Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
weekly notes - Oct 27th 2017
CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS—WEEKLY NOTES for: October 27', 2017 TO: City Council Members&Staff' FROM: Eric Johnson,City Administrator Development and Zoning Items: 1. No new applications have been received. 2. As requested by the City-Al Maintenance—on Stagecoach Trail—has painted their roof—removing the rusted elements;this along with the Xcel Energy substation being painted—results in the area looking much nicer as one enters the City from that direction.Perhaps we can work on getting Xcel Energy to remove and update the barbed wire fence at the substation as well. 3. A copy of a nuisance abatement request to 14372 57th street. 4. The Hellermans did make an initial appearance in court for the complaint filed by the City related to their property condition on 63rd Street. 5. A follow-up was provided to MNDOT and the County regarding the south frontage road and the possibility of SC MALL entertaining such a re-route—which they have indicated that they would consider further concepts if prepared. Please see the enclosed letter which again outlines that the City would support the project,but is not in a position to take over such roadways at this time. 6. On 10/261 received a request from Washington County asking for feedback on their DRAFT RFP for a jurisdictional road transfer study with comments due by 11/2. 1 have enclosed the draft RFP and Staff prepared comments—still in draft form as it needs some fine tuning. Other items: • There will be an increase in the tipping fees incurred by Tennis Sanitation of$7/per ton—please see the enclosed memo from the Ramsey/Washington County Energy Board.Tennis is required by law to take the City's waste to this facility.This will however result in a rate increase for disposal costs to the City based on the established formulas—of perhaps$.25 to.50(cents)per unit per month or about$3,000 to$5,000 annually.Staff will better refine these figures as required by the Contract. On a related note, Staff did provide feedback to Washington County regarding their planned amendments to their Solid Waste Master plan—for which the County did send a thank-you response and some general follow-up. • The MCF- Stillwater will be hosting its Community Advisory Meeting on Wednesday at 2:00 PM -See enclosed invitation if you desire to attend. • The 2017-2018 dues for the LMC will be$5,065 as outlined in the enclosed invoice;also attached is their annual report highlighting their work for the past year. • Valley Branch Watershed Agenda for 10/26/17 Mayor McComber provided: 1. METRO CITIES NEWS for 1/26/17 2. Conversations in the Valley—for Nov 15th."Secrets of the Congdon Mansion" 3. Information on the Greater MSP—Annual Meeting. 4. Lower St.Croix Management Partnership team—Agenda for 11/1/17 Please let me know if you have any questions-651-253-7837 Call Anytime. 1 of 59 CITY OF r., OAK PARK HEIGHTS 14168 Oak Park Boulevard No. • P.O.Box 2007• Oak Park Heights,MN 55082-2007 • Phone:651/439-4439 • Fax:651/439-0574 October 24, 2017 Melissa Meier 1437257 1h St. N. Oak Park Heights, MN 55082 Re: Off Street Parking/Nuisance Abatement Request Dear Melissa: This letter serves as the City's request for abatement of a public nuisance and to make you aware of City Ordinances 401.15, sections B.14 and F., which regulate off street parking and exterior storage. Additionally, City Ordinances 1109 and 1301, declare the storage of wrecked,junked or inoperative vehicles, and other junk or debris a public nuisance. A copy of the above- referenced ordinances are enclosed. All vehicles are required to be operational, registered and parked upon your driveway. Any vehicles that are not operational or registered are to be stored within your garage or removed from the property. If the number of vehicles you have that are both operational and registered do not fully fit upon your driveway, you may wish to consider a parking pad. I am happy to discuss parking pad regulations with you, should you decide that you would like to pursue the installation of one. Please ensure that the vehicle, currently parked upon your yard, is properly licensed and operable and move it onto the driveway or place it to the interior of the garage no later than Tuesday,November 7, 2017. Compliance will be verified. Please contact me with any questions you may have regarding this request. Your prompt attention is appreciated. Sincerely, PLANNING& CODE ENFORCEMENT Juli ultman Bui g Of Enclosures c: Property Owner—Group 41 Ltd., P.O. Box 488, Stillwater, MN 55082(No Enclosures) Eric Johnson. City Administrator(No Enclosures) 2 of 59 Tree City U.S.A. o,t City of Oak Park Heights 14168 Oak Park Blvd. N•Box 2007.Oak Park Heights,MN 55082•Phone(651)439-4439•Fax(651)439-0574 October 24,2017 TO: Mr.Wayne Sandberg,Washington County—via email only Mr.Adam Josephson,MNDOT—via email only RE: SC Mall—South Frontage Road—Follow-up Gentlemen, As I had committed to performing for the value of further dialogue, I did reach out to Andersen Windows(SC MALL)as to their amenability to a rerouting of the south frontage road behind the Stillwater Crossings(Carbone's)building.That letter is attached again for your files and recall SC Mall is the underlying owner.Based on the subsequent conversation I had with Andersen Staff member, Linda Larson they have expressed that they would be willing to have a dialogue about such possibility and would be willing to review some further concepts; but would need to better understand any plan before further comments were made or a decision on possible R.O.W.costs of such lands. At this time,the City will leave it to your agencies to further pursue this project with SC MALL and investigate the feasibility and concepts as these two roadways(the Frontage Road and Osgood Ave) are owned by the State and the County. Logically, it remains primarily the responsibility of these two agencies to manage and potentially improve these routes and how they interrelate, for which all County and State residents and businesses might benefit as well as your respective transportation systems. If the County and State would desire to seek a re-allocation of any remaining HPP funds and/or seek bonding funds,etc.the City would conceptually support that effort.However,the City's position remains that,while it does support the concept of such a project, it cannot at this time accept any additional maintenance or ownership responsibility of any portion of this roadway nor commit to fund a"leg"of a future signalization as the City(a non-State Aid city)currently faces significant roadway costs for other routes and systems. I would believe if the State and/or County did desire to reach out to Ms. Linda Larson for further discussion she would be willing to explore the ideas discussed above as would the City when more advanced concepts are available. Kind Regards, 40 Eric Johnson City Administrator Cc: Linda Larson,Via Email Only-Linda.Larson(dAndersenCorp.com Molly O'Rourke,Washington County Administrator Weekly Notes 3 of 59 t City of Oak Park Heights 74168 0mk Pat 331x-&>w•Scs 2007•We Pat Ha�bM55082•Fbm(651)4394439-Fa(551)439-0574 9ctslber 5D.,2017 T& F&Susan Roeder,Andersen Wk dows FROM: Eric Jftsas,Ckf A&&&bakw P�A_ RE. SC Mall Lands 0 smffi ftnbp road mmepL Dew Ms'Roeder: t9wIm past few yews,these has been sane general bion mug g the bcM road agendes g the cwwpt of re4mft the=A hostage madway ham 6 surest loceh n to a locatiaa behnd The S@kzfu Cnls qp (Cwbone's)bd ft.We believe daese lands are owned by SC Md and may have ha tw cmm easer3seets upas them. See the atb&,ed maps. A oDmplete sh*of ffie are and how suds a mase wmk irgW bafc and all property owner,iff wfmg SC MALL would need tri be smlJ*aesderskod blare wctdd begrt tie eve faward,mduding asc a iaung tun ft sommes and mwde –none of which has a been eVkred in duW.Pomem,as a pwjw to #ate stades and wpVdon.The Slate,Coady and of comse the C4 are mmm about the folloift two . Would SC Md at a4 erdertaus the cwway mce of such finds to a public enbly so Haat to roadway eaa;d be re Ruch a cn meyanae offands is germabyshm w RED w lea map affadeedand world A* firs loss sofa ffewpwAng aadsome drainage oThe map arab'tears a voymvp cord Would drat conveymce Imm SC Md mgm a paperd of some tmm' On thamm a mw the am is bafog and by lee ganw pLwt at ffss am aw p shed,area Ob Me ptdkk mab snare lamnalywoW mdum pnvafa an-soya qmm§wW cas.%)W nW maYan*adm access so lea&W=Sft b ma puls3Cic Mobs mdovred. Im Cly of tac Park Heift is al this tints wu*bft the htabve to pose fm question very ealy for the tlnee pubk enffmscmmmpbm and farlOw wdrsbnft otcosl5 and scope_6ttae t wrier of such Pands to the public for sof papos s flow,SC Md snotv;abb for yowopmft%,atleastdis khat m aptiaatpdarto any deelm shad m bdmcmd&sw. We thaaic you for ymw tions and We again are o*al the ve3y early stages of ft comemabon and any is of coarse vak afble.I am glad lo answer any questions you nosy have.651-43"439. I%rmrd!. bra Joleasnn, C4 4 of 59 21111 11111 i f ENTe Area in RED HATCH • �I ifr' ii � 11 ! Conveyed to the PU BUC + . y r {11 squaFe• F CARS qv Area in Blu CW Wed by 5 of 59 a fwev i t' s a a w gip. T n r , Awa". r �r v y. y I v„toll r.. R W1r 14 N�r pl#N F�1 t pH1'F T' .' " ,s.► ., � „_ �4'. ►!fl r pp 6 of 59 Eric Johnson From: Andrew Giesen <And rew.Giesen @co.washi ngton.m n.us> Sent: Thursday, October 26, 2017 1:01 PM To: 'cryus.knutson@state.mn.us'; 'adam Josephson@state.mn.us'; 'Shawn Sanders'; Eric Johnson; 'jparotti@sehinc.com'; 'kathyschmoeckel@stillwatertownship.com'; 'clerk@baytowmmn.org'; 'townclerk@westlakeland.govoffice2.com' Cc: Wayne Sandberg;Cory Slagle; Frank Ticknor; Becky Haydon;Joe Gustafson Subject: St. Croix Valley Roadway Jurisdictional Study Attachments: St.Croix Valley Jurisdictional Study RFP- Draft.pdf,StCroixJurisdictionalStudy(AJG).pdf All, Washington County will be leading a study to identify candidates for roadway jurisdictional transfers in the general vicinity of the new St.Croix River Crossing. As most of you know,the St. Croix River Crossing has impacts to traffic patterns on local roads,county highways and state highways. In addition;the current local,county and state roadway jurisdictions have gaps,stub segments, and are based on obsolete traffic patterns. Washington County knows to have a successful project,we need to work closely with the state,our cities and our townships. We will be requesting proposals from consultants to lead this study,which will involve: • MnDOT,County,City and Township engagement that will seek consensus on roadway characteristics of a local road,county highway,and state highway. • Traffic data collection and analysis. • A Final Report that will include the process to determine jurisdiction classifications of roadways, recommended transfers,and cost associated with recommended transfers. Attached to this email is the draft request for proposals(RFP)and a map of proposed roadways to be included in the study. This RFP will be posted to our website for consultants to submit on. Before we post this RFP,we would like gather feedback and answer any questions from MnDOT, Cities and Townships related to this study. If you have any comments on the draft RFP, please get them back to me by the end of the day on Thursday, November 2. 1 look forward to working with you on this study. Thanks, Andrew Andrew Giesen, EIT I Engineer I I Transportation Division Phone:651-430-4336 andrew.giesen(o)co.washinston.mn.us Washington County Public Works Department 11660 Myeron Rd North I Stillwater, MN 55082 "Plan,build and maintain a better Washington County" 1 7 of 59 Public Works Department Donald J.Theisen,P.E. 0 Director gtionWayne H.Sandberg,P.E. Deputy Dinector/County Engineer ,omuu,u°a«iiiiiumuuomuiuwio igpipAl1i11AlIIl4ll11ylUlluiWUOjj°'' County ii«amuloalU(({{Ilpfllfluunuwiivar REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP) FOR ST. CROIX VAT.II,FV ROADWAY,TTTRTCDTCTTON4T., S T1TOY PROJECT COORDINATION, MUNICIPAL EDUCATION AND INVOLVEMENT, TRAFFIC DATA COLLECTION, AND REPORT IN THE CITIES OF STILLWATER, OAK PARK HEIGHTS, BAYPORT, AND IN STILLWATER TOWNSHIP, BAYTOWN TOWNSHIP, AND WEST LAKELAND TOWNSHIP Note:A "Qualification Based Selection"method will be used to review proposals submitted in response to this RFP. The responder must not include price information either in the body of the proposal or as a separate submittal. This RFP contains the following sections: 1. PROJECT INFORMATION 2. SCOPE OF WORK AND DELIVERABLES 3. PROPOSAL CONTENT 4. PROPOSAL EVALUATION 5. PROPOSAL SUBMITTAL 6. PROPOSAL QUESTIONS APPENDIX A:CONTRACT TERMS AND CONDITIONS APPENDIX B:PROJECT LOCATION MAP 1. PROJECT INFORMATION 1.1. PROJECT OVERVIEW The Washington County Public Works Department is issuing this request for proposals(RFP) to determine future roadway jurisdictions for roadways impacted by the new St. Croix River Crossing and its associated regional highway improvements. The St.Croix River Crossing has impacts to traffic patterns on local roads, county highways, and state highways. In addition; the current local, county, and state roadway jurisdictions have gaps, stub segments, and are based on obsolete traffic patterns. 11660 Myeron Road North,Stillwater,Minnesota 55082-9573 Phone: 651-430-4300 • Fax: 651-430-4350 • TTY: 651-430-6246 www_cn_wachington mn mc Equal Employment Opportunity/Affirmative Action 8 of 59 St.Croix Valley Roadway Jurisdictional Study Washington County Public Works November 2017 This St.Croix Valley Roadway Jurisdictional Study is intended identify candidates for roadway jurisdictional transfer and coordinate with the state, cities, and townships that own roadways that for jurisdictional transfers. The Consultant will complete a municipal engageme�pjr;o-c�at will se consensus the road c aractenstics o a ro_ ,county -ffTgftWay,and state hi way. The ons t will also lead municipalities to approve a process of id—UnEf id-ening and approving changes to roadway jurisdictions. This project will be a cooperative project between Washington County,Minnesota Department 1.( V . of Transportation(MnDOT),the City of Stillwater,the City of Oak Park Heights,the City of �(,� Bayport, Stillwater Township, Baytown Township, and West Lakeland Township; with ) 4& Washington County serving as the lead agency. At a minimum,Washington County seeks to include the following roadways in the Study. A map of these roadways can be found in Appendix B: 1. 301i Street N,from CSAH 15(Manning Avenue N)to CSAH 21 (Stagecoach Trail N) 2. CSAH 14(5h Street N),from CSAH 21(Stagecoach Trail N)to TH 95(St.Croix Trail) 3. Northbrook Boulevard N/Oakgreen Avenue N,from CSAH 14(401i Street N)to TH 36 4. CSAH 23 /CSAH 26 (Stagecoach Trail N/S Frontage Road), from CSAH 21 (561 Street N)to CSAH 23 (Beach Road) 5. CSAH 26(591i Street/Osman Avenue N/601 Street/S Frontage Road),from CSAH 24(N Osgood Avenue)to CSAH 23 (Beach Road) 6. 601i Street N/W Frontage Road/Oren Avenue N,from Greeley Street S to N Osgood Avenue 7. Market Drive/ W Frontage Road/6011 Street N, from Curve Crest Boulevard to N Osgood Avenue 8. Neal Avenue N/601i Street N,from 581'Street N to N Osgood Avenue 9. Greeley Street S,from TH 36 to Myrtle Street W 10. N Osgood Avenue/41'Street S,from TH 36 to Pine Street W 11. CSAH 23 (Orleans Street E / Paris Avenue N / Beach Road), from CSAH 24 (N Osgood Avenue)to CSAH 26(S Frontage Road) 12. CSAH 23 (3`1 Street S),from Orleans Street E to Myrtle Street W 13. CSAH 23 (Chestnut Street E),from 3r1 Street S to TH 95(St. Croix Trail) 14. Churchill Street W,from Greeley Street S to CSAH 23 (3'1 Street S) 15. Pine Street W,from CSAH 5(Stillwater Boulevard N)to CSAH 23 (3i1 Street S) 16. Olive Street W,from CSAH 5(Owens Street S)to Greeley Street S 17. Myrtle Street W,from CSAH 5(Owens Street N)to TH 95(St:Croix Trail) 18. CR 64(McKusick Road N)from CSAH 15(Manning Avenue N)to CSAH 5(Owens Street N) 19. CSAH 11 (Otchipwe Avenue N), from TH 96 (Dellwood Road) to CSAH 5 (Stonebridge Trail N) 20. Stonebridge Trail N,from CSAH 11 (Otchipwe Avenue N)to CR 55 (Partridge Road N) It should be anticipated that this list will increase during the study. 1.2. PROJECT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES The objective of this project is to assign appropriate roadway jurisdictions near the St.Croix River Crossing Project. In summary,the project goals are as follows: Page 2 of 12 9 of 59 St.Croix Valley Roadway Jurisdictional Study Washington County Public Works November 2017 • Create a study process t educates ency staff from Washington County, MnDOT, Cities,and Townships: o Roadway Functional assifications o Access Management a Roadway J ictional Classifications • Create a roadw sdi analysis process that Washington County, MnDOT, Cities, and Townshi an agree o . • Complete a Juri diction tudy that: o Defines roa way functional and jurisdictional classifications o Explains county,city and township funding designations o Explains why roadway jurisdictional changes are necessary o Recommends roadway jurisdictional transfers o Determines an estimated cost of roadway jurisdictional transfers. o Includes a plan to program and budget jurisdictional transfers of roadways. • Maintain the long-term transportation goals of Washington County, MnDOT,the City of Stillwater, the City of Oak Park Heights, the City of Bayport, Stillwater Township, Baytown Township,and West Lakeland Township. 1.3. PROJECT SCHEDULE The project work will commence upon selection of the Consultant and after award of a contract. The Consultant will prepare a project schedule based on a completion date of no later than December 21,2018. Schedule Washington County anticipates the following schedule for this project: RFP Solicitation Release November 3,2017 Proposals Due December 1,2017 County to Select Consultant December 15,2017 Project Scoping with Successful Consultant Dec. 15—Jan. 5 County Board Awards Consultant Contract January 16,2018 Jurisdictional Study Jan.2018—Dec.2018 2. SCOPE OF WORK AND DELIVERABLES All aspects of the scope of services outlined below and included herein are expected to be completed within the project deadlines. All reports/documentation must be developed and presented in Microsoft Office. The role of the selected Consultant team will be to complete all tasks necessary to take the project through municinal engagement.traffic data collection. and generation of the final renort_ Washington County will act as the lead agency through all aspects of the project. The County's role as lead agency does not preclude direct and regular interaction between the Consultant and MnDOT,the Cities,and Townships. Their input,review,and approval are important; however,the County is to be kept informed of municipal dialogue and will assist the Consultant in determining the need and scope of interaction with a particular municipality. MnDOT, the Cities, and Townships will need to be involved in the project development and review,and their input will be incorporated on a regular basis to avoid delays or reworking. Page 3 of 12 10 of 59 St. Croix Valley Roadway Jurisdictional Study Washington County Public Works November 2017 2.1.PROJECT MANAGEMENT PROJECT MANAGEMENT The Consultant will perform all work necessary to effectively coordinate the project development, maintain the project schedule and budget as well as manage the Project Management Team(PMT) starting with a project kick-off meeting. The proposal should include a summary of the project management measures required to ensure that the project is completed on time, within budget and in accordance with applicable laws, policies, standards and good engineering practice. Consistency in project management for this project is paramount. 2.2.PROJECT COORDINATION 2.2.1. DATA COLLECTION AND SITE VIsas The Consultant shall collect existing data and reports relevant to the project area and obtain new information as needed for all aspects of the project. Washington County will provide the following information to the successful Consultant: • City and County traffic volume data(as of December 2017) • As-built information • Right of Way information,available upon request 2.2.2. MUNICIPAL EwoLvEMENT The Consultant will perform municipal involvement to facilitate acceptance of the project. A sound municipal involvement strategy is needed to accomplish the project goals and to ensure project success. As this project moves forward, a strategy is needed to assess stakeholder positions and evaluate a process to facilitate acceptance for the project. For this proposal,the Consultant shall propose a municipal involvement strategy to meet the project objective and goals. For this proposal,the Consultant will propose a municipal involvement plan,as well as specific involvement activities,techniques,and strategies and -� how these specific tasks will integrate into the overall process. The proposal should provide projects in which the Consultant has utilized a successful municipal involvement plan to bring multiple stakeholders with varying project goals to informed consent. 2.3.TRAFFIC ANALYSIS EXISTING AND FUTURE CONDmom ANALYSIS The Consultant will develop traffic forecasts in accordance with the Washington County's 2040 traffic forecasts for the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. It is expected these traffic forecasts will be available by February 1,2018. The Consultant shall identify the level of traffic forecast work required to complete the jurisdictional study,but at a minimum, it is expected that daily traffic volumes will need to be collected by the Consultant. 2.4.REPORT AND ADDITIONAL TASKS 2.4.1. REPORT A St. Croix Valley Roadway Jurisdictional Study Report shall be drafted after municipal education and involvement,and after all traffic analysis has been collected. At a minimum, this report should cover: Page 4 of 12 11 of 59 St. Croix Valley Roadway Jurisdictional Study Washington County Public Works November 2017 • The process to determine jurisdiction classification of roadways • The level of municipality education and involvement that occurred. List and map of roads included in the study • t associated with proposed jurisdictional transfers (costs shall include at a List um): Long Term Costs(expansion projects,reconstruction projects, intersection improvement projects) ���� Short Term Costs(signal upgrades,turn lanes,pedestrian improvements, resurfacing) o o Soft Costs (additional plow truck, additional maintenance staff, annual O maintenance cost) J • ecommended jurisdictional transfers and recommendations n how ey canbe budgeted and implemented. T report also needs to account for the county's and city's "banked" miles that can be sed to designate County State Aid Highways (CSAR) and Municipal State Aid Streets (MSAS). 2.4.2. ADDTTIONAL TASKS The Consultant is encouraged to include and describe additional tasks not mentioned within the RFP that will enhance the project. 3. PROPOSAL CONTENT Proposals will be limited to no more than twelve(12)pages in length,excluding a cover sheet,a cover letter, and appendices. The font shall be no smaller than 11 point, 11x17 pages can be used for maps, exhibits, and/or schedule and will count as a single page. Appendices are anticipated to contain pre- prepared marketing materials and/or full resumes or other supporting documents. Reviewers may or may not review material contained in appendices.The following will be considered minimum contents of the proposal and must be submitted in the order listed: 3.1. Title Page/Cover Letter to introduce the Consultant submitting the proposal,including the name, address,telephone number,email address of the contact person(s)representing the team and also the names of other firms or individuals participating in the proposal. 3.2. Table of contents to identify the proposal material by section and page number. Tabs are recommended for differentiating sections of the proposal. 3.3. A statement of the objectives, goals and tasks to show or demonstrate the responder's understanding of the nature of the project and the work required. 3.4. A description of the proposed project approach and methodology to be utilized. A work plan and/or schedule identifying the major tasks to be accomplished. The work plan must present the responder's approach, task breakdown of the major project requirements, approach to quality control, a timeline, deliverable due dates, and project completion date. The work plan will form the basis for cost negotiations after responder selection. Firms are encouraged to propose additional tasks or activities if they believe such tasks or activities will substantially improve the results of the project. 3.5. A project manager from the firm must be identified with detailed educational experience and any other additional information to demonstrate competence and ability to fulfill the obligations of the Contract. The project manager must have been a project manager on a similar proiect prior to working on this project. The Consultant project manager must be available in a local office (Minneapolis/St.Paul metropolitan area)during the entire project period. Page 5 of 12 12 of 59 St.Croix Valley Roadway Jurisdictional Study Washington County Public Works November 2017 Include examples of similar work indicating the responder's level of involvement in the project, as well as,information on the client contact person,address,email address,phone number original budget, final budget, original completion date, and final completion date. Emphasis should be placed on ability and history to successfully deliver projects similar to the county's proposed project. 3.6. A list of key personnel who will be assigned to the project; their area of responsibility, work experience, qualifications and availability to perform the proposed work. Include a detailed description of the team's background and experience with work similar to this proj ect. This should include examples of similar work indicating the responder's level of involvement in the project. 3.7. The Proposer shall identify if they or their firm represent a city or township in the study area. 3.8. The Proposer shall summarize the key elements of the proposal and provide a discussion as to why the firm should be selected for this project. 3.9. A"Qualification Based Selection"method will be used to review proposals submitted in response to this RFP. The responder must not include either price information or hour summaries in the body of the proposal. 4. PROPOSAL EVALUATION Representatives of Washington County will evaluate all responses received by the deadline. All responses will be evaluated on the basis of qualifications so the team(s)should be fully aware that their experience in providing similar services or projects within the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area will strongly influence their scores. A 100-percent scale will be used to create the final evaluation recommendation. The factors and weighting on which proposals will be judged are: 1 Expressed understanding of the project objectives 20% 2) Project Approach and Methodology including completeness,quality,and overall technical competence of the proposal,approach,work plan,and schedule 40% 3) Project Manager qualifications including,experience,availability,and work on similar projects 25% 4) Team Qualifications including,experience,availability,and work on similar projects 15% Proposals will be evaluated and a successful responder will be chosen on the basis of qualifications only. The successful responder will be required to submit a detailed scope of services and budget promptly after selection. Washington County and the successful responder will then meet to negotiate the final scope of services and compensation. If Washington County and the successful responder are unable to agree upon a scope of services and compensation within a reasonable time,as determined by Washington County,then negotiations may commence with the next highest-ranked responder. The County reserves the right to waive any minor irregularities in the proposal request process. The County reserves the right to interview any,all,or none of the respondents at its discretion. The County shall not be liable for any expenses incurred by the Consultant including but not limited to expenses associated with the preparation of the proposal. Page 6 of 12 13 of 59 St.Croix Valley Roadway Jurisdictional Study Washington County Public Works November 2017 Prospective Consultants should thoroughly read the CONTRACT TERMS AND CONDITIONS attached hereto(Appendix A)as the Consultant to whom the contract is awarded shall be required to comply with the terms and conditions contained therein. 5. PROPOSAL SUBMITTAL All proposals must be sent to: Andrew Giesen,Project Manager Washington County Public Works 11660 Myeron Road North Stillwater,MN 55082 Interested firms must both submit to the e-mail address above and deliver four(4) copies in a sealed package clearly marked as follows: "St. Croix Valley Roadway Jurisdictional Study Proposal'. Each copy ofthe proposal must be signed by an authorized representative of the firm. Submit all copies to the address indicated above,no later than 3:00 pm on December 1, 2017. Late submittals will not be considered and will be returned. 6. PROPOSAL QUESTIONS If you are interested in submitting a proposal for this service you must email Andrew Giesen, Project Manager, indicating your interest and your contact person by November 17, 2017. All questions regarding this RFP must be sent via electronic mail to the following contact: Andrew Giesen,Project Manager `itd o ..,;t 11,'d CCS�ki lr Only written questions will receive responses. Washington County reserves the right to disregard questions received after 3:00 PM on November 22,2017. If a question pertains to a clarification of this RFP,the question and answer will be forwarded to all Consultants who expressed interest in submitting a proposal. A copy of all written questions submitted,with responses,will be distributed to interested Consultants no later than 3:00 PM on November 28,2017. Please note that no other Washington County personnel are allowed to discuss this RFP with anyone, including Respondents, before the proposal submission deadline. This RFP does not obligate the County to award a Contract or complete the project. The County reserves the right to reject any or all proposals. Page 7 of 12 14 of 59 St.Croix Valley Roadway Jurisdictional Study Washington County Public Works November 2017 APPENDIX A REQUIRED CONTRACT TERMS AND CONDITIONS A contract will be prepared by Washington County upon selection of a firm. Appropriate language will be added to document the specific nature and scope of services, costs, responsibilities, and liabilities of each party. Additional areas of concern may be incorporated, subject to mutual agreement between parties. General conditions set forth in this section will be incorporated into the professional services agreement. The following provisions I through XVII must be included in any contract and are non-negotiable. I. DOCUMENT FORMAT All word processing documents shall be done and provided to the County in Microsoft Word format, and not converted from other formats. Data files shall be provided in Microsoft Excel format. CAD files shall be provided in AutoCAD or MicroStation format. II. NONDISCRIMINATION The Consultant agrees to comply with the nondiscrimination provision set forth in Minnesota Statute 181.59. The Consultant's failure to comply with section 181.59 may result in cancellation or termination of the agreement, and all money due or to become due under the contract may be forfeited for a second or any subsequent violation of the terms or conditions of this contract. III. STANDARDS The Consultant shall comply with all applicable Federal law, State statutes, Federal and State regulations, and local ordinances now in effect or adopted during the performance of the services herein until completion of said services. Failure to meet the requirements of the above shall be a substantial breach of the agreement and will be cause for cancellation of this contract. IV. POSSESSION OF FIREARMS ON COUNTY PREMISES Unless specifically required by the terms of this contract or the person it is subject to an exception provided by 18 USC§ 926B or 926BC (LEOSA) no provider of services pursuant to this contract or subcontractors shall carry or possess a firearm on county premises or while acting on behalf of Washington County pursuant to the terms of this agreement. Violation of this provision is grounds for immediate suspension or termination of this contract. V. SUBCONTRACTING AND ASSIGNMENT The Consultant shall not enter into any subcontract for performance of any services contemplated under this agreement; nor novate or assign any interest in the agreement, without the prior written approval of the county. Any assignment or novation may be made subject to such conditions and provisions as the county may impose. If the Consultant subcontracts the obligations under this agreement, the Consultant shall be responsible for the performance of all obligations by the subcontractors. Page 8 of 12 15 of 59 St. Croix Valley Roadway Jurisdictional Study Washington County Public Works November 2017 VI. SUBCONTRACTOR PROMPT PAYMENT Pursuant to Minnesota Statute §471.425 subd. 4a., Consultant shall pay any subcontractors within 10 days of the Consultant's receipt of payment from the county for undisputed services provided by the subcontractor. The Consultant shall pay interest of 1% percent per month, or any part of a month, to the subcontractor on any disputed amount not paid on time to the subcontractor. The minimum monthly interest penalty payment for an unpaid balance of$100 or more is $10. For an unpaid balance of less than $100, the prime Consultant shall pay the actual penalty due to the subcontractor. The subcontractor shall have third party rights under this agreement to enforce this provision. VII. DATA PRACTICES All data collected, created, received, maintained, or disseminated for any purpose by the activities of the Consultant, because of this agreement shall be governed by the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minnesota Statutes Chapter 13 (Act), as amended and the Rules implementing the Act now in force or as amended. The Consultant is subject to the requirements of the Act and Rules and must comply with those requirements as if it is a governmental entity. The remedies contained in section 13.08 of the Act shall apply to the Consultant. VIII. AUDITS, REPORTS, RECORDS AND MONITORING PROCEDURES/RECORDS AVAILABILITY&RETENTION Pursuant to Minn. Stat. section 16C.05 subd. 5, the Consultant will: Maintain records which reflect all revenues, costs incurred and services provided in the performance of this Agreement. Agree that the County, the State Auditor, or legislative authority, or any of their duly authorized representatives at any time during normal business hours, and as often as they may deem reasonably necessary, shall have access to and the right to examine, audit, excerpt, and transcribe any books, documents, papers, records, etc., and accounting procedures and practices and involve transactions relating to this agreement. The Consultant agrees to maintain these records for a period of six(6) years from the date of the termination of this agreement. IX. JURISDICTION &VENUE This contract, amendments and supplements thereto, shall be governed by the laws of the State of Minnesota. All actions brought under this agreement shall be brought exclusively in Minnesota State Courts of competent jurisdiction with venue in Washington County. X. CONTRACTOR DEBARMENT, SUSPENSION AND RESPONSIBILITY CERTIFICATION Federal Regulation 45 CFR 92.35 prohibits the county from purchasing goods or services with federal money from vendors who have been suspended or debarred by the federal government. Similarly, Minnesota Statutes, Section 16C.03, subdivision 2, provides the Commissioner of Administration with the authority to debar and suspend vendors who seek to contract with the county. Consultants may be suspended or debarred when it is determined through a duly authorized hearing process, that they have abused the public trust in a serious manner. Page 9 of 12 16 of 59 St.Croix Valley Roadway Jurisdictional Study Washington County Public Works November 2017 By signing this agreement, the Consultant certifies that it and its principals*and employees: A. Are not presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared ineligible, or voluntarily excluded from transacting business by or with any federal, state, or local governmental department or agency; and B. Have not within a three year-period preceding this agreement: 1) been convicted of or had a civil judgment rendered against them for commission of fraud or a criminal offense in connection with obtaining, attempting to obtain or performing a public (federal, state, or local government)transaction or contract, 2)violated any federal or state antitrust statutes, or 3) committed embezzlement, theft, forgery, bribery, falsification or destruction of records, making false statements or receiving stolen property; and C. Are not presently indicted or otherwise criminally or civilly charged by a governmental entity for: 1) commission of fraud or a criminal offense In connection with obtaining, attempting to obtain or performing a public (federal, state, or local government) transaction, 2) violating any federal or state antitrust statutes, or 3) committing embezzlement, theft, forgery, bribery, falsification or destruction of records, making false statements or receiving stolen property; and D.Are not aware of any information and possess no knowledge that any subcontractor(s), that will perform work pursuant to this agreement, are in violation of any of the certifications set forth above; and E. Shall immediately give written notice to the contract manager should the Consultant come under investigation for allegations of fraud or a criminal offense in connection with obtaining or performing a public(federal, state, or local government)transaction, violating any federal or state antitrust statute, or committing embezzlement, theft, forgery, bribery,falsification of records, making false statements, or receiving stolen property. *Principals, for the purpose of this certification, means officers, directors, owners, partners, and persons having primary management or supervisory responsibilities within a business entity (e.g., general manager, plant manager, head of subsidiary division or business segment, and similar positions). XI. INDEMNIFICATION The Consultant agrees it will defend, indemnify and hold harmless the County, its officers and employees against any and all liability, loss, costs, damages, and expenses which the County, its officers, or employees may hereafter sustain, incur, or be required to pay arising out of the negligent or willful acts or omissions of the Consultant in the performance of this agreement. Page 10 of 12 17 of 59 St.Croix Valley Roadway Jurisdictional Study Washington County Public Works November 2017 XII. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS The Consultant agrees that in order to protect itself, as well as the County, under the indemnity provisions set forth above, it will at all times during the term of this Agreement. keep in force the following insurance protection in the limits specified: A. Commercial General Liability with contractual liability and Professional Liability coverage in the amount of the County's tort liability limits set forth in Minnesota Statute 466.04 and as amended from time to time. B. Automobile coverage in the amount of the County's tort liability limits set forth in Minnesota Statute 466.04 and as amended from time to time. C. Worker's Compensation in statutory amount. (if applicable) Prior to the effective date of this Agreement, the Consultant will furnish the County with a current and valid proof of insurance certificate indicating insurance coverage in the amounts required by this agreement. This certificate of insurance shall be on file with the County throughout the term of the agreement.As a condition subsequent to this agreement, Consultant shall insure that the certificate of insurance provided to the County will at all times be current. The parties agree that failure by the Consultant to maintain a current certificate of insurance with the County shall be a substantial breach of the contract and payments on the contract shall be withheld by the County until a certificate of insurance showing current insurance coverage in amounts required by the contract is provided to the County. Any policy obtained and maintained under this clause shall provide that it shall not be cancelled, materially changed, or not renewed without thirty days' notice thereof to the County. XIII. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR It will be agreed that nothing within the contract is intended or should be construed in any manner as creating or establishing the relationship of co-partners between the parties or as constituting the Consultant as the agent, representative, or employee of the County or the Public Works Department for any purpose or in any manner whatsoever. The Consultant is to be and shall remain an independent consultant with respect to all services performed under this agreement. The Consultant will secure, at its own expense, all personnel required in performing services under the agreement. Any and all personnel of the Consultant or other persons, while engaged in the performance of any work or services required by the Consultant under this agreement shall have no contractual relationship with the County or the Public Works Department and shall not be considered employees of the County or Public Works Department. XIV. MODIFICATIONS Any material alteration, modification, or variation shall be reduced to writing as an amendment and signed by the parties. Any alterations, modifications, or variations deemed clot to be material by agreement of the County and the Consultant shall not require written approval. Page 11 of 12 18 of 59 St.Croix Valley Roadway Jurisdictional Study Washington County Public Works November 2017 XV. MERGER It is understood and agreed that the entire agreement of the parties is contained here and that this contract supersedes all oral agreements and negotiations between the parties relating to this subject matter. All items referred to in this contract are incorporated or attached and deemed to be part of the contract. XVI. CANCELLATION The County may cancel this Agreement at any time upon giving fifteen (15) days written notice sent to the Consultant at the address above. XVII. SERVICES BEYOND THE SCOPE OF THIS CONTRACT Any additional tasks added to this project must be by written amendment to this Contract signed by both parties. Page 12 of 12 19 of 59 tNRYTOWNSHIP VV WasIXingtion PPE B Country ,. ;rw _ STIL-LWATER s l TOWNSHIP rM` z NQra��Q m x� 1 w 'F� 55 ^= -FST w x FAIRY illif � y.. e• s�'� �, ���"d' t'II.IE Sl'W,�� :�rrY-.. 64 - - � cHI3xcHu,I;mow_ ,; m ST.ILLWAiT.ER. is Inset I 64 �� A4YlCIrESTa STI•L'LWA�TER �ssrwr f ., aid m: cxuxctma,srw y s �T�sr.0 z (z K Sara ara OAK PAR HEIGHTS BAYTOWN TOWNSHIP 5THAVH6T LAKE _ EL-MO STfiAVHN BAYTOWN TOWNSHIP St. Croix Valley 30tH Si N r Jurisdiction Study This me p Is the resuk of a compilation WEST LAKELAND and reproduction of land rewrds as they 0 0.250.5 1 1.5 2 appear ii various Washington County ofices. .TOWNSHIP Thi m wl be.u;rrrefersnce parpase: ty.Washington Cuargy la not Miles responslb nor any inacq��lA 59 City of Oak Park Heights 14168 Oak Park Blvd. N•Box 2007.Oak Park Heights,MN 55082•Phone(651)439-4439•Fax(651)439-0574 10127/17 Andrew Giesen, EIT VIA EMAIL ONLY: andrew.giesen(&co.washington.mn.us Transportation Division Washington County Public Works Department 11660 Myeron Rd North Stillwater, MN 55082 RE:Jurisdictional Study—initial Feedback Dear Andrew: Thank you for sharing the draft of the RFP. As noted in the email I received on 10-26-17 —from County Staff— requesting feedback on this RFP within 7 calendar days-the City would appreciate the ability to comment further over the next month... But here it goes: 1. The general position taken (see pane two) in the RFP that this process is a COOPERATIVE process is a broad statement and to date the City of Oak Park Heights has not committed to participate in such a study— we would ask that this be amended.Understandably,as the County is paying the consultant and directing this project and work product,the consultant will be working intimately with County staff and following their lead and policies—accordingly this is not a joint or cooperative study.Accordingly,this should be edited to state that this study being solely undertaken by Washington County(or other parties based on some up-front buy- in agreement),but that it will seek input from other agencies or entities as the study may move forward. 2. As outlined on page two, the Consultant is to complete a municipal engagement process — as well as in Section 2.2.2—there should be some outline of what that might include. Moreover, please define what "consensus" means exactly, how would that be achieved and how would such data be used?There should alsn he a statement in the RFP that because there may be some"definitional"consensus. it does not mean any plan shall be implemented. 3. Section 2.4.1 outlines that the study would include reports that outline costs for maintenance, - Long term, short term and soft costs—this section should be amended to include what acceptable standard will be used to define and measure such costs — these measurements or estimates should be based on a accepted standard as approved by Minnesota municipal engineering or Minnesota public works entities. 4. It is reasonable to acknowledge that some entities may hesitate to participate if this process is believed to be predetermined to certain outcomes—such as those found in the Washington County Comprehensive plans (2030 versions)—See as attached—which essentially outline what roadways the County desires to shift to the City.Accordingly,there should be a clear statement in the RFP—prior to any formal process being initiated that the Consultant provide objective viewpoints—separate from County any County Comprehensive Plan. For your files,the City has attached a legal position dated; that offers information that neither the State nor the County may require that any roadway be transferred without another party's willing consent. The RFP should duly note these statutory elements and ensure that these are commonly referenced.These legal philosophies should be imbedded in the RFP and followed. 21 of 59 5. The RFP should note in Section 2.4.1 that no process outlined may deviate from any municipalities internal policies on roadway takeover.The City would like to have our current policy attached as an exhibit to this RFP as an example one municipalities process—as an example as to what a Consultant might be expected to work with for any future transfers requests that may result from the County's study. 6. The map provided in the RFP appears to incorrectly place certain lands in Oak Park Heights—please see the lands in the SE Quadrant of Manning Ave and STH 36—these lands are in Stillwater Township. This might just need a mapping edit—but should be clarified if possible. Beyond the elements of the RFP we have the following thoughts that we would ask all parties to consider: The City understands that there is likely a desire on the part of the County and State to divest itself of the financial responsibility of managing certain roads despite the fact that County and State residents regularly use such roads— well beyond the 4,600+/-residents of Oak Park Heights. As your office should understand the City will view this process critically as the financial implications can be significant. Based on a very cursory measurement of the roadways discussed in the RFP,the County/State would seek to have the City accept 2+miles of roadway—some of which are three-lanes wide and substantially un-assessable for reconstruction-yet only accept perhaps one-half mile in return. This likely presents a non-tenable financial situation for the City. Also, we all must acknowledge that this process—despite best intentions as outlined could likely place the entities in an adversarial position as it relates to final outcomes with parties who cannot agree with conclusions-or committing to shifts in roadway jurisdiction as being perceived as obstructionist or"not getting along". Simply because a study may conclude that a road is defined as city, county or state does not equate to that cost being shifted. We all must recall the historical perspectives of why current roadways exist and those commitments made at that point in history to establish such roads. These are legacy costs that all parties should understand that when a governmental unit builds a road-i.e.it is likely forever. Even though Oak Park Heights does not receive consistent State aids for its roadways—unlike the County or other jurisdictions,the City would of course consider a possible transfer or roads(both to or from)if these make economic sense to the City,improve the transportation system for City taxpayers and if these concepts are financially sustainable. If there are specific roads the County desires the City to consider taking over...these could be directly addressed now and follow the City's established process as attached—we would believe this would circumvent this protracted process and would likely save the County significant time and money in engaging in such a complex study.Perhaps there are roads that the City and County could agree that should change jurisdiction without such a process and these may be essentially cost neutral,but improve management,functionality and access. FOR EXAMPLE.df....If..there was a transfer of Paris Ave.(north of the STH 36 Bridge)to the City and a transfer of Oakgreen Ave to the County.it is possible these could be comparative in cost But we are unsure how this might be perceived from our local residents in terms of access and development opportunities.Each such suggestion would be complex and would likely no fat kdo a broad RFP/ Study met*—so there are pros and cons. ._ As mentioned above, we appreciate the ability to provide feedback and we look forward to discussing this matter further. Kind Regards, 22 of 59 CITY OF OAK PARK]HEIGHTS POLICY O"CITY ACCEPTANCE OR TAKEOVER OF ROADWAYS FROM OT]HER MUSDICTIO S The City currently has a deficit in its ability to fully fund the long-term care and maintenance of its current roadway systems.The consideration of the acceptance of additional roadways from other jurisdictions places even greater and unsustainable burden on the City's ability to fund and maintain such infrastructure.Accordingly, the City will not accept the"tarn back"or consider the acceptance of any roadways from the other government entities until such time as the following conditions are met: 1. Any public entity that desires the City to assume a roadway shall make that request in writing not less than 12 months prior to any potential action. 2. Any public entity thatt desires the City to consider a roadway takeover sball proaide the City detailed study(justification and analysis)regarding the proposed transfer. This study shall be performed by an independmt engimeermg farm capable of performing such task and shall include traffic studies,history of repairs and maintenance, cost-benefit analyses to the City and other impacted panties as well the anticipated results of the proposed project.This study shall be undertaken by the City at the expense of the proposing agency and which shall be paid for upfront by the proposing agency. 3. Public meetings shall be held and convened by the agency proposing to impact or transfer such roadways to the City,affected parties that are reasonably anticipated to be impacted by the proposal (both public and private) shall be inNited to the meeting(s)- 4- At a minimuan,.prior to tlhe City assuming any roadways, all such roadways that are proposed to be conveyed to the City shall fully reconstructed (or recently recc ustructed)by the proposing agency at their sole expense to the standards as may be minimally required by the City Engineer;including all crab and gutters and drainage systems inclusive of downstream control structures. All proposed street reconstruction subject to a proposed conveyance to the City shall comply with the in-effect watershed and MS4 rules. 5. The City shall not be required to fund any portion of such proposed reconstruction or secure needed right of ways of any roadways to be coanteyed to the City. If City lands are proposed to be used,these shall fust be purchased by the proposing 23 of 59 agency;or the City shall be compensated for such value as determined by the City Council. 6. Prior to any acceptance of a roadway, the City shall first be supplied with as upfront payment of not less than one-half of the second"life-cycle" cost of the street surace and its appurtenances including but not limited to:curb and gutter and pond maintenance. This shall generally include, tam "seal-coatings", one mW and overlay"and one full reconstruction of the street surfaces and curb dr gutters and minor and major pond maintenance_ This calculation shall be performed by the City Engineer subject to applicable Construction Cost Indexes. 7. The City shall not assume any roadways from another jurisdiction until such time as the City becomes fully eligible for State Road Aids as defined in MN STAT 162.09 S. The City Council may deviate from these policies for good cause and should make that finding in any related City Council resolution. 24 of 59 ✓ A14YTOPSHIP `,. Washington County F 51 STILL WATER s� TWNSFIIP Al, F Z , .,. 4 yy t p F � srw 'a r ' GRANT— FINEST W I ` '© 64. MCKUSICK RD N,1 CHHRCk11LL,STW Inset 64 66 � STIL'LWA�TE' 4 �. PINESTW a^ F f0 . 'CHURCHILLS[W IOti rpn+srH f ss 1> Z^ HEZGIITS I P - T. �ry -. OAK PAI& 4 - u — HEIGHTS +� +r -� 4 ' BAYTOWN BA LAKETOWNSHIPr�o�r \. 5rHAVEr�, ELMO - SIIInVEN 1 i C BRAI'P BAYTOWN = DP H r — r TOWNSMIP Covy��`f TAKE A MIMSTN I I q , St. Croix Valley Jurisdiction Study „1>s may is ma reaaR m a aamOWN WEST LAKELAND and nlnrQdaalon of�rle racorea as they TC WNSHIP aaaaar wr��a�alllaaroncourld a 0 0.250.5 1 1.5 2 neem aule.ba.aaaEkrlefererce Miles Wrymaa - NpeHnglan s.net raaponsihldl5or alry Inaala �y -AMMMM" . d � � � �6 .� \ � � J $ � Wmhincyton \ County m. : \ ( 2030 Comprehensive Plan , � A Policy Guide to 2030 \ Transportation . � Approved by Board of Commissioners May 26 2009 \ Adopted by Boal of Commissioners September 7, 2010 i 26 of 59 II DDD 4-20: Integrate trails and pedestrian and bicycle uses into the design of roadway and transit facilities as appropriate. 4-21: Identify and support trail connections that provide links to parks,cultural and historic resources,and community destinations. 4-22: Provide safe and appropriate trail crossings and access to the county roadway system. ,C1 4-23: Comply with the American with Disabilities Act(ADA) «` and guidelines for new and reconstructed trail and roadway projects. Future Transportation Needs Highways and Roads g 9 Ys Proposed Functional Classification The roadway functional classification system provides guidelines for designing a roadway network for safe and efficient R j, movement of people.The functional classification defines a C roadway's purpose and use and assists in evaluating operations. p It is crucial,when soliciting federal funds,that the roadway is correctly classified so that it competes with roadways having Rt similar characteristics. � The county reviewed the functional classification of all county c roadways in March 2007.Changes proposed at that time were n approved by the Metropolitan Council and are included in C N Figure 4-3 Road Functional Classification in the Existing U Conditions section.These proposed changes include: [� ■ CSAH 35 from Trunk Highway 36 to CSAH 13 and CSAH 13 0 from CSAH 35 to Trunk Highway 5: Change from a major c d collector to a minor arterial. o ■ CSAH 2 from Trunk Highway 61 to Trunk Highway 97: ' Change from a minor collector to a major collector. o o Env a;: c y � � C 4 N p age 14-49 27 of 59 nq I Proposed Jurisdictional Classification Figure 4-15 shows the candidate for changes in jurisdiction for roadways within the county.The changes represent a closer alignment between the level of government owning and maintaining the roadway and the manner in which the roadway functions to meet local,county,regional,or statewide needs. Factors that are considered when determining potential jurisdictional transfers include historical practices,legal requirements,type of trips served(purpose and length), funding,traffic volumes,access controls,maintenance issues, and functional classification.Additional information regarding jurisdictional classifications transfer decisions is available in Appendix 4-A. Table 4-8 lists the recommended changes and shows the approximate roadway mileage for each roadway segment. Washington County is recommending a transfer of 40.9 miles from MN/DOT to Washington County,4.6 miles from local to Washington County,and 24.3 miles from county to local,for a total net gain of 27.9 miles in county jurisdiction. 2030 Forecasts and Capacity Year 2030 Base Traffic Model The 2030 traffic model projects the traffic forecasts for the county's roadways. The traffic forecasts are an essential analytical tool to approximate the adequacy of the road system to handle planned future development.The model uses community land use plans and development objectives to project 2030 household, population,and employment data for sub-areas of the county called traffic-analysis zones(TAZs). Appendix 4-B contains a summary of the methodology used to develop the traffic forecasts and Appendix 4-C contains a map of and the data for the TAZs. 71.ma Page j4-S0 28 of 59 Figure 4-15 g�- FOREST LAK Candidate Jurisdictional SCANDIA SARIS Classification Changes °' MAY t C I ' T WN IP • � T I Hugo V A5 8 ATEW MAX O DI e BIRD 00 = - OHAN T• i_ r VILLA ,, LER SE 1 t BEA County to Local(24.3 miles) !\'K.',.rRA K TS Local to County(4.6 miles) N C,,�{' Q #"NINNii State to County(40.9 miles) AMS L6. +: TOWN T MllcagesalespprolriRlste. 3.; , B, t• — TO NSNSRt r LAKE r-.. r. is s., ELYO Y11ELK'REN I T WS_Srlll, ♦ i._Y` '11 S r4. LA E D 4_ LL —12 (10 y., 1- LA �4LJr'./ 7 - �@ _ AKE AND r 4 t Y;i '? •` AKE T AFT LQ 3 WOODBURY M; 0 \' U rn 8T 'k 4 xL � Q N +� N C x .1 E ..� �, �` COTTAGE D ORC.VE OR LO .D `'* __ - DENMARK Q /IB ND �j-'._ .. --._.TOWNSHI U ow SNI. t' b S C _ B h 0 1 2 3 4 5 C Miles \ Prepared By.Washington County GIS Support Unit,IT Department {` Data Source:The Lawrence Group-2007 NA 70 t~ , Page 14-51 29 of 59 �e r Table 4-8 Candidate Jurisdictional Changes Washington County Roadway From7- To Loci!Community Wes) k A/D07mwad+in� Trunk Highway 5 West county line Trunk Highway 36 Oakdale,Lake Elmo 8.8 Trunk Highway 61 South county line in North county line in Hugo,Forest Lake 13.0 Hugo Forest Lake Trunk Highway 96 West county line Trunk Highway 95 Dellwood,Grant, 9.5 Stillwater Township, Stillwater Trunk Highway 120(1) Woodbine Avenue Trunk Highway 244 Maplewood,Oakdale, 9.6 North St Paul,Mahtomedi, White Bear Lake Total Miles 40.9 Local to Wifashlinxion U,,itr,ty Jamaica Avenue South CSAH 20 CSAH 22 Cottage Grove 0.9 Valley Creek Road CSAH 19 Trunk Highway 95 Woodbury 2.0 Everton Avenue North 220 Street N CSAH 2 Forest Lake 0.8 221f Street North West county line Everton Avenue Forest Lake 0.4 North 5. t c°t ketal: CSAH 24 R Panama Avenue Oak Park Heights G.'3 t GrL'C,ro Aveiiu' f 4.f N 62 Street N Oak Park Heights 0.2 Frontage Road Total Miles 4.6 Waddrow County to LOG41 CSAH 2 Trunk Highway 61 Trunk Highway 97 Forest Lake 7.0 CSAH 34 Trunk Highway 61 Trunk Highway 97 Forest Lake 1.2 CSAR 20 Jamaica Avenue S CSAH 19 Cottage Grove 1.2 CR 66 TH 36 Orieans Street W Stillwater 0.5 County Road 71 CSAH 20 CSAH 10 Afton,West Lakeland 6.0 Township County Road 74 Hastings Avenue CSAH 13 Newport, Cottage Grove 2.2 CR 75 105 Street S 14 Avenue St Paul Park and Grey 2.5 ' Cloud Island Township CSAH 23 CSAH 24 CSAH 21 Stillwater,Oak Park 1.4 Heights CSAH 28 Stagecoach Trail N TH 95 Oak Park Heights,Bayport 0.2 County Road 13B CSAH 13/CSAH 35 Trunk Highway 36 Lake Elmo 2.1 Total Miles 24.3 (1) Jurisdiction will be Jointly held with Ramsey County (2) Jurisdiction will be with Anoka County and/or Washington County. - oldrIty Page 14-52 30 of 59 C; Appendix 4-A Jurisdictional Transfer Guidelines Issues and factors,which must be considered when determining potential jurisdictional change include historical practices,type of trips served(purpose and length),connectivity,traffic volumes,access controls,functional classification, legal requirements,and funding and maintenance issues.The following guidelines were developed to provide a basis to review the routes in Washington County for potential jurisdictional transfers.These guidelines will not determine if the jurisdictional transfer is politically acceptable,nor do they establish a timeframe under which transfers may occur. However,they define an approach for arriving at logical jurisdictional designations. Once there is agreement on how the jurisdictional designations should be established,an ongoing jurisdictional transfer process will need to be developed to address issues such as the financial implications for construction and maintenance of the facility, operational implications(perceived level of service,ability to maintain), perceived fairness in the distribution of route responsibilities,and timing of transfer. It is not anticipated that all guideline criteria must be met in order for a jurisdictional change to be recommended.However, the more criteria a route addresses,the stronger the case for recommending it as a transfer. State Jurisdiction Normally state jurisdiction routes are characterized as follows: ■ Classified as either a principal or minor arterial. ■ Typically longer routes serving statewide and interstate trips that connect larger population and business centers. • Spaced at intervals that are consistent with population density,such that all developed areas of the state are within reasonable distance of an arterial.(As a guide, rural arterial routes are considered to"serve"a community if it is within 10 miles or 20 minutes travel time on a minor arterial). WP a g e 14-92 31 of 59 Appendix 4-A • Typically have design features(such as properly spaced access points)that are intended to promote higher travel speeds.They also accommodate more truck movements. ■ Typically carry the major portion of trips entering and leaving urban areas as well as the majority of trips bypassing central cities. County Jurisdiction Typically,county jurisdiction routes are characterized as follows: Rural Areas • Functionally classified as a minor arterial,major collector,or minor collector. ■ Provide essential connections and links not served by the principal and other minor arterial routes. They serve adjacent larger towns that are not directly served by principal and minor arterial routes and they provide service to major traffic generators that have intra-county importance. • Spaced at intervals that are consistent with population density so as to provide reasonable access to arterial or collector routes in developed areas. ■ Provide links between local traffic generators and outlying rural areas. Within Urban Boundaries • Classified as either principal or minor arterial routes. • Carry higher-traffic volumes or provide access to major regional traffic generators(shopping centers,education centers,major industrial complexes). ■ Provide connections and continuity to major rural collector routes accessing the urban area and provide continuity within the urban area,but do not divide homogeneous neighborhoods. • Emphasize higher mobility features than other local minor arterial routes(i.e.,some form of access management or access control). VVAsbkXtM Page 1 4-93 32 of 59 i ' Appendix 4-A City Jurisdiction Arterial routes within the urban area should be considered for city jurisdiction if they are characterized as follows: ■ Short segments(less than three miles)with a moderate volume of traffic(3,000 to 8,000 ADT). ■ Higher local land access needs and close intersection spacing(promotion of local land access over mobility). ■ Close spacing with other arterial routes and shorter trip lengths such as found in central business district(CBD)areas ■ Provide no,or very limited,continuity to outlying rural areas. Urban arterials tend to have shorter trip lengths than rural arterials or collectors. ■ Serve small geographic travelsheds. ■ Provide on-street parking or other amenities that discourage the use of the route as a regional route (promotion of local access and adjacent land use activities at the street edge). Collectors and local streets that provide property access and local traffic circulation are normally under city jurisdiction. These streets typically constitute 65 to 80 percent of the entire urban system mileage and are characterized as follows: Shorter in length (less than 1.5 miles)and carry low to medium volumes of traffic(500 to 3,000 ADT). ■ Provide land access and traffic circulation to residential neighborhoods and to commercial and industrial areas(high access low mobility functions). Divide homogeneous residential neighborhoods to distribute trips to arterial street system or their final trip destination. Township Jurisdiction Customarily,township jurisdiction rural routes are characterized as follows: ■ Low traffic volumes(less than 500 ADT). g*_--Cz� Page 14-94 33 of 59 Appendix 4-A ® Classified as local roadways on the functional classification system. ■ Provide access to adjacent property. • Link outlying rural areas to county roads(CR)or County State Aid Highways(CSAH);the route length is usually less than five miles between CR or CSAHs. ■ Primarily serve farmsteads,small rural subdivisions, rural churches/cemeteries,and agricultural facilities. ■ Irregular access spacing, but most often provide access to farms,field entrances,and they sometimes"T"with other roadways or dead-end. Page 14-95 34 of 59 Ramsey/Washington- 2785 White Bear Ave. Suite 350 RECYCLING & Office:651-266wood,MN-1199 Office:651-266-1199 ENERGY BOARD Fax: lest 66-1177 i nfo�morevaluelesstra sh.com morevaluelesstrash.com October 26,2017 Re: Tipping Fee Changes To: Municipalities and School Districts of Ramsey and Washington Counties The Recycling&Energy Center(R&E Center)tipping fee for trash from Ramsey and Washington counties will be $77.00 per ton in 2018 and$79.00 per ton in 2019.The hauler rebate for trash from Ramsey and Washington counties taken to the R&E Center will be$12.00 per ton in 2018 and$10.00 per ton in 2019. Please visit www.morevaluelesstrash.com for the legal definitions and stipulations associated with tipping fees and hauler rebates. Public entity waste from outside of Ramsey and Washington counties may be delivered to the R&E Center in 2018 at a tipping fee of$94.00 per ton. Background Working together, Ramsey and Washington counties own and operate the R&E Center,which recovers resources from trash from the two counties, instead of putting it into landfills.By doing this,tens of thousands of tons of metal are recycled,and fuel is produced that is used by Xcel Energy to provide enough electricity to power over 20,000 homes. With the purchase of the R&E Center,the plans are to include more recovery of recyclables and different forms of energy. Beginning in 2018,the counties will require that haulers deliver all trash from Ramsey and Washington counties to be processed, rather than be taken to a landfill. Buying the R&E Center has allowed the counties to reduce costs—in 2015,under private ownership,the cost for a hauler to deliver one ton of trash was$86.22. In 2016 and 2017,the counties charged$70.00 per ton. In 2018, the charge is$77.00 per ton.In addition,for a number of years the counties have provided a rebate to haulers as an incentive to deliver trash to the facility.That rebate will be at the same level in 2018, but is being reduced in 2019,and will eventually be eliminated.When that happens,the fee charged to haulers will be the full cost of handling the trash they collect from customers. Disposal costs(tipping fee)are typically only one third of a trash bill.The rest of the bill is related mainly to collection costs. Like any other business, haulers incur cost increases,such as insurance, labor, etc.that may be passed on to customers. Benefits The decision by Ramsey and Washington counties to purchase the R&E Center and require that all trash(after recycling)from Ramsey and Washington counties be taken to the R&E Center to be processed was important because processing trash, rather than landfilling it, has many benefits, including: • Economic Benefits o Createsjobs o Supports the local economy • Environmental Benefits o Reduces landfilling o Increases recycling 35 of 59 o Reduces greenhouse gas emissions o Enables trash to be used to create energy using existing and emerging technologies • Statutory Benefits o Enables Ramsey and Washington counties to meet objectives set by the state to ■ Minimize landfilling ■ Maximize recycling For more information,visit www.morevaluelesstrash.com. For questions,please contact Joe Wozniak at ioe.wozniak@co.ramsey.mn.us or 651-266-1187. Sincerely, Recycling&Energy Board Joint Leadership Team Zack Hansen Judy Hunter Sean Pfeiffer 36 of 59 • Department of Public Health and Environment Lowell Johnson co&ty Director David Brummel Deputy Director 10/24/17 Eric Johnson,City Administrator City of Oak Park Heights 14168 Oak Park Blvd.N. PO Box 2007 Oak Park Heights, MN 55082 RE: Input on Draft Washington County Waste Management Master Plan 2018-2038 Dear Eric, Thank you for taking the time to review and provide input on the draft Washington County Waste Management Master Plan 2018-2038(Plan).Cities and townships in the county are key in meeting the waste objectives in the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency(MPCA) Metropolitan Solid Waste Management Policy Plan 2016-2036. The Plan has always included specific direction and expected actions for cities and townships. These reflect a number of state statutes directing city and township responsibilities in waste and recycling.For example, MN §115A.551 Subd.2a specifically requires"each county develop and implement or require political subdivisions within the county to develop and implement programs,practices,or methods designed to meet is recycling goal".Additional responsibilities of cities and townships with both this Plan and in previous ones are to: • Provide communication, information,and public education to residents and businesses, • Manage residential recycling programs including multi-family housing, • Meet recycling goals and ensure residents have opportunity to recycle, • Lead in recycling and waste reduction at city and township facilities,and • Maintain consistency of recycling programs,contracts,or ordinances with county waste management master plan. As always,the County works jointly with cities and townships on the plan strategies.Your primary concerns appear to be clarification in city role in meeting requirements, new mandates or expectations, and undue burden to the city.The city has a role in meeting MPCA waste objectives,but the county will continue providing assistance and partnering with cities and township to develop the pathways to implement the strategies as has been done in previous plans. Government Center • 14949 62nd Street North—P.O. Box 6, Stillwater, Minnesota 55082-0006 Phone: 651-430-6655 • Fax: 651-430-6730 • TTY: 651-430-6246 www.co.washington.mn.us Equal Employment Opportunity/Affirmative Action to HVA►x c 37 of 59 � Primary funding sources for these programs are provided through state recycling funds and the County Environmental Charge.Also,some of your comments pertained to policies carried over from preceding plans and questions on how these will be implemented.The policies provide overall direction from the county board,where the strategies are specific to implementation.Changes have been made to the Plan addressing some of your concerns and add clarity to the intent of policies or strategies in question. Again,thank you for taking the time to review.The revised draft has been changed to reflect your comments.Cities and townships will receive notice when a final Plan is approved by the MPCA expected later this year or early January 2018. Please contact me with further questions at 651-430-6713. Sincerely, %17 ✓ ' Nicole Stewart Environmental Resource Supervisor cc: Jennifer Pinski,City of Oak Park Heights Clerk Molly O'Rourke,County Administrator Kevin Corbid,County Deputy Administrator Lowell Johnson,County Department Director Judy Hunter,County Department Senior Program Manager 2 38 of 59 Eric Johnson From: Armstrong, Susan (DOC) <susan.armstrong@state.mn.us> Sent: Wednesday,October 25, 2017 11:35 AM To: Adam Bell;Armstrong,Susan (DOC); Bohn, Sherry(DOC); Brent Wartner (brent.wartner@co.washington.mn.us); Brian DeRosier, Dan Starry, Eric Johnson; Fred Fink;jgannaway@ci.stillwater.mn.us;fil l.strong@co.wash ington.mn.us; Karin Housely (sen.karin.housley@senate.mn); Laura Eastman; Mary McComber (marymccomber@aol.com); Miles, Eddie (DOC); Pawelk, Chris (DOC); pete.orput@co.washington.mn.us; Reishus, Dave(DOC); Rep. Kathy Lohmer (rep.kathy.lohmer@house.mn);S.Taylor(staylor@ci.bayport.mn.us);Smith, Michelle L (DOC);Susan St.Ores (sstores@ci.bayport.mn.us);tom.adkins@co.washington.mn.us; Wanchpna-Virtnr fnc)r)-Whpplpr Charlinrla R lr)nr) Subject: Community Advisory Committee Meeting - November 1, 2017 Hi Everyone, Just a reminder that the next Community Advisory Committee meeting is Wednesday,November 1,2017 at 2:00 pm. This meeting will be held at MCF-Stillwater in the Warden's Conference Room in the main facility. Please RSVP and forward any agenda items you may have to me by Monday 10/30/17. We look forward to seeing you on the 1nl Thank you. Sue ,Armstrong Executive Assistant I Warden's Office MCF—Stillwater 970 Pickett Street North Bayport, MN 55003 0: 651-779-2706 Contributing to a safer Minnesota I mn.eov/doc "nDEEUT .. ,,, ,,,, This email is intended to be read only by the intended recipient.This email may be legally privileged or protected from disclosure by law. If you are not the intended recipient,any dissemination of this email or any attachments is strictly prohibited,and you should refrain from reading this email or examining any attachments. If you received this email in error,please notify the sender immediately and delete this email and any attachments. Thank you. 1 39 of 59 Invoice Number: 258405 Membership Dues Invoice Effective during 2017-2018 O j EAGU E of MINNESOTA CITIES City of Oak Park Heights Dues Amount: $5,065 (Dues amount rounded to nearest dollar.) Population:4,712 (Population represents the 2016 State Demographer and Metropolitan Council Estimates.) Dues are based on your population.See how we calculated your dues at:www.Ime.org/dues For membership dues in the League of Minnesota Cities for the year beginning September 1,2017.Annual dues for membership in the League of Minnesota Cities include subscriptions to Minnesota Cities magazine.* Pursuant to the disclosure requirements of Minnesota Statutes,Section 6.76,the proportionate amount of dues spent for lobbying purposes is 9.8%.This percentage is reported to the State Auditor as required by statute. Payment from Public Funds Authorized by Minn.Stats,Sec.465.58 I declare under the penalties of law that the foregoing account is just and correct and that no part of it has been paid. Please Remit To: Finance Department Dated: September 1,2017 League of Minnesota Cities 145 University Ave W St Paul,MN 55103-2044 David Unmacht Include this invoice or reference Executive Director,League of Minnesota Cities invoice#258405 on your payment. Questions:billing@lmc.org Phone:(651)281-1200 *Arcual dues include subscriptions w Minnesota Cides magazine at$30 per subscription according to the following schedule based on population.249 or less,6;250-4999,11;5000-9999,15;10000-19999,20;20000-49999,25;50000-299999,30;300000+,35.For fiu&w information on subscriptions contact the League offices.This information is given in order to meet postal regulations.Please do not use as a basis for payment. The League will routinely communicate via e-mail with your city's staff and elected officials as part of your membership in the League. 40 of 59 i ,. 40 fee " 4 f' j dl � x A b MESSAGE FROM EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR DAVID UNMACHT Working Together for Success The League of and value.We are motivated by three • Federal advocacy. Our Minnesota Cities primary principles: 1)Power of our Intergovernmental Relations (LMC)has mission;2) Strength of our culture; team—in collaboration with ^" certainly had a and 3) Respect for our members. you—does an outstanding job of _".. lot of ups and These are the principles that drive advocating for cities at the state downs over the our committment to our members. Capitol.We want to increase last year. Lots A big part of these principles our influence at the federal of triumphs and involves collaborating,engaging,and level.We will work to increase trials. connecting—with our members and understanding of federal policies During this year,for example, other organizations. and strengthen relationships with we reintroduced our Legislative our members of Congress. Conference with attendance that Two of the priorities • Community engagement. Our surpassed expectations;we lost long- 2017-2018 President Jo Emerson, time League staff to untimely passing we will focus on in mayor of White Bear Lake,is and planned retirement;and we the next year are challenging us to find innovative initiated efforts in the areas of race federal advocacy and ways to help cities energize a new equity,information technology,and community engagement. class of future leaders.She plans federal advocacy.Many of you have to focus her presidential year on joined us in these initiatives and that encouraging all cities and citizens engagement is the key to success. Upcoming agenda to"Celebrate Public Service." The year ahead will see us develop We are making these issues a priority Our driving forces strategies and advance existing because you—our members—have In my two years as League executive priorities.You can read about our race told us that these are important director,I have learned how the equity and information technology objectives to support the work in your League and the League of Minnesota initiatives in articles by staff members city. I look forward to continuing to Cities Insurance Trust(LMCIT) in this report.Two other priorities we work together with you to advance function while maintaining relevancy will focus on in the next year are: these initiatives. LMCIT Leader Passes the Torch _. 7 1By Dan Greensweig Note:Pete Tritz retired as administrator of LMCIT in July 2017.He joined the League in 1974 and led the launch of the insurance trust in 1980. Dan Greensweig, " who has been LMOT's assistant administrator since 2010,is the new administrator. l ~ When I first met Pete Tritz in 1992,LMCIT had been around for more than a decade,the product of hard work,imagination,and a commitment to doing the right thing.It wasn't all Pete,of course,but he's always been at the center of it. So,what do you say to someone like that—a person who helped Minnesota cities build and experiment,and led LMCIT to its place as one of the most widely respected self-insurance pools in the country?There's meworin"' its. only one thing you can say:Thank you.Thank you for your creativity,your dedication,and your belief in public service. Lgill"; Its to And for myself and the others who have known and worked with Pete over the years,thank you for that privilege.Thank you for mentoring us, its think. and even challenging us to do better,making us think,and even making us laugh.Most important,thank you for being a valued celleaAle and e-heriah wi£rlpn�i 42 of 59 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES ANNUAL REPORT 2016-2017 CONNECTING Race Equity: Seeking a Culture of Acceptance By Alicia Thoj,LMCIT Claims Examiner I live in two worlds: one is being We have spent many hours learning strategies and working a Hmong woman,and the other on a race equity plan for the League.Through this work,we is being an American citizen.I seek to empower cities to build a new culture of acceptance remember a time when I realized I for all people. * .., was living in a society where only one One of the main strategies is to focus on community of my identities was recognized. engagement.That means connecting directly with After a hike with my family,we communities of color to collaborate on ideas for building stopped at a gas station.While stronger communities. Sounds easy,right?The truth is, my dad got gas,my siblings and I if you have never had a friend or family member from a wandered inside to buy something from the colorful candy4G different ethnic background,this aisle. I was no more than 10 years old,but I noticed a store The Leagues may not come easy.You may employee watching us closely,afraid we would steal the commitment to need to make an intentional candy.Nothing was stolen,nor did we purchase anything, advancing race effort. because we left feeling hurt and misunderstood. What if we all placed ourselves This is only one example of the many times that, as a equity—and the in the shoes of someone of a Hmong-American,I've been misunderstood,marginalized, steps many cities different race or ethnicity?This or disempowered. That's why when I was invited to join are taking to do could be done by shopping at the League's race equity cohort,I enthusiastically accepted ethnic markets, attending cultural the opportunity. the Same— festivals,trying the foods that The League's Board of Directors made it a priority this is inspiring." other cultures love,becoming year to study the issue of race equity and what role the friends with our neighbors, League could play in helping cities provide services in —Rhonda Posmyo and learning from each other. an equitable way for all residents.As part of this effort, Northfield mayor Something amazing happens we teamed up with the Government Alliance on Race when we stop to breathe in the aromas of the cultures and Equity(GARS).With the help of GARS,the League surrounding us:our minds and hearts begin to see the sponsors race equity cohorts—groups of government beauty in the many cultures,languages,traditions,and officials that meet regularly to learn how they can advance beliefs that bring life to Minnesota.That's what makes our race equity. (Learn more at www.Ime.org/equity.) state so unique! The second LMC/GARE cohort was formed in January As I reflect on the memory of feeling misunderstood as 2017,and the League decided to have a group of its own a young girl,I am reminded there is a greater hope for the staff members participate.Our staff group is made up of children of the future. I am no longer discouraged,but am people with a variety of ethnic backgrounds—both white empowered as I work with influential leaders in this cohort and non-white—and I am honored to be a part of it. who also desire equity for everyone.The League intends to be the catalyst in this area for Minnesota cities,and I am committed to the work that is ahead of us. fla re rare zl fA2%v more exanlplc,s 0f llow flaw 1,e ague prr,-inoted nate€-a.luity: The thi.111c (if the 2017 '1'lae 2017 Armand A webinsar on We partnered with Leadership Conference for Conference had :a trach unconscious Misr• GARE to present as rake 11XI)ericFlee Ll Officials-kN.as +aai °'0-cating luelaasi�°e xvaas presented in egraitV tr.rinirlg seHCS "Adv ancint:; R aci*al l elaart { rYrrraaaartaities." iwlsav 2017. frar Cleeled city eatficiaals. resources .. 2016-2017 - • . legal • • regulation of drones, and smali cell wireless deployment. 43 of 59 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES I ANNUAL REPORT 2016-2017 ENGAGING Cities Step Up to Support Local Control By Anne Finn,LMC Assistant Intergovernmental Relations Director I have a few interference at the local level.Little by legislative sessions little,the bills started to lose traction. f under my belt-21 Legislators began to express privately to be exact. One that they were uncomfortable with the thing I've learned is bills after hearing from city officials that every session unhappy with the Legislature's scrutiny has a defining issue. of community leaders.Gov.Dayton,too, • "• There was the When became more year of the"Jesse key vocal about • Checks,"a one-time sales tax rebate in legislative his opposition ■ r 2000 that gave every taxpayer an average issues arise, like to provisions - « of,$600.The year 2006 brought major aimed at maintaining local changes to property rights laws through COnti"Ol 'tee rel On usurping local eminent domain reform.The 2013 + y control. Legislature redefined marriage the League to help A few of the in Minnesota.And let's not forget the us respond. They bills did make multiple sessions that were focused did not disappoint it to the finish around building stadiums for our beloved line,but in athletic teams. in 2017. watered-down I believe 2017 will be remembered —Heidi Omersversions.New .■ a., as the year cities successfully fought Ely councilmember laws include • back against numerous challenges to a prohibition • local authority.More than 30 bills that on plastic bag ban ordinances and an a . would interfere with local control were LGA offset for cities that implement .■ - introduced in 2017.There were bills "unauthorized"pre-trial diversion to require reverse referendums,bills to programs.A bill pre-empting local withhold local government aid(LGA)to employment ordinances reached the penalize cities for various policies,and governor's desk,but was vetoed. bills to prohibit local ordinances. As frustrating as it was to watch all City officials refused to sit idly as this happening at the Capitol,it was legislators worked to strip away the also inspiring to see our community t authority of local elected leaders.With of cities unite around the idea that guidance from the League,more than local elected officials are quite capable 70 cities passed resolutions in support of implementing policies for their of local control. constituents.It was a privilege for your This engagement by city officials intergovernmental relations team to be prompted dozens of newspapers to publish your unapologetic advocates for local stories questioning the need for state decision-making authority. 4 1 . I • « 11 ■_ 4 9 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES ANNUAL REPORT 2016-2017 COLLABORATING LMC's Technology Efforts Pave the Way for Cities By Melissa Reeder,LMC Chief Information Officer My first year as Security efforts the League's CIO Email-based phishing scams continue has been a year of to be the top threat to the government learning for me, sector. Reports indicate that the but we also made number of attacks have increased progress on many drastically in recent years, and they technology goals continue to get more sophisticated. set before I was Spam is not just a nuisance,it is a hired. I am looking primary delivery mechanism for attacks. • -• forward to tackling new projects over the The League rolled out a security next year. program that includes simulated email The League's technology accomplish- scams,training,and a method for our ■ ments this year are due to a dedicatedCities will continue staff to and talented staff.This group operates identify behind the scenes to ensure we are to look toward id inting able to effectively deliver all our services technology to better emails. to members. serve their citizens. After this experience, Key initiatives we were able to share what we learned •• .11 This year,in addition to going live with with members at our 2017 Safety and our new finance system,we upgraded Loss Control Workshops.We are also ` several internal applications.One key available to help cities that are interested " r- initiative was implementing Office365. in learning more about this issue. • •• This software forged our way into using • cloud services and gave us expanded What's next? -•- applications and services,tools for Cities will continue to look toward collaboration,and long-term budget technology to better serve their sustainability.We documented our citizens.Likewise,our citizens expect experience so we can share lessons action and information on demand. learned with our members. We are determined to help find new Another key initiative was the launch ways for our member cities,both of our online LMCIT Member Center. small and large,to use collaborative It allows members to access their opportunities,group pricing,and cloud { property/casualty claim information, services,so they can make the most of compare their claim history to that their technology investment.Because • of other cities,and submit mid-term technology is rapidly changing the way • schedule changes all from the comfort cities deliver services,the League will • • of their home or office. continue to lead and advocate policy »• development on behalf of cities. I' 111111 R •• • •- LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES ANNUAL REPORT 2016-2017 � ,4 Connecting the Numbers to Our Mission Financial stability is key to ensuring we can deliver on our mission of promoting excellence in local government through effective advocacy, Id LMC Expenditures&Transfers expert analysis,and trusted guidance for all Minnesota cities.The Salaries&Benefits numbers added up to a solid financial base that allowed us to deliver the many resources and services we offered to you this past year. $9^2511* Contractual Services • LMC added three new • LMCIT had a combined net Transfers to Capital Improvement Fund members and had 100 percent position of$176 million and member retention;of the 853 assets of,469 million. Operational cities in Minnesota,98 percent e In December 2016,LMCIT's are members of the League. property/casualty program LMC Revenues LMC had a net position of distributed dividends totaling ,,, $12.1 million and assets of $25 million. ,' JDues $20.6 million.The League . At year end,the 4M Fund hit an $9,824,829 °) Non-Dues met its fiscal policy of all-time high,with investments LMCIT Cost Sharing maintaining a 40 percent exceeding$860 million. 9 reserve of the subsequent a LMC,LMCIT,and 4M Fund Institutional Fee year's net operating budget. audits had clean opinion letters. P Numbers are from fiscal year 2016(9/1/15-9/1/16),the most recent audited numbers. LMC BOARD OF DIRECTORS, 2016-2017 (LMCIT BOARD OF TRUSTEES, 2017 President Dave Smiglewski CHAIR Rhonda Pownell Mayor,City of Granite Falls Todd Prafke Mayor,City of Northfield Kevin Staunton Past League President First Vice President Councilmember,City of Edina City Administrator, Jo Emerson City of St.Peter Mayor,City of White Bear Lake Randy Staver Councilmember,City of Rochester Second Vice President TRUSTEES Heidi Omenta Chris Tolbert Jake Benson Special thanks to Councilmember,City of St Paul two long-term Councilmember,City of Ely Councilmember, Brad Wiersum City of Proctor LMCIT trustees who DIRECTORS Councilmember,City of Minnetonka recently left the Dave Canister Board. Little Canada Tim Busse City Manager, EX-OFFICIO City of Plymouth City Administrator Councilmember,City of Bloomington Joel Hanson LMC Past President Clinton Gridley Mark Casey Steve Nasby City Administrator, served 16 years, City Manager,City of St.Anthony Village and Princeton City City Administrator,City of Windom City of Woodbury Elizabeth Glidden Administrator Counciimember,City of Minneapolis Ron J Representative C Love Mark Karnowski Ron Johnson Councilmember, Sue Hilgert Councilmember,City of Bemidji City of Centerville served nine years. Mayor,City of Olivia (Replaced Robert Broader,former Mayor of Le Sueur,midyear) Rhonda Pownell Shaunna Johnson Mayor,City of Northfield City Administrator,City of Waite Park Metro Cities Representative (Replaced GaryWillhite,former Mayor Anne Mavity David Unmacht of Crookston,midyear) Councilmember,City of St.Louis Park Executive Director, League of Minnesota Cities Brent Mareck MAOSC Representative City Manager,City of Carver Tina Rennemo Mike Mornson City Clerk-Treasurer,City of Baudette City Manager,City of Hopkins 02017 League of Minnesota Cities.All Rights Reserved. LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES I ANNUAL REPORT 2016-2017 46 of 59 1 Valley Branch Watershed District Regular Meeting#969 Agenda October 26,2017 ..>; Baytown Township Community Building 4020 McDonald Drive North, Baytown Township, MN Estimated Time Item 7:00 p.m. I. CALL TO ORDER IL ANNOUNCEMENTS M. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES OF 10/12/2017 IV. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA (Additions/Corrections/Deletions/Reorganization) V. PUBLIC FORUM Anyone wishing to address the Board of Managers on an item not on the agenda or on the consent calendar may come forward at this time. 7:05 p.m. VI. REPORTS A. Citizens Advisory Committee R Secretary C. Inspector 0 4767 McDonald Drive Circle North, Baytown Township D. Attorney 7:20 p.m. E. Engineer 1. Flood Levels within the Tri-Lakes and Beutel Pond Watersheds 7:50 p.m. F. Managers 1. Consent Calendar 2. Website 3. Meeting Recordings 4. Sally Manzara Interpretive Nature Center 8:50 P.M. G. Treasurer VII FUTURE MEETINGS AND BUSINESS A. Meeting with Washington County Commissioners and staff regarding Sunnybrook Lake-Washington County Government Center; 12:30 p.m., October 30, 2017 B. Valley Branch Watershed District Meetings.Baytown Township Community Building;7.00 p.m.;November 9 and December 14, 2017 C. Washington County Commissioners'Meeting with Watershed Organizations:Washington County Government Center,9:00 a.m.; November 14,2017 • Items in bold signify that an action needs to be taken by the Board. DAVID BUCHECK • LINCOLN FETCHER JILL LUCAS EDWARD MARCHAN ANTHONY RAIDER y+' � VALLEY BRANCH WATERSHED DISTRICT PO.BQX 838 TAKE ELMO,iJ11NNESOTA55042-0538 www.vbwd.org 47 of 59 Valley Branch Watershed District October 26,2017, Meeting Agenda Page 2 D 2017 Minnesota Association of Watershed Districts Annual Meeting and Trade Show.Arrowwood Conference Center,Alexandria, Minnesota; November 30—December 2,2017 9:10 P.M. VM. ADJOURN Consent Calendar Consent calendar items are generally defined as items of routine business that do not require discussion and can be approved in one vote. The Managers may elect to pull a consent calendar item(s) for discussion and/or separate action. The following items are presented for the Managers'approval: A. Permit Requests: i. Woodbury Legends/Settler's Ridge Senior Center,Woodbury ii. Katherine Abbot Park, Mahtomedi iii. Hidden Meadows, Lake Elmo B. Cost-Share Payment Requests: Kelle's Creek Septic System Inspection Pilot Program i. Julia Welter; 15045 45th Street South,Afton ii. Alice Journey(property owner) and Inspect Minnesota & Midwest Soil Testing (contractor); 14935 45th Street South,Afton C. Bid Award and Contractor Hiring: Beaver Dam and Beaver Removal at West Lakeland Storage Site 48 of 59 Current/Archived Newsletters -Metro Cities Pagel of 3 CETRO CITIES Association of Metropolitan Municipalities Search I GO Metro Cities News VA1111111111%CON IIIIIIIIIIN& . October 26, 2017 Newsletter Archive iftwoetwomb" ' Have you hearth the latest? Metro Cities' Draft Policies Are Online Follow us on Twitter. for Review 1000iirr�s :tom*go V46NNOWAM Metro Cities' Draft 2018 Legislative Policies are now online for review. The draft policies were recommended by members through Metro Cities'four policy committees and approved by the Metro Cities Board of Directors. Copies of the policies and Metro Cities' policy adoption protocol were mailed to city administrators/managers. The policies will V0WqWdft&ftW1, be adopted by Metro Cities' membership at ,046 ftwah"a the Policy Adoption Meeting on Wednesday, November 29, 2017. Please ftna" `'. '" be sure to mark your calendar! Click here to read the agenda and here to register. Amp _ Comments or questions on the proposed policies should be directed to kimberlyCaD-metrocitiesmn.orn. The In CurrenttArchived policies will receive final adoption at the Newsletters: meeting on November 29. Each member Archives city has one vote, with one additional vote for each 50,000 population above the initial 50,000. Once the policies are adopted, they will serve as the framework for Metro Cities' work at the Legislature and Metropolitan 49 of 59 http://www.metrocitiesmn.orghndex.asp?Type=B BASIC&SEC=%7b3738C3A0-lB97-... 10/27/2017 Current/Archived Newsletters-Metro Cities Page 2 of 3 Council in 2018. We hope to see you at the meeting! SAC Task Force Recommendations and Outreach Meetings Metro Cities staff and several city officials, as well as representatives from the business community, participated over the last several months on a task force to discuss the regional SAC (Sewer Availability Charge) program. The task force's initial charge was to consider SAC for outdoor seating, and was later broadened to include a more comprehensive look at the SAC program and potential changes to the process for determining SAC. The task force conducted an in-depth look at using gross square footage for SAC determinations rather than net square footage for individual uses, and has made some recommendations for the program that are intended to simplify the process without changing the SAC rate. Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) staff will conduct a series of outreach meetings in November to provide detailed information, and ask for feedback on the task force recommendations. Metro Cities encourages city officials to attend one of the meetings below: Eagan Thursday, November 2, 9 to 11 a.m. Eagan Community Center Oasis Room, 1501 Central Parkway Golden Valley Thursday, November 9, 1 to 3 p.m. Golden Valley City Hall, Council Chambers, 7800 Golden Valley Road Register at SACpr r° r.riId)I,E,tL'; S � 6" r�r ni Uaa. 50 of 59 http://www.metrocitiesmn.org/index.asp?Type=B BASIC&SECS/o7b3738C3A0-lB97-... 10/27/2017 Current/Archived Newsletters -Metro Cities Page 3 of 3 Metro Cities News is emailed periodically to all Metro Cities member mayors, councilmembers, city managers and administrators to keep officials abreast of important metro city issues. This information is also intended to be shared with city staff. If you'd like to sign up to receive Metro Cities News, please email ,or�( and provide the following: Name, Title, Employer and Email address. Thank you. Metro Cities 145 University Ave W., St. Paul, MN 55103-2044 Phone 651-215- 4000 Fax 651-281-1299 Website www.MetroCitiesMN.org Home I About Us I Metro CMies Members I Board of Directors I Legislature I Metropolitan Council I Metro Cities Task Force Report on Metropolitan Governance I Press and Publications 12017 Legislative Policies I Policy CommMtees I CurrenHArchlved Newsletters I Metropolitan Area Management Association I Questions.Comments or Suggestions I Staff I Links and Presentations F .�2reE ey Printer-friendly Version 51 of 59 http://www.metrocitiesmn.org/index.asp?Type=B_BASIC&SEC=%7b3 73 8C3A0-1 B97-... 10/27/2017 Eric Johnson From: Mary Mccomber <marymccomber@aol.com> Sent: Tuesday,October 24, 2017 1:18 PM To: Eric Johnson Subject: Fwd:Conversations of the Valley presents Joseph Kimball o November 1 h For weekly notes ----Original Message----- From: St. Croix Valley Foundation <sdvard@scvfoundation.org> To: marymccomber<marymccomber@aol.com> Sent: Tue, Oct 24, 2017 12:32 pm Subject: Conversations of the Valley presents Joseph Kimball on November 15th ST. CRt3IX VALLEY FOUNDATIO Presents. �J Conversations of the Valley A luncheon speaker series sponsored by St. Croix Valley Foundation & First State Bank and Trust "Secrets of the Congdon Mansion" with guest speaker Joseph Kimball reporter at Minnpost.com 52 of 59 TOFJF- r 7 FEW Joe Kimball will talk about the infamous Congdon murders and his book, Secrets of the Congdon Mansion, a first-hand account of the Duluth case. One of Minnesota's richest women was smothered in her 39-room mansion, and her night nurse was bludgeoned to death on the stairway. A daughter was accused of planning the murders to speed up her $8 million inheritance. There were convictions and acquittals in the case, along with more bodies, arson, bigamy and more. The mansion, known as Glensheen, has become a popular tour site on the shores of Lake Superior, but the guides won't tell you much about the case. 2 53 of 59 It was one of Minnesota's most publicized and sensational murder cases and Joe had a front-row seat, covering it from start to finish as a reporter for the Star Tribune. This year is the 40th anniversary of the murders. Wednesday, November 15, 2017 11 :30 a.m. to 1 :00 p.m. The Lowell Inn Event Center 102 N. Second St., Stillwater Free parking in the ramp with validation. The cost of the lunch and program is $17 and must be paid in advance to guarantee your reservation. (Any payments received on the day of the event will be charged $20 a ticket, if seats available.) To make a reservation (due in SCVF offices by noon prior to the day of luncheon): 1. Mail your check to: SCVF, 516 Second St. #214, Hudson, Wl 54016, or 2. Make your reservation by credit card online using the PayPal button below. There is a $1.00 processing fee per person using PayPal. 3 54 of 59 Eric Johnson From: Mary Mccomber <marymccomber@aol.com> Sent: Tuesday, October 24,201710:45 AM To: Eric Johnson Subject: Fwd:Join Us! GREATER MSP 2017 Annual Meeting For weekly notes -----Original Message---- From: GREATER MSP <info@greatermsp.org> To: marymccomber<marymccomber@aol.com> Sent: Tue, Oct 24, 2017 8:06 am Subject: Join Us! GREATER MSP 2017 Annual Meeting GREATER %TMsp ® Minroapolis Saint SIA Regionaf Economic Development Paftetsfflp 2017 GREATER MSP ANNUAL MEETING 55 of 59 2017 GREATER ANNUAL MEETING NOVEMBER 13 20.17 m R ,. MINNESOTA - CLICK TO REGISTER 345 WASHINGTON STREET hftmdp��Ra Pft�R—D-4-1�F—Wp SAINT PAUL. , Join your partners of GREATER MSP as we discuss how to drive our region's economic prosperity in the future. Featured speakers will include Richard Davis, Michael Langley and other speakers who will demonstrate that by working together, we can achieve great results for the region. As the world grows increasingly faster and more complicated, partnership becomes our path to the future. Together we will drive to a GREATER MSP. We are pleased to welcome the Saint Paul Chamber Orchestra as they perform at GREATER MSP's Annual Meeting. -- REGISTER R 2 56 of 59 Thank you to our Program Sponsor. ECOLM Thank you to our Hospitality Sponsors: TRAVELERS . � HealffiPartners- Thank you to our Entertainment Sponsor: THE SAINT PAUL CHAMBER ORCHESTRA Questions?Contact Judy Johnson, -,or 651-287-1362 Share this email: 3 57 of 59 Manage your preferences(Opt out using TrueRemove@ Got this as a torward?Sign up to receive our future emails View this email online 400 Robert St North Suite 1600 Saint Paul. MN{55101 US This email was sent to marymccomber@aol com To continue receiving our emails, add us to your address book 4 58 of 59 LOWER ST. CROIX MANAGEMENT COMMISSION PARTNERSHIP TEAM 7:00 PM Tuesday,November 1,2017 City Hall 14168 Oak Park Blvd.N. Oak Park Heights,MN 55082 Agenda for MEETING#65 (Quorum(5+7+8)/3 X 0.6=4) 7:00 1 Roll Call—Introductions—Sign in. 7:10 2.Approval of Minutes of August 29,2017 7:15 3. "Safe Harbor"earthtone and summer vegetation colors,Malick/Warren Update 7:25 4. Landowners Guide to the St. Croix Riverway,approval to send Guide to Management Commission for adoption. 7:50 S.River Wakes discussion and any possible recommdation to the Management Commission,John Goodfellow 8:30 4. General Riverway Announcements.-Adjourn No Riverway property reviews at the November meeting Since the PT has no staff or budget, agendas and minutes will be furnished only by e-mail Future Land Use Review Committee meetings: MN DNR Warner Road, 3:00 PM second Tuesday of each 5-Tuesday month, 1/9/18, 5/8/18, 7/10/18, 10/9/18, 1/8/19,4/9/19 Future Partnership Meetings: Oak Park Heights City Hall, 7:00 PM 5a`Tuesday. 1/30/18, 5/29/18, 7/31/18, 10/30/18, 1/29/2019,4/30/19 59 of 59