs the form and
returns it to the bureau.
(2) The person shall mail the signed verification form back
to the bureau within ten days after receipt of the form, stating
an the form the current and last address of the person's
residence and the other information required under subdivision
4a.
(3) In addition to the requirements listed in this section,
a person who is assigned to risk level 11 or III under section
. ,�44.052, and who is no longer under correctional supervision for
a registration offense, or a failure to register offense, but
who resides, works, or attends school in Minnesota, shall have
an annual in-person contact with a law enforcement authority as
provided in this section. If the person resides in Minnesota,
the annual in-person contact shall be with the law enforcement
authority that has jurisdiction over the person's primary
address or, if the person has no address, the location where the
person is staying. If the person does not reside in Minnesota
but works or attends school in this state, the person shall have
an annual in-person contact with the law enforcement authority
or authorities with jurisdiction over the person's school or
workplace. During the month of the person's birth date, the
person shall report to the authority to verify the accuracy of
the registration information and to be photographed. Within
three days of this contact, the authority shall enter
information as required by the bureau into the predatory
offender registration database and submit an updated photograph
Page 7 of 14
http://w . state ,nm,us/stats/243/166,htnil 3/10/2006
Minnesota Statutes 2005, 243.166
of the person to the bureau's predatory offender registration
unit.
(4) If the person fails to mail the completed and signed
verification form to the bureau within ten days after receipt of
the form, or if the person fails to report to the law
enforcement authority during the month of the person's birth
date, the person is in violation of this section,
(5) For any person who fails to mail the completed and
signed verification form to the bureau within ten days after
receipt of the form and who has been determined to be a risk
level III offender under section 244.052, the bureau shall
immediately investigate and notify local law enforcement
authorities to investigate the person's location and to ensure
compliance with this section. The bureau also shall immediately
give notice of the person's violation of this section to the law
enforcement authority having jurisdiction over the person's last
registered address or addresses.
For persons required to register under subdivision lb, paragraph
(c), following commitment pursuant to a court commitment under
section 2 53B.185 or a similar law of another state or the United
States, the bureau shall comply with clause (1) at least four
times each year. For persons who, under section 244,052, are
assigned to risk level III and who are no longer under
correctional supervision for a registration offense or a failure
to register offense, the bureau shall comply with clause (1) at
least two times each year. For all other persons required to
register under this section, the bureau shall comply with clause
(1) each year within 30 days of the anniversary date of the
person's initial registration,
(f) When sending out a - verification form, the bureau shall
determine whether the person to whom the verification form is
being sent has signed a written consent form as provided for in
paragraph (a). if the person has not signed such a consent
form, the bureau shall send a written consent form to the person
along with the verification form. A person who receives this
written consent form shall sign and return it to the bureau at
the same time as the verification form-
Subd. 4a. information required to be provided, (a) A
person required to register under this section shall provide to
the corrections agent or law enforcement authority the following
information:
(1) the person's primary address;
(2) all of the person's secondary addresses in Minnesota,
including all addresses used for residential or recreational
purposes;
(3) the addresses of all Minnesota property owned, leased,
or rented by the person;
(4) the addresses of all locations where the person is
employed;
(5) the addresses of all schools where the person is
Page 8 of 14
http://Nvww.revisor.leg.state.n 3/10/2006
Minnesota Statutes 2005, 243.166
enrolled; and
(6) the year, model, make, license plate number, and color
of all motor vehicles owned or regularly driven by the person.
(b) The person shall report to the agent or authority the
information required to be provided under paragraph (a), clauses
(2) to (6), within five days of the date the clause becomes
applicable. If because of a change in circumstances any
information reported under paragraph (a), clauses (1) to (6), no
longer applies, the person shall immediately inform the agent or
authority that the information is no longer valid.. If the
person leaves a primary address and does not have a new primary
address, the person shall register as provided in subdivision 3a.,
Subd,, 4b. Health care facility; notice of status. (a)
For the purposes of this subdivision, "health care facility"
means a facility licensed by:
(1) the commissioner of health as a hospital, boarding care
home or supervised living facility under sections 144.50 to
144.58, or a nursing home under chapter 144A; or
(2) the commissioner of human services as a residential
facility under chapter 245A to provide adult foster care, adult
mental health treatment, chemical dependency treatment to
adults, or residential services to persons with developmental
disabilities.
(b) Upon admittance to a health care facility, a person
required to register under this section shall disclose to:
(1) the health care facility employee processing the
admission the person's status as a registered predatory offender
under this section; and
(2) the person's corrections agent, or if the person does
not have an assigned corrections agent, the law enforcement
authority with whom the person is currently required to
register, that inpatient admission has occurred.
(c) A law enforcement authority or corrections agent who
receives notice under paragraph (b) or who knows that a person
required to register under this section has been admitted and is
receiving health care at a health care facility shall notify the
administrator of the facility.
(d) Except for a hospital licensed under sections 144.50 to
- 144.58, a health care facility that receives notice under this
subdivision that a predatory offender has been admitted to the
facility shall notify other residents at the facility of this
fact.. If the facility determines that notice to a resident is
not appropriate given the resident's medical, emotional, or
mental status, the facility shall notify the patient's next of
kin or emergency contact,
Subd,, 5. Criminal penalty, (a) A person required to
register under this section who knowingly violates any of its
provisions or intentionally provides false information to a
corrections agent, law enforcement authority, or the bureau is
Page 9 of 14
littp://www.revisor.leg.,state.mn.us/stats/243/166.htnl 3/10/2006
Mhuiesota. Statutes 2005, 243. 166
guilty of a felony and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not
more than five years or to payment of a fine of not more than
$10,000, or both.
(b) Except as provided in paragraph (c), a person convicted
of violating paragraph (a) shall be committed to the custody of
the commissioner of corrections for not less than a year and a
day, nor more than five years,
(c) A person convicted of violating paragraph (a), who has
previously been convicted of or adjudicated delinquent for
violating this section or a similar statute of another state or
the United States, shall be committed to the custody of the
commissioner of corrections for not less than two years, nor
more than five years.
(d) Prior to the time of sentencing, the prosecutor may
file a motion to have the person sentenced without regard to the
mandatory minimum sentence established by this subdivision. The
motion must be accompanied by a statement on the record of the
reasons for it, When presented with the motion, or on its own
motion, the court may sentence the person without regard to the
mandatory minimum sentence if the court finds substantial and
compelling reasons to do so. Sentencing a person in the manner
described in this paragraph is a departure from the Sentencing
Guidelines,
(e) A person convicted and sentenced as required by this
subdivision is not eligible for probation, parole, discharge,
work release, conditional release, or supervised release, until
that person has served the full term of imprisonment as provided
by law, notwithstanding the provisions of sections 241.26,
242.19, 243.05, 244.04, 609.12, and 609.135..
Subd. 5a- Ten-year conditional release for violations
committed by level iii offenders. Notwithstanding the
statutory maximum sentence otherwise applicable to the offense
or any provision of the sentencing guidelines, when a court
commits a person to the custody of the commissioner of
corrections for violating subdivision 5 and, at the time of the
violation, the person was assigned to risk level III under
section 244.052, the court shall provide that after the person
has completed the sentence imposed, the commissioner shall place
the person on conditional release for ten years. The terms of
conditional release are governed by section 609.345
subdivision B.
Subd, 6. Registration period. (a) Notwithstanding
the provisions of section 609.165, subdivision 1, and except as
provided in paragraphs (b), (c), and (d), a person required to
register under this section shall continue to comply with this
section until ten years have elapsed since the person initially
registered in connection with the offense, or until the
probation, supervised release, or conditional release period
expires, whichever occurs later., For a person required to
register under this section who is committed under section
2538.18 or 2538.185, the ten-year registration period does not
include the period of commitment,
(b) If a person required to register under this section
Page 10 of 14
htV://www,Tevisor.leg.state.nin.us/stats/243/166.htrnl 3/10/2006
Minnesota Statutes 20 24" 3 ), 166
Z
fails to provide the person's primary address as required by
subdivision 3, paragraph (b), fails to comply with the
requirements of subdivision 3a, fails to provide information as
required by subdivision 4a, or fails to return the verification
form referenced in subdivision 4 within ten days, the
commissioner of public safety may require the person to continue
to register for an additional period of five years. This
five-year period is added to the end of the offender's
registration period.
(c) If a person required to register under this section is
subsequently incarcerated following a conviction for a new
offense or following a revocation of probation, supervised
release, or conditional release for any offense, the person
shall continue to register until ten years have elapsed since
the person was last released from incarceration or until the
person's probation, supervised release, or conditional release
period expires, whichever occurs later.
(d) A person shall continue to comply with this section for
the life of that person:
(1) if the person is convicted of or adjudicated delinquent
for any offense for which registration is required under
subdivision lb, or any offense from another state or any federal
offense similar to the offenses described in subdivision lb, and
the person has a prior conviction or adjudication for an offense
for which registration was or would have been required under
subdivision lb, or an offense from another state or a federal
offense similar to an offense described in subdivision lb;
(2) if the person is required to register based upon a
conviction or delinquency adjudication for an offense under
section 609.185, clause (2), or a similar statute from another
state or the United States;
(3) if the person is required to register based upon a
conviction for an offense under section 609.342, subdivision 1,
paragraph (a), (c), (d), (e), (f), or (h); 609.343, subdivision
1, paragraph (a), (c), (d), (e), (f), or (h); 609.344,
subdivision 1, paragraph (a), (c), or (g); or 609.345,
subdivision 1, paragraph (a), (c), or (g); or a statute from
another state or the United States similar to the offenses
described in this clause; or
(4) if the person is required to register under subdivision
lb, paragraph (Q), following commitment pursuant to a court
commitment under section 2533.185 or a similar law of another
state or the United States,
Subd. 7. Use of data- Except as otherwise provided
in subdivision 7a or sections 244.052 and 2990.093, the data
provided under this section is private data on individuals under
section 13.02, subdivision 12. The data may be used only for
law enforcement and corrections purposes. State-operated
services, as defined in section 246.014, are also authorized to
have access to the data for the purposes described in section
246.13, subdivision 2, paragraph (b).
Subd. 7a. Availability of information on offenders who
Pacy e I I of 14
http://www.revisor,leg.state,,nm.usistats/243/166.html 3/10/2006
Minnesota Statutes 2005, 243 .. 166
are out of compliance with registration law, (a) The bureau
may make information available to the public about offenders who
are 16 years of age or older and who are out of compliance with
this section for 30 days or longer for failure to provide the
offenders' primary or secondary addresses,. This information may
be made available to the public through electronic,
computerized, or other accessible means. The amount and type of
information made available is limited to the information
necessary for the public to assist law enforcement in locating
the offender.,
(b) An offender who comes into compliance with this section
after the bureau discloses information about the offender to the
public may send a written request to the bureau requesting the
bureau to treat information about the offender as private data,
consistent with subdivision 7. The bureau shall review the
request and promptly take reasonable action to treat the data as
private, if the offender has complied with the requirement that
the offender provide the offender's primary and secondary
addresses, or promptly notify the offender that the information
will continue to be treated as public information and the
reasons for the bureau's decision.
(c) If an offender believes the information made public
about the offender is inaccurate or incomplete, the offender may
challenge the data under section 13.04, subdivision 4,,
(d) The bureau is immune from any civil or criminal
liability that might otherwise arise, based on the accuracy or
completeness of any information made public under this
subdivision, if the bureau acts in good faith.
Subd. 8, Repealed, 2005 c 136 art 3 s 31
Subd. 9. offenders from other states. (a) When the
state accepts an offender from another state under a reciprocal
agreement under the interstate compact authorized by section
243.16, the interstate compact authorized by section 243.1605,
or under any authorized interstate agreement, the acceptance is
conditional on the offender agreeing to register under this
section when the offender is living in Minnesota.,
(b) The Bureau of Criminal Apprehension shall notify the
commissioner of corrections:
(1) when the bureau receives notice from a local law
enforcement authority that a person from another state who is
subject to this section has registered with the authority,
unless the bureau previously received information about the
offender from the commissioner of corrections;
(2) when a registration authority, corrections agent, or
law enforcement agency in another state notifies the bureau that
a person from another state who is subject to this section is
moving to Minnesota; and
(3) when the bureau learns that a person from another state
is in Minnesota and allegedly in violation of subdivision 5 for
failure to register.
Page 12 of 14
htip://www.revisot•,lec,.,state.mn.us/stats/243/166,1 3/10/2006
Z:)
Minnesota Statutes 2005, 241166 Page 13 of 14
(c) When a local law enforcement agency notifies the bureau
of an out-of-state offender's registration, the agency shall
provide the bureau with information on whether the person is
subject to community notification in another state and the risk
level the person was assigned, if any.
(d) The bureau must forward all information it receives
regarding offenders covered under this subdivision from sources
other than the commissioner of corrections to the commissioner.
(e) When the bureau receives information directly from a
registration authority, corrections agent, or law enforcement
agency in another state that a person who may be subject to this
section is moving to Minnesota, the bureau must ask whether the
person entering the state is subject to community notification
in another state and the risk level the person has been
assigned, if any,,
(f) When the bureau learns that a person subject to this
section intends to move into Minnesota from another state or has
moved into Minnesota from another state, the bureau shall notify
the law enforcement authority with jurisdiction in the area of
the person's primary address and provide all information
concerning the person that is available to the bureau.
(g) The commissioner of corrections must determine the
parole, supervised release, or conditional release status of
persons who are referred to the commissioner under this
subdivision. If the commissioner determines that a person is
subject to parole, supervised release, or conditional release in
another state and is not registered in Minnesota under the
applicable interstate compact, the commissioner shall inform the
local law enforcement agency that the person is in violation of
section 243.161. If the person is not subject to supervised
release, the commissioner shall notify the bureau and the local
law enforcement agency of the person's status.
Subd.. 10. Repealed, 1Sp200l c 8 art 9 s 8
Subd. 10. Venue; aggregation. (a) A violation of
this section may be prosecuted in any jurisdiction where an
offense takes place, However, the prosecutorial agency in the
jurisdiction where the person last registered a primary address
is initially responsible to review the case for prosecution.
(b) When a person commits two or more offenses in two or
more counties, the accused may be prosecuted for all of the
offenses in any county in which one of the offenses was
committed.
Subd. 11, Certified copies as evidence., Certified
copies of predatory offender registration records are admissible
as substantive evidence when necessary to prove the commission
of a violation of this section.
HIST: 1991 c 285 s 3; 1993 c 326 art 10 s 1-7; 1994 c 636 art
4 s 5-8; ISpI994 c 1 art 3 s 1,2; 1995 c 226 art 4 s 3; 1996 c
408 art 5 s 2,3; 1.997 c 239 art 5 s 1-3; 1.598 c 367 art 3 s 1-3;
art 6 s 15; 1999 c 127 s 1; 1999 c 139 art 4 s 2; 1999 c 233 s
1-3; 2000 c 260 s 28; 2000 c 311 art 2 s 1-10; lSD2001 c 8 art 9
http://www.revisor.leg.state.nin.us/stats/243/166-litml 3/10/2006
Minnesota Statutes 2005, 243,166
s 1-4; 2002 c 222 s 1; 2003 c 116 s 2; ISp2003 c 2 art 8 s 4,5;
2005 c 136 art 3 s 8; art 5 s 1; lSp2005 c 4 art I s 2,3
Copyright 2005 by the Office of Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota.
Page 14 of 14
http://wwwxevisor.leg.state.mn.us/stats/243/166.html 3/10/2006
Minnesota Statutes 2005, 243 . 167
Minnesota Statutes 2005. Table of C hap ters
11 ---- 11-1-1-- —.-P-
Table of contents for ChaD—ter 243
243.167 Registration under the predatory offender
registration law for other offenses.
Subdivision 1. Definition., As used in this section,
"crime against the person" means a violation of any of the
following or a similar law of another state or of the United
States: section 609.165; 609,185; 609.19; 609.195; 609.20;
609.205; 609.221; 609.222; 609.223; 609.2231; 609-924,
subdivision 2 or 4; 609.2242, subdivision 2 or 4; 609.235;
609.245, subdivision 1; 609.25; 609.255; 609.3451, subdivision
2; 609.498, subdivision 1; 609.582, subdivision 1; or 617,23,
subdivision 2; or any felony-level violation of section 609.229;
609,377; 609, or 624 .713r
Subd., 2, When required. (a) In addition to the
requirements of section 243.166, a person also shall register
under section 243.166 if:
(1) the person is convicted of a crime against the person;
and
(2) the person was previously convicted of or adjudicated
delinquent for an offense listed in section 243.166 but was not
required to register for the offense because the registration
requirements of that section did not apply to the person at the
time the offense was committed or at the time the person was
released from imprisonment.
(b) A person who was previously required to register in any
state and who has completed the registration requirements of
that state shall again register under section 243.166 if the
person commits a crime against the person,
HIST: 2000 c 311 art 2 s 11; ISp2001 c 8 art 9 s 5; 2005 c 136
art 3 s 9
Copyright 2005 by the Office of Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota.
Page I of I
http://www.i�evisoi, le ,state.mn.us/stats/243/167.htmI 3/10/2006
Agenda Item KA
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Manager
FROM: Shann Finwall, AICP, Planner
SUBJECT: Nonconforming Use Ordinance Amendment (Second Reading)
DATE: March 20, 2006
INTRODUCTION
On May 29, 2004, Governor Tim Pawlenty approved amendments to the state's nonconforming
statute. The amendment authorizes further restriction toward repairing and replacing
nonconforming uses. The amended statute takes precedence over the city's current
nonconforming ordinance. To be consistent with the standards in the state statute, staff is
proposing an amendment to the city's nonconforming use ordinance.
DISCUSSION
The city's zoning code, Article I, Section 44 -12 (c) states that a "nonconforming use that is
wholly or partially destroyed by fire, explosion, flood or other phenomenon or legally condemned
may be reconstructed and used for the same nonconforming use provided that building
reconstruction shall be commenced within one year from the date the building was destroyed or
condemned and shall be carried on without interruption." (Refer to Attachment 1.) However,
Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.357, subdivision 1(e) states that any nonconforming use may
continue after destruction unless more than 50% of the market value was destroyed and no
building permit has been applied for within 180 days from the date of the destruction. (Refer to
Attachment 2.)
Changing the city's nonconforming use ordinance to disallow a nonconforming use if 50% of the
market value has been lost and to mandate owners of nonconforming uses to apply for a
building permit within 180 days will be consistent with state statute.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
On February 6, 2006, the planning commission recommended approval of the proposed
nonconforming use code amendment.
CITY COUNCIL ACTION — FIRST READING
On February 27, 2006, the city council approved the first reading of the proposed
nonconforming use ordinance amendment. The city council directed staff to review changes to
the ordinance including: 1) defining market value; and 2) adding courtesy language to notify
property owners of their rights.
CITY ATTORNEY REVIEW
City staff requested that the city attorney's office review the city council's above- mentioned
requests as well as all portions of the city's ordinances which pertain to nonconforming uses to
ensure our ordinances meets state statute. Trevor Oliver of Kelly & Fawcett, P.A., submitted
the attached legal opinion on this matter (Attachment 3).
Market Value
Mr. Oliver recommends that the city define market value by using the taxable market value as
determined by the Ramsey County Assessor. He states that the assessor is the only source
that assigns value to properties and structures regardless of whether they are up for sale or not.
Ramsey County's definition of market value is the value the assessor estimates a property (land
and building) would likely sell for under competitive open- market conditions. Mr. Oliver states
that the city should avoid a system which tries to assign a market value to the property after
damage occurs. With this legal opinion city staff recommends the following definition of market
value: The taxable market value as determined by the Ramsey County Assessor's office.
Courtesy Language
The city council requested that language be included in the ordinance which states that the city
should submit written documentation to a nonconforming property owner once their property has
been destroyed of the requirement to apply for a building permit within 180 days, or they will
lose their nonconforming status. Mr. Oliver does not recommend adding language which states
that the city "should" do something. This practice will lead to disputes with citizens, as the
language does not require the city to do anything, but makes citizens expect that something will
be done. With this legal opinion city staff recommends no additional language be added
regarding notice.
Review of Existing Nonconforming Use Ordinances
There are three areas in the city's ordinances which pertain to nonconforming uses including the
zoning code, adult uses, and floodplain. After the first reading of the nonconforming use
ordinance amendment, city staff requested that the city attorney's office compare our
nonconforming use ordinances to state statutes to ensure we are in compliance. Mr. Oliver has
the following recommendations for these areas of the ordinance.
Zoning Code (Sections 44 -3, 44 -6, and 44 -12):
In the first reading of the ordinance amendment (Section 44- 12(c)), city staff recommended
revising the existing nonconforming use language slightly to reflect the state statute
requirements. Mr. Oliver states that the new language proposed actually conflicts with the state
statute because it would discontinue all damaged nonconforming uses if no application for
permit is made within 180 days. The statute only discontinues uses if damage exceeds 50
percent of market value. Mr. Oliver recommends changing the language to ensure it is written
exactly as found in the state statute as follows (changes to the original language are underlined
if added and cross -out if deleted):
If a A nonconforming building, structure or use is destroyed by fire or other peril to the extent of
greater main be nnnfir UGGI iRG161 ling thF96igh repair , FeplaGeMeRt restoration , maiRteRaRGe 0 nr
than fifty (50) percent of its market value and no
is destroyed and provided that ° building permit has been applied for within one- hundred and
eighty (180) days from the date the building, structure or use was damaged subsequent use of
such building or land shall be in conformity with this chapter. The I ity may
impose reasonable conditions upon a building permit sought in order to maintain a damaged
nonconforming building, structure, or use in order to mitigate any newly created impact upon G44
ag adjacent property.
2
Mr. Oliver states that all other portions of the nonconforming use ordinances found in the zoning
code comply with state statute.
Adult Uses (Section 14 -122):
Mr. Oliver states that all portions of the adult use ordinance pertaining to nonconforming uses
comply with state statute.
Floodplain (44 -1206 and 44 -1248)
Mr. Oliver states that this section of the ordinance requires more study. The Legislature
amended the nonconforming use statute in 2005 to include mandates that cities "regulate the
repair, replacement, maintenance, improvement, or expansion of nonconforming uses and
structures in floodplain areas to the extent necessary to maintain eligibility in the National Flood
Insurance Program and not increase flood damage potential or increase the degree of
obstruction to flood flows in the floodway." After further review by city staff and the city
attorney's office, this portion of the ordinance may be brought before the city council in the
future for an amendment. At this time, no changes are being recommended.
U:* f ` 9
Approve the proposed ordinance amendment attached. This code amendment changes the
zoning definitions and nonconforming use ordinance (Section 44 -6 and 44 -12) to make them
consistent with Minnesota Statute, Section 462.357, subdivision 1(e).
P:ordlnon conform ing uselnonconforming use amendment (second reading)
Attachments:
1. Maplewood's Nonconforming Use Ordinance
2. Minnesota Statutes, section 462.357
3. City Attorney's Memorandum Dated 3116146
4. Proposed Ordinance Amendment
3
JOBNAME: No Job Name PAGE: 624 SESS: 2 OUTPUT: Tue Apr 8 12:31:10 2003
/first/pubdocs/mcc/3/11217—full Attachment 1
§ 44-11 MAPLEWOOD CODE
(3) Whenever an OL district is established, any subsequent application to change the
district with which the OL district is combined shall not be construed to be an
application to eliminate the OL district for the area covered by the application, unless
such intent is expressly stated in the application.
(4) Establishment of and any subsequent modification of the boundaries of any OL district
shall be by ordinance amending the zoning map of the city. Such amendment shall
comply with the requirements of article VII of this chapter.
(e) District regulations. In any OL district parcel criteria, property development and use
regulations may be established in accordance with the objectives identified in the district's
individual purpose and intent. Such regulations shall be structured to implement the purpose
and intent of the individual district and shall be applied uniformly to all properties within the
district.
(Code 1982, §§ 36-14-36-16)
See. 44-12. Nonconforming buildings or uses.
(a) Any lawful use of a building or land existing at the effective date of any section of this
chapter may be continued although such use does not conform to such section of this chapter.
(b) The substitution of one nonconforming use for another nonconforming use may be
permitted by the city council by conditional use permit, as provided in article V of this chapter,
provided that such nonconforming use is determined by the city council to be of the same or
more restrictive nature as the original nonconforming use. Whenever a nonconforming use of
a building or land has been changed to a use of a more restrictive classification or to a
conforming use, such use shall not thereafter be changed to a use of a less restricted
classification.
(c) A nonconforming building wholly or partially destroyed by fire, explosion, flood or other
phenomenon or legally condemned may be reconstructed and used for the same nonconforming
use, provided that building reconstruction shall be commenced within one year from the date
the building was destroyed or condemned and shall be carried on without interruption.
(d) If a nonconforming use of a building or land is voluntarily abandoned and ceases for a
continuous period of one year or more, subsequent use of such building or land shall be in
conformity with this chapter.
(e) No existing building or premises devoted to a use not permitted in the district in which
such building or premises is located shall be enlarged, reconstructed or structurally altered,
unless:
(1) Required by law or government order; or
(2) There would not be a significant effect, as determined by the city through a conditional
use permit, on the development of the parcel as zoned.
CD44:22
Minnesota Statutes 2005, 462.357 Page I of 6
Page
2
Minnesota Statutes 2005. Table of Chapters
Table of contents for Chapter 462
462.357 Official controls: zoning ordinance.
Subdivision 1. Authority for zoning. For the purpose
of promoting the public health, safety, morals, and general
welfare, a municipality may by ordinance regulate on the earth's
surface, in the air space above the surface, and in subsurface
areas, the location, height, width, bulk, type of foundation,
number of stories, size of buildings and other structures, the
percentage of lot which may be occupied, the size of yards and
other open spaces, the density and distribution of population,
the uses of buildings and structures for trade, industry,
residence, recreation, public activities, or other purposes, and
the uses of land for trade, industry, residence, recreation,
agriculture, forestry, soil conservation, water supply
conservation, conservation of shorelands, as defined in sections
103F.201 to 103F.221, access to direct sunlight for solar energy
systems as defined in section 2160.06, flood control or other
purposes, and may establish standards and procedures regulating
such uses. To accomplish these purposes, official controls may
include provision for purchase of development rights by the
governing body in the - form of conservation easements under
chapter 84C in areas where the governing body considers
preservation desirable and the transfer of development rights
from those areas to areas the governing body considers more
appropriate for development. No regulation may prohibit earth
sheltered construction as defined in section 216C.06,
subdivision 14, relocated residential buildings, or manufactured
homes built in conformance with sections 327.31 to 327.35 that
comply with all other zoning ordinances promulgated pursuant to
this section. The regulations may divide the surface, above
surface, and subsurface areas of the municipality into districts
or zones of suitable numbers, shape, and area. The regulations
shall be uniform for each class or kind of buildings,
structures, or land and for each class or kind of use throughout
such district, but the regulations in one district may differ
from those in other districts. The ordinance embodying these
regulations shall be known as the zoning ordinance and shall
consist of text and maps. A city may by ordinance extend the
application of its zoning regulations to unincorporated
territory located within two miles of its limits in any
direction, but not in a county or town which has adopted zoning
regulations; provided that where two or more noncontiguous
municipalities have boundaries less than four miles apart, each
is authorized to control the zoning of land on its side of a
line equidistant between the two noncontiguous municipalities
unless a town or county in the affected area has adopted zoning
regulations. any city may thereafter enforce such regulations
in the area to the same extent as if such property were situated
within its corporate limits, until the county or town board
adopts a comprehensive zoning regulation which includes the area.
Subd. !a. Certain zoning ordinances. A municipality
must not enact, amend, or enforce a zoning ordinance that has
the effect of altering the existing density, lot-size
http://ww 1/17/2006
Minnesota Statutes 2005, 462.357
requirements, or manufactured home setback requirements in any
manufactured home mark constructed before January 1, 1995, if
the manufactured home park, when constructed, complied with the
then existing density, lot-size and setback requirements.
Subd. lb. Conditional uses. A manufactured home
park, as defined in section 327.14 ., subdivision 3, is a
conditional use in a zoning district that allows the
construction or placement of a building used or intended to be
used by two or more families.
Subd. 1c. Amortization prohibited. Except as
otherwise provided in this subdivision, a municipality must not
enact, amend, or enforce an ordinance providing for the
elimination or termination of a use by amortization which use
was lawful at the time of its inception. This subdivision does
not apply to adults-only bookstores, adults-only theaters, or
similar adults-only businesses, as defined by ordinance.
Subd. ld. Nuisance. Subdivision lc does not prohibit
a municipality from enforcing an ordinance providing for the
prevention or abatement of nuisances, as defined in section
561,01, or eliminating a use determined to be a public nuisance,
as defined in section 617.81, subdivision 2, paragraph (a),
clauses (1) to (9), without payment of compensation.
Subd. le. Nonconformities. (a) Any nonconformity,
including the lawful use or occupation of land or premises
existing at the time of the adoption of an additional control
under this chapter, may be continued, including through repair,
replacement, restoration, maintenance, or improvement, but not
including expansion, unless:
(1) the nonconformity or occupancy is discontinued for a
period of more than one year; or
(2) any nonconforming use is destroyed by fire or other
peril to the extent of greater than 50 percent of its market
value, and no building permit has been applied for within 180
days of when the property is damaged. In this case, a
municipality may impose reasonable conditions upon a building
permit in order to mitigate any newly created impact on adjacent
property.
(b) Any subsequent use or occupancy of the land or premises
shall be a conforming use or occupancy. A municipality may, by
ordinance, permit an expansion or impose upon nonconformities
reasonable regulations to prevent and abate nuisances and to
protect the public health, welfare, or safety. This subdivision
does not prohibit a municipality from enforcing an ordinance
that applies to adults-only bookstores, adults-only theaters, or
similar adults-only businesses, as defined by ordinance.
(c) Notwithstanding paragraph (a), a municipality shall
regulate the repair, replacement, maintenance, improvement, or
expansion of nonconforming uses and structures in floodplain
areas to the extent necessary to maintain eligibility in the
National Flood Insurance Program and not increase flood damage
potential or increase the degree of obstruction to flood -flows
in the floodway.
Page 2 of 6
http://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/stats/462/357.html 1/17/2006
Minnesota Statutes 2005, 462.357
Subd. lf. Substandard structures. Notwithstanding
subdivision le, Minnesota Rules, parts 6105.0351 to 6105.0550,
may allow for the continuation and improvement of substandard
structures, as defined in Minnesota Rules, part 6105.0354,
subpart 30, in the Lower Saint Croix National Scenic Riverway.
Subd. lg. Feedlot zoning controls. (a) A
municipality proposing to adopt a new feedlot zoning control or
to amend an existing feedlot zoning control must notify the
Pollution Control Agency and commissioner of agriculture at the
beginning of the process, no later than the date notice is given
of the first hearing proposing to adopt or amend a zoning
control purporting to address feedlots.
(b) Prior to final approval of a feedlot zoning control,
the governing body of a municipality may submit a copy of the
proposed zoning control to the Pollution Control Agency and to
the commissioner of agriculture and request review, comment, and
recommendations on the environmental and agricultural effects
from specific provisions in the ordinance.
(c) The agencies' response to the municipality may include;
and
(1) any recommendations for improvements in the ordinance;
(2) the legal, social, economic, or scientific
justification for each recommendation under clause (1).
(d) At the request of the municipality's governing body,
the municipality must prepare a report on the economic effects
from specific provisions in the ordinance. Economic analysis
must state whether the ordinance will affect the local economy
and describe the kinds of businesses affected and the projected
impact the proposal will have on those businesses. To assist
the municipality, the commissioner of agriculture, in
cooperation with the Department of Employment and Economic
Development, must develop a template for measuring local
economic effects and make it available to the municipality. The
report must be submitted to the commissioners of employment and
economic development and agriculture along with the proposed
ordinance.
(e) A local ordinance that contains a setback for new
feedlots from existing residences must also provide for a new
residence setback from existing -feedlots located in areas zoned
agricultural at the same distances and conditions specified in
the setback for new feedlots, unless the new residence is built
to replace an existing residence. A municipality may grant a
variance from this requirement under section 462.358,,
subdivision 6.
Subd. 2. General requirements. (a) At any time after
the adoption of a land use plan for the municipality, the
planning agency, for the purpose of carrying out the policies
and goals of the land use plan, may prepare a proposed zoning
ordinance and submit it to the governing body with its
recommendations for adoption.
Pa 3 of 6
http://w 1/17/2006
Minnesota Statutes 2005, 462.357
(b) Subject to the requirements of subdivisions 3, 4, and
5, the governing body may adopt and amend a zoning ordinance by
a majority vote of all its members. The adoption or amendment
of any portion of a zoning ordinance which changes all or part
of the existing classification of a zoning district from
residential to either commercial or industrial requires a
two-thirds majority vote of all members of the governing body.
(c) The land use plan must provide guidelines for the
timing and sequence of the adoption of official controls to
ensure planned, orderly, and staged development and
redevelopment consistent with the land use plan.
Subd. 3. Public hearings. No zoning ordinance or
amendment thereto shall he adopted until a public hearing has
been held thereon by the planning agency or by the governing
body. A notice of the time, place and purpose of the hearing
shall be published in the official newspaper of the municipality
at least ten days prior to the day of the hearing. When an
amendment involves changes in district boundaries affecting an
area of five acres or less, a similar notice shall be mailed at
least ten days before the day of the hearing to each owner of
affected property and property situated wholly or partly within
350 feet of the property to which the amendment relates. For
the purpose of giving mailed notice, the person responsible for
mailing the notice may use any appropriate records to determine
the names and addresses of owners. A copy of the notice and a
list of the owners and addresses to which the notice was sent
shall be attested to by the responsible person and shall be made
a part of the records of the proceedings. The failure to give
mailed notice to individual property owners, or defects in the
notice shall not invalidate the proceedings, provided a bona
fide attempt to comply with this subdivision has been made.
Subd. 4. Amendments. An amendment to a zoning
ordinance may be initiated by the governing body, the planning
agency, or by petition of affected property owners as defined in
the zoning ordinance. An amendment not initiated by the
planning agency shall be referred to the planning agency, if
there is one, for study and report and may not be acted upon by
the governing body until it has received the recommendation of
the planning agency on the proposed amendment or until 60 days
have elapsed from the date of reference of the amendment without
a report by the planning agency.
Subd. 5. Amendment; certain cities of the first class.
The provisions of this subdivision apply to the adoption or
amendment of any portion of a zoning ordinance which changes all
or part of the existing classification of a zoning district from
residential to either commercial or industrial of a property
located in a city of the first class, except a city of the first
class in which a different process is provided through the
operation of the city's home rule charter. In a city to which
this subdivision applies, amendments to a zoning ordinance shall
be made in conformance with this section but only after there
shall have been filed in the office of the city clerk a written
consent of the owners of two-thirds of the several descriptions
of real estate situate with 100 feet of the total contiguous
descriptions of real estate held by the same owner or any party
purchasing any such contiguous property within one year
Page 4 of 6
http:// 1/17/2006
Minnesota Statutes 2005.462 357
preceding the request, and after the affirmative vote in favor
thereof by a majority of the members of the governing body of
any such city. The governing body of such city may, by a
two-thirds vote of its members, after hearing, adopt a new
zoning ordinance without such written consent whenever the
planning commission or planning board of such city shall have
made a survey of the whole area of the city or of an area of not
less than 40 acres, within which the new ordinance or the
amendments or alterations of the existing ordinance would take
effect when adopted, and shall have considered whether the
number of descriptions of real estate affected by such changes
and alterations renders the obtaining of such written consent
impractical, and such planning commission or planning board
shall report in writing as to whether in its opinion the
proposals of the governing body in any case are reasonably
related to the overall needs of the community, to existing land
use, or to a plan for future land use, and shall have conducted
a public hearing on such proposed ordinance, changes or
alterations, of which hearing published notice shall have been
given in a daily newspaper of general circulation at least once
each week for three successive weeks prior to such hearing,
which notice shall state the time, place and purpose of such
hearing, and shall have reported to the governing body of the
city its findings and recommendations in writing.
Subd. 6. Appeals and adjustments. Appeals to the
board of appeals and adjustments may be taken by any affected
person upon compliance with any reasonable conditions imposed by
the zoning ordinance. The board of appeals and adjustments has
the following powers with respect to the zoning ordinance:
(1) To hear and decide appeals where it is alleged that
there is an error in any order, requirement, decision, or
determination made by an administrative officer in the
enforcement of the zoning ordinance.
(2) To hear requests for variances from the literal
provisions of the ordinance in instances where their strict
enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances
unique to the individual property under consideration, and to
grant such variances only when it is demonstrated that such
actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the
ordinance. "Undue hardship" as used in connection with the
granting of a variance means the property in question cannot be
put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the
official controls, the plight of the landowner is due to
circumstances unique to the property not created by the
landowner, and the variance, if granted, will not alter the
essential character of the locality. Economic considerations
alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use
for the property exists under the terms of the ordinance. Undue
hardship also includes, but is not limited to, inadequate access
to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be
granted for earth sheltered construction as defined in section
2_D C.06, subdivision 14, when in harmony with the ordinance.
The board of appeals and adjustments or the governing body as
the case may be, may not permit as a variance any use that is
not permitted under the ordinance for property in the zone where
the affected person's land is located. The board or governing
body as the case may be, may permit as a variance the temporary
Page 5 of 6
http://www.revisor.le 1/17/2006
Minnesota Statutes 2005, 462. )57
use of a one family dwelling as a two family dwelling. The
board or governing body as the case may be may impose conditions
in the granting of variances to insure compliance and to protect
adjacent properties.
Subd. 6a. Normal residential surroundings for
handicapped. It is the policy of this state that handicapped
persons and children should not be excluded by municipal zoning
ordinances or other land use regulations from the benefits of
normal residential surroundings. For purposes of subdivisions
6a through 9, "person" has the meaning given in section 245A.02,
subdivision 11.
Subd. 7. Permitted single family - use. A state
licensed residential facility or a housing with services
establishment registered under chapter 144D serving six or fewer
persons, a licensed day care facility serving 12 or fewer
persons, and a group family day care facility licensed under
Minnesota Rules, parts 9502.0315 to 9502.0445 to serve 14 or
fewer children shall be considered a permitted single family
residential use of property for the purposes of zoning, except
that a residential facility whose primary purpose is to treat
juveniles who have violated criminal statutes relating to sex
offenses or have been adjudicated delinquent on the basis of
conduct in violation of criminal statutes relating to sex
offenses shall not be considered a permitted use.
Subd. B. Permitted multifamily use. Except as
otherwise provided in subdivision 7 or in any town, municipal or
county zoning regulation as authorized by this subdivision, a
state licensed residential facility serving from 7 through 16
persons or a licensed day care facility serving from 13 through
16 persons shall be considered a permitted multifamily
residential use of property for purposes of zoning. A township,
municipal or county zoning authority may require a conditional
use or special use permit in order to assure proper maintenance
and operation of a facility, provided that no conditions shall
be imposed on the facility which are more restrictive than those
imposed on other conditional uses or special uses of residential
property in the same zones, unless the additional conditions are
necessary to protect the health and safety of the residents of
the residential -facility. Nothing herein shall be construed to
exclude or prohibit residential or day care facilities from
single family zones if otherwise permitted by a local zoning
regulation.
HIST: 1965 c 670 s 7; 1969 c 259 s 1; 1973 c 123 art 5 s 7;
1973 c 379 s 4; 1973 c 539 s 1; 1973 c 559 s 1,2; 1975 c 60 s 2;
1978 c 786 s 14,15; Ex1979 c 2 s 42,43; 1981 c 356 s 248; 1.982 c
490 s 2; 1982 c 507 s 22; 1984 c 617 s 6-6; 1985 c 62 s 3; 1.985
c 194 s 23; 1986 c 444; 1.987 c 333 s 22; 1989 c 82 s 2; 1990 c
391 art 8 s 47; 1990 c 566 art 2 s 66,67; 1994 c 473 a 3; 1995 c
224 s 95; 1997 c 113 s 20; 1997 c 200 art 4 s 5; 1997 c 202 art
4 s 11; 1997 c 216 s 138; 1999 c 96 s 3,4; 1999 c 211 s 1; 2001
c 174 s 1; 2001 c 207 s 13,14; 2002 c 366 s 6; 2004 c 258 s 2;
lSp2005 c 1 art I s 92; art 2 s 146
Copyright 2005 by the Office of Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota.
Page 6 of 6
1
http://www.revisor.lety. state. rn n.us/stats/462/ )57.html 1/17/2006
0
Attachment 3
DATE: 312212006
TO: Shann Finwall
Cc: Pat Kelly
FROM: Trevor Oliver
RE: Amendments to Zoning Code
After the February 27 Council meeting, you faxed us several questions to answer prior to
the second reading of a proposed amendment to the City Zoning Code. You asked for:
1) A suggested definition of "market value";
2) An opinion on adding "courtesy" language as requested by the Council; and
3) A review of all sections on the Code referring to non - conformities in light of
changes to Minn. Stat. § 462.357 (1)(e).
1. Market value We recommend using the taxable market value as determined by the
Ramsey County Assessor. "Market value" in itself means "the price property would
command in the open market." (Black's Law Dictionary, 6` Ed.) This is not a good
definition to use in the City Code, however, and reference to an outside source is the best
way to avoid long disputes over the value of a property. The Assessor is the only source
that I am aware of that assigns value to properties and structures regardless of whether
they are up for sale or not. Other outside sources may be considered if they have
similarly comprehensive coverage. What the City should avoid at all costs is a system
which tries to assign a market value to the property after damage occurs.
2. "Courtesy" lan"age We do not recommend adding any language to our ordinances
which state that the City "should" do something. This practice will only lead to disputes
with citizens, as the language does not require the City to do anything, but makes citizens
expect that something will be done.
In addition, this specific proposal would make it seem that the 180 day period would not
start until the City sent out its notice, when this is clearly not the case. If the City does
not send a notice, there is no code violation, and the 180 days still begins on the date of
the damage. I can't imagine that anyone would like explaining that to a property owner
who can point to a City Code section, or even a City policy, which says that the City
"should" send a notice.
Legally, the language can go in, as nothing in state statute prohibits it. As a practical
matter, however, City Code provisions deal with rights and obligations, not courtesies. If
the Council does not want to obligate the City to send notice, then it should make no
mention of notice, because anything in the Code, however worded, is going to be seen as
an obligation.
P: \ORD \Nonconforming Use\Attorney Opinion.doc
3/22/2006 10:09 AM
Page I of 3
3. Review of existing non - conforming use codes
44 -3: This section defines how the Code applies to any non - conforming uses at the time
the Code is adopted. It complies with current law, and is necessary in the event of a
complete overhaul of the Zoning Code or comprehensive plan.
44 -6: The definition conforms with State law.
44 -12: This section is primarily affected by § 462.357. Our thoughts:
(b) — You raised a question about whether this part of the ordinance conflicts with
462.357. 1 can see your concern, in that the statute clearly says that "any subsequent
use or occupancy ... shall be a conforming use or occupancy." However, this
provision really just states the reality that the Council may grant a conditional use
permit for any property, whether a nonconforming use previously existed or not.
Also consider that, by definition, any "substituted" use is not a true nonconforming
use, as it did not exist at the time the Zoning Code was adopted. Uses under
conditional use permits are conforming uses, as they are exempted from the definition
of "nonconforming use" in 44 -6. It appears that the real utility of 44 -12(b) is to
prevent the previous nonconforming use from being used as an excuse to allow
broader development beyond a CUP.
(c) — After a fourth look at the proposed amendment, I have finally figured out what
bothered me about it. As it's currently written, it conflicts with the State statute; the
proposed amendment would discontinue all damaged nonconforming uses if no
application for permit is made within 180 days. M.S. 462.357 only discontinues uses
if damage exceeds 50% of market value. The confusion stems from creating one
sentence out of two separate pieces of the enabling statute. I would propose taking
the same language of the proposed amendment, and presenting it this way:
Revise 44 -12 (a): Any lawful use ... may be continued including through repair,
replacement, restoration, maintenance, or improvement, but not including
expansion, although such use does not conform to such section of this chapter.
Delete existing 44- 12(c), replace with new section: If a nonconforming building,
structure or use is destroyed by fire or other peril to the extent of greater than fifty
(50) percent of its market value and no building permit has been applied for
within one hundred and eighty (180) days from the date the building, structure, or
use was damaged, subsequent use of such building or land shall be in conformity
with this chapter. The City Day iMpose reasonable conditions upon a building
permit sought in order to maintain a damaged nonconforming building, structure,
or use in order to mitigate any newly created impact upon adjacent property
P: \ORD \Nonconforming Use\Attorney Opinion.doc
3/22/2006 10:09 AM
Page 2 of 3
I changed the new (c) slightly to make it read more like 44 -12 (d), the other part of
the section which discontinues nonconforming uses. Otherwise, presenting the new
language in this fashion is identical to the way it appears in the statute, and clears up
the conflict noted above.
The rest of 44 -12 conforms to current statute.
14 -122: This section conforms to state statute.
44 -1206: This section of the ordinance requires more study. The Legislature amended
462.357 in the 2005 special session to include a mandate that cities:
"regulate the repair, replacement, maintenance, improvement, or expansion of
nonconforming uses and structures in floodplain areas to the extent necessary to
maintain eligibility in the National Flood Insurance Program and not increase
flood damage potential or increase the degree of obstruction to flood flows in the
floodway." Laws sp. 2005, Ch 1, Art 2, Sec. 146.
I am not familiar enough with the NFIP eligibility standards or any other part of the
mandate to give an opinion right now of whether our current ordinance complies with
state statute. I am interested in your analysis of this new section. I'm guessing that an
amendment is going to be necessary to require more permits and City review of activities
on floodplain buildings, but I will have to look at this question in more depth before
offering a final opinion.
44 -1248: This part of the shoreland zoning controls is not affected by changes to
§ 462.357, but is in compliance with § 103F.221 and Minn. R. 6120.3300 subp. 3(J),
which govern nonconforming decks on shoreland.
P: \ORD \Nonconforming Use\Attorney Opinion.doc
3/22/2006 10:09 AM
Page 3 of 3
Attachment 4
�O ' 4 •
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE NONCONFORMING BUILDINGS OR USES SECTION
The Maplewood City Council approves the following changes to the Maplewood Code of
Ordinances:
Section 1. This amendment revises Section 44 -6 (Zoning Code Definitions) (additions are
underlined and deletions are stricken):
Market Value is the taxable market value as determined by the Ramsey County Assessor's
office.
Section 2. This amendment revises Section 44 -12(c) (Nonconforming Buildings or Uses)
(additions are underlined and deletions are stricken):
fl nnnnnnfnrminn building wholly or partially destroyed his fire flood or other
o r
0
from the date the huilrlinn inias rJestrnire rJ OF nnnrlam nerl Q nd shall b A narrier7 Q A Withnit
intern iptinn
lT'1'C'G'ITGf'�Tfv1T
If a nonconforming building, structure or use is destroyed by fire or other peril to the extent
of greater than fifty (50) percent of its market value and no building permit has been applied for
within one hundred and eighty (180) days from the date the building, structure, or use was
damaged, subsequent use of such building or land shall be in conformity with this chapter. The
city may impose reasonable conditions upon a building permit sought in order to maintain a
damaged nonconforming building, structure, or use in order to mitigate any newly created
impact upon adiacent Drooertv.
Section 3. This ordinance shall take effect after the city publishes it in the official newspaper
The City Council approved this ordinance on March 27, 2006.
Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Agenda Item L1
SUMMARY MEMORANDUM
TO:
City Manager
FROM:
Ken Roberts, Planner
SUBJECT:
CUP Revision, Parking Reduction Authorization and Design
Approval
PROJECT:
Menards
LOCATION:
2280 Maplewood Drive
DATE:
March 3, 2006
INTRODUCTION
Project Description
Robert Geske, of Menards, Inc., is proposing to build a 16,105- square -foot garden center
addition on the south side of the Menards store. Refer to the applicant's narrative statement
and the maps in the project review memo. The proposed plans also show changes to the
existing parking lot and changes to the exterior of the building.
In addition, they are proposing to update the front of the store. This would include changing the
existing mansard and signage over the main entrance and adding four fieldstone and timber
columns to support the new canopy. Finally, Menards wants to change the signage on the
building.
Requests
Mr. Geske is requesting city approval of:
1. A conditional use permit (CUP) revision to enlarge the building and amend the site plan.
The city code requires council approval of a CUP revision for an owner to expand or revise a
store or site for which a CUP exists.
2. A parking - reduction authorization for 50 spaces. The code requires 451 spaces for the
store. Menards is proposing to have 401 parking stalls.
3. The site and building design plans.
DISCUSSION
City staff is supportive of the changes proposed for Menards. As with almost all projects, there
are details for staff to work out with the applicant (such as approval of the final building plans)
before construction starts on the garden center. These, however, do not present any serious
concerns for staff.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff is recommending approval of the conditional use permit revision, the parking reduction
authorization and the project design plans for the proposed garden center for Menards.
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Manager
FROM: Ken Roberts, Planner
SUBJECT: CUP Revision, Parking Reduction Authorization and Design Approval
PROJECT: Menards
LOCATION: 2280 Maplewood Drive
DATE: March 20, 2006
INTRODUCTION
Project Description
Menards, Inc., is proposing to build a 16,105- square -foot garden center addition on the south side of
the existing Menards store at 2280 Maplewood Drive. Refer to the applicant's narrative on pages 9
and 10, the maps and plans on pages 11 -16 and the separate project plans. They are proposing an
exterior of glass panels, emerald green accent panels and a wrought iron fence for the garden
center.
The proposed plans also show changes to the existing parking lot and changes to the exterior of the
building. Specifically, Menards would eliminate 17 parking spaces and reconfigure the parking lot so
that all of the spaces would be at 90- degrees to the drive aisles. Refer to the site plan.
In addition, they are proposing to update the front of the store. This would include changing the
existing mansard and signage over the main entrance and adding four fieldstone and timber
columns to support the new canopy. Finally, Menards wants to change the signage on the building.
Requests
Mr. Geske is requesting city approval of:
1. A conditional use permit (CUP) revision to enlarge the building and amend the site plan. Refer
to the project narrative on pages 9 and 10. The city code requires council approval of a CUP
revision for an owner to expand or revise a store or site for which a CUP exists.
2. A parking - reduction authorization for 50 spaces. The code requires 451 spaces for the store.
Menards is proposing to have 401 parking stalls. Refer to the narrative on page 9.
3. The site and building design plans. (See the maps and plans on pages 11 -16 and the enclosed
project plans.)
BACKGROUND
October 25, 1999: The city council approved a CUP revision for a building expansion, site plan
changes and the project architectural, site and landscape plans. Refer to the council minutes in the
attachment on pages 19 - 23.
November 27, 2000: The council reviewed the CUP and moved to review it again in one year.
April 9, 2001: The council approved revised plans for the exterior of the new addition and required
additional landscaping on the Highway 36 side of the building. This approval was subject to five
conditions of approval. (Refer to the council minutes on pages 24 and 25.)
November 26, 2001:
The council reviewed this CUP and moved to review it again in one year.
December 9, 2002:
The council reviewed this CUP and agreed to review it again in one year.
January 7, 2004:
The council reviewed this CUP and agreed to review it again in one year.
January 30, 2004: The city approved plans for expansion of the exterior storage area and
relocation of the fire gate on the east side (rear) of the building.
DISCUSSION
CUP Revision
The proposed site revision with the addition of the garden center will meet the requirements for a
CUP and should improve the store and the overall site. It should not have any impact on the
adjacent residential neighborhood.
Parking
The applicant is requesting that the city approve a reduction of 50 (from 451 to 401) in the number of
parking spaces for the store. They want to reconfigure the parking lot in front of the store to make
the traffic flow smoother, but this redesign would result in the loss of parking spaces. Menards has
gotten by, essentially, with the main parking area in front of the building since 1988 (when the city
had approved a parking reduction authorization). The proposed garden center addition would need
80 spaces according to the code (if the city treated it as regular retail space). Menards, however, is
now using the location of the proposed garden center for retail sales and outdoor storage as
approved earlier by the city. As such, it should not generate additional parking needs for the store.
Site Drainage / Shoreland Requirements
The site is within the shoreland boundary of Keller Lake. Presently the site has 95 percent
impervious - surface coverage. The shoreland code requires a maximum coverage of 40 percent.
This project will not change the amount of impervious surface on the site as the addition for the
garden center would be constructed over a part of the existing paved storage area.
Building Design Changes and Concerns
For the garden center, they are proposing an exterior of glass panels, emerald green accent panels
and a wrought iron fence near the entrance and the parking lot. This center and its design should
be a nice addition to the store.
In addition, as part of this project, Menards is proposing to update the front of the store. This would
include changing the existing mansard and signage over the main entrance and adding four
fieldstone and timber columns to support the new canopy. Menards also wants to change the
signage on the building.
Staff is concerned about the proposed appearance of the north building elevation. In 2001, the city
council required Menards to include the green stripe on the north elevation when they approved the
store project plans. Menards is proposing to keep the green stripe on the building. As an alternative,
they could add more landscaping to the north elevation to help enhance the elevation.
2
In response to comments the CDRB made at their March 1, 2006 meeting, Menards revised the
project plans for the garden center. 1 have included their latest plans (date - stamped March 8, 2006)
and a letter from Robert Geske of Menards explaining the changes they made to the plans.
Fire Marshal's Concerns
Menards must keep the perimeter of the building accessible for fire emergencies. The applicant
should arrange with the fire marshal for access through the gate behind the building in the case of
emergencies. In addition, Menards needs to have a monitored fire protection system and shall
provide a floor plan of their store and a fire department lock box at the main entrance.
Police Department Comments
Lt. Michael Shortreed of the Maplewood Police Department reviewed this proposal and offered
several comments. I have included his memo and comments in Attachment 9.
City Engineer's Comment
Menards should provide a gate and clear access to the sanitary sewer manhole on the site as part of
this request.
Commission Actions
On February 6, 2006, the planning commission recommended approval of the of the proposed CUP
revision for Menards.
On March 1, 2006, the community design review board (CDRB) recommended approval of the
project design plans, subject to several conditions of approval.
RECOMMENDATIONS
A. Adopt the resolution on pages 26 - 28. This resolution approves a conditional use permit revision
for Menards at 2280 Maplewood Drive to add a 16,105- square -foot garden center to the existing
store. The city bases this approval on the findings required by the code. Approval of this CUP
revision is subject to the following conditions (additions are underlined and deletions are crossed
out):
1. Adherence to the site plan date - stamped March 8, 2006 May 5, 1999. The director of
community development may approve minor changes.
2. Compliance with the following screening -fence requirements:
a. The property owner shall continue to have and keep, in a maintained condition, wooden
screening fences as follows:
(1) The eight- foot -tall screening fence west of 1071 County Road B and running east -
west behind 1071, 1081 and part of 1101 County Road B shall remain.
(2) All other screening fences that abut the residential lots shall be 14 feet tall.
(3) All screening fences shall be constructed of vertical boards of the same dimension,
color and material.
b. No material on the storage racks, adjacent to the fence behind 1101 and 1115 County
Road B, shall extend above the 14 -foot -tall fence.
c. No more than 2'/2 feet of the 17'/2 -foot -tall interior storage racks shall be visible from the
homes to the south that are at street level along County Road B. This excludes those
houses that sit higher on a hill.
d. Menards shall be responsible for the safety of the neighbors in regard to the materials
stored over the height of the fence.
3. Hours of operation in the storage yard and garden center shall be limited to 7 a.m. to 10 p.m.
4. An exterior public address system shall not be allowed.
5. All lighting in the storage yard that is not needed for site security shall be turned off after
business hours.
6. The city council shall review this permit revision in one year. if th proposed Fetail spag
Rddotipp h;;
7. Plowed snow shall be stored away from the southern and eastern property lines to avoid
runoff problems on residential property.
8. Menards shall store all their materials within the fenced storage area.
9. Sanitation facilities shall be provided by Menards for the employees.
10. 4-3-. The proposed building addition and site work must be substantially started within
one year of council approval or the permit shall become null and void. The council may
extend this deadline for one year.
11. The perimeter of the building must be kept accessible for fire emergencies. The
applicant shall arrange with the fire marshal for access through the gate behind the building
in the case of emergencies.
B. Approve a parking - reduction authorization for Menards at 2280 Maplewood Drive to have 50
spaces fewer than the code requires. (The city code requires 451 parking spaces and Menards
is proposing 401 parking spaces.) Approval is because:
The required number of spaces is excessive. Menards has gotten by, essentially, with the
main parking area in front of the building since 1988. Menards customers do not typically
use other available parking areas on the site.
2. The proposed garden center addition would need 80 spaces according to the code.
However, Menards is currently using this same area for retail sales and outdoor storage as
approved earlier by the city.
4
As a condition of approval of this request, Menards shall provide adequate directional signage in the
parking lot and have employees or others provide traffic control and direction assistance in the
parking lot on all busy shopping days.
C. Approve the site plan date - stamped March 8, 2006, and the building elevations date - stamped
March 8, 2006, for the 16,105- square -foot garden center addition to Menards at 2280
Maplewood Drive. Approval is subject to the following conditions:
1. Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit for this project.
2. Before getting a building permit, the applicant shall:
a. Submit grading, drainage, utility and erosion control plans to the city engineering
department for approval. The city engineering department should review the plans for
the possibility of Menards implementing some or additional types of best management
practices to help treat storm water on the site.
b. Revise the site plans for staff approval to provide enough handicap - accessible parking
spaces to comply with ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) requirements.
c. Submit for staff approval, consistent elevations and site plans that correlate to each
other, based on the plans date- stamped March 8, 2006. The plans date - stamped
January 17, 2006, and elevations date - stamped February 6, 2006, are inconsistent and
difficult to read.
d. Submit a revised wrought -iron fence elevation showing that the proposed decorative
lights have been removed from the fence.
e. Submit a landscaping plan showing the following:
(1) All existing landscaping on the north side of the building. This plan should reflect all
landscape materials that are healthy, in poor health, or dead. The purpose of this plan is
to ensure that all landscaping required previously by the city in this location has been
planted and is healthy and thriving.
(2) Work with staff to implement landscaping in front of or near the new garden center. If
landscaping in this area is not feasible, work with staff to implement additional
landscaping throughout the site.
f. Submit to city staff a cash escrow or an irrevocable letter of credit for all required exterior
improvements. The amount shall be 150 percent of the cost of the work.
3. The applicant shall complete the following before occupying the building addition:
a. Menards shall provide a gate and clear access to the sanitary sewer manhole on the site
as part of this request.
b. Paint any new rooftop mechanical equipment to match the building color if the units are
visible. (code requirement)
c. The city waives the trash- dumpster screening requirement unless the dumpsters would
be visible to the public. If Menards wants to keep their dumpsters outside, then they shall
5
provide an enclosure for them using the same materials and color as the building.
d. Provide site - security lighting as required by the code. The light source, including the lens
covering the bulb, shall be concealed so not to cause any nuisance to drivers or
neighbors.
e. Meet all the requirements of the fire marshal including:
(1) Keeping the perimeter of the building accessible for fire emergencies. The applicant
should arrange with the fire marshal for access through the gate behind the building
in the case of emergencies.
(2) Installing a monitored fire protection system.
(3) Providing a floor plan of the store and a fire department lock box at the main
entrance.
f. Verify that all existing required landscaping is healthy and growing, and replace the
landscaping if it is not healthy and growing. Plant all other landscaping required with this
approval.
4. If any required work is not done, the city may allow temporary occupancy if:
a. The city determines that the work is not essential to the public health, safety or welfare.
b. The above - required letter of credit or cash escrow is held by the city for all required
exterior improvements. The owner or contractor shall complete any unfinished
landscaping by June 1 of the next year if the building is occupied in the fall or winter, or
within six weeks of occupancy if the building is occupied in the spring or summer.
5. All work shall follow the approved plans. The director of community development may
approve minor changes.
6. Signs are not part of this approval. The applicant shall submit any requests for new or
revised signs to staff for sign permits.
CITIZEN COMMENTS
I surveyed the 50 surrounding property owners within 500 feet of Menards for their opinion of this
request. I received one reply. This neighbor commented about the somewhat difficult traffic flow at
the intersection of County Road B and the frontage road.
REFERENCE INFORMATION
SITE DESCRIPTION
Site size: 13.48 acres
Existing land use: Menards Store with outdoor sales and parking lot
0
North: Highway 36
South: Single dwellings and Citgo Motor Fuel Station
West: Highway 61
East: Countryside VW/SAAB
PAST ACTIONS
March 28, 1988: The city council approved Menards' CUP and granted a parking reduction
authorization.
January 23, February 13, March 27 and April 6, 1989: The council changed the CUP conditions
The changes were to clarify the screening fence and storage rack height requirements.
March 26, 1990: The council reviewed the CUP.
November 14, 1994, and September 11, 1995: The council amended the CUP conditions
April 8, 1996: The council amended the CUP conditions because of a request for a seasonal,
outdoor greenhouse and plant sale operation.
May 20, 1996: The council again reviewed the CUP and directed Menards, Citgo, staff and the
neighbors to meet and discuss several issues raised by one of the neighbors. These issues were
about the screening fence, engine noises, fumes, parking and cross traffic between Citgo and
Menards.
August 12, 1997: The council reviewed the CUP again. The previous concerns and problems have
been resolved. The council moved to review the CUP again only if a problem develops.
PLANNING
Land Use Plan designation: M -1 (light manufacturing)
Zoning: M -1
ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS
Section 44- 512(4) requires a CUP for the exterior storage of goods or materials.
Section 44- 637(b) requires a CUP for any building or exterior use within 350 feet of a residential
district.
Section 44 -17(a) requires parking for Menards at the ratios of one space for each 200 square feet of
retail or office space and one parking space for each 1000 square feet of warehouse space.
Criteria for Conditional Use Permit Approval
Section 44- 1097(a) states that the city council may approve a CUP, based on nine standards. (See
7
findings 1 -9 in the resolution on pages 26 and 27.)
Ordinance Requirements
Section 2- 290(b) of the city code requires that the community design review board make the
following findings to approve plans:
1. That the design and location of the proposed development and its relationship to neighboring,
existing or proposed developments and traffic is such that it will not impair the desirability of
investment or occupation in the neighborhood; that it will not unreasonably interfere with the use
and enjoyment of neighboring, existing or proposed developments; and that it will not create traffic
hazards or congestion.
2. That the design and location of the proposed development is in keeping with the character of the
surrounding neighborhood and is not detrimental to the harmonious, orderly and attractive
development contemplated by this article and the city's comprehensive municipal plan.
3. That the design and location of the proposed development would provide a desirable environment
for its occupants, as well as for its neighbors, and that it is aesthetically of good composition,
materials, textures and colors.
APPLICATION DATE
The city received the complete CUP and CDRB applications for this request on January 17, 2006.
Minnesota Statutes, Section 15.99 requires that the city take action within 60 days of receiving a
complete application for a land use proposal, unless the applicant agree to a time extension. In this
case, the city would have normally been required to act on these requests by March 16, 2006.
Menards, however, because of the severe snowstorm on March 13, 2006, requested the city table
action on their requests until March 27, 2006.
p:sec9 \menards 1999 to 2006
Attachments:
1. Applicant's Project Narrative
2. Location Map
3. Property Line / Zoning Map
4. Proposed Site Plan
5. Partial Site Plan
6. Partial Site Plan (Garden Center)
7. Proposed Building Elevations
8. January 25, 2006, memo from David Fisher
9. January 24, 2006, memo from Lt. Shortreed
10. October 25, 1999, City Council minutes
11. April 9, 2001, City Council minutes
12. CUP - Revision Resolution
13. Letter date - stamped March 8, 2006 from Robert Geske
14. Project Plans date- stamped March 8, 2006 (separate attachments)
0
UV - mt U, MEN I a I
pipm W-EVIDI
MUCH CUIRTM
Maplewood, NIN
t, The new Garden Center and store update will be located, designed, maintained,
constructed and operated in conformity with the City's comprehensive plan and Code of
Ordinances.
2. The new Garden Center and store update wilt not change the existing or planned
character of the surrounding area.
3. The new Garden Center and store update will not depreciate property values.
0
4 The new Garden Center and store update will not involve any activity, process,
materials, equipments or methods of operation that would be dangerous, hazardous, detrimental,
disturbing, or cause a nuisance to any person or property, because of excessive noise, glare,
smoke, dust, odor, fumes, water or air pollution, drainage water run-off, vibration, general
unsightliness, electrical interference or other nuisances,
5. The new Garden Center and store update will generate only minimal vehicular
traffic on local streets and would not create traffic congestion or unsafe access on existing, or
proposed streets.
6. The new Garden Center and store update will be served by the existing, adequate
public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures,
water and sewer systems, schools and parks.
T The new Garden Center and store update will not create excessive additional costs
for public facilities or services,
8, The new Garden Center and store update will continue to maximize the
preservation of and incorporate the site's natural and scenic features into the existing
development design.
9. The new Garden Center and store update should cause minimal (if any) adverse
environmental effects.
to] 04 IrIM 019 IDWWRIMMIKOM I KWM slim W Lou Iti MOMIM
I Conditional Use Revision approval from the Planning Commission and City
Council.
2. Conunturity Design Review Board approval,
I Approval for the reduction in required parking stalls to 401 parking stalls.
4. Any other approvals necessary to allow for the proposed addition and update.
im
Z\
N
cn
SEXTANT AVE P Q /
C <
GERVAIS AVE
DR
Attachment 2
COPE AVE
COUNTY ROAD B
JUNCTION AVE
GERVAIS AVE
Location Map
Memrds
2280 Maplewood Drive
Z\ Attachment 3
'Pul
........ .. ........ ... .. ........... ........ .. ........ ........ ...........
GERVAIS AVE xx.xx
........... ..... .. .. .. .....
14
228D
ri
L1
28
..... ......
w.
If
f f
E
.. .. .. ..................... .. ..........
2160
217()
Zoning Map
Memrds
2280 Maplewood Drive
, 1 la-
P �
0-1-
2j5
2242
L-j
.. .........................
F?y
F
. ... .. .. ... .. ... ... . .
L
J L
-�P ad
f
14
228D
ri
L1
28
..... ......
w.
If
f f
E
.. .. .. ..................... .. ..........
2160
217()
Zoning Map
Memrds
2280 Maplewood Drive
, 1 la-
P �
0-1-
2j5
2242
L-j
.. .........................
F?y
F
. ... .. .. ... .. ... ... . .
L
J L
-�P ad
Attachment 4
VAR NT fRQN F N Ti
SCALE; 1/4' - 1*-0'
13
I
Attachment 5
im
Attachment 6
15
• �
i
E
-- - ---- o
i
I
VVE PLANTS I
1L
— ®_I
120 -Q
4
LAWSCAPM 8L=5 so"
18
i
15
M1
W
To: Ken Roberts, Planner
From: David Fisher, Building Official
Re: Menards New Garden Center Addition — Proposed Revision
of the CUP & CDRB
Date: January 25, 2006
- Provide complete building code analysis to verify the existing structure can
be increased by 16,000 square feet and stay in compliance with the
construction type of the existing building and the building setbacks per
2000 International Building Code for allowable area and exterior wall
protection.
- The city will require a complete building code analysis when the
construction plans are submitted to the city for building permits.
- All exiting must go to a public way.
- Provide adequate Fire Department access to the buildings.
- The addition to building is required to be fire sprinklered.
I would recommend a pre - construction meeting with the contractor, the
project manager and the city building inspection department.
17
Attachment 9
After reviewing the attached proposal on the Menard's Garden Center Addition, I have
the following comments and suggestions:
1) Appropriate outdoor lighting should be provided during all times that the Garden Center
will be in operation.
im
Attachment 10
MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL
7:00 P.M., Monday, October 25, 1999
Council Chambers, Municipal Building
Meeting No. 99 -24
A. CALL TO ORDER:
A regular meeting of the City Council of Maplewood, Minnesota was held in the Council Chambers,
Municipal Building, and was called to order at 7:00 P.M. by Mayor Rossbach.
B. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
C. ROLL CALL:
George Rossbach, Mayor Present
Sherry Allenspach, Councilmember Present
Dale H. Carlson, Councilmember Present
Kevin Kittridge, Councilmember Present
Marvin C. Koppen, Councilmember Present
H. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1. 7:00 P.M. Menard's Conditional Use Permit Review (2280 Maplewood Drive)
a. Mayor Rossbach convened the meeting for a public hearing.
b. Manager McGuire introduced the staff report.
c. Community Development Director Coleman presented the specifics of the report.
d. Mayor Rossbach opened the public hearing, calling for proponents of opponents.
The following person(s) were heard:
Gary Colby, Menard's
Deb Forbes, 1071 County Road B
Peter Botick, 1115 County Road B
George Velento, 1081 County Road B
Gary Colby, 2nd appearance
e. Mayor Rossbach closed the public hearing.
Councilmember Carlson movedfintroduced the following Resolution approving a conditional use
permit revision for a 33,769- square -foot addition at 2280 Maplewood Drive and moved its adoption:
99 -10 -100
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, Menard's, Inc, is proposing changes to a conditional use permit to build a 33,769 -
square -foot addition on the north side of the building at 2280 Maplewood Drive. The legal
description is:
10 -�6 -99
SUB TO ESMTS; PART OF FOL TRACTS SELY OF HWYS 36 & 61; EX S 100 FT PART OF SW
1/4 N OF CO RD B & PART OF SE 1/4 W OF CLIFTON ADD S OF L 107 FT N OF S L OF BLK 15
OF SD ADD EXTENDED & N OF HEINEMANS BELLEVIEW & IN CLIFTON ADD, EX E 240 FT;
ELKS 15 & 16 & EX E 255 FT BLK 10 & ALSO W 120 FT OF E 255 FT OF N 30 FT OF BLK 10
WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit is as follows:
On June 21, 1999, the planning commission recommended that the city council
approve this permit.
2. On July 12, 1999, the city council held a public hearing. The city staff published a
notice in the paper and sent notices to the surrounding property owners. The council
gave everyone at the hearing a chance to speak and present written statements. The
council also considered reports and recommendations from the city staff and planning
commission.
3. On October 25, 1999, the city council held another public hearing regarding this
proposal because several neighbors were missed in the mailing of notifications for the
July 12, 1999 public hearing. The city staff published a notice in the paper and sent
notices to all of the surrounding property owners. The council gave everyone at the
hearing a chance to speak and present written statements. The council also
considered reports and recommendations from the city staff and planning commission.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council approve the above- described
conditional use permit, because:
The use would be located, designed, maintained, constructed and operated to be in
conformity with the city's comprehensive plan and code of ordinances.
2. The use would not change the existing or planned character of the surrounding area.
3. The use would not depreciate property values.
4. The use would not involve any activity, process, materials, equipment or methods of
operation that would be dangerous, hazardous, detrimental, disturbing or cause a
nuisance to any person or property, because of excessive noise, glare, smoke, dust,
odor, fumes, water or air pollution, drainage, water run -off, vibration, general
unsightliness, electrical interference or other nuisances.
5. The use would generate only minimal vehicular traffic on local streets and would not
create traffic congestion or unsafe access on existing or proposed streets.
6. The use would be served by adequate public facilities and services, including streets,
police and fire protection, drainage structures, water and sewer systems, schools and
parks.
7. The use would not create excessive additional costs for public facilities or services.
8. The use would maximize the preservation of and incorporate the site's natural and
scenic features into the development design.
10 -26 -99 2
9. The use would cause minimal adverse environmental effects.
Approval is subject to the following conditions:
Adherence to the site plan date - stamped May 5, 1999. The director of community
development may approve minor changes.
2. Compliance with the following screening -fence requirements:
a. The property owner shall continue to have and keep, in a maintained condition,
wooden screening - fences as follows:
(1) The eight -foot -tall screening fence west of 1071 County Road B and running
east -west behind 1071, 1081 and part of 1101 County Road B shall remain.
The applicant shall repair or repair latch hardware and reenforce all gate
bracing to square the gates to hang straight.
(2) All other screening fences that abut the residential lots shall be 14 feet tall.
This means that all existing 10 -foot -tall screening fence shall be replaced with
new 14 -foot -tall sections.
(3) All screening fences shall be constructed of vertical boards of the same
dimension, color and material.
(4) All screening fences shall be continually maintained and repaired as needed.
b. No material on the storage racks, adjacent to the fence behind 1101 and 1115 County
Road B, shall extend above the 14 -foot -tall fence.
C. No more than 2'/2 feet of the 17'h -foot -tall interior storage racks shall be visible from
the homes to the south that are at street level along County Road B. This excludes
those houses that sit higher on a hill.
d. Menard's shall be responsible for the safety of the neighbors in regard to the materials
stored over the height of the fence.
3. Hours of operation in the storage yard shall be limited to 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.
4. An exterior public address system shall not be allowed.
5. All lighting in the storage yard that is not needed for site security shall be turned off after
business hours.
6. The city council shall review this permit in one year if the proposed retail -space addition has
not begun.
7. Plowed snow shall be stored away from the southern and eastern property lines to avoid
runoff problems on residential property.
8. Menard's shall store all their materials within the fenced storage area.
10 -21 -99
9. Sanitation facilities shall be provided by Menard's for the employees.
10. The proposed building addition and site work must be substantially started within one year of
council approval or the permit shall become null and void. The council may extend this deadline
for one year.
11. This permit terminates the approval for the temporary, seasonal greenhouse.
12. The perimeter of the building must be kept accessible for fire emergencies. The applicant shall
arrange with the fire marshal for access through the gate behind the building in the case of
emergencies.
The Maplewood City Council approved this resolution on October 25, 1999.
Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes - all
Councilmember Carlson moved to approve the plans date - stamped May 5, 1999, and the parking -
lot curbing addendum date - stamped May 14, 1999, for the 33,769- square -foot addition to
Menard's, 2280 Maplewood Drive. Approval is subject to the following conditions:
Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit for
this project.
2. Before getting a building permit, the applicant shall:
a. Submit grading, drainage, utility and erosion control plans to the city engineer
for approval.
b. Revise the building elevations for staff approval to extend the front (westerly)
elevation of the proposed addition two feet to the west of the existing wall. The
applicant shall use brick - imprinted, precast concrete panels, as proposed, on
all sides of the proposed addition. The color shall be complementary to the
brick color of the existing building. The applicant shall also revise the window
mullion spacing to align with the precast panel joints.
C. Revise the site and landscape plans for staff approval as follows:
(1) Provide enough handicap - accessible parking spaces to comply with
ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) requirements.
(2) Increase the tree sizes to six -feet -tall for the spruce trees and 2
inches in caliper for the deciduous trees.
(3) Delete the curb cut labeled as "existing access" leading into the
proposed 149 -car parking lot. Parking stripes shall be added in the
area of this curb cut.
d. Submit a site - lighting plan for staff approval for the new parking lot. The light
source, including the lens covering the bulb, shall be concealed so not to cause
any nuisance to drivers or neighbors.
10 -2� -99 4
3. The applicant shall complete the following before occupying the building:
a. Close the existing curb cut north of the building with continuous concrete
curbing, remove the asphalt and landscape according to the approved plan.
The proposed access driveway and curb cut shall meet all requirements of the
city engineer.
b. Menard's shall provide a gate and clear access to the sanitary sewer manhole
on the site as part of this request.
C. Provide continuous concrete curb and gutter all around the new parking lot
west of the outside- storage yard. The applicant shall also provide the curbed
medians as shown on the addendum and repave this entire area.
d. Paint new rooftop mechanical equipment to match the building color if the units
are visible. (code requirement)
e. The trash- dumpster screening requirement is waived unless the dumpsters
would be visible to the public. In which case, an enclosure shall be provided
using the same materials and color as the building.
f. An in ground lawn- irrigation system shall not be required for the landscaped
area in the southwest corner of the site. The applicant shall install an in- ground
lawn irrigation system for the landscaped area north of the building.
g. Provide site - security lighting as required by the code. The light source,
including the lens covering the bulb, shall be concealed so not to cause any
nuisance to drivers or neighbors.
4. If any required work is not done, the city may allow temporary occupancy if:
a. The city determines that the work is not essential to the public health, safety or
welfare.
b. The city receives a cash escrow or an irrevocable letter of credit for the
required work. The amount shall be 200 percent of the cost of the unfinished
work. Any unfinished landscaping shall be completed by June 1 if the building
is occupied in the fall or winter or within six weeks if the building is occupied in
the spring or summer.
5. All work shall follow the approved plans. The director of community development may
approve minor changes.
6. Signs are not part of this approval. Staff will review sign permit requests.
Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes - all
10 -2� -99 5
MINUTES MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL Attachment 11
7:00 P.M., Monday, April 9, 2001
Council Chambers, Municipal Building
Meeting No. 01 -08
A.
W
CALL TO ORDER:
A regular meeting of the City Council of Maplewood, Minnesota was held in the Council Chambers,
Municipal Building, and was called to order at 7:00 P.M. by Mayor Cardinal.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Robert Cardinal, Mayor Present
Sherry Allenspach, Councilmember Present
Kenneth V. Collins, Councilmember Present
Marvin C. Koppen, Councilmember Present
Julie A. Wasiluk, Councilmember Present
2
Menards Building Exterior Revision Approval (2280 Maplewood Drive)
a. City Manager Fursman introduced the staff report.
b. Community Development Director Coleman presented the specifics of the report.
C. Boardmember Matt Ledvina presented the Community Design Review Board report.
d. The following persons addressed the council:
Gary Colby, Menard's, 4777 Menard Drive, Eau Claire, Wisconsin
Will Rossbach, City of Maplewood Planning Commissioner
Kathleen Juenemann, 721 Mt. Vernon Avenue East, Maplewood
Councilmember Koppen moved to approve the plans date- stamped March 19, 2001, for the
buildina desian and landscaoina chanaes for the Menards store addition at 2280 Maolewood
Drive. Approval is subject to the property owner doing the following:
1. Painting all flashing and building fascias hunter green.
2. Painting or staining a horizontal accent stripe on the west, north and east sides of the
addition. This stripe shall be hunter green to match the fascia and flashing. The width
of this stripe shall be at least three feet high. This stripe shall be placed under the
"Menard's" sign on the north side of the building.
3. Installing all landscaping on the site by the time of the occupancy of the addition or the
applicant shall provide escrow as required previously by the city council.
4. Installing the two- tiered retaining wall planters with a brown -tone color as a contrast to
the building color and a rock -face front that totals a height of five feet.
5. Compliance with the October 25, 1999, city council conditions except as stated above.
Seconded by Mayor Cardinal Ayes - Mayor Cardinal, Councilmembers
Collins, Koppen, Wasiluk
Nays - Councilmember Allenspach
s.a
UKM.M - -MEEK
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REVISION RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, Robert Geske, of Menards, Inc. is proposing changes to a site with an existing
conditional use permit to build a 16,105- square -foot garden center addition on the south side of the
building at 2280 Maplewood Drive. The legal description is:
SUB TO ESMTS; PART OF FOL TRACTS SELY OF HWYS 36 & 61; EX S 100 FT PART OF SW
1/4 N OF CO RD B & PART OF SE 1/4 W OF CLIFTON ADD S OF L 107 FT N OF S L OF BLK 15
OF SD ADD EXTENDED & N OF HEINEMANS BELLEVIEW & IN CLIFTON ADD, EX E 240 FT;
ELKS 15 & 16 & EX E 255 FT BLK 10 & ALSO W 120 FT OF E 255 FT OF N 30 FT OF
BLK 10 (PIN 09- 29 -22 -43 -0042)
WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit revision is as follows
1. On February 6, 2006, the planning commission held a public hearing. The city staff
published a notice in the paper and sent notices to the surrounding property owners. The
planning commission gave persons at the hearing a chance to speak and present written
statements. The commission also considered reports and recommendations of the city staff.
The planning commission recommended that the city council approve the conditional use
permit revision.
2. On March 27, 2006, the city council discussed the proposed conditional use permit revision.
They considered reports and recommendations from the planning commission and city staff.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council approve the above - described
conditional use permit revision, because:
1. The use would be located, designed, maintained, constructed and operated to be in
conformity with the city's comprehensive plan and code of ordinances.
2. The use would not change the existing or planned character of the surrounding area.
3. The use would not depreciate property values.
4. The use would not involve any activity, process, materials, equipment or methods of
operation that would be dangerous, hazardous, detrimental, disturbing or cause a nuisance
to any person or property, because of excessive noise, glare, smoke, dust, odor, fumes,
water or air pollution, drainage, water run -off, vibration, general unsightliness, electrical
interference or other nuisances.
5. The use would generate only minimal vehicular traffic on local streets and would not create
traffic congestion or unsafe access on existing or proposed streets.
6. The use would be served by adequate public facilities and services, including streets, police
and fire protection, drainage structures, water and sewer systems, schools and parks.
7. The use would not create excessive additional costs for public facilities or services.
8. The use would maximize the preservation of and incorporate the site's natural and scenic
features into the development design.
9. The use would cause minimal adverse environmental effects.
Approval is subject to the following conditions: (additions are underlined and deletions are crossed
out):
1. Adherence to the site plan date - stamped March 8, 2006 May 5, 1999. The director of
community development may approve minor changes.
2. Compliance with the following screening -fence requirements:
a. The property owner shall continue to have and keep, in a maintained condition, wooden
screening fences as follows:
(1) The eight- foot -tall screening fence west of 1071 County Road B and running east -
west behind 1071, 1081 and part of 1101 County Road B shall remain.
(2) All other screening fences that abut the residential lots shall be 14 feet tall.
(3) All screening fences shall be constructed of vertical boards of the same dimension,
color and material.
b. No material on the storage racks, adjacent to the fence behind 1101 and 1115 County
Road B, shall extend above the 14 -foot -tall fence.
c. No more than 2 1 /2 feet of the 17 interior storage racks shall be visible from the
homes to the south that are at street level along County Road B. This excludes those
houses that sit higher on a hill.
d. Menards shall be responsible for the safety of the neighbors in regard to the materials
stored over the height of the fence.
3. Hours of operation in the storage yard and garden center shall be limited to 7 a.m. to 10 p.m.
4. An exterior public address system shall not be allowed.
5. All lighting in the storage yard that is not needed for site security shall be turned off after
business hours.
6. The city council shall review this permit revision in one year
7. Plowed snow shall be stored away from the southern and eastern property lines to avoid
runoff problems on residential property.
8. Menards shall store all their materials within the fenced storage area.
9. Sanitation facilities shall be provided by Menards for the employees.
2
10. 4-3, The proposed building addition and site work must be substantially started within
one year of council approval or the permit shall become null and void. The council may
extend this deadline for one year.
11. The perimeter of the building must be kept accessible for fire emergencies. The
applicant shall arrange with the fire marshal for access through the gate behind the building
in the case of emergencies.
The Maplewood City Council approved this resolution on , 2006.
Mr. Ken Roberts
Planner Community Developincrit
City orMaplewmod
1830 Count Road B East
Maplewood MN 55109
Re: Site Plan Revisions esubmittal
IN'lenard, Inc. — Nlaplcm, NIN
I
F - m� IT, 71--TIT& 10
V14 OVERNIGHTAIAIL
(65!) 2303
»`
Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or comments reg'arding this matter.
Thank y o u r ryour assistance in securing our approvals.
cc: Man Prochaska, VP-Real Estate, Menard. Inc.
MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION
1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 2006
1. CALL TO ORDER
Chairperson Fischer called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
11. ROLL CALL
Vice - Chairperson Tushar Desai
Present
Commissioner Mary Dierich
Present
Chairperson Lorraine Fischer
Present
Commissioner Michael Grover
Present
Commissioner Jim Kaczrowski
Present
Commissioner Gary Pearson
Present
Commissioner Dale Trippler
Present
Commissioner Jeremy Yarwood
Present
Staff Present: Ken Roberts Planner
Lisa Kroll Recording Secretary
V. PUBLIC HEARING
a. Conditional Use Permit Revision — Menards (2280 Maplewood Drive) (7:06 -7:26 p.m.)
Mr. Roberts said Robert Geske, of Menards, Inc. is proposing to build a 16,105- square -foot
garden center addition on the south side of the Menards store. They are proposing an exterior of
glass panels, emerald green accent panels and a wrought iron fence for the garden center.
The proposed plans also show changes to the existing parking lot and changes to the exterior of
the building. Specifically, Menards would eliminate 17 parking spaces and reconfigure the parking
lot so that all of the spaces would be at 90- degrees to the drive aisles.
In addition, they are proposing to update the front of the store. This would include changing the
existing mansard and signage over the main entrance and adding four fieldstone and timber
columns to support the new canopy.
Mr. Geske is asking for a conditional use permit revision, a parking reduction authorization for 50
spaces, and the site and building design plans to be approved.
Commissioner Trippler said he spoke with people at Menards regarding the parking reduction on
site and he doesn't think it will be a big issue. However, he asked if it would be appropriate to add
a condition that Menards should hire a parking lot assistant to help with the traffic flow during the
holiday season or during the busier times of the year?
Chairperson Fischer asked the applicant to address the commission.
W
Planning Commission -2-
Minutes of 02 -06 -06
Mr. Robert Geske, Real Estate Associate with Menard, Inc., 4777 Menard Drive, Eau Claire,
Wisconsin, addressed the commission. He said Mr. Roberts did an excellent job with his report
and presentation. This is a fairly simple project if the city allows them to go forward with it.
Menards looks forward to bringing this garden center addition into the city.
Commissioner Grover said since most of the activity for a garden center mostly takes place in the
spring, summer and early fall, he asked what Menards would be using the garden center space
for during the late fall and into the winter months?
Mr. Geske said a lot of Menards stores turn the garden center into an area to sell Christmas trees
and other things during the off season months. If there were to be any storage in the garden
center it would have to be stacked appropriately and would be done according to the city
requirements. The garden center would be used for rocks, blocks, bricks, plants, flowers, trees,
and other things like that during the season.
Chairperson Fischer asked if Menards would have any problem with the request made by
Commissioner Trippler regarding hiring someone to assist with the traffic flow during the busier
times?
Mr. Geske said he would have to take that back on advisement to the real estate committee but
he believes Menards does that already.
Chairperson Fischer asked if anybody in the audience wanted to address the commission.
Mr. Will Rossbach, city councilmember and Maplewood Resident, 1386 County Road C East,
Maplewood, addressed the commission. He said at a previous planning commission meeting
Commissioner Grover said it would be nice to know what the city council might be looking for
regarding certain projects. Mr. Rossbach said in the past the concern regarding Menards has
been the residential homes along County Road B which is the reason the tall fence is there.
Those residents may show up at one of the city meetings to see what the proposal for Menards is
about. There was an oversight that occurred with the last Menards building addition project. There
was an approved plan for Menards and they built a building that was not the same plan that had
been approved by the city council. It wasn't discovered until the building was already started and
he wants to make sure that Menards has crystal clear plans for the city and that Menards follows
the approved plans so this problem doesn't occur again.
Chairperson Fischer asked if anyone in the audience wanted to speak.
Nobody came forward.
Chairperson Fischer closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Trippler moved to adopt the resolution on pages 26 -28 of the staff report. This
resolution approves a conditional use permit revision for Menards at 2280 Maplewood Drive to
add a 16,105- square -foot garden center to the existing store. The city bases this approval on the
findings required by the code. Approval of this CUP revision is subject to the following conditions
(additions are underlined and deletions are crossed out):
Em
Planning Commission -3-
Minutes of 02 -06 -06
Adherence to the site plan date - stamped January 17, 2006 M° °9Q The director of
community development may approve minor changes.
2. Compliance with the following screening -fence requirements:
a. The property owner shall continue to have and keep, in a maintained condition, wooden
screening fences as follows:
(1) The eight - foot -tall screening fence west of 1071 County Road B and running east -
west behind 1071, 1081 and part of 1101 County Road B shall remain.
(2) All other screening fences that abut the residential lots shall be 14 feet tall.
(3) All screening fences shall be constructed of vertical boards of the same dimension,
color and material.
b. No material on the storage racks, adjacent to the fence behind 1101 and 1115 County
Road B, shall extend above the 14 -foot -tall fence.
C. No more than 2'12 feet of the 17'12- foot -tall interior storage racks shall be visible from the
homes to the south that are at street level along County Road B. This excludes those
houses that sit higher on a hill.
d. Menards shall be responsible for the safety of the neighbors in regard to the materials
stored over the height of the fence.
3. Hours of operation in the storage yard and garden center shall be limited to 7 a.m. to 10 p.m.
4. An exterior public address system shall not be allowed.
5. All lighting in the storage yard that is not needed for site security be turned off after business
hours.
6. The city council shall review this permit in one year if Menards has not yet started the
construction of the .garden center if the pFepesed Feta#-&p
7. Plowed snow shall be stored away from the southern and eastern property lines to avoid
runoff problems on residential property.
8. Menards shall store all their materials within the fenced storage area.
9. Sanitation facilities shall be provided by Menards for the employees.
10. 4-3. The proposed building addition and site work must be substantially started within one year
of council approval or the permit shall become null and void. The council may extend this
deadline for one year.
31
Planning Commission -4-
Minutes of 02 -06 -06
11. The perimeter of the building must be kept accessible for fire emergencies. The applicant shall
arrange with the fire marshal for access through the gate behind the building in the case of
emergencies.
Commissioner Trippler moved to approve a parking - reduction authorization for Menards at 2280
Maplewood Drive to have 51 spaces fewer than the code requires. (The city code requires 451
parking spaces and Menards is proposing 401 parking spaces.) Approval is because:
The required number of spaces is excessive. Menards has gotten by, essentially, with the
main parking area in front of the building since 1988. Menards customers do not typically use
other available parking areas on the site.
2. The proposed garden center addition would need 80 spaces according to the code. However,
Menards is currently using this same area for retail sales and outdoor storage as approved
earlier by the city.
3. Durinq busy holiday seasons, Menards shall hire and use a parking lot assistant to help with
the traffic flow in the parking lot.
Commissioner Pearson seconded. Ayes — Desai, Dierich, Fischer, Grover,
Kaczrowski, Pearson, Trippler, Yarwood
The motion passed.
This item goes to the city council on February 27, 2006.
32
DRAFT
MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 1, 2006
CALL TO ORDER
Chairperson Olson called the meeting to order at 6:01 p.m.
11. ROLL CALL
Board member John Hinzman Absent
Vice- Chairperson Matt Ledvina Present
Chairperson Linda Olson Present
Board member Ananth Shankar Present
Board member Joel Schurke Present
Staff Present: Shann Finwall Planner
Lisa Kroll Recording Secretary
VI. DESIGN REVIEW
a. Menards — 2280 Maplewood Drive
Ms. Finwall said Mr. Robert Geske, of Menard's Inc., is proposing to build a 16,105- square -foot
garden center addition on the south side of the Menards store. They are proposing an exterior
of glass panels, emerald green accent panels and a wrought iron fence for the garden center.
The proposed plans also show changes to the existing parking lot and changes to the exterior
of the building. Specifically, Menards would eliminate 17 parking spaces and reconfigure the
parking lot so that all of the spaces would be at 90- degrees to the drive aisles. In addition, they
are proposing to update the front of the store. This would include changing the existing
mansard and signage over the main entrance and adding four fieldstone and timber columns
to support the new canopy. Menards wants to change the signage on the building. Ms. Finwall
said the planning commission recommended the CUP and the parking reduction to the city
council on February 6, 2006.
Board member Ledvina clarified that the CDRB would not be discussing the parking lot
reduction?
Ms. Finwall said the planning commission made a recommendation on the parking reduction
but the CDRB can comment on that as part of the site plan.
Board member Ledvina said regarding the recommendation for additional architectural
features on the north fagade, the elevations provided really don't reflect the existing conditions
with the extensive tiered landscaping that is on the north elevation. He asked if that
recommendation accounts for the tiered landscaping?
Ms. Finwall said initially Menards submitted a plan with the green stripe removed and that is
where the concern came about and as the planning process went on, the city found out the
green stripe would remain. That was taking into account the landscaping which was a
33
Community Design Review Board 2
Minutes 3 -1 -2006
condition of the CDRB in 2001. With that in mind staff thought it would be a nice element
inclusive of the landscaping.
Board member Ledvina said when you look at that elevation it would be easy to dress it up but
the elevation does not represent the existing condition along the north facade.
Ms. Finwall said she wished she would have taken a photo of the existing tiered landscaping
conditions.
Board member Schurke said he is personally not in favor of ornamenting the north elevation
with these columns. This is a big box building and expresses itself that way. He would like to
see if some element of landscaping occur at the entrance to the building since this is a
landscaping /garden center and it has a hard scape entrance to the building.
Board member Shankar had no comments at this time.
Chairperson Olson asked the applicant to address the board.
Mr. Mark Lee, representing Menards, 2280 Maplewood Drive, Maplewood, addressed the
board. The other representative for Menards, Joel has fallen ill and could not be here this
evening. As far as whether or not there will be landscaping in front of the garden center, what
is shown on the garden center elevations is a low wall with the polycarbonate panels and glass
and the accent panels above it. He said what Menards is proposing is an improvement over
what is currently there. He would hate to make the assumption that there would be any other
landscaping that is not already represented on the plan.
Chairperson Olson asked if the entry to the landscaping area would only be accessible through
the store or would it be accessible through the wrought iron fence? It is unclear on the plans.
Mr. Lee said he has photos of another Menards garden center that was built to represent how
this proposal would look. Mr. Lee gave the photos to staff to put on the screen.
Chairperson Olson asked if there were any building materials to present to the board for
review?
Mr. Lee presented the board with two building samples. He said the emerald green metal
accent panels would be for canopy structures, and the clear glass sample would be for the
glass panels for the garden center walls. They would also be using a black wrought iron fence.
Access to the garden center can be obtained both through the Menards store as well as
through the garden center entrance itself.
The board was not clear how far the wrought iron fence and the roofline of the garden center
would go because the plan and the building elevation do not correlate, therefore there was
much discussion back and forth regarding this as well as other issues.
Board member Schurke said it appears to be impossible to have four canopies into the
entrance area because on the elevation plan the entrance shows only one canopy above it.
Chairperson Olson said she wasn't sure these plans were to scale.
34
Community Design Review Board 3
Minutes 3 -1 -2006
Mr. Lee said he didn't have a scale with him but he has no reason not to believe this wasn't
exactly what Menards is proposing.
The board did not have a scale to measure the plan either.
Chairperson Olson asked what Menards proposed to do with the existing fence.
Mr. Lee said the wood fence would remain. He said there are wood pallets and shelves
stacked against the fence.
Chairperson Olson asked if they would be painting or staining the wood fence to make it look
more attractive.
Mr. Lee said they propose to leave the fence natural. When you use stain it becomes blotchy
and paint peels so they would leave the fence in its natural condition. Some stores use a chain
link fence which would be see through and you can see the lumber supply, but they prefer to
use a wood fence to block the view for the residents.
Again there was a lot of time spent discussing the inconsistencies that the board found on the
plans.
Chairperson Olson said personally she does not have a problem with the design, she has a
problem with the presentation and how it translates.
Ms. Finwall said the scale of the canopies does not correspond to the plan and she doesn't
believe four canopies would fit there. Ms. Finwall said perhaps the CDRB could vote on this
proposal and make it a condition to have the plans clarified in better detail.
Board member Ledvina asked what Menards reaction was to the staff condition labeled C. 2.
b. which states Revise building elevations to keep or add major design elements on the north
elevation. This could include keeping the green stripe on the building or adding fieldstone and
timber columns as proposed for the front entrance.
Mr. Lee said frankly he didn't think this would be an issue and he thought the plan was
essentially acceptable as it was. If it's the preference to deviate from this plan he would hate to
delay this development. He said maybe he could call Mr. Geske and ask what the preference
was if it is okay with the board.
Board member Ledvina said the staff report has been written for 1 month now.
Mr. Lee said Mr. Geske is home sick this evening and Mr. Geske knows this plan front to back.
Board member Shankar said Menards is proposing four new columns on the west side so it is
the same type of treatment on the north side as proposed by staff. There is terraced keystone
landscaping there and these timber columns may fall right on top of the landscaping. He said
the planters are five feet from the building.
Board member Ledvina said just to update you Mr. Lee, Menards was required to have the
terraced keystone landscaping because Menards built their building five feet taller than what
was allowed. 35
Community Design Review Board 4
Minutes 3 -1 -2006
Chairperson Olson said one of the reasons the board is so strict tonight is because the city has
had problems with Menards Inc. in the past. The CDRB approved a building and Menards built
the building taller than what was approved. The landscaped tiers were added on the north side
of the building as a condition to make the height of the building appear not so tall. The CDRB
wanted to require more but were unable to. There were very strong feelings there because
Menards did not accurately represent what was constructed. That is one of the reasons the
board is paying such close attention to this garden center proposal this evening. She said she
is not particularly interested in seeing the columns added to the north side but what she would
like to see is that the landscaping is cared for and enhanced. She has noticed a lot of the
bushes have died and it seems to her if the landscaping was fortified more the columns would
not be necessary. Personally she would prefer the columns to be near the doorway to attract
attention and get the customers in and out of the store. If columns are placed near a service
door for example that would be distracting for customers.
Board member Schurke said he would concur with those statements. He would also
recommend to staff that the board should have a scale ruler for proposals like this. When there
are issues that are unclear the board would have a scale ruler on hand to verify the scale of
things. Personally he would rather see Menards invest the money that they would have put into
the columns and invest it into additional landscaping on the site. Including doing some
landscaping to soften the whole parking lot experience.
Board member Schurke said he would also like to see something done in terms of the storm
water management on the site with the reduction in the parking requirements and with the
adjacency to Keller Lake.
Chairperson Olson thought those were very good observations to bring forward.
Mr. Lee asked if Menards would have to bring these changes back to the CDRB for approval?
Ms. Finwall said that's up to the CDRB if they want to see the revisions to the plans or not.
Otherwise the board could recommend that staff review the changes for approval and then this
could proceed to the city council.
Board member Schurke said if it's appropriate he would recommend in order to not delay the
process any longer than necessary if the conditions and changes are clear enough, staff could
review the changes on behalf of the CDRB so it can be moved on to the city council.
Board member Ledvina said this would go onto the city council next.
Chairperson Olson said Menards can appeal the board's decision if they are not happy with
the board's recommendation.
Board member Shankar asked staff when this would be heard by the city council?
Ms. Finwall said March 13, 2006.
Board member Schurke said he would like to have the light post removed from the wrought
iron fence. He thinks it would look nicer without it and he also has concerns about light
pollution. 36
Community Design Review Board 5
Minutes 3 -1 -2006
Mr. Lee said personally he likes the decorative light post on the wrought iron fence. It would
only use a 75 watt bulb and would not cast a lot of light, it's only meant to add some
ornamentation to the fence.
Chairperson Olson asked how many light posts there would be on the fences?
Mr. Lee said he doesn't see them shown on the plan.
Board member Schurke said they are shown on the site plan on page 13 of the staff report.
Board member Schurke said he would be happy without them on the fence at all.
Board member Ledvina said he would agree the light posts should not be there.
Chairperson Olson said she would also agree they should not be there.
Board member Schurke said he would recommend that some type of storm water
management be looked at for this site. It struck him that this site is 95% impervious.
Board member Ledvina said this site is grandfathered in and that is why there is so much
impervious surface.
Chairperson Olson said that could be added to condition C. 2. a.
Board member Ledvina moved to approve the site plan date - stamped January 17, 2006, and
the building elevations date - stamped February 6, 2006, for the 16,105- square -foot garden
center addition to Menards at 2280 Maplewood Drive. Approval is subject to the following
conditions: (changes to the conditions are underlined if added and stricken if deleted.)
1. Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit for this
project.
2. Before getting a building permit, the applicant shall:
a. Submit grading, drainage, utility and erosion control plans to the city engineer for
approval. The city engineering department should review the plans for the
Possibility of Menards implementing some or additional types of best
management practices to help treat storm water on the site.
b Revise the site plans for staff approval to provide enough handicap- accessible
parking spaces to comply with ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act)
requirements.
C. Submit for staff approval, consistent elevations and site plans which correlate to
each other. The plans date - stamped January 17, 2006, and elevations date -
stamped February 6, 2006, ar.�,inconsistent and difficult to read.
Community Design Review Board 6
Minutes 3 -1 -2006
d. Submit a revised wrought -iron fence elevation showing that the proposed
decorative lights have been removed from the fence.
e. Submit a landscaping plan showing the following:
(1) All existing landscaping on the north side of the building. This plan
should reflect all landscaping materials which are healthy, in poor health,
or dead. The purpose of this plan is to ensure that all landscaping
required previously by the city in this location has been planted and is
healthy and thriving.
(2) Work with staff to implement landscaping in front of or near the new
garden center. If landscaping in this area is not feasible, work with staff
to implement additional landscaping throughout the site.
f. A cash escrow or an irrevocable letter of credit for all required exterior
improvements. The amount shall be 150 percent of the cost of the work.
3. The applicant shall complete the following before occupying the building addition:
a. Menards shall provide a gate and clear access to the sanitary sewer manhole on
the site as part of this request.
b. Paint any new rooftop mechanical equipment to match the building color if the
units are visible. (code requirement)
C. The city waives the trash- dumpster screening requirement unless the dumpsters
would be visible to the public. If Menards wants to keep their dumpsters outside,
then they shall provide an enclosure for them using the same materials and color
as the building.
d. Provide site - security lighting as required by the code. The light source, including
the lens covering the bulb, shall be concealed so not to cause any nuisance to
drivers or neighbors.
e. Meet all the requirements of the fire marshal including:
(1) Keeping the perimeter of the building accessible for fire emergencies.
The applicant should arrange with the fire marshal for access through
the gate behind the building in the case of emergencies.
(2) Installing a monitored fire protection system.
(3) Providing a floor plan of the store and a fire department lock box at the
main entrance.
f. Verify that all existing required landscaping is healthy and growing, and replace
the landscaping if it is not healthy and growing. Plant all other landscaping
required with this approval. 38
Community Design Review Board 7
Minutes 3 -1 -2006
4. If any required work is not done, the city may allow temporary occupancy if:
a. The city determines that the work is not essential to the public health, safety or
welfare.
b. The above - required letter of credit or cash escrow is held by the city for all
required exterior improvements. The owner or contractor shall complete any
unfinished landscaping by June 1 of the next year if the building is occupied in
the fall or winter, or within six weeks of occupancy if the building is occupied in
the spring or summer.
5. All work shall follow the approved plans. The director of community development may
approve minor changes.
6. Signs are not part of this approval. The applicant shall submit any requests for new or
revised signs to staff for sign permits.
Chairperson Olson seconded. Ayes — Ledvina, Olson, Shankar,
Schurke
The motion passed.
This item goes to the city council on Monday, March 13, 2006.
m
Agenda Item L2
AGENDA REPORT
TO: Richard Fursman, City Manager
FROM: Charles Ahl, Public Works Director /City Engineer
SUBJECT: 1/1 Reduction Program @ 3M — City Project 06 -02 — Initiate Project and
Authorize Project Funding
DATE: March 20, 2006
INTRODUCTION
The Capital Improvement Plan for the Sanitary Sewer system calls for an expenditure of $100,000 annually
in a program to reduce the amount of excess flow within the sanitary sewer system. Excess flows have
been identified at the 3M Campus. Authorization to proceed with a project using one of the City's
engineering consultants is recommended.
Background
The Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) provides trunk sewage conveyance and
treatment services for the City's sanitary sewer system. The Council has adopted a program to add a
surcharge to communities that have areas with excess water in the sanitary sewer system. This excess
water, which enters the system during rain events from sump pumps or leaking connections, overloads the
treatment systems and is called infiltration and inflow (1 /1). MCES has identified the 3M area of Maplewood
as having excessive flows. The attached meter records show flows from three meters, all in the area south
of Minnehaha and north of Upper Afton Road. The meters are owned and maintain by MCES. They show
the flow during storm events for Meter 005 for August 8, August 26, September 3, September 6, October 4
and October 5 that exceeded the normal allocation of three times the normal weather flow. Also attached
are storm event flows for Meters 007 and 007A for October 4 -5, 2005 that also show the excessive flow.
The MCES program provides for a surcharge beginning in 2007 that could approach a 25% increase in
annual charges. For Maplewood, we paid MCES $2,225,740 for sewage treatment charges in 2005. A
25% surcharge could amount to over $550,000 based on the 2005 flow rates. The MCES program allows
for credits and appeals on flows. One of the credits is for funds spent in identification and correction of 1/1
sources. The City spent $100,000 on a sump pump program in 2005 which will apply toward the credit. It
is proposed that the City Council authorize an additional $100,000 towards a similar program in 2006.
The 2006 program will differ from the 2005 program, which was also in the Battle Creek area, in that we will
be concentrating on identifying 1/1 in and around the 3M Campus. The major problem meter (M005) is on
McKnight Road, just south of 1 -94, and serves a large portion of the 3M facility. This has been identified
previously as a source of excess water. The other two meters (M007 and M007A) have never exceeded
the threshold flows, although the October 4 -5, 2005 storm event was exceptionally large within this area.
The scope of work will include an investigation into these areas as well. The 2005 Program was
administered through one of the City's engineering consultants, SEH Engineers, Inc. It is proposed to
continue with SEH as part of the 2006 Program to maintain continuity with flow data and information.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council authorize a transfer of $100,000 from the Sanitary Sewer Fund to a
project fund and direct and authorize the Director of Public Works to negotiate a work scope with SEH
Engineers, Inc. not to exceed $100,000 for investigation of Infiltration and Inflow in and around the 3M
campus.
Attachment:
1. Flow Charts (Color copies provided for City Council)
2. MCES Infiltration /Inflow Letter
Agenda Item L2
05
a C) (D
GOW
C>
co
C)
...... ....... <
to
co
%0
CD
co
CD
C)
....... .. ..............
co
. . . .......... . .... -.7
u) 0
u) 0
........ ...... . ....
C) C:p
CO Cj
... ............
. ........ .... ...
CO
OD
- -- - - ------- -- - -----
05
a C) (D
GOW
Agenda Item L
us y<
:2<
U<
1�<
lUi
0 �[}
l«1
w-
uj
}c\
Q y
a. j
)�}
Sj
i«;
/p
/ co
cQ
N
to
00
G�
t o \
cN
q�
ca
_R ?
CN
.�ƒ
om
«: g
?\ ~ G
Agenda Item L2
Agenda Item L2
NIM
t
x
LO
Ln
rD
CN
T
+.
,.
i
.......... €
�
`mow....
........ ......n.. £
ko
bra.
r
E
Ln
CD
Lx to
CD CD
! y
Tt
.�
r4
cn p c y
r4: s
NIM
Agenda Item L2
I
z
w
0
0
w
CL
< re
2 Z)
0
I
M
CD
P- CN
0
An
00
,00
M
I
I
I
M
M
0
OaA
Agenda Item L2
MM
Agenda Item L2
T j Metropolitan Council
Eiivit S(-
agroved the imilementation of an 1/1 Sure
The 1/1 Surcharge Program has two substantial changes that may be of interest that were added because of
the feedback from the public comment process: 1) an exclusion for flow outside of a party's control, and
2) a potential deferral of H surcharges over 25% of municipal wastewater charges.
To find out if your community is on the list already or for additional information on the surcharge
program you may look on the Council website at http://www,metrocouncil.orp/enviromnent.htm.
923M
Jason M. Willett
MI'-ICE'S Finance Director
�c -,�
— -- ---- ------------------------- . ... . ...... . . .......... . . .. ................ .................. .. .... ... . . . .................. . ...... . .........
E—:
13�
Agenda Item L3
AGENDA REPORT
TO: Richard Fursman, City Manager
FROM: Charles Ahl, Public Works Director /City Engineer
SUBJECT: Gladstone Redevelopment Initiative — City Project 04 -21 — Approve
Resolution Calling Special Meeting for April 18, 2006 to Review
Alternative
DATE: March 20, 2006
INTRODUCTION
The Gladstone process has been under extensive study and public debate for nearly 18 months. The
City's planning consultant is preparing final documents for consideration by the City Council. Due to the
large interest and expected timeframe necessary for this issue, it is proposed that the City Council call a
special meeting and dedicate the entire agenda to the Gladstone Public Hearing. The consultant indicates
that he will be ready for the presentation by mid - April. The calling of the hearing will allow staff to provide
notice and publication of the hearing so that all property owners and interested parties will receive proper
notice. The attached resolution calls that hearing for Tuesday evening, April 18, 2006. Adoption of the
resolution is recommended.
Background
The background information on the Gladstone process is currently being finalized. The commissions and
committees of the City and the Task Force are in the process of preparing their final recommendations. It
is proposed that each of these groups be called to make the recommendation to the Council at the public
hearing and that the Council receive public testimony. It is likely that a number of hours will be needed for
the Council to receive all this information. The staff has been notifying over 400 people of each of the
public meetings that have been held. We will provide a similar number of people notice if this hearing date
is acceptable to the Council. Staff is not planning to conduct a survey or poll of property owners and
residents.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution calling a special meeting of the
Council and conduct a public hearing for April 18, 2006, at 7:00 pm on the Gladstone Redevelopment
Initiative.
Attachments:
1. Resolution
Agenda Item L3
RESOLUTION
CALLING FOR PUBLIC HEARING
WHEREAS, the Maplewood City Council has authorized hiring of a consultant as a Master
Planner to direct the preparation of a Master Plan for the Redevelopment of the Gladstone Area of
Maplewood, and
WHEREAS, the Maplewood City Council has authorized a second option of reduced
density and expenditure to be explored and analyzed, and
WHEREAS, the Council has previously authorized the preparation of an Alternative Urban
Areawide Review to analyze the environmental impacts of the proposed redevelopment
alternatives, an
WHEREAS, said proposals require extensive public review and comment, and
WHEREAS, the Council desires to hear all relative comment on the proposal.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD,
MINNESOTA
1 . The council will consider presentations from the Master Planning consultant and
representatives from the various committees and commissions, along with the Gladstone Task
Force who have reviewed both alternatives for redevelopment.
2. A public hearing shall be held on such proposed proposals on the 18th day of April
2006, in the council chambers of city hall at 7:00 p.m., and the clerk shall give mailed and
published notice of such hearing and improvement as required.
Agenda Item L4
The following item, "Purchasing Authority Ordinance" was submitted by Mayor
Longrie for council consideration. Attached to her agenda report is a memorandum to the
city council from the city manager regarding the impact that the ordinance may have.
MEMORANDUM
1'0: Richard FLa "its Manw-
Diaria Lom)rie, m yor
DATF" March '19,2006
Rl"' (I'itv Mana(ler PUrchasintr ALIthoritv Ordinance
I -- -
Meetim- Date March '27, 2006
Agenda Item:
The ('itV CUrrontly has no ordiiiatice its place providing for the City Manager to be sLib'
I - qect to a
1xit or mitractim limit diff'ercm from the limits set un(ler Minnesota State Law.
The pCllillCot Minnesota Statutes lor a ('lass 11 0tv are as fi:)llo-,vs:
412.241 Council to control finances.
The council shall have full aUthority over the financial alTairs ofthe city. and shall provide fisr
the collectimi ofall revemies and other assets. the aUditiriaand settlement of accounts. and the
sai'ekeeping and disbursement of public inotievs.
HIS'l 1 949 c 119 s ", I - 197' c I -)' art 2 s I subd 2
412,691 Manager is purchasing agent; audit and approval.
14 IST 1 949 c I 1 s 85r 1959 c 526 s I - 1973) c, 121 art 2 s I
S L 1 b CI 2' 199 c 3 8 0 s 3 ; 2 0 0 4 c 7'79' s 5
The proposed klaplewoo(l orcfir�ance takes advantage ofthe state slattitevdiich allows the cit
comlcil to specil'y it lovcr limit than the 520,000 mamirium.
* Roseville has enacted a limit, of $5000,00 Ior then City Manzwer 0 B ("ity)
As 6or adclitiotial Ififiormatiom
( ' TFY OF MAPI.,,EWOOD
ORDINANCE NO.
A N` 0 R D I N A INTCE AMENDING SECTION 2 OF THE MAI>[,,FW(.)Ol) CITYCODE,
ADDING A NEIW SE(I"rION 2 (j).
T[ (I)FMAPLf"WOOD ORDAINS:
SECTION 1. Section I of1he Maplewood City Code is amended by �IddiTIU thC fbi 10WiflU"
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Council
FROM: City Manager
RE: PROPOSED CHANGE TO PURCHASING LIMITS
DATE: March 22, 2006
The proposed change to purchasing limits would cause the following problems:
"The city would incur late payment penalties on Xcel gas and electricity bills unless they were
excluded from the $3,000 limit. Also, Council meeting agendas would be longer because there
would be approximately 30 purchases over $3,000 per meeting that would require Council
approval."
Dan Faust
Finance Director
Bruce K. Anderson
107MM92 0=11 F I
— a 1 •
INNUM —
Sherrie Le
Human Resource Director
"As for fire there are times that repairs are over $3,000. It will slow down the time it takes to get
what we need and fix items. There will be more paper work. $5,000 would be a better limit
because most of our items are under $5,000 on a day to day purchase."
Steve Lukin
Fire Chief
P:\agn\PURCHASING LIMITS
Agenda Item L5
MEMORANDUM
TO: Richard Fursman, City Manager
FROM: Karen Guilfoile, City Clerk
DATE: March 21, 2006
RE: 2006 City Council Appointment
Introduction
At its first meeting of the year the City Council officially makes annual appointments to
organizations of which the City is a member and to those who serve at the pleasure of the
Council.
Councilmember Bartol was appointed to the Joint Ice Arena Board, the Housing
Redevelopment Authority and the Parks & Recreation Commission. With the election of
councilmember Cave it is requested that the city council move to appoint her to the
aforementioned as the council representative.