The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About03/28/2011 Council PacketCITY COUNCIL AGENDA Monday, March 28, 2011 6:30 p.m. (Scheduled to be broadcast on Channel 16) City Council: Mayor Reinert, Council Members O'Donnell, Gallup, Roeser & Rafferty City Administrator: Jeff Karlson COUNCIL WORK SESSION, 5:30 P.M. Community Room (not televised) A) Anoka County Public Safety Records System ( ? ?) B) Anoka County Connect Fiber Project C) Review Regular Agenda CITY COUNCIL MEETING, 6:30 P.M. ➢ Call to Order and Roll Call ➢ Pledge of Allegiance ➢ Open Mike / Public Comment ➢ Setting the Agenda: Addition or deletion of agenda items CONSENT AGENDA A) Consideration of Expenditures: i) March 28, 2011 (Check No. 90338 through 90426) in the amount of $236,293.66; ii) Centennial Fire District (Check No. 4735 through 4748) in the amount of $64,785.81 B) Consider approval of March 7, 2011 Work Session Minutes C) Consider approval of March 14, 2011 Council Meeting Minutes FINANCE DEPARTMENT REPORT, Al Rolek Council Agenda -2- March 28, 2011 ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT REPORT Dan Tesch • PUBLIC SAFETY DEPARTMENT REPORT, Kent Strege A) Consider Resolution No. 11 -36, Approving the Centennial School District Contract for Youth Resource Officer, Kent Strege PUBLIC SERVICES DEPARTMENT REPORT, Rick DeGardner COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT, Michael Grochala A) Century Farm North Pg x -x i) Consider 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 07 -11: Amending Planned Unit Development Zoning and Amending the PUD Development Stage Plan/Preliminary Plat, Jeff Smyser *Council may vote to dispense with full reading of ordinance * Roll call vote is required for adoption of the ordinance ii) Consider 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 06 -11, Approving the Vacation of Drainage and Utility Easement, Jeff Smyser *Council may vote to dispense with full reading of ordinance * Roll call vote is required for adoption of the ordinance B) Stormwater Ordinance i) Consider Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance No. 09 -11, Adding Section 1011 to the City Code, Regulating Construction Site Erosion & Sediment Control and Post Construction Stormwater Management, Jim Studenski & Marty Asleson *Council may vote to dispense with full reading of ordinance * Roll call vote is required for adoption of the ordinance ii) Consider Resolution No. 11 -37, Summary publication of Ordinance No. 09 -11 C) Consideration of Resolution No. 11 -38, Accepting Corridor Study Report and Recommendations, County State Aid Highway 34 (Birch Street), Michael Grochala D) Consideration of Resolution No. 11 -39 Related to Special Legislation for Tax Increment Financing in the City of Lino Lakes, Michael Grochala UNFINISHED BUSINESS Council Agenda 8. NEW BUSINESS Adjournment -3- March 28, 2011 Community Calendar— A Look Ahead March 29, 2011 through April 11, 2011 Alk Monday, April 4 5:30 pm, Community Room Council Work Session Nk Monday, April 11 6:30 pm, Council Chambers City Council Meeting EXPANDED AGENDA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Monday, March 28, 2011 *********** 6:30 p.m. (Scheduled to be broadcast on Channel 16) City Council: Mayor Reinert, Council Members O'Donnell, Gallup, Roeser & Rafferty City Administrator: Jeff Karlson COUNCIL WORK SESSION, 5:30 P.M. Community Room (not televised) A) Anoka County Public Safety Records System Presentation received; resolution supporting project considered at council meeting (Item 4A) B) Anoka County Connect Fiber Project After review and discussion, the matter was referred to the April 4 work session C) Review Regular Agenda CITY COUNCIL MEETING, 6 :30 P.M. ➢ Call to Order — 6:30 p.m. ➢ Roll Call - Council Members O'Donnell, Roeser & Rafferty, and Mayor Reinert were present; Council Member Gallup was absent ➢ Pledge of Allegiance ➢ Open Mike / Public Comment No public comment ➢ Setting the Agenda: Addition or deletion of agenda items The agenda was not amended • CONSENT AGENDA A) Consideration of Expenditures: i) March 28, 2011 (Check No. 90338 through 90426) in the amount of $236,293.66; ii) Centennial Fire District (Check No. 4735 through 4748) in the amount of $64,785.81 Pg 41 -53 B) Consider approval of March 7, 2011 Work Session Minutes Pg 54 -60 Council Agenda -2- EXPANDED AGENDA March 28, 2011 C) Consider approval of March 14, 2011 Council Meeting Minutes Pg 61 -66 Action Taken: Motion by Roeser, seconded by Rafferty, to approve the Consent Agenda, Items 1A through 1C, was adopted; Council Member O'Donnell abstained on Items 1B and 1C FINANCE DEPARTMENT REPORT, Al Rolek No Report ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT REPORT, Dan Teach A) Employment offer to John Swenson for Public Safety Director Pg 66a position Action Taken: Motion by Roeser, seconded by Rafferty, to approve the offer of employment as presented, was adopted PUBLIC SAFETY DEPARTMENT REPORT, Kent Strege A) Consider Resolution No. 11 -36, Approving the Centennial Pg 67 -72 School District Contract for Youth Resource Officer, Kent Strege Action Taken: Motion by O'Donnell, seconded by Roeser, to approve Resolution No. 11 -36 as presented, was adopted B) Consider Resolution No. 11 -39, Supporting an Anoka County Pg 73 -78 Joint Public Safety Data System and Associated Bonding, Kent Strege Action Taken: Motion by Roeser, seconded by O'Donnell, to approve Resolution No. 11 -39 as presented, was adopted PUBLIC SERVICES DEPARTMENT REPORT, Rick DeGardner No Report COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT, Michael Grochala A) Century Farm North Pg 79 -83 i) Consider 2 "d Reading of Ordinance No. 07 -11: Amending Planned Unit Development Zoning and Amending the PUD Development Stage Plan/Preliminary Plat, Jeff Smyser Action Taken: Motion by O'Donnell, seconded by Rafferty, to approve second reading and passage of Ordinance No. 07 -11 as presented, was adopted: Yeas; 4; Nays none (Absent — Gallup) ii) Consider 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 06 -11, Approving the Vacation of Drainage and Utility Easement, Jeff Smyser Action Taken: Motion by Rafferty, seconded by Roeser, to approve second reading and passage of Ordinance No. 06 -11 as presented, was adopted: Yeas; 4; Nays none (Absent — Gallup) Council Agenda -3- March 28, 2011 EXPANDED AGENDA B) Stormwater Ordinance Pg 84 -114 i) Consider Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance No. 09 -11, Adding Section 1011 to the City Code, Regulating Construction Site Erosion & Sediment Control and Post Construction Stormwater Management, Jim Studenski & Marty Asleson Action Taken: Motion by O'Donnell, seconded by Roeser, to approve second reading and passage of Ordinance No. 09 -11 as presented, was adopted: Yeas; 4; Nays none (Absent — Gallup) ii) Consider Resolution No. 11 -37, Summary publication of Ordinance No. 09 -11 Action Taken: Motion by Rafferty, seconded by O'Donnell, to approve Resolution No. 11 -37 as presented, was adopted C) Consideration of Resolution No. 11 -38, Accepting Corridor Study Report and Recommendations, County State Aid Highway 34 (Birch Street), Michael Grochala Action Taken: Motion by Rafferty, seconded by Roeser, to approve Resolution No. 11 -38 as amended, was adopted D) Consideration of Resolution No. 11 -39 Related to Special Legislation for Tax Increment Financing in the City of Lino Lakes, Michael Grochala Action Taken: Motion by Roeser, seconded by O'Donnell, to approve Resolution No. 11 -39 as presented, was adopted Pg 115 -120 Pg 121 -123 7. UNFINISHED BUSINESS None NEW BUSINESS None Adjournment Motion by O'Donnell, seconded by Roeser, to adjourn at 7:00 p.m., was adopted Community Calendar - A Look Ahead March 29, 2011 through April 11, 2011 4. Wednesday, March 30 . Monday, April 4 • Monday, April 4 • Monday, April 11 6:30 pm, Council Chambers 6:30 pm, Council Chambers 5:30 pm, Community Room 6:30 pm, Council Chambers Environmental Board Park Board Council Work Session City Council Meeting • • • CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Monday, March 28, 2011 * * * * * * * * * ** 6:30 p.m. (Scheduled to be broadcast on Channel 16) City Council: Mayor Reinert, Council Members O'Donnell, Gallup, Roeser & Rafferty City Administrator: Jeff Karlson COUNCIL WORK SESSION, 5:30 P.M. Community Room (not televised) A) Anoka County Public Safety Records System B) Anoka County Connect Fiber Project C) Review Regular Agenda CITY COUNCIL MEETING, 6:30 P.M. ➢ Call to Order and Roll Call ➢ Pledge of Allegiance ➢ Open Mike / Public Comment ➢ Setting the Agenda: Addition or deletion of agenda items Pg 1 -40 1. CONSENT AGENDA Consideration of Expenditures: i) March 28, 2011 (Check No. 90338 through 90426) in the amount of $236,293.66; ii) Centennial Fire District (Check No. 4735 through 4748) in the amount of $64,785.81 Pg 41 -53 B) Consider approval of March 7, 2011 Work Session Minutes Pg 54 -60 C) Consider approval of March 14, 2011 Council Meeting Minutes Pg 61 -66 2. FINANCE DEPARTMENT REPORT, Al Rolek No Report 3. ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT REPORT, Dan Tesch No Report Council Agenda -2- March 28, 2011 4. PUBLIC SAFETY DEPARTMENT REPORT, Kent Strege A) Consider Resolution No. 11 -36, Approving the Centennial School Pg 67 -72 District Contract for Youth Resource Officer, Kent Strege B) Consider Resolution No. 11 -39, Supporting an Anoka County Joint Pg 73 -78 Public Safety Data System and Associated Bonding, Kent Strege 5. PUBLIC SERVICES DEPARTMENT REPORT, Rick DeGardner No Report 6. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT, Michael Grochala A) Century Farm North Pg 79 -83 i) Consider 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 07 -11: Amending Planned Unit Development Zoning and Amending the PUD Development Stage Plan/Preliminary Plat, Jeff Smyser *Council may vote to dispense with full reading of ordinance * Roll call vote is required for adoption of the ordinance ii) Consider 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 06 -11, Approving the Vacation of Drainage and Utility Easement, Jeff Smyser *Council may vote to dispense with full reading of ordinance * Roll call vote is required for adoption of the ordinance B) Stormwater Ordinance Pg 84 -114 i) Consider Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance No. 09 -11, Adding Section 1011 to the City Code, Regulating Construction Site Erosion & Sediment Control and Post Construction Stormwater Management, Jim Studenski & Marty Asleson *Council may vote to dispense with full reading of ordinance * Roll call vote is required for adoption of the ordinance ii) Consider Resolution No. 11 -37, Summary publication of Ordinance No. 09 -11 C) Consideration of Resolution No. 11 -38, Accepting Corridor Study Report and Recommendations, County State Aid Highway 34 (Birch Street), Michael Grochala Pg 115 -120 D) Consideration of Resolution No. 11 -39 Related to Special Legislation Pg 121 -123 for Tax Increment Financing in the City of Lino Lakes, Michael Grochala 7. UNFINISHED BUSINESS None • • • • • • Council Agenda -3- March 28, 2011 8. NEW BUSINESS None Adjournment Community Calendar - A Look Ahead March 29, 2011 through April 11, 2011 ♦- Wednesday, March 30 4- Monday, April 4 1 Monday, April 4 J. Monday, April 11 6:30 pm, Council Chambers 6:30 pm, Council Chambers 5:30 pm, Community Room 6:30 pm, Council Chambers Environmental Board Park Board Council Work Session City Council Meeting 1 S l Lc. GQ v fr. Sze SSrCfL., 2 1 IENT PLANT N3 3RD LANE NE SCHOOLS RD ANOKA CO. JUVENILE CENTER EAST CENTRAL REGIONAL JUVENILE 7555 4TH AVE ‘—re A 800 MHz RADIO TOWER - LINO LAKES LINO LAKE LIBRAR 450 TOWN CENTER PKWY CENTENNIAL LAKES POLICE STATION 54 NORTH RD • LINO LAKES PUBLIC WORKS 1189 MAIN ST 1 C TENNIAL FIRE STATION 2 31 LAKE DR LINO LAKES CITY HALL 600 TOWN CENTER PKWY LINO LAIC; CHOMINIX CLUB HOUSE • 646 SANDPIPER DR JOSEPH E. WARGO NATURE CENTER 7701 MAIN ST CE RICE CREEK PARKS BUILDING 7401 MAIN ST. at ,CLE PINES BLIC WORKS CIVIC HEIGHTS DRIVE "Y HALL S CIR S VILLE CENTERVILLE CITY HALL & CENTENNIAL FIRE STATION 3 1880 MAIN ST CENTERVILLE PUBLIC WORKS 2085 CEDAR ST Anoka County Proposed Fiber Network • Anchor Institutions Aerial Fiber Line Underground Fiber Line Core Ring 1 Core Ring 2 Core Ring 3 Railroad County Park A City of Lino Lakes, MN Prepared by Anoka County GIS Department This lea compilation or records as they appear In the Anoka County Offices affecting the area shown. This drawing is to he used only for reference purposes and the County Is not responsible for any inaccuracies herein contained..... March 2, 2011 btkL UJ1( AnokaCountyp Lino Lakes City Council March 28, 2011 03/17/2011 Obligations of Zayo Under the Wholesale MSA and Master Fiber IRU — Construct system to anchor institutions — Provide 15% matching funds ($2.8 million) — Provide capacity (transport) service through 2030 — Dark fiber for 120 years or useful life of fiber — Audits by Anoka County — Any transfer of ownership requires transfer of contract obligations YLVLC'Ct AnokaCounty 03/17/2011 1 Project Summary • Anoka County & Zayo Bandwidth Partnership • $13.4M NTIA Grant to Zayo Bandwidth to construct privately owned /operated network • Connectivity (transport) service to 145 public sites (schools, colleges, cities, counties) • 3 Rings /10GB capacity • Dark fiber for future use Aok unto 1 Zayo Obligations Under the NTIA Grant • Construct and operate the system IAW Grant • Quarterly reporting to NTIA • Provide security interest in the equipment to NTIA for the useful life of the equipment • Audits by NTIA • Open access network CakaCoun 1 03/17/2011 Obligations of Anoka County to Lino Lakes • Pass - through services provided by the project • Coordinate Zayo activities with Lino Lakes • Coordinate between the entities on the network to resolve user technical issues • Ensure that fees are only used to pay direct costs of project (such as the match) tit AnokaCountyy 03/17/2011 Options for Lino Lakes • No action /reject project • Select equipment but no service at some or all sites • Select equipment and service at some or all sites pnokaCou n� � 03/17/2011 Questions? AnokaCountifr Your Gateway to the Future! 2 Obligations of Lino Lakes • Provide adequate space for equipment and fiber • Provide contact information and access to equipment for repairs • Provide insurance • Assume liability for city's negligent acts which damage equipment • If electing service, pay monthly fee • If electing service, cooperate to solve network congestion or other issues AnokaCounty Questions? AnokaCountifr Your Gateway to the Future! 2 Pt 5 2u..f..z ‘14(6 . fvv:t 3le ti Connectivity Services Agreement With Community Anchor Institution(s) For Broadband Services At Co- location Service Site(s) This Agreement, entered into by and between: 1. COUNTY of Anoka (Anoka County), 2100 Third Avenue North, Anoka, Minnesota 55303; and 2. , (Entity), , Minnesota, 55 WHEREAS, ZAYO Bandwidth LLC (ZAYO) was recently awarded a grant from the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) which is to be combined with matching funds from ZAYO and Anoka County to build a fiber optic network in Anoka County to provide high -speed broadband services to Community Anchor Institutions; and WHEREAS, Anoka County has recently entered into a Master Fiber Indefeasible Right of Use (IRU) Agreement and a Wholesale Master Service Agreement with ZAYO in order to facilitate the purposes of the grant obtained by ZAYO; and WHEREAS, Anoka County and ZAYO have identified multiple Community Anchor Institutions to be connected by the Core Backbone and Distribution Network which will comprise the fiber optic network; and WHEREAS, Anoka County desires to arrange for co- location service sites at various Community Anchor Institutions which have been identified for the purposes of building the fiber -optic network; and WHEREAS, Connectivity Services will become available to each of the Community Anchor Institutions at the co- location service sites as a result of the fiber - optic network built by Anoka County and ZAYO; and WHEREAS, the Community Anchor Institutions will have the option of accepting Connectivity Services initially, or allowing the equipment to be installed and reserving the acceptance of Connectivity Services until a later time; and WHEREAS, Entity is a community anchor institution which owns, leases, controls, rents or administers a designated co- location service site; and WHEREAS, it is in the interest of Entity to work together with Anoka County to facilitate ZAYO in building the fiber optic network. March 28, 2011 Final NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows: I. DEFINITIONS That the parties agree the following definitions for terms used in this Agreement: a) Community Anchor Institutions: quasi - government, government, educational and public safety institutions. b) Co- location service sites: designated physical sites located in various Community Anchor Institutions located in and around Anoka County. (See Attachment A.) c) ZAYO System: an integrated multi - cable, multi -ring fiber optic communication system comprised of cables and ducts, lateral connections, and the manholes and handholds locates therein, and related equipment required to provide Connectivity Services as provided through the NTIA grant. d) Connectivity Services: As described in Article V. e) Underlying Rights: all deeds, IRUs, (exclusive or non - exclusive) easements, rights -of -way agreements, licenses, grants, contracts and other rights, titles and interests to use real property of any third person, which are reasonably necessary for the construction, placement, location, installation, operation, use, IRU, rental, maintenance, repair or replacement by ZAYO or Anoka County, as the case may be, of the ZAYO System, Ducts, County Equipment, Cable or County Dark Fibers. f) IRU: Indefeasible Right of Use. g) Equipment: electronics, optronics, and other devices as necessary to deliver the Connectivity Services. h) Permitted use: Connectivity services shall only be used by Community Anchor Institutions for quasi - governmental, governmental, educational or public safety purposes and shall not be used to directly or indirectly compete with ZAYO. i) ZAYO Staff: Employees, consultants, and other sub - contractors working under the direction of ZAYO to install and support the ZAYO System. 2 I March 28, 2011 Final II. SCOPE OF SERVICES A. Anoka County will provide, through its contract with ZAYO, Connectivity Services to Entity through the fiber optic network built by ZAYO. Once the fiber optic network is built and the system is installed in the various co- location service sites, Anoka County, through its agreement with ZAYO, its successors and /or assigns, will provide ongoing support for the provision of Connectivity Services to Entity. Only site locations identified with fee amounts on Attachment A will receive Connectivity Services. Any mutually agreed changes to Connectivity Services will require a modification to Attachment A pursuant to section XII. B. Entity shall provide space for a co- location service site where ZAYO, on behalf of Anoka County, can install equipment to be connected to the ZAYO system in order to build the Fiber Optic network. Entity shall provide Underlying Rights to the co- location site to Anoka County for the purpose of building the Fiber Optic network to the point of demarcation. C. Nothing in this agreement affects or limits Entity's cable franchising authority or other authority to manage and regulate ZAYO's use of public rights of way. 111. COSTS AND COMPENSATION A. A. To the extent that Connectivity Services are used by Entity, Entity will pay Anoka County a monthly fee as detailed in Attachment A. Fees reflect the actual costs to provide the Connectivity Services. For entities receiving connectivity services, the initial fee is established at $75.00 per month per site for 100 mbps and $400.00 per month per site for 1 gbps. Fees will be periodically reviewed to reflect current costs, but will not be modified without the agreement of both parties. Initially the fees will primarily be used to pay the proportionate share of the county's match to the project. Once the proportionate share of this match is recovered, it is expected the fee amount will decrease if other factors remain constant. Fees will be invoiced starting the 3 March 28, 2011 Final month following when Connectivity Services begin. Entity will provide payment within 30 days of receipt of an invoice. Nonpayment shall be grounds for default. B. Entity shall not charge Anoka County, or ZAYO through Anoka County, for the Underlying Rights in the co- location site used by Anoka County and ZAYO to build the Fiber Optic Network. Additionally, Entity shall not charge rent, access fees, lease payments, or any other fee to Anoka County or ZAYO for the co- location space provided for the installation and housing of Equipment provided for connectivity service for Entity. IV. PHYSICAL ACCESS TO CO- LOCATION SITE A. Entity shall provide co- location space at co- location service sites indicated on Attachment A where ZAYO, on behalf of Anoka County, can install Equipment to provide services. Security shall be maintained at the site as indicated in Attachment B. Entity shall provide adequate power and temperature control as may be further detailed on the service order Attachment B. Entity shall provide all Underlying Rights and rights of access necessary for ZAYO to enter the premises and to construct and maintain fiber connections across the co- location service site whether the site is owned, leased, rented or administered by Entity. B. ZAYO, on behalf of Anoka County, shall provide, install, maintain, repair, operate and control its Equipment, as necessary. Unless specifically provided in Attachment A, there shall be no cost to Entity for the purchase and/ or installation of the ZAYO Equipment. Any ZAYO Equipment shall be maintained and replaced at no expense to Entity until the earlier of August 17, 2017, or this contract is otherwise terminated. Thereafter, if the ZAYO Equipment deteriorates, or no longer supports the provisioning of services, Entity agrees that it shall pay the prorata costs incurred in the replacement of such ZAYO Equipment. 4 March 28, 2011 Final C. ZAYO, through Anoka County, may request permission to place additional ZAYO Equipment at the co- location service site indentified in Attachment A to solely service commercial customers. If Entity elects to allow such installation for commercial service at the co- location service site, ZAYO shall pay to Entity $250 per month for the first device, and $100 per month for each additional device. No co- location fees will apply if ZAYO Equipment used to provide services to Entity and to Anoka County if such ZAYO Equipment is also used to serve a commercial customer. D. The ZAYO Equipment shall remain the sole and exclusive property of ZAYO, and nothing contained herein shall give or convey to Entity any right, title or interest whatsoever in the ZAYO Equipment. The ZAYO Equipment shall remain personal property, notwithstanding that it may be or become attached to, or embedded in, realty. The ZAYO Equipment shall not be considered a fixture of that real property. Neither Anoka County nor Entity shall tamper with, remove or conceal any identifying plates, tags, or labels identifying ZAYO's ownership interest in the ZAYO Equipment. E. Equipment and service beyond the point of demarcation and /or interconnection between ZAYO's facilities and Entity terminal Equipment and the wiring at the point of demarcation shall be the responsibility of the Entity. F. Entity shall provide access to ZAYO on behalf of Anoka County to provide services for purposes of installation, maintenance and repair of ZAYO Equipment. ZAYO, on behalf of Anoka County, shall restrict access to the co- location site space to authorized ZAYO staff. ZAYO staff shall abide by any physical security requirements provided to ZAYO in writing. ZAYO shall make reasonable attempts to provide at least two days notice prior to entering the co- location site to install, maintain, or repair any of the ZAYO Equipment. If it is not reasonably possible to provide such notice, or in an emergency, ZAYO shall provide notice as soon as practicable, but in all events prior to entering the co- location site. See Attachments B and D. 5 I March 28, 2011 Final G. If Entity provides its own Equipment, Anoka County, or ZAYO on Anoka County's behalf, shall have no obligation to install maintain or repair the Equipment. If, on responding to an Entity initiated service call, Anoka County, ZAYO and Entity jointly determine that the cause of the service delinquency was a failure, malfunction or the inadequacy of Entity's Equipment, Entity shall compensate Anoka County /ZAYO for ZAYO's actual time and materials expended during the service call. H. Neither party shall adjust, align, attempt to repair, relocate or remove the other party's Equipment, or ZAYO's Equipment, except as expressly authorized in writing by the other party or ZAYO. I. Prior to any installation of the SYSTEM, ZAYO will submit to Entity entrance and construction plans specifying the location, construction and method of installation related to the System. Entity shall respond to the plans with any objections as soon as reasonably possible, but in any event no later than 60 days. Entity shall immediately provide notice to ZAYO of known asbestos or other hazardous substances, pollutants or contaminants as defined by the Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), Title 42, U.S. Code, or similar state or federal law. J. Entity shall provide to Anoka County 24 -hour contact information for the purpose of gaining co- location service site access. This information shall be used for both business hour and non - business hour services access. Entity will review and update the information provided as needed, but at least on an annual basis. See Attachment D. K. Entity shall not arbitrarily or capriciously require ZAYO to relocate ZAYO Equipment. However, upon ninety (90) days written notice, or, in the event of any emergency, Entity may require ZAYO to relocate co- located ZAYO Equipment; provided, however, the site of relocations shall afford comparable environmental 6 I March 28, 2011 Final conditions for the ZAYO Equipment and a comparable accessibility to the ZAYO Equipment. V. CONNECTIVITY SERVICE LEVEL REQUIREMENTS A. Anoka County, through its agreement with ZAYO, shall provide Connectivity Services to Entity at the capacity level indicated in Attachment A. Any upgrades to service will be dependent on costs of Equipment, fees to ZAYO, capacity limitations of the network, and other relevant factors. Entity recognizes that the network has a total bandwidth of 10GB on the core ring and 1 GB on distribution rings and distribution laterals. This total capacity is shared among other Community Anchor Institutions which are part of this project. Entity agrees to work with Anoka County to manage bandwidth and equitably resolve capacity issues on the network. B. Dark fibers will be installed at each co- location service site as indicated in Attachment A. These dark fibers will be terminated at the site and are reserved for future use. This agreement neither contemplates nor conveys to Entity present or future rights to the use of the dark fiber. Any future use will be by a separate agreement and at an additional cost. C. Entity may use the network only to provide service to itself, and agencies and departments of the Entity in keeping with the Permitted Uses of this Agreement. D. Transport Availability: The transport services being provided will meet or exceed 99.999% network availability for protected optical service, 99.99% for protected TDM based services such as DS3s and DS1s and 99.9% for unprotected services as measured on a monthly basis. If Network Availability is below the percentage above in two out of the three preceding calendar months not due to an Excused Outage, the same shall constitute an event of default hereunder. 7 March 28, 2011 Final E. Ethernet Availability: The Ethernet Services being provided will meet or exceed 99.9% network availability for unprotected service and 99.95% for protected service as measured on a monthly basis. If Network Availability is below 99.9% for unprotected circuits and 99.95% for protected circuits in two out of the three preceding calendar months not due to an Excused Outage, the same shall constitute an event of default hereunder. F. Mean Time To Repair (MTTR): ZAYO's MTTR will be four hours for protected services and eight hours for unprotected services as measured on a monthly basis for outages of the services provided or any part of the services provided; for example an individual DS3 or group of DS3s. If ZAYO's MTTR for all protected services is greater than four hours in two out of the three preceding months not due to a Force Majeure Event such occurrence shall constitute an Event of Default on the part of ZAYO, on behalf of Anoka County, for the affected circuit. VI. TERM This Agreement will be for a period commencing on the date of signing by both parties, and continuing until August 16, 2015 (Initial Term), with up to a total of three (3) renewal periods of additional five (5) years terms (Renewal Terms) upon written amendment. Both parties shall provide written notice of intent to renew this agreement not Tess than one hundred eighty days (180) before the end of the Initial Term or Renewal Term. For purposes of this agreement, written notices shall be sent to the addresses of each of the Parties as indicated above. Upon the termination or expiration of this Agreement, Anoka County shall have no further obligation to provide Services and no further liability to Entity. Upon termination or expiration of this agreement, ZAYO shall be provided a reasonable opportunity to retrieve its equipment from the co- location service site(s). Any underlying rights granted by the Entity under this Agreement shall terminate or expire with the Agreement without need for further action or notice by any party. 8 1 March 28, 2011 Final VII. INDEMNIFICATION To the extent permitted by law, each party shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless the other party, it's commissioners, council members, school board members, superintendents, directors, officers, employees and agents, successors and assigns, from all damages, costs, expenses and liabilities, including reasonable attorney's fees and disbursements, sustained in any action commenced by any third party in connection with the indemnifying party's performance of its obligations and duties under this Agreement except those damages, costs, expenses, and liabilities arising from the negligence or willful misconduct of the other party. The indemnified party shall promptly notify the other party in writing of any such law suit or claim. Under no circumstances shall a party be required to pay on behalf of itself and other parties, any amounts in excess of the limits on liability established in Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 466, or any similar statutory limits on tort liability. VIII. INSURANCE During the Initial Term, and during each renewal term, each party shall obtain and maintain not Tess than the insurance set forth in Attachment C. IX. LIABILITY AND LIMITATIONS OF LIABILITY A. Entity shall be liable for any Toss of or damage to the ZAYO Equipment at the co- location site caused by Entity's negligence, intentional acts, willful misconduct or unauthorized maintenance subject to statutory limits. Entity shall reimburse Anoka County on behalf of ZAYO for the reasonable cost of repair of the ZAYO Equipment, or the replacement thereof, within thirty (30) days after receipt by Entity of a written request for reimbursement. 9 1 March 28, 2011 Final B. Anoka County shall be liable for any loss of or damage to Entity's equipment caused by Anoka County or ZAYO's negligence, intentional act, willful misconduct or unauthorized maintenance. Anoka County shall reimburse Entity for the reasonable cost of repair of the equipment, or the replacement thereof, within thirty (30) days after a written request for reimbursement and ZAYO has reimbursed Anoka County for the loss or damage pursuant to Anoka County's Agreement with ZAYO. Anoka will make reasonable effort to pursue reimbursement on the Entity's behalf. C. Anoka County shall not be liable for delays in installation, commencement or restoration of the service; for any temporary or permanent cessation of service; for errors, malfunctions, delays or defects in transmission of the service; for loss or damage occasioned by a Force Majeure Event. Anoka County's liability for any and all causes and claims whether based in contract, warranty, negligence or otherwise shall in no event exceed: 1) an amount equivalent to the proportionate charge by Anoka County to Entity for the period of service affected, or 2) if applicable, the replacement value of any Entity equipment which is lost or damaged as a result of Anoka County's gross negligence or willful misconduct. D. ANOKA COUNTY NEITHER ASSUMES NOR MAKES ANY WARRANTY, EXPRESS, IMPLIED, STATUTORY OR OTHERWISE AS TO THE DESCRIPTION, QUALITY, MERCHANTIBILITY, COMPLETENESS OR FITNESS FOR ANY PARTICULAR PURPOSE OR USE OF THE SERVICE, LOCAL ACCESS OR ANY OTHER MATTER, EXCEPT AS SET FORTH IN THIS AGREEMENT. SUCH WARRANTIES ARE HEREBY EXCLUDED AND DISCLAIMED. X. FORCE MAJEURE Neither party individually and Anoka County on behalf of ZAYO shall be liable for any failure of performance hereunder due to causes beyond its reasonable control including, but not limited to acts of God, fire, explosion, vandalism, cable cut, flood, storm, or other similar catastrophe, any law, order, regulation, direction, action or 10 I March 28, 2011 Final request of the government, or any department, agency, commission, court, or bureau of a government, or any civil or military authority, national emergency, insurrection, riot, war, strike, lockout, or work stoppage (each a "Force Majeure event "). The party claiming relief under this section shall notify the other party of the occurrence or existence of the Force Majeure event and of the termination of such event. In the event Anoka County through ZAYO is unable to deliver services as a result of a Force Majeure event which precludes ZAYO from performing, the other party shall not be obligated to pay for the services so affected for as long as ZAYO is unable to deliver the Services. XI. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS In providing all services pursuant to this Agreement, the parties shall abide by all statutes, ordinances, rules and regulations pertaining to or regulating the provision of such services, including those now in effect and hereafter adopted. Any violation of said statutes, ordinances, rules, or regulations shall constitute a material breach of this Agreement and shall entitle the Parties to terminate this Agreement immediately upon delivery of written notice of termination. XII. MODIFICATIONS Any material alterations, modifications, amendments, or variations of the terms of this Agreement shall be valid and enforceable only when they have been reduced to writing as an amendment and signed by the parties. XIII. DATA PRIVACY In collecting, storing, using and disseminating data on individuals in the course of providing services hereunder, the parties agree to abide by all pertinent state and federal statutes, rules and regulations covering data privacy, including, but not limited 11 I March 28, 2011 Final to, the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act and all rules promulgated pursuant thereto by the Commissioner of the Department of Administration. All data created, collected, received, stored, used, maintained, or disseminated by the parties in performing this Agreement is also subject to the provisions of Minn. Stat. § 13 et. seq. (the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act) and, pursuant to that statute, the parties must comply with the requirements of that statute. All remedies set forth in Minn. Stat. § 13.08 shall also apply to the parties. XIV. EARLY TERMINATION This Agreement may be terminated by either party at any time, with or without cause, upon One Hundred Eighty (180) days written notice delivered by mail or in person. If notices are delivered by mail, they shall be effective two days after mailing. XV. DEFAULT AND REMEDY A. Default by Entity: Entity is in default of the agreement if Entity: 1) is more than 15 days past due in paying for services as agreed in this Agreement, or any invoice pursuant to its terms, excluding those amounts which Entity has notified Anoka County as reasonably being in dispute; or 2) materially fails to observe or perform any non - monetary obligation or covenant hereunder; or 3) files or initiates proceedings or has proceedings filed or initiated against it, seeking liquidation, reorganization or other relief(such as the appointment of a trustee, receiver, liquidator, custodian or such other official) under any bankruptcy, insolvency or similar law; or 4) violates the permitted uses. In the event of default by Entity, notification of Default shall be sent to the address provided below in Section XVI. Entity shall have five days to cure a monetary breach, or thirty days to cure a non - monetary breach. If the Default remains uncured, 12 I March 28, 2011 Final Anoka County may suspend services until Entity remedies the Default, terminate or suspend services under this agreement and /or the applicable services being provided under the service order. If Anoka County terminates this Agreement pursuant to this article of the Agreement, Anoka County shall have the right to seek full payment for amounts due for services rendered prior to the date of termination. B. Anoka County shall be in default under this Agreement if it: 1) fails to arrange for ZAYO to provide the services in accordance with the Service Order (see Exhibit E) or otherwise fails to cure any breach of the Agreement after receiving written notice of default from Entity; or 2) defaults on its agreement with ZAYO and does not cure said default within five days for a monetary breach or thirty days of a non - monetary breach of that agreement: or 3) fails to notify Entity of default by ZAYO within five days of said Default, or fails to notify Entity that ZAYO has alleged that Anoka County is in Default, within five days of receipt of notification from ZAYO. Notification of Default by Anoka County shall be sent to the address provided below in Section XVI. Anoka County shall have five days to cure a monetary breach and thirty days to cure an non - monetary breach of the agreement. If Anoka County is caused to be in default of this agreement by the breach of ZAYO, Anoka County shall notify ZAYO in writing and allow ZAYO thirty days to cure, or such longer period of time as may be reasonably necessary to cure as long as the cure is initiated and diligently pursued within such thirty days or provide notice of a dispute about the existence such default. However, Entity and Anoka County may terminate this agreement upon written notice if ZAYO causes Anoka County to default by not meeting the terms of Article V. CONNECTIVITY SERVICE LEVEL REQUIREMENTS as noted above. XVI. NOTICES Notices shall be sent to the parties at the following: 13 1 March 28, 2011 Final Anoka County: Entity: Information Technology Director Anoka County Government Center Information Technology Department 2100 Third Avenue North Ste. 300 Anoka, Minnesota 55303 , Minnesota 55 XVII. AFFIRMATIVE ACTION In accordance with Anoka County's Affirmative Action Policy and the County Commissioners' policies against discrimination, no person shall illegally be excluded from full -time employment rights in, be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to discrimination in the program which is the subject of this Agreement on the basis of race, creed, color, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, public assistance status, age, disability, or national origin. XVIII. SURVIVAL OF REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES. The representations, warranties, covenants, and agreements of the parties under this Agreement, and the remedies of either party for the breach of such representations, warranties, covenants, and agreement by the other party shall survive the execution and term of this Agreement. XIX. WAIVER. 14 I March 28, 2011 Final The waiver of any of the rights and /or remedies arising under the terms of the Agreement on any one occasion by any party hereto shall not constitute a waiver of any rights or remedies in respect to any subsequent breach or default of the terms of the Agreement. The rights and remedies provided or referred to under the terms of the Agreement are cumulative and not mutually exclusive. XX. GOVERNING LAW. This Agreement shall be interpreted and construed according to the laws of the State of Minnesota, excluding the State of Minnesota's choice of law provisions. Jurisdiction and venue shall reside in the County of Anoka, Minnesota. XXI. SEVERABILITY. The provisions of this Agreement shall be deemed severable. If any part of this Agreement is rendered void, invalid, or unenforceable, such rendering shall not affect the validity and enforceability of the remainder of this Agreement. XXII. NO RIGHTS OF THIRD PARTIES. Except for specific provisions as related to ZAYO acting through the auspices of Anoka County, nothing in this Agreement is intended to confer any rights or remedies on other than the parties to the Agreement XXIII. ATTACHMENTS AND EXHIBITS. The following Exhibits are attached to this agreement and are incorporated into this agreement by reference: Attachment A: Capacity and costs for each co- location service site Attachment B: Co- location service site requirements Attachment C: Insurance Requirements Attachment D: Building Access Contact Information Attachment E: Service Order Form Attachment F: Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) 15 March 28, 2011 Final The following Attachments are included for reference in this agreement and are informational exhibits, but do not confer any rights onto the Entity unless also specifically included in this agreement: Attachment G: Wholesale Master Service Agreement, Anoka County Contract #2010 -0239 Attachment H: Master Fiber IRU by and between ZAYO BANDWIDTH, LLC and Anoka County, Minnesota dated August 17, 2010 (this exhibit does not include 20 pages of photographic exhibits which are included in the original, and are available to Entities on request.) XXIV. AUDIT, DISCLOSURE AND RETENTION OF RECORDS Both parties agree to make available to duly authorized representatives of the other and of the State of Minnesota, for the purpose of audit examination pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 16C.05, any books, documents, papers, and records of the party that are pertinent to the provision of services hereunder. Both parties further agree to maintain all such required records for six (6) years after receipt of final payment and the closing of all other related matters. XXV. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR A. Anoka County has entered into a separate contract with ZAYO for the construction of the ZAYO system /fiber optic network. See informational Exhibits G and H. ZAYO remains an independent contractor, however, and neither that agreement nor this one creates a partnership, joint venture or agency relationship between Zayo or the County. Anoka County has no authority to bind ZAYO beyond the obligations and responsibilities of those contracts. B. It is agreed by the parties that at all times and for all purposes hereunder, the relationship of the County to the Entity is that of an independent contractor and not an employee or agent of the Entity. C. It is agreed by the parties that at all times and for all purposes hereunder, the relationship of the Entity to the County is that of an independent contractor and not an employee or agent of the County 16 i March 28, 2011 Final XXVI. ENTIRE AGREEMENT It is understood and agreed by the parties that the entire agreements of the parties is contained herein and that this Agreement supersedes all oral agreements and negotiations between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof as well as any previous agreements presently in effect between the Anoka County and Entity relating to the subject matter hereof. The parties hereto revoke any prior oral or written agreement between themselves and hereby agree that this Agreement is the only and complete agreement regarding the subject hereof. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have caused this Agreement to be executed as of the date first written above, notwithstanding the date of the signatures of the parties.. ANOKA COUNTY MINNESOTA By: By: Rhonda Sivarajah, Chair County Board of Commissioners Dated: Dated: ATTEST ATTEST By: By: Terry L. Johnson County Administrator Dated: Dated: APPROVED AS TO FORM APPROVED AS TO FORM 17 March 28, 2011 Final By: By: Kathryn M. Timm Assistant County Attorney Dated: Dated: 18 March 28, 2011 Final Attachment A: Attachment B: Attachment C: Attachment D: Attachment E: Attachment F: Attachment G: #2010 -02391 Attachment H: Attachments Capacity and costs for each co- location service site Co- location service site requirements Insurance Requirements Building Access Contact Information Service Order Form Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) Wholesale Master Service Agreement, Anoka County Contract Master Fiber IRU by and between ZAYO BANDWIDTH, LLC and Anoka County, Minnesota dated August 17, 2010 (this exhibit does not include 20 pages of photographic exhibits which are included in the original, and are available to Entities on request.) 1 Note Bene, the MSA has two attachments which will be amended, but have not been so at the time of this writing. The list of 145 co- location sites has been altered since the MSA was signed on August 17, 2010. Once the final sites are approved by the NTIA, this attachment will be amended. Additionally, there is an attachment which details minimum power requirements at the co- locations site of 48 volts DC. The County and Zayo verbally agreed that these requirements will be changed to standard 110 AC. This verbal agreement has not been reduced to writing as of the date of this writing, but is expected shortly. 19 I March 28, 2011 Final ATTACHMENT A Capacity and Costs for Co- location Sites 1. Entity Name: MINNESOTA 2. Entity Contact Information: Name: Position: Office Phone: ( ) Cell Phone: ( ) Home Phone: ( ) Pager: ( ) Email: Principal Contact: Name: Position: Office Phone: Cell Phone: Home Phone: Pager: Email: Secondary Contact: Name: Position: Office Phone: ( ) Cell Phone: ( ) Home Phone: ( ) Pager: ( ) Email: Billing Contact: 3. Following are the site locations included for equipment co- location: Site # Location Address City Service Monthly Capacity Costs 20 March 28, 2011 Final Attachment B Co- Location Service Site requirements A. Security Requirements. Entity shall provide best practices physical security to the co- location service site in the form of traditional lock service, key card, numeric access code, or electronic security system equal to that which Entity provides for its own assets. Keys, key cards, numeric access codes and the electronic security systems shall be maintained according to industry standards. Entity shall take all reasonable precautions to ensure the integrity of the security of the co- location service site. Anoka County shall make reasonable efforts to ensure that its employees and agents, including ZAYO, follow all written instructions at the co- location site as provided by the Entity. B. Temperature and Environmental Control Requirements. Space provided to ZAYO for the housing of the ZAYO system and equipment in the co- location service site shall meet industry standards for temperature controls, humidity, lighting, and protection from power surges and outages. Entity shall ensure that the co- location service site temperature remains in a constant range between 68 °F and 83 °F, and humidity remains in a constant range of 40 % - -60 %. Entity shall use best efforts to implement a protection plan ensuring that the ZAYO System remains functional in the event of a power outage or similar emergency. C. Environmental Space Requirements. Entity shall provide sufficient cubic space for the installation of the ZAYO system and equipment in a secure area. ZAYO shall provide the space specifications for each co- location service site directly to Entity. Entity shall ensure that the space provided to ZAYO for the installation of the ZAYO System and equipment will also include sufficient space for ZAYO to access the equipment for repairs, maintenance and upgrades. The space will be convenient to the demarcation point, and will include any necessary space to install cable, conduit, fiber, and or circuitry from the demarcation point to the equipment. 21 March 28, 2011 Final Attachment C Insurance Requirements Insurance Limits. During the Term, each party shall obtain and maintain not less than the insurance set forth below: Worker's Compensation: Statutory limits. Automobile Liability Insurance: Such policy coverage will include coverage for all vehicles owned, hired, non - hired, non - owned and borrowed by the party in the performance of the obligations covered under this agreement: Combined single limit: $1,000,000.00 Commercial General Liability and /or Umbrella Liability: All liability insurance must meet the requirements of Minn. Stat § 466.04 subdivision 1 (a) (3) or $500,000.00, minimum liability for claims of death by wrongful act or omission and $500,000.00 to any claimant in any other case, whichever is greater. All liability insurance must meet the requirements of Minn. Stat. § 466.04 Subdivision 1 (a) (7) or $1, 500,000.00 minimum liability for any number of claims arising out of a single occurrence, whichever is greater. All umbrella insurance must meet the requirements of Minn. Stat. §466.04 Subd. 1(a) (8). Umbrella insurance coverage must be on a "follow- form" basis. The above minimum requirements as to insurance coverage shall not limit the liability of either party under this agreement. The above limits may be satisfied using a combination of primary and excess coverage, self insurance as provided by Minn. Stat. § 471.981. Each Party shall obtain and maintain the insurance policies required above with insurance and /or reinsurance companies authorized to insure risks in Minnesota. With the exception of Worker's Compensation, each party, its Affiliates, and their officers, directors and employees and any other person entitled to indemnification hereunder, shall be named as additional insured to the extent of such indemnification. Each Party shall provide the other party with a certificate of insurance showing that the party has complied with the insurance requirements of this Attachment. Each insurance policy shall contain a provision providing such other party with thirty days advanced notice of 22 March 28, 2011 Final any cancellation or material change in coverage at which time such party will notify the other party immediately of such cancellation or material change in coverage. Deductible/ Self Insured Retentions: All proof of insurance shall clearly set forth deductible or self insured retentions. Each Party shall be responsible for its deductible and /or self insured retentions. 23 March 28, 2011 Final ATTACHMENT D Building Access Contact Information Entity shall provide 24 hour, seven day a week access to ZAYO for the ZAYO System equipment housed in the Co- location service site for the purposes of maintenance, service, upgrade and repairs of the equipment and system. Such access will include the name and contact information of co- location site key - holder for business and non - business hour access. All access shall comply with written instructions provided to ZAYO and County (see section IV.F). Please provide contacts below. Business Hour Contact(s) — List contacts in the order you would like them to be called. Provide a minimum of 2 contacts (you may provide as many as you would like). Name: Position: Office Phone: CeII Phone: Home Phone: Pager: Email: Name: Position: Office Phone: CeII Phone: Home Phone: Pager: Email: Name: Position: Office Phone: CeII Phone: Home Phone: Pager: Email: March 28, 2011 Final Contact #1 Contact #2 Contact #3 24 Non - Business Hour Contact(s) — List contacts in the order you would like them to be called. These contacts should have keys for building access to the co- location equipment area and be available after hours. Select people you would like called in case of such emergencies as equipment failures, fiber hits, storm damage, emergency locates, etc. Provide a minimum of 2 contacts (you may provide as many as you would like). Name: Position: Office Phone: Cell Phone: Home Phone: Pager: Email: Name: Position: Office Phone: CeII Phone: Home Phone: Pager: Email: Name: Position: Office Phone: CeII Phone: Home Phone: Pager: Email: Contact #1 Contact #2 Contact #3 Updates may be submitted to Anoka County IS at address provided in the Notices Section. 25 March 28, 2011 Final EXHIBIT E EXAMPLE SERVICE ORDER FORM Service Order Form Pr 1 cif 2 r lrrformetton Act Ike Customer !tame Phone Number Email Address T Acomird Kimmel" Wes 0 83) 331-3237 wicRrrretazay+a_ccrn New Cornrsct Details SevIcie Cotter ID Ca3: ServIcelenn LISA Custmiter PQ Betete 36 88 Prodrret Debits Prathct Farley Priv'? urn Proaset Category Poi rd ks Pct t3anct1lAdtf D-S3 Illicit Optfars 0S3 Gott UrmctranrfeeaEd A.Lnca6on 00 Hudson St. 1st Ft MNR Herr York, NY 10013 Pfufertlti* i}etail�` I3cirltrrg Stairs Cin -Net Handal CFAProdziett Ey Zola Entratce CFALocanan Zayn{7rt -lees EACal Mier Pitt Yes Dheaslty Lo sal Mtwork. PrOteare €Y3 S3ig* Yes Protection Debits` col-E.-Network Fite Fatlt Diversity Core- t l Menem [fie L3tuaiS y i it sevaraiion 401 N! Brood St. Stan DEC PA 11312;3 Pyv4a .lIor Debits* Burning Staffs et CFA Pmeded By Zoo CFA Location Z3yo Qtktiet. Enraroe YES YES DS,3 Local! Fiber Pa tr Its Y Local Networt Yes Monad Weak Lk* Mode Une' Salim L1em LDeec PrimeeUne WIC Iron Fee Wedgy" Recently Charges Total: Nom Recurring Merges. Total: 1 S75D.tlg 410011116 Expiration Prices an this Form expires W Sen icoe Order is rent signed prior to 211412001 EXHIBIT E EXAMPLE SERVICE ORDER FORM co Order (a) :048365 Page 2of2 Customer ,rile.. Printed tame_ Dale_ tayo gate: we.;.d F.fr s.ar s i+yv b rtri• deems Order Fred *vibe F..ned be r,a:,«.ia.d ia1,e.Siw.. 5...,ar orp,wn+rr. Wowed Ze0 mnr mews edreernard wed bee. fed demi.. r" Farmar ■ asiis rd c'dfam if Asti Prod tervne. vsy.d. atei deem= or*.- (-,■ rr, rng a.8 bod a b a dad it Y maN Yf r+rid -a ed.., saddindse rid spvd_rd an td.. Oidr Perm . r_++ isdinv irdad dal rid ha*Amd lead ereted.r md.na..d . imam da3.dand7law d9 lei. Ckdr !ai ,atmr id a.nc..,d *Odd I* *v.* 0,3. Yarns stes leder +ode %ad * dal ids r idd ii imadtiddd di ddc Seiwi• C ,law Fad, C.aM_vr.r twiny atedd>., tar dm pad-arw re Somme d trig srr ederrette a.cr a ir.mrre.:..sa. id *0 add di e* d.rksi den dud seemed. dm diedatutera dewier *diode ie Ile . Wok i.eArr.. aagdzi.daLh .a•+8.. ry. F.r.3i a,rs..rrra.se,.e,.h e.. _rd hr ee ruder seeded %seek.. ,S Ism . dwsa pddiagtvei sab .it e>. carsiMe. desertion "dr...4 erldn the rare dere.** dilitherdert weeded-ready wedded el en. bd,.vr.lu,; odd . piaeib., zhvdded,Av, Ow ode redder* meted, red w decedriceeeendridred iy dm ^esini LLEk. Cafe- 4t5'Wa in r.medal rt9*,..:." a ,6 ACV osarinIFtpYn.ts.�fi :'�weia. t,. neMmk L deli-..d d e- ne/xati:5. %bn Y'V"(r v,SE f.Ei:i i;erasr cIc .. _� er vvfrksj a C er-6saei .t , , L-40 m C.arc110ie NINO, +■A'ff i.d erC...idM4 • nenpayi s..e.aanai or n unrid•••iid SASramanci., , unindipped L . Cods. rt-de i.. *ad dewed 9eede, bedewed ih...?pa diea mer . , r;d o•rynsted..tuattom A ni.e.:,rd l' i Gms xrs+M .o dd t , n,; t[eo�* L. ' emig erri dreier. 1C5, 4X_' -S. Weda.1.X1V trandortth *di mot* thl i tifo -a: . Firer led, femme! aL lea. ....ica A viii wi,.er 13i 510111A14 ..:tl.. *Ana ddi ..,. rr aaddial. iii erverteder and Cn,i t.a Attachment F Connect Anoka County Frequently Asked Questions 1. What is Connect Anoka County? Connect Anoka County is the county -led effort to increase the amount of fiber optic cable in the county. The Connect Anoka County project has resulted in a partnership between Zayo Bandwidth, LLC and Anoka County. Through the partnership, Zayo Bandwidth applied for and received a National Telecommunications Information Administration (NTIA) grant paying 70 percent of the fiber construction cost and initial equipment. The grant project will construct an approximately 286 mile fiber network throughout Anoka County linking 145 governmental institutions. 2. Who owns the fiber optic cable? The fiber optic cable that is installed as part of the grant will be owned by Zayo Bandwith. Zayo will provide the capacity services for the governmental network and separately offer connectivity services to the private sector. The grant will also provide dark fiber strands for Anoka County use. The right to use these dark strands is conveyed to the county through a fiber Indefeasible Right to Use (IRU), which is similar to a long -term lease. Should the county decide to use the dark fiber, equipment will need to be purchased and a monthly maintenance fee paid to Zayo. 3. What are the project costs and how are they paid? The total grant- funded project budget is $19.1 million. Seventy percent of the costs ($13.4 million) will be paid by the NTIA grant. The balance of the project ($5.7 million) will be paid equally by Zayo Bandwidth and Anoka County ($2.8 million each). The county intends to recoup a portion of the $2.8 million match by charging the anchor institutions a proportional share based on a per connection charge. 4. What services are offered? The project is only providing connectivity, meaning that any governmental institution will still need to have an Internet Service Provider (ISP). The county purchases its ISP service from the State of Minnesota, Office of Enterprise Technology (OET) and is in discussions with OET to expand ISP services to include cities that are a part of the project. If this option becomes available, Cities will be notified. 5. How were the 145 anchor institutions decided upon? The agreements between Anoka County and Zayo Bandwidth specify 145 governmental and quasi - governmental anchor institutions as a part of the grant project. The list was made by asking each jurisdiction to submit a list of facilities to include in the project. As the project developed, some sites were added and others dropped at the request of the entities. NTIA will need to approve all changes. 6. Can sites be added in the future? The agreements between Anoka County and Zayo Bandwidth limit the number of sites to 145. Any additional sites on the network will require a service request to Zayo Bandwidth. As additional governmental sites require fiber, each entity will need to conduct an analysis as to the most cost - effective way to serve the location. In some cases it may be possible to connect through one of the original 145 sites. In other cases it may be cost effective to have Zayo Bandwidth or another private company serve the facility. March 7, 2011 1 7. What is the project schedule? The project is currently underway. The environmental assessment is scheduled to be completed by spring 2011. Some connectivity service may be provided in 2011, but project completion will not be until 2012. Zayo Bandwidth is also working with road authorities to acquire the appropriate permits. 8. What are the decisions needed by my entity and when? Thus far, entities have only been asked for good -faith non binding commitments. However, Anoka County will need to have written agreements in place with any entity that wishes to participate by April 1, 2011. Specifically, each jurisdiction will need to confirm the sites and the connection speed. 9. What are the costs to my entity? Anoka County will charge each entity that connects a monthly fee. Any fee charged will be included in the agreement. The proposed agreement establishes a fee of $75 /month for 100 mbps service, and $400 /month for lgbps service. Cities that do not need service immediately can elect through the agreement to have equipment placed at their facility as part of the project and then establish service during the term of the agreement. The monthly fee will not be charged until service is established. To establish service at that time or make some other change for sites that have equipment, the entity and Anoka County will need to modify Attachment A of the agreement. 10. What do I do if a business in my community asks me about service? Zayo Group provides a full range of business products to the private sector. If you are interested in learning more, or getting information for business expos, chamber of commerce meetings, or specific businesses, the contact is Steve Kopp, Senior Account Manager, Zayo Enterprise Networks, at 952- 230 -4861 or steve .koppa,zavoenterprise.com, Web site www.zavo.com. 11. Who is Zayo and how were they selected for this project? Anoka County developed a Request for Proposal (RFP) seeking a partner for the Connect Anoka County project and to submit for an NTIA grant. The county received five proposals and, after review, selected Zayo Bandwidth. Zayo Bandwidth is a part of the Zayo Group which provides telecom and bandwidth infrastructure solutions that span over 153 markets and 30 states plus the District of Columbia including over 21,000 miles of fiber optic infrastructure. 12. Will each Entity be required to provide easements without cost to Anoka County and/or Zayo? Yes, it is contemplated that the easement will be provided without charge to get from the right of way to your facility across the private property of your facility. Entities retain authority to charge for building permits, franchises, etc. in the right of way. 13. Will physical access be required by Zayo? The agreement contemplates that there may be specific requirements that vary from location to location. Zayo must abide by your written security requirements. For example, if you want equipment installed in a location that you do not want to give unaccompanied access to, simply state that requirement in writing. Also, you do not need to give keys, access codes, or access cards to Zayo, so presuming that you keep your facilities locked, they would not be able to enter them without someone to let them in. The access that Zayo needs to maintain your equipment is similar to other providers such as Qwest, Comcast, US Cable, etc. March 7, 2011 2 14. What assurances are in place for Zayo performance? Zayo has obligations under the agreement with the County to perform as well as NTIA grant requirements that Zayo must follow. In addition, Zayo will have an incentive to complete the fiber network so they can sell connectivity services to their commercial customers. 15. Does the County agreement with Zayo include a Performance Bond requirement? No, there is no performance bond requirement. However, Zayo has notified the County that performance bonds will be required from Contractors that Zayo employs in the construction process. 16. What happens if Zayo goes bankrupt? Prior to entering into an agreement with Zayo, an analysis was completed that determined that Zayo was in a healthy financial situation. If, in the future, Zayo files for bankruptcy, the outcome would be determined by the bankruptcy court. Additionally, Anoka County has an IRU in the dark fiber, there is added protection for the integrity of the network even if Zayo is no longer available to provide maintenance and support. 17. Concern was expressed with the warranty language in Section IX.D. This type of warranty language is very typical of fiber agreements such as this. This warranty language is a pass through to the Entities of the warranties negotiated between Zayo and the County. Anoka County cannot bind Zayo to any other warranties than what is provided in the Master Service Agreement and the IRU which are attached to the agreement in Exhibits G and H. 18. How will equipment replacement be made after the expiration of the warranty on August 17, 2017? If the equipment needs to be replaced after that time, the entity will need to pay the prorata costs for such replacement. In addition, consideration will need to be made for future maintenance of this new equipment. If the entity is not getting connectivity service, or no longer wants service, no replacement equipment at entity cost is required. 19. Will there be a forum for the entities to provide input in the future? It is the County's intent to continue meetings with the entities. In addition, if there is interest, we could consider creating advisory committees (i.e. technical, administrative) to provide a forum for interested entities to meet more frequently. 20. Does the agreement only address the installation of equipment at the co- location site, or does it also include the construction of dark fiber to the site? The entity needs to approve the agreement to allow the placement of equipment at the site as well as construction of the network including dark fiber to the co- location site. However, the entity may initially elect not to receive the connectivity service at a site. 21. I note the service site requirements in Attachment B (security, temperature and environmental, and space requirements). What is the size of the equipment; how much space is required, and; are there any special location requirements? The County and Zayo staff will be conducting a review of each site location over the next couple of months. It should also be noted that the Zayo equipment will be owned and managed by Zayo. The equipment will be switches that will fit into standard racks commonly found in data closets. See #27. March7,2011 3 22. Should additional language be included for waiver of subrogation? No, the mutual indemnification language included in the agreement eliminates the need for any waiver of subrogation. 23. What is the point of demarcation contemplated in the Agreement? It is clear in the Agreement that the Entity is responsible for interconnection and wiring beyond the point of demarcation. Does this mean that the Entity will be required to wire to individual sites within the co- location service site? Yes, the Entity is responsible for wiring within each co- location site. This wiring is likely the entity's existing network. See Exhibit H for definition of demarcation point. 24. What exactly will the Entity be paying for? Does the agreement contemplate the use of dark fiber, or any additional cost to add capacity in the future? The entity is paying for connectivity which includes transport and ethernet service. The Entity will only pay if the connectivity service is used. The dark fiber will be installed with the network, but additional equipment will be required to utilize it. No specific use of the dark fiber is included in the agreement. 25. The Agreement states that the Entity will work with the County to manage bandwidth, but what does that mean? If there are capacity issues, all the entities will need to work together to resolve them to the mutual benefit of the parties. We will also be working to monitor bandwidth utilization to identify potential problems before they impact the service. 26. Have the insurance issues been resolved so that the requirements coincide with what is currently provided through the League of Minnesota Cities? We have made edits to the insurance language with input from the cities. Kurt Glaser, Lexington City Attorney, requested an opinion from the League of Minnesota Cities, which was received on March 2, 2011. Additional edits were made to the insurance requirements in order to comply with this opinion. 27. What are the space and environmental requirements for the Zayo Equipment? Ideally there would be rack space (19'X72" standard steel or aluminum telecom relay rack) available for the switch of 8u or about 12 inches, with sufficient space to access the equipment for repairs, maintenance and upgrades. The space should also be convenient to the entity's demarcation point. To maintain maximum uptime, it would be best to meet the specified requirements for space and environmental conditions. However, if all specifications cannot be met, the County and Zayo will work with the entity to determine an acceptable equipment location. See #21. 28. Why isn't Zayo a party to the Connectivity Services agreement? Some attorneys have suggested that ZAYO should be a party to this agreement. The County's agreement with ZAYO provides that the County must secure the various co- location sites, whether the properties are County owned or owned by another governmental or quasi - governmental agency. ZAYO has expressed disinterest in directly contracting with the various entities. 29. Who is responsible if Zayo damages equipment or systems belonging to a third party that are at the co- location site during installation? March7,2011 4 This agreement does not confer any third party benefits to anyone. The agreement is between the County and the Entity, with Zayo subordinate to the County. If the entity is concerned that Zayo will not use due care regarding a third party's equipment located at the co- location site, then the Entity should limit ZAYO's access to third party property. 30. We are not clear on the meaning of certain terms, such as Demarcation Point, Fiber Optic Network, Ducts, Network Availability, Transport Services, Ethernet Services, etc. Are these terms defined anywhere? Many of these terms are defined in the Master Service Agreement and Indefeasible Right of Use Agreement executed between the County and Zayo on August 17, 2010. A copy of these two agreements will be attached to the Connectivity Services Agreement for reference as informational exhibits. Additionally, some of these terms are "terms of art" in the broadband and Information Technology industry, and are used here in standard industry usage. 31. Why doesn't the Entity gain ownership rights in the equipment if the city is required to pay a pro -rata share for repairs and /or replacement after the warranty period expires on August 16, 2017? The initial equipment is paid for by the grant, at no cost to the Entity. Contrast this with more typical agreements, where the Entity pays a much larger monthly fee to a provider for both the service and the equipment. If, after 2017, equipment is replaced completely the situation may change. Options for total replacement at that time, if necessary, may include replacement with Zayo Equipment, Entity Equipment or County Equipment, 32. May the entity, in particular a city, charge building permit fees, franchises, etc. to Zayo outside of the co- location site? Pursuant to Paragraphs II.C. and III.B., Entities retain franchising authority, and may issue building permits, franchise fees as allowed by Minnesota statutes. The entity may not charge these fees for the co- location site itself (for example, the entity may not charge fees for underlying rights needed to place equipment in City Hall, or a fire station which are the designated co- location sites described in Exhibit A.) 33. Will Zayo or Anoka County be providing cable services in competition with Comcast or other private cable carriers through this agreement? No. Anoka County will not be a cable provider. Providing cable TV services is not consistent with Anoka County's mission statement. The County's fibers may only be used for governmental and quasi - governmental purposes. Zayo is not a cable provider, nor does it offer triple- play services (telephone /voice, data /internet, and cable /video). While no one can predict the future, a more likely scenario is that private carriers will contract with Zayo to use Zayo's fibers to provide services to private customers throughout the county. 34. Where can I get more information on the project? By phone: 763- 422 -7537 (Carrie Johnson) By e-mail: ConnectAnokaCounty(a co.anoka.mn.us By mail: Connect Anoka County, Attn: Information Technology 2100 3rd Avenue, Suite 300 Anoka, MN 55303 March 7, 2011 5 151-1,(1906 k_.c,.s, /z&7/1( Answers to Steve Guzzetta's questions regarding Connect Anoka County, sent via email to Tom Haluska, Assistant Anoka County Attorney, on March 14, 2011. 1. Please describe how individual connectivity services agreements relate to Anoka County's August 17, 2010, Wholesale Master Service Agreement with ZAYO Broadband, LLC ("ZAYO'). For example, will local government parties to a connectivity services agreement be subject the acceptable use policy set forth in the Master Service Agreement. Anoka County is required by the MSA to secure the agreement of the various entities who own non - County co- location sites. The connectivity service agreements are pass through, so where the County is subject to provisions in the MSA for connectivity, those requirements are applicable to the Entities in the Connectivity Services Agreements. Those provisions have been incorporated directly into the language of the CSA. Regarding the example, the Acceptable Use Policy (section 18.3 of the MSA): 1) prohibits Anoka County from using the network for illegal purposes; 2) allows Zayo to remove materials such as child pornography and other objectionable materials from the network; and 3) provides that Zayo may co- operate with investigations into criminal activity. While sec. 18 provides additional terms and conditions applicable only to the purchase of IP /Data based services which would not be passed through to the entities, the CSA does require compliance with laws relating to the provision of services (Section XI). Trafficking in Internet Child Pornography is illegal, as is using the Internet for identity theft, and would be a breach of Section XI. It seemed superfluous to repeat the AUP provision in the CSA. 2. A. Please provide a detailed description of the "ZAYO System" that will be utilized to provide Connectivity Services to local government units pursuant to a connectivity services agreement, including the number of fibers, the types of fibers to be used, the types of optronics to be used, the network design and topology to be used, back -up and standby power capabilities, and the bandwidth /capacity limits of each portion or segment of the ZAYO System. B. What happens if certain entities do not participate in the project (so that specific anticipated co- location sites are not available)? C. How will that alter the ZAYO System design? A. See the IRU and MSA . B. If an identified entity chooses not to participate in the project at all and will not allow equipment to be placed in the site, Anoka County /Zayo will request alternative site approvals from the NTIA where appropriate, or if there is no appropriate alternative, will simply have less than 145 co- location sites. C. It is unknown if the design will be altered. 3. Please provide a map showing the most recent network design (including all rings, trunks, distribution laterals, drops, electronics, etc.) and route for the ZAYO System that will be utilized to provide Connectivity Services to local government entities that execute a connectivity services agreement. See the map in the IRU attachments. 4. Will ZAYO be building more than one network as part of this project, either with NTIA grant funds or with other funds? If so, please provide a detailed description of the network, including what services will be provided and what customers will be served. The County's project is a stand alone. The County is not privy to Zayo internal plans regarding other projects. 5. A. Will Connectivity Services be delivered to participating entities over dedicated fibers that are part of the ZAYO System, or will other services (including "commercial services') be offered and delivered using the same fibers, so that participating entities will be sharing fibers and /or bandwidth with other customers (including commercial customers)? B. What impact, if any, will commercial customers have on the bandwidth /throughput capabilities of the ZAYO System that will be used to provide connectivity services to community anchor institutions? A. Connect Anoka County will be served on dedicated fibers. Commercial customers will be served on other fibers which may be in the conduit. Equipment may be shared. B. There should be no impact on bandwidth /throughput capabilities provided to community anchor institutions. 6. If a community anchor institution permits equipment to be installed in co- location sites, but does not elect to receive connectivity services at those sites, will the equipment be activated, operated and maintained by ZAYO or its affiliates to provide services to other community anchor institutions or to "commercial" customers? Yes, services will be provided to other community anchor institutions and possibly commercial entities. 7. A. Do the $75.00 and $400 per month per site fee quoted by Anoka County include all applicable taxes, fees and charges, or are they exclusive of such taxes, fees and charges? B. If the foregoing fees do not include all applicable taxes, fees and charges, what does Anoka County and /or ZAYO estimate the total monthly charge per month per site will be for 100 Mbps and 1 Gbps Connectivity Service? A. There are no taxes and fees that we are aware for these services. B. Please be aware the entities will still have to make separate arrangements for ISP services from another provider and will have to pay whatever taxes, fees, or other charges are applicable to that provider. Anoka County does not have information as to what the entities will pay to ISP providers outside of this contract. 8. A. If a participating entity purchases and installs its own equipment at co- location sites are the $75.00 and $400.00 per month per site fees still applicable? B. If not, what fees will be charged? A. Yes B. Not applicable. 9. If a participating entity installs its own equipment, where and how will the entity connect with the ZAYO System? The agreement does not provide for a participating entity to connect to the Zayo fiber network directly. The Zayo system includes Zayo equipment. An entity with its own equipment will have to make arrangements with Zayo to connect that equipment to the System. 10. Will an entity that purchases its own equipment operate over dark fibers or will it share the functional ZA YO System fibers with other entities? See above. The participating entity equipment will not share Zayo System fiber directly. The County's dark fibers are reserved for future use, and are not part of this agreement. See FAQ #24. 11. Who is responsible for damage to a co- location site or damage to other providers /entities' equipment located within a co- location site caused by ZAYO? See IX.B and FAQ #29. 12. Who is responsible for additional costs of wiring, upgrading electrical service and /or installing fire suppression and back -up power equipment associated with the placement of equipment and the provision of services at or through a co- location site. See FAQ #23 and Exhibit B. 13. Where, specifically, will County Dark Fibers be terminated in each co- location site? The fibers will be terminated in the same physical rack where the Zayo equipment is planned to be installed at the co- location site. 14. Where and how will County Dark Fibers be identified in Attachment A? The dark fibers are not part of this agreement and will not be identified in the attachments. 15. A If the NTIA/federal government will retain a security interest in all ZAYO System equipment and facilities, why should a participating entity have to pay ZAYO to replace such equipment after a prescribed period? B. Will the NTIA/federal government have security interest in replacement equipment and facilities (e.g., fiber)? A. The entity is not paying for the initial equipment. This equipment will be purchased through the grant, which is why the NTIA has a security interest in it. When the equipment needs replacement or repair after the warranty period, the grant will no longer be applicable. At that point, the entity will pay a pro -rata share if replacement or repair is necessary. B. No. 16. Does Anoka County anticipate being able to place County Dark Fibers in co- location sites free of charge even if a participating entity is not able or permitted to use those fibers? Yes. 17. Please define the term "transport services" utilized in the connectivity services agreement. See IRU, MSA, section V and FAQ #30. Please note the provision of the IRU that words having well known or trade meanings are so defined unless specifically defined otherwise, 18. Please define the capitalized term "Ethernet Services" used in the connectivity services agreement. See IRU, MSA, V and FAQ #30. 19. Please define the capitalized term "Network Availability" used in the connectivity services agreement. See IRU, MSA and FAQ #30. 20. Please define the capitalized term "Excused Outage" used in the connectivity services agreement. See IRU, MSA and FAQ #30. 21. Please define the concept of a ZAYO System "outage" (excused or unexcused) for purposes the connectivity services agreement (e.g., a slowdown, inability to use certain applications, etc ?) See IRU, MSA and FAQ #30. 22. Please define the terms "protected services" and "unprotected services" as utilized in the connectivity services agreement. See IRU, MSA and FAQ #30. 23. A. If a connectivity services agreement is terminated or expires, what happens to the equipment and facilities (e.g., fiber) located at the participating entity's co- location sites and anchor institutions? B. Who is responsible for removing such equipment and facilities and repairing any damage to co- location sites and restoring co- location sites and to their prior condition? A and B. See liability and termination sections (IX and XIV) of Connectivity Services Agreement. The County will work with Zayo to remove the equipment if needed. Any damage repair (assuming there is) will need to be repaired by the party who caused it. The County will not restore to prior condition as the bringing fiber into a designated area and installing equipment will not cause major changes to the building. 24. If a participating entity is ultimately deemed in default for failing to pay amounts owed for a single co- location site, can Anoka County and ZAYO suspend Connectivity Services provided to all the entity's other community anchor institutions and co- location sites? If a entity is in default for one of multiple sites, the entity is default. We would pursue default remedies. If an entity desires to terminate only one of several sites, it may do so with 180 days notice and avoid default. 25. With respect to connectivity, please define what and to whom (e.g., 100 Mbps to the? To another location? Per location? 100 Mbps to a node? 100 Mbps to Anoka County's control center ?) There will be a physical connection (100 mbps or 1 Gbps) to equipment at a specific physical location. This physical interface may logically connect to one or more remote locations on the Anoka County network — the aggregate capacity of the physical interface may not exceed the subscribed (100 mbps or 1 Gbps) capacity. 26. How will a 10 Gbps backbone support the connections anticipated by Anoka County? The 10 Gbps backbone is a shared resource and will be used to connect the community anchor institutions on the network. 27. A. Is the ZAYO System scalable? B. If so, please describe how, with any current plans, designs or anticipated upgrades. A. Yes. B. Anoka can negotiate with Zayo to purchase additional capacity /equipment for expansion if necessary. Additional 10 gbps capacity on the backbone can be deployed. This would require additional expense. Currently there is no plan to deploy beyond the initial 10 gbps on each of the rings. 28. Are the Connectivity Services symmetrical throughout the ZAYO system (e.g., 100 Mbps upstream and downstream ?) If not, please describe all available upstream and downstream transmission speeds. Yes, the connectivity service is symmetrical. 29. How will Anoka County and ZAYO overcome bottlenecks on the system that occur over time? Based on the problem or issue causing the bottleneck, the County, Zayo, and the entities will work to resolve issues equitably. While we anticipate that bottlenecks may occur, it is impossible to predict the exact location and cause at present. See FAQ #19. 30. Please describe how quality of service will be handled on the ZAYO System (or any other system carry participating entity traffic) and what guarantees the participating entities will have from Anoka County that critical and real -time services will not be affected by traffic congestion anywhere on the network, even at peak traffic times. The County is currently working with Zayo on quality of service deployment. 31. If participating entity personnel are required to respond, after hours, to a co- location site where the participating entity does not receive service or is not affected by the ZAYO System network problem, will the participating entity be compensated for its response costs (e.g., providing access to a co- location site and /or monitoring ZAYO staff)? The Entity will provide secured access to Zayo's authorized staff according to its own policies and preferences. This may include providing a key, electronic card or code access, thus not requiring participating entity's personnel to be present at the site. An Entity may also choose to require only access that is accompanied by Entity staff. See Exhibit D and FAQ #13. We will not pay for access costs. 32. A. How will priority be given in the event more than one location is out of service when the problems may be independent of each other? B. Will commercial customers be given priority or will participating entities be given priority? A and B. The County is currently working with Zayo on the problem reporting and resolution process, and expects to document the service level for response. Zayo is aware of the critical nature of the services provided by the public sector and the need for priority service. See the MSA and connectivity service agreement for MTTR. lS. (.9(t. -t AnokaCountv What is this project? This project is a private /public partnership between Anoka County and Zayo Bandwidth. Zayo bandwidth was awarded $13.4 million in federal grant funds to construct a fiber network in Anoka county. Zayo and Anoka County have an agreement whereby Zayo will provide capacity services at 145 public facilities. Anoka county, in turn desires to enter into agreements with public agencies such as cities to allow them to participate. What is the cost of the project and how will it be paid for? The total project cost is $19 million. 70 percent of the project is funded by grant money and 30 percent is being split between Zayo and Anoka County (approximately $2.8 million each). Anoka County plans to repay a portion of the match by charging the entities for service. The proposed cost for service is $75 /month for a 100MB connection and $400 /month for a 1GB connection. Can my city opt in later? As part of the initial project, equipment is contemplated at all 145 public sites. Once the equipment is installed, the city may chose to initiate service later. What does the agreement require of my city? The agreement requires that the entity provide the underlying rights to access the space so that the fiber can be installed across the property and run into the building. The agreement also requires the entity to provide space for the equipment. The equipment consists of a switch that fits into a computer rack. Additionally, the agreement requires that the city provide access to the equipment and that the city assume responsibility for its negligent acts that result in damage to the equipment. Who pays for the equipment? The initial equipment is paid for by the project. Zayo provides a warranty through 2017. After the expiration of the warranty, the city is responsible for the cost of the equipment at its sites on a pro -rata basis. Does this project give Zayo an unfair advantage? Zayo was selected after an RFP process as the firm best able to meet the county's requirements. Zayo is a middle mile fiber provider and does not provide to the home service. The grant requires that Zayo make the system available so any carrier is able to purchase service from Zayo. The system will also allow service to to areas that are currently un- served or underserved. What advantages does this project create for the business community? This project will construct an open access fiber network throughout Anoka County. The open access nature of the network will allow incumbent providers to purchase service, as well as allow new entrants into the area providing for additional competition and choices for local businesses and residents. Will any new jobs be created for design and construction? Zayo currently employs 22 people in Minnesota. They will contract for engineering and construction services. The engineering vendor estimates that they will hire 4 -5 local staff to complete the project. The construction vendor will be selected later this year. What guarantees are there that Zayo will complete the project? Zayo's network spans 30 states, 153 markets, and over 22,000 unique route miles of fiber. Zayo has the business capacity to construct and operate the fiber for this project. Zayo is contractually bound to Anoka County and is also bound by the NTIA grant rules which require it to construct and operate the network. • • • WS — Item 2 WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT Work Session Item Date: March 28, 2011 To: City Council From: Jeff Karlson, City Administrator .094 Re: Connect Anoka County Fiber Project Background Connect Anoka County is a county -led project to increase the amount of fiber optic cable in the county. The initiative resulted in a partnership between Anoka County and Zayo Bandwidth of Louisville, Colorado, who applied for and received a National Communications Information Administration (NTIA) grant paying 70 percent ($13.4 million) of the fiber construction cost and initial equipment. The Connect Anoka County project will link 145 anchor institutions with three core rings, creating a 286 -mile backbone. The backbone will connect police, fire, public works, libraries, K -12 schools, colleges, city halls, and county buildings. The network will provide a direct advantage to local businesses, passing directly through the county's key business districts and economic development zones. Ultimately, the fiber will provide faster and more reliable service. The countywide fiber network will be owned and operated by Zayo Bandwidth, a private company, allowing service to local businesses and homes. The agreement for connectivity services is with Anoka County. The monthly fee for broadband service is $75 /month for 100 MB service and $400 /month for 1 GB service. These initial fees will be used primarily to pay the proportionate share of the county's match ($2.9 million) to the project. Once the proportionate share of this match is recovered, it is expected the fees will decrease if other factors remain constant. The Agreement specifies that there is no cost to Lino Lakes for the purchase and installation of the Zayo equipment. The Agreement also provides that the Zayo equipment will be maintained and replaced at no expense to City until August 17, 2017. Thereafter, the City would pay the pro rata costs incurred when the equipment needs to be replaced to support the network services. The two designated co- location sites in Lino Lakes are at city hall and the public works facility. Staff has identified the most suitable location for the network equipment in each building. Through Anoka County, Zayo may request permission to place additional equipment at the city hall or public works facility to solely service commercial customers. If the City elected to allow such installation for commercial service, Zayo would pay the City $250 per month for the first device, and $100 per month for each additional device. This equipment would remain the personal property of Zayo. Anoka County has held several meetings with the public entities to go over the project details and to answer questions about the fiber optic backbone. Many questions have been raised and not all of them have been answered by the County or Zayo. The County is asking the community anchor institutions to adopt a Connectivity Services Agreement by April 1, 2011. Because there were too any unanswered questions about the project, the North Metro Cable Commission (of which Lino Lakes is a member) asked its telecommunications attorney, Steve Guzzetta, to review the Connectivity Services Agreement. Mr. Guzzetta pointed out several concerns he had with the agreement and drafted a revised agreement that addresses all of his concerns. His revised version of the agreement is now being reviewed by the County Attorney's Office. Included in the packet is a letter from Mr. Guzzetta, dated March 21, 2011, which lists the major issues in the Connectivity Services Agreement. Representatives from Anoka County will be available on Monday night for a brief presentation and to answer any questions. Requested Council Direction Staff is recommending that the Council take no action on the Agreement until the concerns raised by North Metro TV attorney, Steve Guzzetta, have been addressed to the satisfaction of Mr. Guzzetta, the North Metro Cable Commission, and other community anchor institutions. If the Council wishes to act on the County's proposed Agreement in order to meet the April 1 deadline, the Council can add this item to the agenda during the regular Council meeting for consideration. Attachments Connectivity Services Agreement Frequently Asked Questions March 21, 2011 Letter from Steve Guzzetta Mr. Guzzetta's recommended Service Level Requirements Project Schedule P2 • • • P3 Connectivity Services Agreement With Community Anchor Institution(s) For Broadband Services At Co- location Service Site(s) This Agreement, entered into by and between: 1. COUNTY of Anoka (Anoka County), 2100 Third Avenue North, Anoka, Minnesota 55303; and 2. , (Entity), , Minnesota, 55 WHEREAS, ZAYO Bandwidth LLC (ZAYO) was recently awarded a grant from the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) which is to be combined with matching funds from ZAYO and Anoka County to build a fiber optic network in Anoka County to provide high -speed broadband services to Community Anchor Institutions; and WHEREAS, Anoka County has recently entered into a Master Fiber Indefeasible Right of Use (IRU) Agreement and a Wholesale Master Service Agreement with ZAYO in order to facilitate the purposes of the grant obtained by ZAYO; and WHEREAS, Anoka County and ZAYO have identified multiple Community • Anchor Institutions to be connected by the Core Backbone and Distribution Network which will comprise the fiber optic network; and WHEREAS, Anoka County desires to arrange for co- location service sites at various Community Anchor Institutions which have been identified for the purposes of building the fiber -optic network; and WHEREAS, Connectivity Services will become available to each of the Community Anchor Institutions at the co- location service sites as a result of the fiber - optic network built by Anoka County and ZAYO; and WHEREAS, the Community Anchor Institutions will have the option of accepting Connectivity Services initially, or allowing the equipment to be installed and reserving the acceptance of Connectivity Services until a later time; and WHEREAS, Entity is a community anchor institution which owns, leases, controls, rents or administers a designated co- location service site; and WHEREAS, it is in the interest of Entity to work together with Anoka County to facilitate ZAYO in building the fiber optic network. 10 NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows: Final Agreement as of March 4, 2011 1. DEFINITIONS That the parties agree the following definitions for terms used in this Agreement: a) Community Anchor Institutions: quasi - government, government, educational and public safety institutions. b) Co- location service sites: designated physical sites located in various Community Anchor Institutions located in and around Anoka County. (See Attachment A.) c) ZAYO System: an integrated multi - cable, multi -ring fiber optic communication system comprised of cables and ducts, lateral connections, and the manholes and handholds locates therein, and related equipment required to provide Connectivity Services as provided through the NTIA grant. d) Connectivity Services: As described in Article V. e) Underlying Rights: all deeds, IRUs, (exclusive or non - exclusive) easements, rights -of -way agreements, licenses, grants, contracts and other rights, titles and interests to use real property of any third person, which are reasonably necessary for the construction, placement, location, installation, operation, use, IRU, rental, maintenance, repair or replacement by ZAYO or Anoka County, as the case may be, of the ZAYO System, Ducts, County Equipment, Cable or County Dark Fibers. f) IRU: Indefeasible Right of Use. g) Equipment: electronics, optronics, and other devices as necessary to deliver the Connectivity Services. h) Permitted use: Connectivity services shall only be used by Community Anchor Institutions for quasi - governmental, governmental, educational or public safety purposes and shall not be used to directly or indirectly compete with ZAYO. i) ZAYO Staff: Employees, consultants, and other sub - contractors working under the direction of ZAYO to install and support the ZAYO System. II. SCOPE OF SERVICES A. Anoka County will provide, through its contract with ZAYO, Connectivity Services to Entity through the fiber optic network built by ZAYO. Once the fiber optic network is built and the system is installed in the various co- location service sites, 2 Final Agreement as March 4, 2011 P4 • • • Anoka County, through its agreement with ZAYO, its successors and /or assigns, will provide ongoing support for the provision of Connectivity Services to Entity. Only site locations identified with fee amounts on Attachment A will receive Connectivity Services. Any mutually agreed changes to Connectivity Services will require a modification to Attachment A pursuant to section XII. B. Entity shall provide space for a co- location service site where ZAYO, on behalf of Anoka County, can install equipment to be connected to the ZAYO system in order to build the Fiber Optic network. Entity shall provide Underlying Rights to the co- location site to Anoka County for the purpose of building the Fiber Optic network to the point of demarcation. C. Nothing in this agreement affects Entity's cable franchising authority. III. COSTS AND COMPENSATION A. A. To the extent that Connectivity Services are used by Entity, Entity will pay Anoka County a monthly fee as detailed in Attachment A. Fees reflect the actual costs to provide the Connectivity Services. For entities receiving connectivity services, the initial fee is established at $75.00 per month per site for 100 mbps and $400.00 per month per site for 1 gbps. Fees will be periodically reviewed to reflect current costs, but will not be modified without the agreement of both parties. Initially the fees will primarily be used to pay the proportionate share of the county's match to the project. Once the proportionate share of this match is recovered, it is expected the fee amount will decrease if other factors remain constant. Fees will be invoiced starting the month following when Connectivity Services begin. Entity will provide payment within 30 days of receipt of an invoice. Nonpayment shall be grounds for default. B. Entity shall not charge Anoka County, or ZAYO through Anoka County, for the Underlying Rights in the co- location site used by Anoka County and ZAYO to build the Fiber Optic Network. Additionally, Entity shall not charge rent, access fees, lease payments, or any other fee to Anoka County or ZAYO for the co- location space provided for the installation and housing of Equipment provided for connectivity service for Entity. 3 Final Agreement as March 4, 2011 PE IV. PHYSICAL ACCESS TO CO- LOCATION SITE A. Entity shall provide co- location space at co- location service sites indicated on Attachment A where ZAYO, on behalf of Anoka County, can install Equipment to provide services. Security shall be maintained at the site as indicated in Attachment B. Entity shall provide adequate power and temperature control as may be further detailed on the service order Attachment B. Entity shall provide all Underlying Rights and rights of access necessary for ZAYO to enter the premises and to construct and maintain fiber connections across the co- location service site whether the site is owned, leased, rented or administered by Entity. B. ZAYO, on behalf of Anoka County, shall provide, install, maintain, repair, operate and control its Equipment, as necessary. Unless specifically provided in Attachment A, there shall be no cost to Entity for the purchase and/ or installation of the ZAYO Equipment. Any ZAYO Equipment shall be maintained and replaced at no expense to Entity until the earlier of August 17, 2017, or this contract is otherwise terminated. Thereafter, if the ZAYO Equipment deteriorates, or no longer supports the provisioning of services, Entity agrees that it shall pay the prorata costs incurred in the replacement of such ZAYO Equipment. C. ZAYO, through Anoka County, may request permission to place additional ZAYO Equipment at the co- location service site indentified in Attachment A to solely service commercial customers. If Entity elects to allow such installation for commercial service at the co- location service site, ZAYO shall pay to Entity $250 per month for the first device, and $100 per month for each additional device. No co- location fees will apply if ZAYO Equipment used to provide services to Entity and to Anoka County if such ZAYO Equipment is also used to serve a commercial customer. D. The ZAYO Equipment shall remain the sole and exclusive property of ZAYO, and nothing contained herein shall give or convey to Entity any right, title or interest whatsoever in the ZAYO Equipment. The ZAYO Equipment shall remain personal property, notwithstanding that it may be or become attached to, or embedded in, realty. The ZAYO Equipment shall not be considered a fixture of that real property. 4 i Final Agreement as March 4, 2011 P6 • • • Neither Anoka County nor Entity shall tamper with, remove or conceal any identifying plates, tags, or labels identifying ZAYO's ownership interest in the ZAYO Equipment. E. Equipment and service beyond the point of demarcation and /or interconnection between ZAYO's facilities and Entity terminal Equipment and the wiring at the point of demarcation shall be the responsibility of the Entity. F. Entity shall provide access to ZAYO on behalf of Anoka County to provide services for purposes of installation, maintenance and repair of ZAYO Equipment. ZAYO, on behalf of Anoka County, shall restrict access to the co- location site space to authorized ZAYO staff. ZAYO staff shall abide by any physical security requirements provided to ZAYO in writing. ZAYO shall make reasonable attempts to provide at least two days notice prior to entering the co- location site to install, maintain, or repair any of the ZAYO Equipment. If it is not reasonably possible to provide such notice, or in an emergency, ZAYO shall provide notice as soon as practicable, but in all events prior to entering the co- location site. See Attachments B and D. G. If Entity provides its own Equipment, Anoka County, or ZAYO on Anoka County's behalf, shall have no obligation to install maintain or repair the Equipment. If, on responding to an Entity initiated service call, Anoka County, ZAYO and Entity jointly determine that the cause of the service delinquency was a failure, malfunction or the inadequacy of Entity's Equipment, Entity shall compensate Anoka County /ZAYO for ZAYO's actual time and materials expended during the service call. H. Neither party shall adjust, align, attempt to repair, relocate or remove the other party's Equipment, or ZAYO's Equipment, except as expressly authorized in writing by the other party or ZAYO. Prior to any installation of the SYSTEM, ZAYO will submit to Entity entrance and construction plans specifying the location, construction and method of installation related to the System. Entity shall respond to the plans with any objections as soon as reasonably possible, but in any event no later than 60 days. Entity shall immediately provide notice to ZAYO of known asbestos or other hazardous substances, pollutants or contaminants as defined by the Comprehensive Environmental Response 5 1 Final Agreement as March 4, 2011 P7 Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), Title 42, U.S. Code, or similar state or federal law. J. Entity shall provide to Anoka County 24 -hour contact information for the purpose of gaining co- location service site access. This information shall be used for both business hour and non - business hour services access. Entity will review and update the information provided as needed, but at least on an annual basis. See Attachment D. K. Entity shall not arbitrarily or capriciously require ZAYO to relocate ZAYO Equipment. However, upon ninety (90) days written notice, or, in the event of any emergency, Entity may require ZAYO to relocate co- located ZAYO Equipment; provided, however, the site of relocations shall afford comparable environmental conditions for the ZAYO Equipment and a comparable accessibility to the ZAYO Equipment. V. CONNECTIVITY SERVICE LEVEL REQUIREMENTS A. Anoka County, through its agreement with ZAYO, shall provide Connectivity Services to Entity at the capacity level indicated in Attachment A. Any upgrades to service will be dependent on costs of Equipment, fees to ZAYO, capacity limitations of the network, and other relevant factors. Entity recognizes that the network has a total bandwidth of 10GB on the core ring and 1GB on distribution rings and distribution laterals. This total capacity is shared among other Community Anchor Institutions which are part of this project. Entity agrees to work with Anoka County to manage bandwidth and equitably resolve capacity issues on the network. B. Dark fibers will be installed at each co- location service site as indicated in Attachment A. These dark fibers will be terminated at the site and are reserved for future use. This agreement neither contemplates nor conveys to Entity present or future rights to the use of the dark fiber. Any future use will be by a separate agreement and at an additional cost. 6 1 Final Agreement as March 4 2011 P8 • • • P9 C. Entity may use the network only to provide service to itself, and agencies and departments of the Entity in keeping with the Permitted Uses of this Agreement. D. Transport Availability: The transport services being provided will meet or exceed 99.999% network availability for protected optical service, 99.99% for protected TDM based services such as DS3s and DS1s and 99.9% for unprotected services as measured on a monthly basis. If Network Availability is below the percentage above in two out of the three preceding calendar months not due to an Excused Outage, the same shall constitute an event of default hereunder. E. Ethernet Availability: The Ethernet Services being provided will meet or exceed 99.9% network availability for unprotected service and 99.95% for protected service as measured on a monthly basis. If Network Availability is below 99.9% for unprotected circuits and 99.95% for protected circuits in two out of the three preceding calendar months not due to an Excused Outage, the same shall constitute an event of default hereunder. F. Mean Time To Repair (MTTR): ZAYO's MTTR will be four hours for protected services and eight hours for unprotected services as measured on a monthly basis for outages of the services provided or any part of the services provided; for example an individual DS3 or group of DS3s. If ZAYO's MTTR for all protected services is greater than four hours in two out of the three preceding months not due to a Force Majeure Event such occurrence shall constitute an Event of Default on the part of ZAYO, on behalf of Anoka County, for the affected circuit. VI. TERM This Agreement will be for a period commencing on the date of signing by both parties, and continuing until August 16, 2015 (Initial Term), with up to a total of three (3) renewal periods of additional five (5) years terms (Renewal Terms) upon written amendment. Both parties shall provide written notice of intent to renew this agreement not less than one hundred eighty days (180) before the end of the Initial Term or Renewal Term. For purposes of this agreement, written notices shall be sent to the addresses of each of the Parties as indicated above. Upon the termination or expiration 7 Final Agreement as March 4, 2011 I of this Agreement, Anoka County shall have no further obligation to provide Services and no further liability to Entity. Upon termination or expiration of this agreement, ZAYO shall be provided a reasonable opportunity to retrieve its equipment from the co- location service site(s). Any underlying rights granted by the Entity under this Agreement shall terminate or expire with the Agreement without need for further action or notice by any party. VII. INDEMNIFICATION To the extent permitted by law, each party shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless the other party, it's commissioners, council members, school board members, superintendents, directors, officers, employees and agents, successors and assigns, from all damages, costs, expenses and liabilities, including reasonable attorney's fees and disbursements, sustained in any action commenced by any third party in connection with the indemnifying party's performance of its obligations and duties under this Agreement except those damages, costs, expenses, and liabilities arising from the negligence or willful misconduct of the other party. The indemnified party shall promptly notify the other party in writing of any such law suit or claim. Under no circumstances shall a party be required to pay on behalf of itself and other parties, any amounts in excess of the limits on liability established in Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 466, or any similar statutory limits on tort liability. VIII. INSURANCE During the Initial Term, and during each renewal term, each party shall obtain and maintain not less than the insurance set forth in Attachment C. IX. LIABILITY AND LIMITATIONS OF LIABILITY A. Entity shall be liable for any loss of or damage to the ZAYO Equipment at the co- location site caused by Entity's negligence, intentional acts, willful misconduct or unauthorized maintenance subject to statutory limits. Entity shall reimburse Anoka County on behalf of ZAYO for the reasonable cost of repair of the ZAYO Equipment, or 8 Final Agreement as March 4, 2011 P10 • • • the replacement thereof, within thirty (30) days after receipt by Entity of a written request for reimbursement. B. Anoka County shall be liable for any Toss of or damage to Entity's equipment caused by Anoka County or ZAYO's negligence, intentional act, willful misconduct or unauthorized maintenance. Anoka County shall reimburse Entity for the reasonable cost of repair of the equipment, or the replacement thereof, within thirty (30) days after a written request for reimbursement and ZAYO has reimbursed Anoka County for the Toss or damage pursuant to Anoka County's Agreement with ZAYO. Anoka will make reasonable effort to pursue reimbursement on the Entity's behalf. C. Anoka County shall not be liable for delays in installation, commencement or restoration of the service; for any temporary or permanent cessation of service; for errors, malfunctions, delays or defects in transmission of the service; for Toss or damage occasioned by a Force Majeure Event. Anoka County's liability for any and all causes and claims whether based in contract, warranty, negligence or otherwise shall in no event exceed: 1) an amount equivalent to the proportionate charge by Anoka County to Entity for the period of service affected, or 2) if applicable, the replacement value of any Entity equipment which is lost or damaged as a result of Anoka County's gross negligence or willful misconduct. D. ANOKA COUNTY NEITHER ASSUMES NOR MAKES ANY WARRANTY, EXPRESS, IMPLIED, STATUTORY OR OTHERWISE AS TO THE DESCRIPTION, QUALITY, MERCHANTIBILITY, COMPLETENESS OR FITNESS FOR ANY PARTICULAR PURPOSE OR USE OF THE SERVICE, LOCAL ACCESS OR ANY OTHER MATTER, EXCEPT AS SET FORTH IN THIS AGREEMENT. SUCH WARRANTIES ARE HEREBY EXCLUDED AND DISCLAIMED. X. FORCE MAJEURE Neither party individually and Anoka County on behalf of ZAYO shall be liable for any failure of performance hereunder due to causes beyond its reasonable control including, but not limited to acts of God, fire, explosion, vandalism, cable cut, flood, storm, or other similar catastrophe, any law, order, regulation, direction, action or 9 Final Agreement as March 4, 2011 P11 request of the government, or any department, agency, commission, court, or bureau of a government, or any civil or military authority, national emergency, insurrection, riot, war, strike, lockout, or work stoppage (each a "Force Majeure event "). The party claiming relief under this section shall notify the other party of the occurrence or existence of the Force Majeure event and of the termination of such event. In the event Anoka County through ZAYO is unable to deliver services as a result of a Force Majeure event which precludes ZAYO from performing, the other party shall not be obligated to pay for the services so affected for as long as ZAYO is unable to deliver the Services. XI. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS In providing all services pursuant to this Agreement, the parties shall abide by all statutes, ordinances, rules and regulations pertaining to or regulating the provision of such services, including those now in effect and hereafter adopted. Any violation of said statutes, ordinances, rules, or regulations shall constitute a material breach of this Agreement and shall entitle the Parties to terminate this Agreement immediately upon delivery of written notice of termination. XII. MODIFICATIONS Any material alterations, modifications, amendments, or variations of the terms of this Agreement shall be valid and enforceable only when they have been reduced to writing as an amendment and signed by the parties. XIII. DATA PRIVACY In collecting, storing, using and disseminating data on individuals in the course of providing services hereunder, the parties agree to abide by all pertinent state and federal statutes, rules and regulations covering data privacy, including, but not limited to, the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act and all rules promulgated pursuant thereto by the Commissioner of the Department of Administration. 10 Final Agreement as March 4, 2011 P12 • • P13 All data created, collected, received, stored, used, maintained, or disseminated by the parties in performing this Agreement is also subject to the provisions of Minn. Stat. § 13 et. seq. (the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act) and, pursuant to that statute, the parties must comply with the requirements of that statute. All remedies set forth in Minn. Stat. § 13.08 shall also apply to the parties. XIV. EARLY TERMINATION This Agreement may be terminated by either party at any time, with or without cause, upon One Hundred Eighty (180) days written notice delivered by mail or in person. If notices are delivered by mail, they shall be effective two days after mailing. XV. DEFAULT AND REMEDY A. Default by Entity: Entity is in default of the agreement if Entity: 1) is more than 15 days past due in paying for services as agreed in this Agreement, or any invoice pursuant to its terms, excluding those amounts which Entity has notified Anoka County as reasonably being in dispute; or 2) materially fails to observe or perform any non - monetary obligation or covenant hereunder; or 3) files or initiates proceedings or has proceedings filed or initiated against it, seeking liquidation, reorganization or other relief(such as the appointment of a trustee, receiver, liquidator, custodian or such other official) under any bankruptcy, insolvency or similar law; or 4) violates the permitted uses. In the event of default by Entity, notification of Default shall be sent to the address provided below in Section XVI. Entity shall have five days to cure a monetary breach, or thirty days to cure a non - monetary breach. If the Default remains uncured, Anoka County may suspend services until Entity remedies the Default, terminate or suspend services under this agreement and /or the applicable services being provided under the service order. If Anoka County terminates this Agreement pursuant to this article of the Agreement, Anoka County shall have the right to seek full payment for amounts due for services rendered prior to the date of termination. 11 Final Agreement as March 4, 2011 B. Anoka County shall be in default under this Agreement if it: 1) fails to arrange for ZAYO to provide the services in accordance with the Service Order (see Exhibit E) or otherwise fails to cure any breach of the Agreement after receiving written notice of default from Entity; or 2) defaults on its agreement with ZAYO and does not cure said default within five days for a monetary breach or thirty days of a non - monetary breach of that agreement: or 3) fails to notify Entity of default by ZAYO within five days of said Default, or fails to notify Entity that ZAYO has alleged that Anoka County is in Default, within five days of receipt of notification from ZAYO. Notification of Default by Anoka County shall be sent to the address provided below in Section XVI. Anoka County shall have five days to cure a monetary breach and thirty days to cure an non - monetary breach of the agreement. If Anoka County is caused to be in default of this agreement by the breach of ZAYO, Anoka County shall notify ZAYO in writing and allow ZAYO thirty days to cure, or such longer period of time as may be reasonably necessary to cure as long as the cure is initiated and diligently pursued within such thirty days or provide notice of a dispute about the existence such default. However, Entity and Anoka County may terminate this agreement upon written notice if ZAYO causes Anoka County to default by not meeting the terms of Article V. CONNECTIVITY SERVICE LEVEL REQUIREMENTS as noted above. 12 1 Final Agreement as March 4, 2011 P14 • • • • XVI. NOTICES Notices shall be sent to the parties at the following: Anoka County: Information Technology Director Anoka County Government Center Information Technology Department 2100 Third Avenue North Ste. 300 Anoka, Minnesota 55303 Entity: , Minnesota 55 XVII. AFFIRMATIVE ACTION In accordance with Anoka County's Affirmative Action Policy and the County Commissioners' policies against discrimination, no person shall illegally be excluded from full -time employment rights in, be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to discrimination in the program which is the subject of this Agreement on the basis of race, creed, color, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, public assistance status, age, disability, or national origin. XVIII. SURVIVAL OF REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES. The representations, warranties, covenants, and agreements of the parties under this Agreement, and the remedies of either party for the breach of such representations, warranties, covenants, and agreement by the other party shall survive the execution and term of this Agreement. I Final Agreement as March 4, 2011 13 P15 XIX. WAIVER. The waiver of any of the rights and /or remedies arising under the terms of the Agreement on any one occasion by any party hereto shall not constitute a waiver of any rights or remedies in respect to any subsequent breach or default of the terms of the Agreement. The rights and remedies provided or referred to under the terms of the Agreement are cumulative and not mutually exclusive. XX. GOVERNING LAW. This Agreement shall be interpreted and construed according to the laws of the State of Minnesota, excluding the State of Minnesota's choice of law provisions. Jurisdiction and venue shall reside in the County of Anoka, Minnesota. XXI. SEVERABILITY. The provisions of this Agreement shall be deemed severable. If any part of this Agreement is rendered void, invalid, or unenforceable, such rendering shall not affect the validity and enforceability of the remainder of this Agreement. XXII. NO RIGHTS OF THIRD PARTIES. Except for specific provisions as related to ZAYO acting through the auspices of Anoka County, nothing in this Agreement is intended to confer any rights or remedies on other than the parties to the Agreement XXIII. ATTACHMENTS AND EXHIBITS. The following Exhibits are attached to this agreement and are incorporated into this agreement by reference: Attachment A: Capacity and costs for each co- location service site Attachment B: Co- location service site requirements Attachment C: Insurance Requirements Attachment D: Building Access Contact Information Attachment E: Service Order Form Attachment F: Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) 14 1 Final Agreement as March 4, 2011 P16 • • • • • The following Attachments are included for reference in this agreement and are informational exhibits, but do not confer any rights onto the Entity unless also specifically included in this agreement: Attachment G: Wholesale Master Service Agreement, Anoka County Contract #2010 -0239. This is a separate document in a pdf format. Attachment H: Master Fiber IRU by and between ZAYO BANDWIDTH, LLC and Anoka County, Minnesota dated August 17, 2010. This is a separate document in a pdf format. (This exhibit does not include 20 pages of photographic exhibits which are included in the original, and are available to Entities on request.) XXIV. AUDIT, DISCLOSURE AND RETENTION OF RECORDS Both parties agree to make available to duly authorized representatives of the other and of the State of Minnesota, for the purpose of audit examination pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 16C.05, any books, documents, papers, and records of the party that are pertinent to the provision of services hereunder. Both parties further agree to maintain all such required records for six (6) years after receipt of final payment and the closing of all other related matters. XXV. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR A. Anoka County has entered into a separate contract with ZAYO for the construction of the ZAYO system /fiber optic network. See informational Exhibits G and H. ZAYO remains an independent contractor, however, and neither that agreement nor this one creates a partnership, joint venture or agency relationship between Zayo or the County. Anoka County has no authority to bind ZAYO beyond the obligations and responsibilities of those contracts. B. It is agreed by the parties that at all times and for all purposes hereunder, the relationship of the County to the Entity is that of an independent contractor and not an employee or agent of the Entity. C. It is agreed by the parties that at all times and for all purposes hereunder, the relationship of the Entity to the County is that of an independent contractor and not an employee or agent of the County. 1 Final Agreement as March 4, 2011 15 P17 XXVI. ENTIRE AGREEMENT It is understood and agreed by the parties that the entire agreements of the parties is contained herein and that this Agreement supersedes all oral agreements and negotiations between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof as well as any previous agreements presently in effect between the Anoka County and Entity relating to the subject matter hereof. The parties hereto revoke any prior oral or written agreement between themselves and hereby agree that this Agreement is the only and complete agreement regarding the subject hereof. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have caused this Agreement to be executed as of the date first written above, notwithstanding the date of the signatures of the parties.. ANOKA COUNTY MINNESOTA By: By: Rhonda Sivarajah, Chair County Board of Commissioners Dated: Dated: ATTEST ATTEST By: By: Terry L. Johnson County Administrator Dated: Dated: APPROVED AS TO FORM APPROVED AS TO FORM By: By: Kathryn M. Timm Assistant County Attorney Dated: Dated: 16 Final Agreement as March 4, 2011 P18 • • • Attachments Attachment A: Capacity and costs for each co- location service site Attachment B: Co- location service site requirements Attachment C: Insurance Requirements Attachment D: Building Access Contact Information Attachment E: Service Order Form Attachment F: Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) Attachment G: Wholesale Master Service Agreement, Anoka County Contract #2010 - 02391. This is a separate document in a pdf format. Attachment H: Master Fiber IRU by and between ZAYO BANDWIDTH, LLC and Anoka County, Minnesota dated August 17, 2010. This is a separate document in a pdf format. (This (this exhibit does not include 20 pages of photographic exhibits which are included in the original, and are available to Entities on request.) I Note Berge, the MSA has two attachments which will be amended, but have not been so at the time of this writing. The list of 145 co- location sites has been altered since the MSA was signed on August 17, 2010. Once the final sites are approved by the NT1A, this attachment will be amended. Additionally, there is an attachment which details minimum power requirements at the co- locations site of 48 volts DC. The County and Zayo verbally agreed that these requirements will be changed to standard 110 AC. This verbal agreement has not been reduced to writing as of the date of this writing, but is expected shortly. 17 Final Agreement as March 4, 2011 P19 ATTACHMENT A Capacity and Costs for Co- location Sites 1. Entity Name: MINNESOTA 2. Entity Contact Information: Name: Position: Office Phone: CeII Phone: Home Phone: Pager: Email: Name: Position: Office Phone: CeII Phone: Home Phone: Pager: Email: Name: Position: Office Phone: Cell Phone: Home Phone: Pager: Email: Principal Contact: Secondary Contact: Billing Contact: 18 I Final Agreement as March 4, 2011 P20 • • • • • 3. Following are the site locations included for equipment co- location: Site # Location Address City Service Monthly Capacity Costs 1 Final Agreement as March 4, 2011 19 P21 1 Attachment B Co- Location Service Site requirements A. Security Requirements. Entity shall provide best practices physical security to the co- location service site in the form of traditional lock service, key card, numeric access code, or electronic security system equal to that which Entity provides for its own assets. Keys, key cards, numeric access codes and the electronic security systems shall be maintained according to industry standards. Entity shall take all reasonable precautions to ensure the integrity of the security of the co- location service site. Anoka County shall make reasonable efforts to ensure that its employees and agents, including ZAYO, follow all written instructions at the co- location site as provided by the Entity. B. Temperature and Environmental Control Requirements. Space provided to ZAYO for the housing of the ZAYO system and equipment in the co- location service site shall meet industry standards for temperature controls, humidity, lighting, and protection from power surges and outages. Entity shall ensure that the co- location service site temperature remains in a constant range between 68 °F and 83 °F, and humidity remains in a constant range of 40 % - -60 %. Entity shall use best efforts to implement a protection plan ensuring that the ZAYO System remains functional in the event of a power outage or similar emergency. C. Environmental Space Requirements. Entity shall provide sufficient cubic space for the installation of the ZAYO system and equipment in a secure area. ZAYO shall provide the space specifications for each co- location service site directly to Entity. Entity shall ensure that the space provided to ZAYO for the installation of the ZAYO System and equipment will also include sufficient space for ZAYO to access the equipment for repairs, maintenance and upgrades. The space will be convenient to the demarcation point, and will include any necessary space to install cable, conduit, fiber, and or circuitry from the demarcation point to the equipment. 20 1 Final Agreement as March 4, 2011 P22 • • • • Attachment C Insurance Requirements Insurance Limits. During the Term, each party shall obtain and maintain not less than the insurance set forth below: Worker's Compensation: Statutory limits. Automobile Liability Insurance: Such policy coverage will include coverage for all vehicles owned, hired, non - hired, non - owned and borrowed by the party in the performance of the obligations covered under this agreement: Combined single limit: $1,000,000.00 Commercial General Liability and /or Umbrella Liability: All liability insurance must meet the requirements of Minn. Stat § 466.04 subdivision 1 (a) (3) or $500,000.00, minimum liability for claims of death by wrongful act or omission and $500,000.00 to any claimant in any other case, whichever is greater. All liability insurance must meet the requirements of Minn. Stat. § 466.04 Subdivision 1 • (a) (7) or $1, 500,000.00 minimum liability for any number of claims arising out of a single occurrence, whichever is greater. • All umbrella insurance must meet the requirements of Minn. Stat. §466.04 Subd. 1(a) (8). Umbrella insurance coverage must be on a "follow- form" basis. The above minimum requirements as to insurance coverage shall not limit the liability of either party under this agreement. The above limits may be satisfied using a combination of primary and excess coverage, self insurance as provided by Minn. Stat. § 471.981. Each Party shall obtain and maintain the insurance policies required above with insurance and /or reinsurance companies authorized to insure risks in Minnesota. With the exception of Worker's Compensation, each party, its Affiliates, and their officers, directors and employees and any other person entitled to indemnification hereunder, shall be named as additional insured to the extent of such indemnification. Each Party shall provide the other party with a certificate of insurance showing that the party has complied with the insurance requirements of this Attachment. Each insurance policy shall contain a provision providing such other party with thirty days advanced notice of any cancellation or material change in coverage at which time such party will notify the other party immediately of such cancellation or material change in coverage. Deductible/ Self Insured Retentions: All proof of insurance shall clearly set forth deductible or self insured retentions. Each Party shall be responsible for its deductible and /or self insured retentions. 1 Final Agreement as March 4, 2011 21 P23 ATTACHMENT D Building Access Contact Information Entity shall provide 24 hour, seven day a week access to ZAYO for the ZAYO System equipment housed in the Co- location service site for the purposes of maintenance, service, upgrade and repairs of the equipment and system. Such access will include the name and contact information of co- location site key - holder for business and non - business hour access. All access shall comply with written instructions provided to ZAYO and County (see section IV.F). Please provide contacts below. Business Hour Contact(s) — List contacts in the order you would like them to be called. Provide a minimum of 2 contacts (you may provide as many as you would like). Name: Position: Office Phone: Cell Phone: Home Phone: Pager: Email: Contact #1 Name: Position: Office Phone: ( ) Cell Phone: Home Phone: ( ) Pager: ( ) Email: Name: Position: Office Phone: CeII Phone: Home Phone: Pager: Email: Contact #2 Contact #3 22 Final Agreement as March 4, 2011 P24 • • • • • Non - Business Hour Contact(s) — List contacts in the order you would like them to be called. These contacts should have keys for building access to the co- location equipment area and be available after hours. Select people you would like called in case of such emergencies as equipment failures, fiber hits, storm damage, emergency locates, etc. Provide a minimum of 2 contacts (you may provide as many as you would like). Name: Position: Office Phone: Cell Phone: Home Phone: Pager: Email: Name: Position: Office Phone: Cell Phone: Home Phone: Pager: Email: Name: Position: Office Phone: Cell Phone: Home Phone: Pager: Email: Contact #1 Contact #2 Contact #3 Updates may be submitted to Anoka County IT at address provided in the Notices Section. Final Agreement as March 4, 2011 2; P25 ATTACHMENT E METROPOLITAN (LOCAL LOOP) NETWORK FIBER ACCEPTANCE TESTING PROCEDURES AND STANDARDS The intent of this Exhibit is to identify the fiber acceptances testing procedures and standards used within the Zayo's metropolitan networks. Deviations from these specifications may occur if Zayo acquires a portion of the Zayo System from a third party pursuant to the Agreement. 1. All splices shall be fusion spliced. Mechanical splices are only allowed during temporary restoration and will be replaced with fusion splices. 2. After end -to -end connectivity on the fibers has been completed, bi- directional OTDR span and power meter testing will be completed. Zayo shall perform tests after the fiber cable is installed and the splicing enclosures have been completed and are in their final resting configuration with the cable vault or hand hole covers closed. This ensures that no micro or macro bending problems with the cable or fiber strands will contribute to the loss /attenuation measurements. 3. Power meter tests shall be completed to verify and insure that no fibers have been crossed at any of the splice points within the network. Zayo shall test and record power level readings on all fiber strands in both directions of transmission (bi- directionally) using the 1310 & 1550 nm wavelengths. 4. All OTDR and power meter tests shall be completed as follows: a. All OTDR traces shall be taken from both ends of a section (between adjacent locations) and recorded using the 1310 nm & 1550 nm wavelength. Loss /attenuation measurements for each splice point from both directions shall be taken and recorded. b. The end -to -end loss value as measured with an industry- accepted laser source and power meter should have an attenuation rating of less than or equal to the following: (1) At 1310 nm: (0.35 dB /km x km of cable) + (number of connectors x 0.50) + (0.15 x number of splices). (2) At 1550 nm: (0.25 dB /km x km of cable) + (number of connectors x 0.50) + (0.15 x number of splices). c. Zayo's loss /attenuation objective for each fiber optic splice is 0.15 dB when measured in one direction with an OTDR test set (excluding connector loss, which is typically 0.50 dB per mated connector pair). If after three attempts this parameter is not met, the splice will be marked as Out -Of -Spec (005) and the splice will remain provided the average loss /attenuation value of all splices on an individual fiber basis shall not exceed 0.15 dB for the entire ring or subsystem. d. For bi- directional OTDR testing, the distance from Location "A" and Location "Z" shall be recorded for each splice point. The loss /attenuation at each splice point shall be recorded at both wavelengths (1310 nm & 1550 nm) in each direction. Zayo shall then average the two readings to obtain the final average splice loss /attenuation for each splice point of each fiber strand within the fiber optic cable. e. Each fiber strand color must be recorded along with its buffer tube color or the ribbon color. The laser source transmit power level using the 1310 & 1550 nm wavelengths will always be recorded together with the receive power level reading at the receiving end of the test. 5. OTDR traces will be taken and splice loss measurements recorded. Zayo will store OTDR traces on electronic media. Loss measurements will be recorded using an industry- 24 Final Agreement as March 4, 2011 P26 • • • • • accepted laser source and a power meter. Copies of all data sheets and tables as well as electronic files with all traces will be available to Lessee. 6. Following emergency restoral, Zayo personnel shall perform span test documenting end -to- end attenuation measurement of each fiber at 1310 & 1550 nm wavelengths. Upon permanent repair, new splice loss readings should be no greater than the original splice loss specifications. Final Agreement as March 4, 2011 25 P27 ATTACHMENT F Connect Anoka County Frequently Asked Questions 1. What is Connect Anoka County? Connect Anoka County is the county -led effort to increase the amount of fiber optic cable in the county. The Connect Anoka County project has resulted in a partnership between Zayo Bandwidth, LLC and Anoka County. Through the partnership, Zayo Bandwidth applied for and received a National Telecommunications Information Administration (NTIA) grant paying 70 percent of the fiber construction cost and initial equipment. The grant project will construct an approximately 286 mile fiber network throughout Anoka County linking 145 governmental institutions. 2. Who owns the fiber optic cable? The fiber optic cable that is installed as part of the grant will be owned by Zayo Bandwith. Zayo will provide the capacity services for the governmental network and separately offer connectivity services to the private sector. The grant will also provide dark fiber strands for Anoka County use. The right to use these dark strands is conveyed to the county through a fiber Indefeasible Right to Use (IRU), which is similar to a Tong -term lease. Should the county decide to use the dark fiber, equipment will need to be purchased and a monthly maintenance fee paid to Zayo. 3. What are the project costs and how are they paid? The total grant- funded project budget is $19.1 million. Seventy percent of the costs ($13.4 million) will be paid by the NTIA grant. The balance of the project ($5.7 million) will be paid equally by Zayo Bandwidth and Anoka County ($2.8 million each). The county intends to recoup a portion of the $2.8 million match by charging the anchor institutions a proportional share based on a per connection charge. 4. What services are offered? The project is only providing connectivity, meaning that any governmental institution will still need to have an Internet Service Provider (ISP). The county purchases its ISP service from the State of Minnesota, Office of Enterprise Technology (OET) and is in discussions with OET to expand ISP services to include cities that are a part of the project. If this option becomes available, Cities will be notified. 5. How were the 145 anchor institutions decided upon? The agreements between Anoka County and Zayo Bandwidth specify 145 governmental and quasi - governmental anchor institutions as a part of the grant project. The list was made by asking each jurisdiction to submit a list of facilities to include in the project. As the project developed, some sites were added and others dropped at the request of the entities. NTIA will need to approve all changes. 6. Can sites be added in the future? 26 Final Agreement as March 4, 2011 P28 • • • The agreements between Anoka County and Zayo Bandwidth limit the number of sites to 145. Any additional sites on the network will require a service request to Zayo Bandwidth. As additional governmental sites require fiber, each entity will need to conduct an analysis as to the most cost - effective way to serve the location. In some cases it may be possible to connect through one of the original 145 sites. In other cases it may be cost effective to have Zayo Bandwidth or another private company serve the facility. 7. What is the project schedule? The project is currently underway. The environmental assessment is scheduled to be completed by spring 2011. Some connectivity service may be provided in 2011, but project completion will not be until 2012. Zayo Bandwidth is also working with road authorities to acquire the appropriate permits. 8. What are the decisions needed by my entity and when? Thus far, entities have only been asked for good -faith non binding commitments. However, Anoka County will need to have written agreements in place with any entity that wishes to participate by April 1, 2011. Specifically, each jurisdiction will need to confirm the sites and the connection speed. 9. What are the costs to my entity? Anoka County will charge each entity that connects a monthly fee. Any fee charged will be included in the agreement. The proposed agreement establishes a fee of $75 /month for 100 mbps service, and $400 /month for lgbps service. Cities that do not need service immediately can elect through the agreement to have equipment placed at their facility as part of the project and then establish service during the term of the agreement. The monthly fee will not be charged until service is established. To establish service at that time or make some other change for sites that have equipment, the entity and Anoka County will need to modify Attachment A of the agreement. 10. What do I do if a business in my community asks me about service? Zayo Group provides a full range of business products to the private sector. If you are interested in learning more, or getting information for business expos, chamber of commerce meetings, or specific businesses, the contact is Steve Kopp, Senior Account Manager, Zayo Enterprise Networks, at 952 - 230 -4861 or Steve. koppzayoenterprise.com, Web site www.zayo.com. 11. Who is Zayo and how were they selected for this project? Anoka County developed a Request for Proposal (RFP) seeking a partner for the Connect Anoka County project and to submit for an NTIA grant. The county received five proposals and, after review, selected Zayo Bandwidth. Zayo Bandwidth is a part of the Zayo Group which provides telecom and bandwidth infrastructure solutions that span over 153 markets and 30 states plus the District of Columbia including over 21,000 miles of fiber optic infrastructure. 27 1 Final Agreement as March 4, 2011 P29 12. Will each Entity be required to provide easements without cost to Anoka County and /or Zayo? Yes, it is contemplated that the easement will be provided without charge to get from the right of way to your facility across the private property of your facility. Entities retain authority to charge for building permits, franchises, etc. in the right of way. 13. Will physical access be required by Zayo? The agreement contemplates that there may be specific requirements that vary from location to location. Zayo must abide by your written security requirements. For example, if you want equipment installed in a location that you do not want to give unaccompanied access to, simply state that requirement in writing. Also, you do not need to give keys, access codes, or access cards to Zayo, so presuming that you keep your facilities locked, they would not be able to enter them without someone to let them in. The access that Zayo needs to maintain your equipment is similar to other providers such as Qwest, Comcast, US Cable, etc. 14. What assurances are in place for Zayo performance? Zayo has obligations under the agreement with the County to perform as well as NTIA grant requirements that Zayo must follow. In addition, Zayo will have an incentive to complete the fiber network so they can sell connectivity services to their commercial customers. 15. Does the County agreement with Zayo include a Performance Bond requirement? No, there is no performance bond requirement. However, Zayo has notified the County that performance bonds will be required from Contractors that Zayo employs in the construction process. 16. What happens if Zayo goes bankrupt? Prior to entering into an agreement with Zayo, an analysis was completed that determined that Zayo was in a healthy financial situation. If, in the future, Zayo files for bankruptcy, the outcome would be determined by the bankruptcy court. Additionally, Anoka County has an IRU in the dark fiber, there is added protection for the integrity of the network even if Zayo is no longer available to provide maintenance and support. 17. Concern was expressed with the warranty language in Section IX.D. This type of warranty language is very typical of fiber agreements such as this. This warranty language is a pass through to the Entities of the warranties negotiated between Zayo and the County. Anoka County cannot bind Zayo to any other warranties than what is provided in the Master Service Agreement and the IRU which are attached to the agreement in Exhibits G and H. 28 1 Final Agreement as March 4, 2011 P30 • • • 18. How will equipment replacement be made after the expiration of the warranty on August 17, 2017? If the equipment needs to be replaced after that time, the entity will need to pay the prorata costs for such replacement. In addition, consideration will need to be made for future maintenance of this new equipment. If the entity is not getting connectivity service, or no longer wants service, no replacement equipment at entity cost is required. 19. Will there be a forum for the entities to provide input in the future? It is the County's intent to continue meetings with the entities. In addition, if there is interest, we could consider creating advisory committees (i.e. technical, administrative) to provide a forum for interested entities to meet more frequently. 20. Does the agreement only address the installation of equipment at the co- location site, or does it also include the construction of dark fiber to the site? The entity needs to approve the agreement to allow the placement of equipment at the site as well as construction of the network including dark fiber to the co- location site. However, the entity may initially elect not to receive the connectivity service at a site. 21. I note the service site requirements in Attachment B (security, temperature and environmental, and space requirements). What is the size of the equipment; how much space is required, and; are there any special location requirements? The County and Zayo staff will be conducting a review of each site location over the next couple of months. It should also be noted that the Zayo equipment will be owned and managed by Zayo. The equipment will be switches that will fit into standard racks commonly found in data closets. See #27. 22. Should additional language be included for waiver of subrogation? No, the mutual indemnification language included in the agreement eliminates the need for any waiver of subrogation. 23. What is the point of demarcation contemplated in the Agreement? It is clear in the Agreement that the Entity is responsible for interconnection and wiring beyond the point of demarcation. Does this mean that the Entity will be required to wire to individual sites within the co- location service site? Yes, the Entity is responsible for wiring within each co- location site. This wiring is likely the entity's existing network. See Exhibit H for definition of demarcation point. 24. What exactly will the Entity be paying for? Does the agreement contemplate the use of dark fiber, or any additional cost to add capacity in the future? The entity is paying for connectivity which includes transport and ethernet service. The Entity will only pay if the connectivity service is used. The dark fiber will be installed with the network, but additional equipment will be required to utilize it. No specific use of the dark fiber is included in the agreement. 29 Final Agreement as March 4, 2011 P31 25. The Agreement states that the Entity will work with the County to manage bandwidth, but what does that mean? If there are capacity issues, all the entities will need to work together to resolve them to the mutual benefit of the parties. We will also be working to monitor bandwidth utilization to identify potential problems before they impact the service. 26. Have the insurance issues been resolved so that the requirements coincide with what is currently provided through the League of Minnesota Cities? We have made edits to the insurance language with input from the cities. Kurt Glaser, Lexington City Attorney, requested an opinion from the League of Minnesota Cities, which was received on March 2, 2011. Additional edits were made to the insurance requirements in order to comply with this opinion. 27. What are the space and environmental requirements for the Zayo Equipment? Ideally there would be rack space (19'X72" standard steel or aluminum telecom relay rack) available for the switch of 8u or about 12 inches, with sufficient space to access the equipment for repairs, maintenance and upgrades. The space should also be convenient to the entity's demarcation point. To maintain maximum uptime, it would be best to meet the specified requirements for space and environmental conditions. However, if all specifications cannot be met, the County and Zayo will work with the entity to determine an acceptable equipment location. See #21. 28. Why isn't Zayo a party to the Connectivity Services agreement? Some attorneys have suggested that ZAYO should be a party to this agreement. The County's agreement with ZAYO provides that the County must secure the various co- location sites, whether the properties are County owned or owned by another governmental or quasi - governmental agency. ZAYO has expressed disinterest in directly contracting with the various entities. 29. Who is responsible if Zayo damages equipment or systems belonging to a third party that are at the co- location site during installation? This agreement does not confer any third party benefits to anyone. The agreement is between the County and the Entity, with Zayo subordinate to the County. If the entity is concerned that Zayo will not use due care regarding a third party's equipment located at the co- location site, then the Entity should limit ZAYO's access to third party property. 30. We are not clear on the meaning of certain terms, such as Demarcation Point, Fiber Optic Network, Ducts, Network Availability, Transport Services, Ethernet Services, etc. Are these terms defined anywhere? Many of these terms are defined in the Master Service Agreement and Indefeasible Right of Use Agreement executed between the County and Zayo on August 17, 2010. A copy of these two agreements will be attached to the Connectivity Services Agreement for reference as informational exhibits. Additionally, some of these terms are "terms of 30 Final Agreement as March 4, 2011 P32 • • • • • art" in the broadband and Information Technology industry, and are used here in standard industry usage. 31. Why doesn't the Entity gain ownership rights in the equipment if the city is required to pay a pro -rata share for repairs and /or replacement after the warranty period expires on August 16, 2017? The initial equipment is paid for by the grant, at no cost to the Entity. Contrast this with more typical agreements, where the Entity pays a much larger monthly fee to a provider for both the service and the equipment. If, after 2017, equipment is replaced completely the situation may change. Options for total replacement at that time, if necessary, may include replacement with Zayo Equipment, Entity Equipment or County Equipment, 32. May the entity, in particular a city, charge building permit fees, franchises, etc. to Zayo outside of the co- location site? Pursuant to Paragraphs II.C. and III.B., Entities retain franchising authority, and may issue building permits, franchise fees as allowed by Minnesota statutes. The entity may not charge these fees for the co- location site itself (for example, the entity may not charge fees for underlying rights needed to place equipment in City Hall, or a fire station which are the designated co- location sites described in Exhibit A.) 33. Will Zayo or Anoka County be providing cable services in competition with Comcast or other private cable carriers through this agreement? No. Anoka County will not be a cable provider. Providing cable TV services is not consistent with Anoka County's mission statement. The County's fibers may only be used for governmental and quasi - governmental purposes. Zayo is not a cable provider, nor does it offer triple- play services (telephone /voice, data /internet, and cable /video). While no one can predict the future, a more likely scenario is that private carriers will contract with Zayo to use Zayo's fibers to provide services to private customers throughout the county. 34. Where can I get more information on the project? By phone: 763- 422 -7537 (Carrie Johnson) By e-mail: ConnectAnokaCounty (cr�co.anoka.mn.us By mail: Connect Anoka County, Attn: Information Technology 2100 3rd Avenue, Suite 300 Anoka, MN 55303 Final Agreement as March 4, 2011 31 P3� .a e rive • • e Drive Attorneys at Law Michael R. Bradleyff Stephen J. Guzzetta* Telecommunications Consultant Laura E. Bergus www.bradleyguzzetta.com tAlso admitted in Wisconsin 'Also admitted in Massachusetts and the District of Columbia ^Qualified Neutral under Rule 114 of the Minnesota General Rules of Practice March 21, 2011 TO: North Metro Telecommunications Commission Member Cities FROM: Stephen J. Guzzetta Counsel to the North Metro Telecommunications Commission SUBJECT: Connectivity Services Agreement Template At the request of a number of its member cities, the North Metro Telecommunications Commission (the "NMTC ") has prepared a connectivity service agreement template that can be used in discussions with Anoka County about the co- location of equipment in municipal institutions, the construction of a "broadband network" and the provision of certain "connectivity services." The purposes of the template are to address a number of deficiencies in the Anoka County versions of the connectivity service agreement, to cover issues not necessarily contemplated by Anoka County, to protect the member cities' interests, to avoid near -term and long -term conflicts with Anoka County and Zayo Bandwidth, LLC ( "Zayo "), so far as possible, and to facilitate the viability and success of the overall Connect Anoka County project. It is not the NMTC's intent to undermine or delay the Connect Anoka County project or the deployment of broadband facilities in member cities and Anoka County in general. Some of the major issues posed by the Anoka County connectivity service agreement drafts that are covered by the template include (but are not limited to): • Zayo is not a party to the agreement, even though it is responsible for almost all obligations under the agreement. Anoka County sees itself as an intermediary between municipalities and Zayo, which in many cases may only serve to add an additional layer of bureaucracy that could delay Zayo's performance. Moreover, if Zayo is not a party to the agreement, it is likely that enforcement issues will arise over time (e.g., can and should a municipality be enforcing the agreement against Anoka County for a deficiency in service, when it is actually Zayo who is providing the service ?) • Anoka County's versions of the agreement, as a whole, do not adequately protect cities' cable franchises and right -of -way management authority. In addition, Anoka County's drafts do not make sufficiently clear P34 • • • • • • what rights Zayo will have to utilize public rights -of -way to reach community anchor institutions. • The concept of "connectivity services" is not clearly defined in the Anoka County versions of the connectivity service agreement. Accordingly, it is not evident what participants would be buying, and what expectations they could have concerning connectivity services. • Zayo and Anoka County are not guaranteeing service speeds. Consequently, municipalities could be paying for services they are not actually getting, or receiving services that do not consistently meet their needs, particularly for mission critical applications. • The Anoka County draft agreement likely contains hidden costs (e.g., for possibly re- wiring co- location sites, adding necessary outlets, providing back -up power, improving heating and air conditioning systems, and re- configuring space to accommodate Zayo equipment and to satisfy Zayo /Anoka County specifications). • Many important terms are not defined in the Anoka County versions of the connectivity service agreement. This will inevitably lead to contract interpretation and enforcement issues down the road. Anoka County has suggested that certain terms in the connectivity service agreement should have the meaning ascribed to them in other agreements. However, those definitions and contracts are not incorporated into the connectivity service agreement, and would therefore have little or no force or utility as to the connectivity service agreement. • Anoka County's and Zayo's proposed service level standards would allow portions of the Zayo system and certain connectivity services to be down for approximately 500 minutes a year, which could lead to serious problems for mission critical applications and potential liability for municipalities (e.g., if police or fire communications were not functional when needed). • The Anoka County version of the connectivity service agreement may also pose logistical, financial and legal issues for municipalities. For example, if the Zayo system is unavailable in a city hall at 3 a.m. on a Saturday morning, who is going provide Zayo with access and who is going to pay for any costs associated with such access? If the equipment in City Hall is used to serve commercial customers, will a municipality be liable to Zayo or the customers for damages, costs, etc. associated with any delay in providing access? As you will see, a variety of additional issues are also addressed in the template. In the process of preparing the template, the NMTC reached out to Anoka County to ask for basic information about the Zayo system so as to ensure it had an accurate understanding of what Anoka County and Zayo are actually proposing (as opposed to what may actually be reflected in the Anoka County draft connectivity service agreement). Anoka County, however, was unwilling to provide the NMTC with requested information in a timeframe that would make it possible to complete the template and meet Anoka County's self - imposed deadlines for entering into connectivity service agreements. Accordingly, in the interest of time, the NMTC was forced to prepare the connectivity services agreement without the benefit of certain information from Anoka County. In doing so, the NMTC relied on best available information. As a result, it is possible that the connectivity service agreement template may need to be updated if requested data is ultimately made available to the NMTC. In addition to drafting the connectivity service agreement template, the NMTC also revised Attachments A -D, crafted a new Attachment E and incorporated a new Attachment F (which is a revised version of an Anoka County document referred to as Exhibit E). The remaining 2 P35 attachments are unmodified versions of documents previously provided by Anoka County (i.e., the FAQ, Service Order, Wholesale Master Service Agreement and Master Fiber IRU Agreement). As always, please feel free to contact me with any questions or concerns you may have. 3 P36 • • • • • ATTACHMENT E Service Level Requirements I. Introduction The following standards and requirements are intended to ensure optimum network performance for all Community Anchor Institutions and Co- location Sites subscribing to Connectivity Services on the ZAYO System as defined and described in this Agreement. These standards shall be observed by the Entity, ZAYO, Anoka County and their respective employees, agents and contractors in installing all new internal ZAYO System interfaces and Equipment, in modifying existing installations, and in operating Equipment on the ZAYO System. These standards and requirements have been agreed upon by Anoka County, ZAYO and the Entity. II. Installation at Co- location Sites The ZAYO System, ZAYO Equipment and any County Equipment shall be installed to the Demarcation Point on or at the designated Co- location Sites within specified Community Anchor Institutions to receive Connectivity Service, to provide Connectivity Services to other authorized entities on the ZAYO System, or to furnish other services to commercial customers. Internal wiring to communications and terminal equipment on the Entity's side of the Demarcation Point is generally the responsibility of the Entity. ZAYO or Anoka County shall provide the Entity with a written description showing all work to be performed, specific electrical and environmental requirements for each Co- location Site, and the specific location of the Demarcation Point between the ZAYO System and the Entity's network and equipment. III. Signal Quality The ZAYO System shall achieve the performance standards listed below under worst -case conditions for communications occurring between each Community Anchor Institution and Co- location Site and ZAYO's central office or network control center. A. Data Communications - For any data communications link on the ZAYO System, including all ZAYO Equipment, the bit error ratio (BER) shall be equal to or better than 1 x 10 to the minus 9, provided the Entity provided premises equipment meets or exceeds, and is operating to these specifications. In addition, jitter and latency on all portions of the ZAYO System shall not exceed IOOms. B. ZAYO System Availability - For each Community Anchor Institution/Co- location Site on the ZAYO System that subscribes to Connectivity Services, system or network availability shall 1 P37 Page 2 of 4 be equal to or better than 99.99% (no more than 52.56 minutes of ZAYO System downtime per customer per year or 4.38 minutes of customer down time per month) as measured on per site, monthly basis. The ZAYO System shall be defined as `unavailable' for any given Community Anchor Institution/Co- location Site subscribing to Connectivity Services when such site: 1. Cannot, because of a ZAYO System problem, measured by ZAYO's monitoring software and Equipment or other appropriate software and associated hardware, or through a failure of a ZAYO System interconnect, transmit or receive video, voice and /or data communications to, from, and/or on the ZAYO System, for which such Entity is paying a fee to Anoka County or ZAYO. Such ZAYO System problems shall include, but not necessarily be limited to, a failure of one or more of the following: 1) the fiber optic cabling, connections and transmission equipment on the ZAYO System; 2) the optical -to- electrical or optical -to- optical conversion equipment at a Co- location Site (where such Equipment is provided by Anoka County or ZAYO); 3) any necessary ZAYO System powering systems and Equipment, with the exception of the Entity's premises equipment, which shall be powered by the Entity; and/or 4) any other ZAYO - provided System component; and/or, 2. Experiences, due to a ZAYO System problem, a data communications packet loss of greater than one (1) percent. For purposes of this availability standard, ZAYO System problems shall not be defined as: infrequent scheduled preventive maintenance as long as the Entity is notified well in advance in accordance with this Agreement. Except as otherwise provided for herein, ZAYO System availability is subject to the Force Majeure provisions of this Agreement and those conditions which are not within the control of Anoka County or ZAYO. Anoka County and ZAYO shall comply with the requirements of "Demand Maintenance /Service and Repair," set forth below, to restore Connectivity Service following any of these occurrences. Anoka County and ZAYO shall give the Entity prompt notice in the event of any of the foregoing occurrences. IV. Service Response A. Network Maintenance — Anoka County and ZAYO shall be responsible for the ongoing maintenance and performance of the ZAYO System from the ZAYO side of the Demarcation Point within a Co- location Site in a Community Anchor Institution throughout the ZAYO System. The Demarcation Point shall be that point within a Co- location Site, designated by the Entity consistent with this Agreement, where the ZAYO System connects to internal wiring and/or equipment in a Community Anchor Institution's Co- location Site. Routine and P38 • • • • Page 3 of 4 preventive maintenance shall be performed continually on the ZAYO System to ensure that it meets all performance criteria detailed herein. The Entity shall have at least ten (10) business days advance notice of routine and preventative maintenance activities that may affect operation of their circuits on the ZAYO System. B. Demand Maintenance /Service and Repair — A response to ZAYO System problems shall occur at all hours (24 hours a day x 365 days per year). ZAYO must have reasonable access to Co- location Sites located within the Entity's Community Anchor Institutions on a 24 hour per day /365 days per year basis, in accordance with the terms of this Agreement, in order to respond, as necessary. This response requirement shall include a response to all situations creating problems on the ZAYO System, regardless of whether they originate within the ZAYO System or with equipment or software at the Entity's Co- location Site(s). Appropriate ZAYO technical support shall respond and actively begin working on ZAYO System problems within 30 minutes of either 1) Anoka County or ZAYO identifying such problem or 2) Anoka County or ZAYO receiving a call at a dedicated 24/365 technical support telephone number or an e-mail from an Entity reporting a ZAYO System problem. Anoka County or ZAYO shall place a phone call to the Entity's designated service contact to inform the Entity that the situation is being addressed. ZAYO shall work continuously until the problem is resolved. If the Entity desires assistance from ZAYO in correcting Entity -owned or leased equipment or software problem, then ZAYO shall provide such assistance, but ZAYO shall also have the right to invoice the Entity in accordance with this Agreement for the time spent correcting the Entity's equipment or software problems. C. ZAYO System Support — Anoka County and ZAYO shall provide an appropriate complement of administrative, Central Office, Network Operations Center and field personnel at all times to meet the performance, maintenance and repair criteria detailed herein. D. Service Call Processing and Tracking — Anoka County and ZAYO shall establish mechanisms and procedures for the Entity to quickly and easily report ZAYO System problems. All trouble or service calls shall be documented, processed, and completed in an expedient manner. Documentation shall include monthly service call reports, distributed to the Entity, which shall include a breakdown of the reasons for and the resolution of ZAYO System problems, as well as call handling efficiency (including all activities from the time a ZAYO System trouble call is received to the time ZAYO and the Entity agree that System trouble is resolved). Notwithstanding the staffing, testing and equipment and response requirements set forth herein, Anoka County and ZAYO shall provide: in -house and/or contractor staff; spare and back -up Central Office or Network Operations Center, distribution, and other applicable equipment; and test and maintenance equipment. Anoka County and ZAYO shall also take all additional steps necessary to ensure that the ZAYO System performs reliably in accordance with all standards detailed herein and in this Agreement. P39 Page 4 of 4 E. Entity Location Performance Testing - All ZAYO System performance specifications shall be met or exceeded at each Co- location Service Site subscribing to Connectivity Service, and the ZAYO System shall at all times enable Entity video, voice and data communications to be successfully transmitted and received in accordance with the reliability and availability standards specified herein. Anoka County or ZAYO shall schedule with the Entity for each Co- location Site /Community Anchor Institution receiving Connectivity Service such testing as is required to ensure successful ZAYO System performance at each designated Community Anchor Institution/Co- location Site.. F. Physical ZAYO System Characteristics - The physical, optical and electrical configuration of the ZAYO System shall at all times comply with all applicable federal, State and local laws, ordinances, regulations, codes and orders. P40 • • • $340,000 $50,000 • Project Updates: AnokaCounty Project Schedule (estimated dates as of 12/21/10): Estimated Task Completion Comments 1. Environmental Assessment January 24, 2011 Environmental Review of fiber routes 2. Connectivity Services Agreement April 1, 2011 ? Approval by Entities completed 3. Network Design and Finalized Routing June 1, 2011 Cities 4. Selection of Construction Vendor June 1, 2011 73 5. Begin Fiber Installation July 1, 2011 Estimated Start of Fiber Install 6. Begin Initial Services September 30, 2011 Estimated Start of Services for initial sites 7. Completion of Fiber Network December 31, 2012 Estimated Completion Date for all Sites Current Site Counts: Estimated Ongoing Operational Budget: Estimated Annual Bond Repayment Costs Fiber Repairs Zayo Payments Total $1,740 $391,740 Assumes Approximately $3.4 million bond issuance for 15 years. Includes funds for fiber moves and repairs Per Agreement - $1 /month for 145 locations Note: The annual project budget excludes costs for county personnel, including a project manager position. Connectivity Fees based on above budget. Connectivity Speed 10 gb 1 gb 100 mb Total I County 4 17 25 46 Cities $900 11 73 84 Schools 3 3 6 Colleges 3 3 Other Govt 5 1 6 Estimated Ongoing Operational Budget: Estimated Annual Bond Repayment Costs Fiber Repairs Zayo Payments Total $1,740 $391,740 Assumes Approximately $3.4 million bond issuance for 15 years. Includes funds for fiber moves and repairs Per Agreement - $1 /month for 145 locations Note: The annual project budget excludes costs for county personnel, including a project manager position. Connectivity Fees based on above budget. Connectivity Speed Monthly Fee Annual Fee 10 gb $4000 $48,000 1gb $400 $4800 100mg $75 $900 Handout - Agreement Review Meeting 12/21/10 • EXPENDITURES MARCH 28, 2011 • • P41 P42 Date: 03/18/2011 Time 15:14:36 City of Lino Lakes FM Entry - Invoice Journal Ranges: Vendor #: (A) Invoice #: (A) Entry Journal #: (r) 9258 - 9259 Trans #: (A) Line 8: (A) Due Date: (A) Bank #: (A) Options: Detail / Summary: s Sort: a Vendor # Name Operator: KKF Page: 1 Invoice Status: A # of copies: 1 Check Over Expend: N Discount # of items Net Gross Discount Lost 008041 10,000 LAKES CHAPTER 1 170.00 170.00 .00 .00 000093 ACE SOLID WASTE, INC. 1 459.57 459.57 .00 .00 000100 AID ELECTRIC SERVICE, INC. 1 4,500.00 4,500.00 .00 00 000210 AMERICAN FASTENER & SUPPLY, INC. 1 32.63 32.63 .00 .00 000370 ANOKA COUNTY CENTRAL COMMICATIONS 3 2,927.06 2,927.06 .00 .00 004063 ANOKA COUNTY LICENSE BUREAU 4 70.75 70.75 .00 .00 000541 ASPEN MILLS, INC. 1 268.40 268.40 .00 .00 007849 BLAUER TACTICAL SYSTEMS, INC. 1 1,400.00 1,400.00 .00 .00 007660 BURNHAM TREE EXPERTS 1 1,015.31 1,015.31 .00 .00 000946 C. P. OFFICE PRODUCTS 2 143.15 143.15 .00 .00 001110 CENTENNIAL UTILITIES 2 5,904.88 5,904.88 .00 .0 002700 CENTERPOINT /MINNEGASCO, INC. 1 2,674.98 2,674.98 .00 10 000537 CENTRAL PENSION FUND 1 2,457.60 2,457.60 .00 .00 007875 CHIEF SUPPLY 1 56.19 56.19 .00 .00 004670 COMCAST 1 69.90 69.90 .00 .00 001187 CONNEXUS ENERGY 1 3,878.70 3,878.70 00 .00 001230 CRYSTEEL TRUCK EQUIPMENT, INC. 1 37.48 37.48 .00 00 001270 DALCO, INC. 1 5.47 5.47 .00 .00 008003 DASH MEDICAL GLOVES, INC. 1 59.90 59.90 .00 .00 000256 DEEP ROCK WATER COMPANY 1 37.64 37.64 .00 .00 001298 DEGARDNER, RICK 1 53.55 53.55 .00 .00 900422 ELK RIVER FORD, INC. 3 65,902.92 65,902.92 .00 .00 • Date: 03/18/2011 Time: 15:14:36 City of Lino Lakes FM Entry - Invoice Journal Operator: KKF Page: 2 P43 Discount •or # Name # of items Net Gross Discount Lost 003220 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY, INC. 5 12.26 12.26 .00 .00 001267 FAST BREAK CORNER MARKET, INC. 1 14.37 14.37 .00 .00 001560 FRATTALLONE'S HARDWARE, INC. 1 4.89 4.89 .00 .00 007751 GALLS, AN ARAMARK COMPANY 1 158.90 158.90 .00 .00 000078 GILBERTSON, STEVE 1 42.99 42.99 .00 .00 008240 GOPHER STATE ONE -CALL 1 92.90 92.90 .00 .00 001720 GRAINGER, INC. 1 245.52 245.52 .00 .00 008256 GTS EDUCATIONAL EVENTS 1 324.00 324.00 .00 .00 008253 HACKBART, KRISTIE 1 20.00 20.00 .00 .00 008065 HALBUR, AMY 1 20.00 20.00 .00 .00 002340 IMAGE PRINTING & GRAPHICS, INC. 2 342.92 342.92 .00 .00 000303 INSTRUMENTAL RESEARCH, INC. 1 142.50 142.50 .00 .00 002000 INTL UNION OF OPER ENGR 1 504.00 504.00 .00 .00 001860 KENNEDY & GRAVEN, INC. 1 1,690.50 1,690.50 .00 .00 008252 KUPFERSCHMIDT, MARY ANN & BERNIE 1 40.00 40.00 .00 .00 002310 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES 2 140.00 140.00 .00 .00 •28 LEXISNEXIS RISK SOLUTIONS INC. 1 480.00 480.00 .00 .00 0007128 MEANY, CHUCK 1 40.00 40.00 .00 .00 007694 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL 1 60,082.17 60,082.17 .00 .00 001310 MINNESOTA CHIEFS OF POLICE 1 805.00 805.00 .00 .00 003882 MINNESOTA SHREDDING LLC 1 162.00 162.00 .00 .00 002931 MN CHILD SUPPORT PAYMENT CENTER 1 698.47 698.47 .00 .00 008021 MN METRO NORTH TOURISM 1 2,336.00 2,336.00 .00 .00 003091 MN NCPERS LIFE INSURANCE 1 336.00 336.00 .00 .00 003986 MPCA 1 23.00 23.00 .00 .00 000649 MPSTMA 1 40.00 40.00 .00 .00 008257 N.E.T., INC. 1 240.00 240.00 .00 .00 • Date: 03/18/2011 Time: 15:14:36 City of Lino Lakes FM Entry - Invoice Journal Operator: KKF Page: 3 P44 Discount Vendor # Name # of items Net Gross Discount 003090 NARDINI FIRE EQUIPMENT CO., INC. 1 128.43 128.43 .00 .00 008198 NATIONAL PAYMENT CENTER 1 193.37 193.37 .00 .00 000364 NORTHERN AIR CORPORATION 1 295.84 295.84 .00 .00 000900 O'REILLY AUTOMOTIVE, INC. 1 8.21 8.21 .00 .00 007730 ON SITE SANITATION INC 2 71.07 71.07 .00 .00 000983 OPTUMHEALTH FINANCIAL SERVICES 2 83.10 83.10 .00 .00 003443 OTTER LAKE ANIMAL CARE CENTER, INC. 1 342.80 342.80 .00 .00 008254 PALMER, TARA 1 10.00 10.00 .00 .00 003492 PETTY CASH 1 228.90 228.90 .00 .00 003524 PITNEY BOWES, INC. 1 269.96 269.96 .00 .00 000771 POWER PLAN OIB 1 77.67 77.67 .00 .00 003600 PRESS PUBLICATIONS, INC. 3 325.95 325.95 .00 .00 008255 PUBLIC AGENCY TRAINING COUNCIL 1 295.00 295.00 .00 .00 001832 QUAD AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 1 170.00 170.00 .00 .00 007776 QWEST 1 52.29 52.29 .00 .00 900491 ROSEVILLE, CITY OF 2 6,720.88 6,720.88 .00 .00 003910 SAM'S CLUB, INC. 1 281.00 281.00 .00 el 002374 SCHULTIES PLUMBING, INC. 1 122.40 122.40 .00 .00 007756 SHI 1 1,769.71 1,769.71 .00 .00 004240 STREICHER'S, INC. 8 513.90 513.90 .00 .00 008195 SWEENEY, MURPHY & SWEENEY, P.A. 1 10,740.28 10,740.28 .00 .00 008141 TASC 1 84.15 84.15 .00 .00 000489 TDS METROCOM MN 1 987.51 987.51 .00 .00 004350 TKDA 1 33,363.87 33,363.87 .00 .00 900357 TRI -STATE BOBCAT, INC. 1 2.66 2.66 .00 .00 004560 U S BANK VISA 1 3,448.51 3,448.51 .00 .00 004606 U S BANK 10 4,255.00 4,255.00 .00 .00 • Date: 03/18/2011 Time: 15:14:37 City of Lino Lakes FM Entry - Invoice Journal Operator: KKF Page: 4 P45 Discount y ndor # Name # of items Net Gross Discount Lost 004575 UPS /UNITED PARCEL SERVICE 1 17.91 17.91 .00 .00 004730 VIKING INDUSTRIAL CENTER, INC. 1 254.79 254.79 .00 .00 000174 W. W. GOETSCH ASSOCIATES, INC. 1 3,574.97 3,574.97 .00 .00 004749 WAGNER, STEVE 1 340.44 340.44 .00 .00 007686 WATER CONSERVATION SERVICE INC. 1 110.20 110.20 .00 .00 004840 WINNICK SUPPLY, INC. 1 67.33 67.33 .00 .00 002609 WOLTJER, GEORGIA 1 31.62 31.62 .00 .00 003250 XCEL ENERGY 8 5,889.47 5,889.47 .00 .00 Grand Totals: 127 236,293.66 236,293.66 .00 .00* • • Date: 03/18/2011 Time: 15:15:41 Operator: KKF Ranges: Page: 1 City of Lino Lakes FM Entry - Invoice Payment - Department Report Fund: Dept Id: Program: Vendor #: Invoice #: Schedule Journal #: Bank #: (A) (A) (A) (A) (A) (R) 9268 - 9270 (A) Options: Print Ranges /Options: Y # of copies: 1 Page on Department: N Department Vendor Name Description CENTRAL PENSION FUND MARCH 2011 IUOE CONTRIBU INTL UNION OF OPER E MARCH 2011 49ER UNION DU SCHULTIES PLUMBING, REFUND OF PERMIT MN CHILD SUPPORT PAY CHILD SUPPORT MN NCPERS LIFE INSUR APR 2011 PERA LIFE NATIONAL PAYMENT CEN GARNISHMENT Total for Department MAYOR /COUNCIL PRESS PUBLICATIONS, ORD 07 -11 PUBLICATION Total for Department 401 ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATION SENIORS FINANCE FINANCE FINANCE LEGAL CONSULTANTS OPTUMHEALTH FINANCIA OPTUMHEALTH FINANCIA SAM'S CLUB, INC. U S BANK VISA LEXISNEXIS RISK SOLD TASC GTS EDUCATIONAL EVEN FEB. 2011 ELIG PLAN PART FEB. 2011 RETIREES MONTHLY PURCHASES APPRECIATION GIFT D. TESCH ANNUAL ENROLLME FEB 2011 ADMIN FEES MCMA /MACA ANNUAL CONFERE Total for Department 402 TDS METROCOM MN MONTHLY PHONE CHARGES Total for Department 406 SAM'S CLUB, INC. U S BANK VISA ROSEVILLE, CITY OF SCHLOER- MEMBERSHIP 2011 MNGFOA MEMBERSHIP D MARCH 2011 IT SERVICES Total for Department 407 SWEENEY, MURPHY & SW MARCH 2011 PROSECUTION S Total for Department 414 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT QUAD AREA CHAMBER OF 2011 MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MN METRO NORTH TOURI JAN /2011 HAMPTON INN HOT Total for Department 415 PLANNING & ZONING ENGINEERING ENGINEERING TKDA TKDA TKDA COMP PLAN UPDATE Total for Department 416 CITY MEETINGS GIS /GPS Amount 2,457.60 504.00 122.40 698.47 336.00 193.37 4,311.84* 55.65 55.65* 55.50 27.60 7.63 75.00 480.00 84.15 324.00 1,053.88* 37.78 37.78* 35.00 60.00 5,769.58 5,864.58* 10,740.28 10,740.28* 170.00 2,336.00 2,506.00* 1,034.09 1,034.09* 1,037.48 610.33 P46 • • • Date: 03/18/2011 Time: 15:15:41 Operator: KKF 11111plartment Page: 2 City of Lino Lakes FM Entry - Invoice Payment - Department Report Vendor Name Description Amount ENGINEERING ENGINEERING ENGINEERING ENGINEERING COMM DEV POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE ICE CE ICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE • TKDA TKDA TKDA TKDA MISC TASKS OTTERLAKE RD EXTENSION F STATE AID /STREETS SURFACE WATER MGMT Total for Department 417 U S BANK VISA SLUC Total for Department 418 ANOKA COUNTY CENTRAL ANOKA COUNTY CENTRAL ANOKA COUNTY CENTRAL TDS METROCOM MN ASPEN MILLS, INC. CONNEXUS ENERGY FAST BREAK CORNER MA MINNESOTA CHIEFS OF LEAGUE LEAGUE LEAGUE LEAGUE LEAGUE LEAGUE LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA OF MINNESOTA OF MINNESOTA OF MINNESOTA OF MINNESOTA OF MINNESOTA OF MINNESOTA OTTER LAKE ANIMAL CA PETTY CASH /LLPD PETTY CASH /LLPD PETTY CASH /LLPD PETTY CASH /LLPD PETTY CASH /LLPD PETTY CASH /LLPD PETTY CASH /LLPD PETTY CASH /LLPD PETTY CASH /LLPD PETTY CASH /LLPD PETTY CASH /LLPD PETTY CASH /LLPD MINNESOTA SHREDDING SAM'S CLUB, INC. STREICHER'S, INC. STREICHER'S, INC. STREICHER'S, INC. STREICHER'S, INC. STREICHER'S, INC. STREICHER'S, INC. STREICHER'S, INC. STREICHER'S, INC. U S BANK VISA U S BANK VISA U S BANK VISA 2011 ANNUAL MOTOROLA RAD ANNUAL METRO EMERGENCY S FEB /2011 WIRELESS INTERN MONTHLY PHONE CHARGES KLOSNER UNIFORM ALLOWANC FEB /2011 ENERGY CHARGES - CAR WASHES ETI REGISTRATION ANDERSON /2011 SAFETY & L BRAGELMAN /2011 SAFETY & HAGER /2011 SAFETY &LOSS C LEIBEL /2011 SAFETY & LOS MCCARTHY /2011 SAFETY & L RUMPSA /2011 SAFETY & LOS STREGE /2011 SAFETY & LOS IMPOUN FEES /CITY BOARDIN CARDS FOR VOLUNTEERS CERT CHIEFS ASSOCIATION FRIENDS AND FITNESS MONTHLY MEETING SUPPLIES PARKING POWER STRIP PSCC RESERVES RIVARD TAILORING - RESERVE TOWELS FOR CELLS USB CABLE SHREDDING OF CONFIDENTIA BATTERIES - TASERS BOEHME UNIFORM ALLOWANCE BRAGELMAN CLOTHING ALLOW BRAGELMAN UNIFORM ALLOWA DEMARS UNIFORM ALLOWANCE RESERVES SUPPLIES T. NOLL UNIFORM ALLOWANC WEGENER RETURN TRAUMA PL WEGENER UNIFORM ALLOWANC AUTO THEFT TASK FORCE CRIME PREVENTION HOMELAND SECURITY & EMER 1,062.22 791.53 5,807.54 3,300.12 12,609.22* 38.00 38.00* 1,884.72 600.00 442.34 675.52 268.40 21.37 14.37 805.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 342.80 27.75 7.98 46.00 26.56 4.99 16.50 8.56 35.82 13.00 7.50 10.69 23.55 144.00 133.50 213.74 101.52 26.70 179.99 128.23 53.43 - 209.98 20.27 214.24 103.00 250.00 1347 Date: 03/18/2011 Time: 15:15:41 Operator: KKF Department Page: 3 City of Lino Lakes FM Entry - Invoice Payment - Department Report Vendor Name Description Amount POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE U S BANK VISA UPS /UNITED PARCEL SE WAGNER, STEVE GALLS, AN ARAMARK CO BLAUER TACTICAL SYST CHIEF SUPPLY PUBLIC AGENCY TRAINI RESERVE UNIT TURTLEMAN 3 OUTBOUND PACKAGES SHIP REIMBURSEMENT DEMARS UNIFORM ALLOWANCE SPEAR SYSTEM APPL FOR CO HI GLO BC37 SEMINAR ID # 9402 - D. H Total for Department 420 BUILDING INSPECTIONS WOLTJER, GEORGIA REIMBURSEMENT- PERMIT WOR BUILDING INSPECTIONS TKDA BUILDING PERMITS BUILDING INSPECTIONS 10,000 LAKES CHAPTER SEMINAR - RYLANDER /MOONE Total for Department 422 STREETS STREETS STREETS STREETS STREETS STREETS STREETS STREETS STREETS STREETS STREETS FLEET FLEET FLEET FLEET FLEET FLEET FLEET FLEET FLEET FLEET FLEET FLEET FLEET FLEET GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS TDS METROCOM MN MONTHLY PHONE CHARGES CONNEXUS ENERGY FEB /2011 ENERGY CHARGES - XCEL ENERGY 7458 LAKE DR UNIT SIGN E XCEL ENERGY 7509 LAKE DR ENERGY USAG XCEL ENERGY 7597 LAKE DR ENERGY USAG XCEL ENERGY 7603 LAKE DR ENERGY USAG XCEL ENERGY 7607 LAKE DR ENERGY USAG XCEL ENERGY 7694 VILLAGE DR ENERGY U TKDA 2010 SURFACT WATER MGMT VIKING INDUSTRIAL CE SAFETY GLASSES /GLOVES /UN QWEST SIGNAL PHONE CHARGES Total for Department 430 AMERICAN FASTENER & POWER PLAN OIB O'REILLY AUTOMOTIVE, CRYSTEEL TRUCK EQUIP FACTORY MOTOR PARTS FACTORY FACTORY FACTORY FACTORY MOTOR PARTS MOTOR PARTS MOTOR PARTS MOTOR PARTS SAM'S CLUB, INC. ANOKA COUNTY LICENSE VIKING INDUSTRIAL CE WINNICK SUPPLY, INC. TRI -STATE BOBCAT, IN STOCK ITEMS -MISC NUTS BO FUEL PUMP /GASKET - #242 OIL FILTER TURN SIGNAL NEW LIGHT - #2 CORE RETURN DEFECTIVE PRO BATT PP54 PAD KIT R - #211 PRO BAT PP54 UN279 WARRANTY CREDIT BUDIG - MEMBERSHIP TITLE FOR NEW SQUAD SAFETY GLASSES /GLOVES /UN OUTSIDE STEEL OIL FILL CAP Total for Department 431 ACE SOLID WASTE, INC AMERICAN FASTENER & DEEP ROCK WATER COMP NORTHERN AIR CORPORA TDS METROCOM MN C. P. OFFICE PRODUCT C. P. OFFICE PRODUCT MONTHLY RUBBISH REMOVAL STOCK ITEMS -MISC NUTS BO BOTTLE DEPOST /WATER DELI ACTUATOR SPRING RETURN MONTHLY PHONE CHARGES COFFE DECANTER PERM MARKERS /MECH PENCIL 169.99 17.91 340.44 158.90 1,400.00 56.19 295.00 9,220.49* 31.62 433.16 170.00 634.78* 37.97 1,075.28 38.20 145.63 23.32 23.50 9.97 24.21 26.83 63.70 52.29 1,520.90* 32.36 77.67 8.21 37.48 - 45.00 - 116.91 160.79 93.72 - 80.34 35.00 60.00 63.69 67.33 2.66 396.66* 459.57 .27 37.64 295.84 122.93 13.64 129.51 P48 • • • P49 Date: 03/18/2011 Time 15:15:41 Operator: KKF • Department Vendor Name Description Amount Page: 4 City of Lino Lakes FM Entry - Invoice Payment - Department Report GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS CENTENNIAL UTILITIES FEB. 2011 GAS CHARGES 5,012.39 GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS CONNEXUS ENERGY FEB /2011 ENERGY CHARGES- 1,203.53 GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS DALCO, INC. BOWL FOR STRAINER 5.47 GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS FRATTALLONE'S HARDWA SENIOR CTR AIR CONDITION 4.89 GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS CENTERPOINT / MINNEGAS MONTHLY GAS CHARGES 1,829.56 GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS NARDINI FIRE EQUIPME SEMI ANNUAL SVC 128.43 GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS XCEL ENERGY 600 TOWN CENTR PARKWAY E 3,524.18 GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS PITNEY BOWES, INC. POSTAGE MACHINE RENTAL 269.96 GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS MINNESOTA SHREDDING SHREDDING OF CONFIDENTIA 18.00 GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS SAM'S CLUB, INC. LUNCH ROOM SUPPLIES 34.87 GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS U S BANK VISA TONER CARTRIDGE 57.49 GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS COMCAST INTERNET CHARGES 69.90 GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS ROSEVILLE, CITY OF MARCH 2011 PHONE CHARGES 951.30 Total for Department 432 14,169.37* PARKS GILBERTSON, STEVE CLOTHING ALLOWANCE REIMB 42.99 PARKS MPSTMA SPRING WORKSHOP - GILBERTS 40.00 PARKS CENTENNIAL UTILITIES FEB. 2011 GAS CHARGES 423.12 PARKS CONNEXUS ENERGY FEB /2011 ENERGY CHARGES- 67.12 PARKS DEGARDNER, RICK MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 53.55 PARKS CENTERPOINT /MINNEGAS MONTHLY GAS CHARGES 223.19 PARKS VIKING INDUSTRIAL CE SAFETY GLASSES /GLOVES /UN 63.70 PARKS BURNHAM TREE EXPERTS REMOVAL OF OAK TREE ® 65 1,015.31 PARKS ON SITE SANITATION I MONTHLY RG UNIT RENT 71.07 Total for Department 450 2,000.05* RECREATION IMAGE PRINTING & GRA UP COMING PARK & REC EVE 201.57 RECREATION SAM'S CLUB, INC. HRONSKI- MEMBERSHIP 35.00 Total for Department 451 236.57* I IRONMENTAL U S BANK VISA MN SHADE TREE SHORT COUR 165.00 Total for Department 461 165.00* FORESTRY U S BANK VISA STYROBLOCK CONTAINERS 68.25 Total for Department 463 68.25* Total for Fund 101 66,663.39* MEANY, CHUCK REPLACEMENT OF LOST CHEC 40.00 HALBUR, AMY PROGRAM REFUND - OVERPAY 20.00 HACKBART, KRISTIE PROGRAM REFUND - OVERPAY 20.00 PALMER, TARA PROGRAM REFUND - OVERPAY 10.00 Total for Department 90.00* ADULT SPORTS U S BANK VISA GIFT CARDS /GREEN MILL 100.00 Total for Department 202 100.00* OTHER N.E.T., INC. EASTER CANDY FILLED EGGS 240.00 Total for Department 204 240.00* • Date: 03/18/2011 Time: 15:15:42 Operator: KKF Page: 5 City of Lino Lakes FM Entry - Invoice Payment - Department Report Department Vendor Name Description Amount SPECIAL EVENTS /TRIPS U S BANK VISA SPECIAL EVENTS /TRIPS U S BANK VISA SPECIAL EVENTS /TRIPS U S BANK VISA SPECIAL EVENTS /TRIPS U S BANK VISA SENIOR BOOK CLUB SENIOR TRIP TICKET SENIOR TRIP TICKETS SENIOR TRIP TRANSPORTATI SPECIAL EVENTS /TRIPS KUPFERSCHMIDT, MARY SENIOR TRIP REFUND Total for Department 205 Total for Fund 201 DEBT SERVICE U. S. BANK 2002A GO IMPROVEMENT BON Total for Department 470 Total for Fund 322 DEBT SERVICE U. S. BANK 2002E TAXABLE GO IMPROVE Total for Department 470 Total for Fund 323 DEBT SERVICE U. S. BANK 2003A GO IMPROVEMENT AND Total for Department 470 Total for Fund 324 DEBT SERVICE U. S. BANK 2005A TAXABLE GO IMPROVE Total for Department 470 Total for Fund 327 DEBT SERVICE U. S. BANK 2005B GO IMPROVEMENT REF Total for Department 470 Total for Fund 328 DEBT SERVICE U. S. BANK 2006C GO TAX ABATEMENT B Total for Department 470 Total for Fund 329 DEBT SERVICE U. S. BANK 2006D GO UTILITY BOND Total for Department 470 Total for Fund 330 DEBT SERVICE U. S. BANK 2006E GEN OBL CAP IMPR P Total for Department 470 Total for Fund 331 DEBT SERVICE U. S. BANK 2007A GO TAX INCREMENT B 96.54 267.00 940.00 398.75 40.00 1,742.29* 2,172.29* 431.25 431.25* 431.25* 431.25 431.25* 431.25* 431.25 431.25* 431.25* 402.50 402.50* 402.50* 402.50 402.50* 402.50* 431.25 431.25* 431.25* 431.25 431.25* 431.25* 431.25 431.25* 431.25* 431.25 P50 • • • P51 111/1 Vendor Name Description Amount Date: 03/18/2011 Time: 15:15:42 Operator: KKF Page: 6 City of Lino Lakes FM Entry - Invoice Payment - Department Report Total for Department 470 Total for Fund 332 431.25* 431.25* POLICE ELK RIVER FORD, INC. 2011 CROWN VIC /2FABP7BV1 21,967.64 POLICE ELK RIVER FORD, INC. 2011 CROWN VIC /2FABP7BV3 21,967.64 POLICE ELK RIVER FORD, INC. 2011 CROWN VIC /2FABP7BV5 21,967.64 Total for Department 420 65,902.92* Total for Fund 402 65,902.92* OTHER KENNEDY & GRAVEN, IN LEGACY AT WOODS EDGE TIF 1,638.00 Total for Department 499 1,638.00* Total for Fund 418 1,638.00* OTHER PRESS PUBLICATIONS, BID PUBLICATION 143.10 OTHER PRESS PUBLICATIONS, BITUMINOUS SEALCOAT PUBL 127.20 OTHER TKDA 2011 OVERLAY PROJECT 3,864.06 OTHER TKDA 2011 SEALCOAT PROJECT 2,272.23 Total for Department 499 6,406.59* Total for Fund 421 6,406.59* OTHER KENNEDY & GRAVEN, IN I -35 & MAIN STRE INTERCH 52.50 Total for Department 499 52.50* Total for Fund 474 52.50* 11111R TKDA BIRCH ST /WARE RD INTERSE 4,460.89 tR TKDA MAIN ST /LAKE DR INTERSEC 6,214.52 Total for Department 499 10,675.41* Total for Fund 475 10,675.41* DEBT SERVICE U. S. BANK 2006F GO WATER REVENUE R 431.25 Total for Department 470 431.25* WATER INSTRUMENTAL RESEARC TOTAL COLIFORM BACTERIA 142.50 WATER TDS METROCOM MN MONTHLY PHONE CHARGES 113.31 WATER CENTENNIAL UTILITIES 1ST QTR 2011 SEWER & WAT 289.50 WATER CONNEXUS ENERGY FEB /2011 ENERGY CHARGES 1,208.35 WATER IMAGE PRINTING & GRA EMERGENCY REPAIR NOTICE 141.35 WATER CENTERPOINT /MINNEGAS MONTHLY GAS CHARGES 575.53 WATER XCEL ENERGY 1180 BIRCH ST ENERGY USA 2,100.46 WATER TKDA UTILITY CONNECTIONS 1,086.13 WATER VIKING INDUSTRIAL CE SAFETY GLASSES /GLOVES /UN 63.70 WATER WATER CONSERVATION S WATER MAIN LEAK LOCATE B 110.20 WATER GOPHER STATE ONE -CAL FEB /2011 LOCATES 46.45 Total for Department 494 5,877.48* • Date: 03/18/2011 Time: 15:15:42 Operator: KKF Page: 7 City of Lino Lakes FM Entry - Invoice Payment - Department Report Department Vendor Name Description Amount Total for Fund 601 6,308.73* SEWER AID ELECTRIC SERVICE USED CUMMINS GENERATOR 4,500.00 SEWER W. W. GOETSCH ASSOCI HYDROMATIC SUBMERSIBLE P 3,574.97 SEWER CENTENNIAL UTILITIES 1ST QTR 2011 SEWER & WAT 162.79 SEWER CENTENNIAL UTILITIES FEB. 2011 GAS CHARGES 17.08 SEWER CONNEXUS ENERGY FEB /2011 ENERGY CHARGES- 303.05 SEWER GRAINGER, INC. PANNEL ENCLOSURE 245.52 SEWER CENTERPOINT /MINNEGAS MONTHLY GAS CHARGES 46.70 SEWER MPCA BUDIG- CERTIFICATION RENE 23.00 SEWER TKDA UTILITY CONNECTIONS 1,086.13 SEWER METROPOLITAN COUNCIL APR 2011 WASTEWATER SVC 60,082.17 SEWER GOPHER STATE ONE -CAL FEB /2011 LOCATES 46.45 Total for Department 495 70,087.86* Total for Fund 602 70,087.86* ANOKA COUNTY LICENSE VEHICLE LICENSE TABS FOR 10.75 TKDA LAKE DR /MAIN ST GAS STAT 276.61 U S BANK VISA SQUAD PRINTER /BLUE RAY W 445.25 SHI OFFICESTD 2010 SNGL WIND 1,769.71 DASH MEDICAL GLOVES, GLOVES 59.90 Total for Department 2,562.22* Total for Fund 801 2,562.22* Grand Total 236,293.66* P52 • • • CENTENNIAL FIRE DISTRICT Check Register- FIRE GL Check Issue Dates: 3/5/2011 - 3/18/2011 • Report Criteria: Report type: Summary • • Page: 1 Mar 18, 2011 12:54PM GL Check Check Vendor Period Issue Date Number Number Description Payee Check Amount 03/11 03/08/2011 4735 130740 03/11 03/18/2011 4736 10750 03/11 03/18/2011 4737 30480 03/11 03/18/2011 4738 31008 03/11 03/18/2011 4739 40040 03/11 03/18/2011 4740 70578 03/11 03/18/2011 4741 120331 0 3/ 11 03/18/2011 4742 120450 03/11 03/18/2011 4743 120490 03/11 03/18/2011 4744 160050 03/11 03/18/2011 4745 160130 03/11 03/18/2011 4746 161605 03/11 03/18/2011 4747 180600 03/11 03/18/2011 4748 190875 Grand Totals: MN IASIU ANOKA CO CENTRAL COMMUN CENTENNIAL UTILITIES COMCAST DEEP ROCK WATER COMPANY GRAINGER LEAGUE OF MN CITIES INS TR CITY OF LINO LAKES LOFFLER COMPANIES, INC PAETEC PERFORMANCE PLUS INVENTORY TRADING CO., INC CITY OF ROSEVILLE SYSTEMS FURNITURE, INC INTERVIEW TRAINING DB 75.00 M 2011 ANNUAL USER FEE 800 M 528.00 STATION 1 UTILITIES 605.46 INTERNET CENTERVILLE STATI 94.00 BOTTLED WATER 18.81 DISPOSABLE SHOE COVERS 139.53 WORKERS COMP INS 2/11 -2/12 30,750.00 FEB REIMBURSEMENTS 20,668.64 COPIER MTC CONTRACT 166.69 PHONES STATION 2 148.42 RECRUIT PHYSICALS 3,410.00 UNIFORMS 100.00 JT POWERS MIS 655.58 TABLES & CHAIRS 7,425.68 64,785.81 M = Manual Check, V = Void Check Rai • • • CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION March 7, 2011 DRAFT 1 CITY OF LINO LAKES 2 MINUTES 3 4 DATE : March 7, 2011 5 TIME STARTED : 5:33 p.m. 6 TIME ENDED : 9:55 p.m. 7 MEMBERS PRESENT : Council Member Gallup, Rafferty, Roeser & 8 Mayor Reinert 9 MEMBERS ABSENT : Council Member O'Donnell 10 11 12 Staff members present: City Administrator Jeff Karlson; Director of Administration Dan 13 Tesch; Director of Public Services Rick DeGardner; Director of Public Safety Kent 14 Strege; Director of Finance Al Rolek; Director of Community Development Michael 15 Grochala; Economic Development Coordinator Mary Alice Divine; City Engineer Jim 16 Studenski; City Planner Jeff Smyser; City Clerk Julie Bartell 17 18 1. CSAH 34 (Birch Street) Corridor Study — Community Development Director 19 Grochala reported that this study has been in progress for the past two years, having 20 originally been identified as a city goal in 2008. Anoka County took the leadership role; 21 the study has been prepared by SRF Consulting Group. He introduced Jack Corkle, 22 Anoka County, and John Hagen and Brian Shorten, SRF Consulting Group. 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 When a council member asked for an explanation of why the recommendation is for some 38 two -lane section and some four -lane, Ms. Corkle explained that the county has looked at 39 the numbers (traffic) very carefully and they feel the two -lane is appropriate in a portion 40 of the corridor but in the more highly accessed area, four -lane is appropriate. The use of 41 some two -lane is a cost saver also. 42 43 When a council member asked why trails are included on both sides of the roadway, Ms. 44 Corkle responded that there is a challenge to get people from both sides of the corridor to Mr. Shorten updated the council on the process used to prepare the study and reviewed the overall recommendations. He noted that it has come forward through a public process during which they found clear concerns about needs for the roadway including high levels of congestion during peak hours, accessibility to the roadway and bike and pedestrian concerns. A transportation advisory group was formed with the goals of improving safety, mobility and design for the corridor. In explaining the elements of the study and recommendations and noting concerns heard about the use of a raised median, Mr. Shorten noted the ability to stay with a two -lane roadway in some areas. The study contains different options but all could be accommodated within the proposed right of way. As the council makes decisions about the corridor, they will have flexibility in the planning that's been done. He noted that the report's executive summary reflects the revisions that have occurred within the report. 1 P54 CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION March 7, 2011 DRAFT 45 amenities that are mostly on the north side so you must get them to a point where they can 46 cross safely. 47 48 The council discussed the speed limit for the corridor and Ms. Corkle explained that the 49 speed is set by the county since it is a county roadway; she suspects the speed of the cars 50 will change somewhat with the planned improvements. She also reminded the council 51 that as they consider development plans for the corridor area, they should be cognizant of 52 following the plans for good traffic movement. 53 54 Regarding changes to the width of the corridor, Mr. Shorten explained that a maximum 55 120 foot wide footprint is planned, adding that 70% of the corridor is already that width. 56 57 Community Development Director Grochala added that he feels that in the two years that 58 have been spent on this project, they have covered a lot of ground and set up a good plan 59 to allow for the vision ahead. It will allow the city to address issues as the corridor 60 develops. 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 The council will consider acceptance of the plan at the March 28, 2011 council meeting. 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 The mayor noted that he understands that the issue is a ditch that hasn't been kept up and 81 is causing due concern among property owners. Further that the RCWD is asking to 82 charge the cost of improvements to some others rather than just the adjacent property 83 owners. 84 85 Attorney Kolb responded that typically, the system for charging looks at who gets 86 drainage from their property and to what degree; it is not technically an assessment 87 process. What the RCWD is proposing to do is to look at the immediate contributing area 88 for a local share of the cost and also directly charge based upon benefit. However, they Robert Bening, 6788 East Shadow Lake Dr, noted his concern that the trails planned for the project will not be acceptable for bike traffic. They are shared and do not allow for the pace of a bike. Also, as he has publicly requested previously, he hopes any improvements will include left turn signals that are sensitive enough to detect bike traffic. He added that shoulders can be used by bicylers but he has concern if they are also used for right turn lanes. Ms. Corkle responded that she will research the turn lane sensitivity as well as the shoulder - sharing question. 2. RCWD Watershed Management District — Representing the Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) were: Phil Belfiori, Administrator; Rick Mastell, Board Member; Patricia Preiner, Board President; and Attorney John Kolb. Mr. Belfiori explained that they are returning to the council after their last visit in February to continue discussion of Anoka County Ditch Project 10- 22 -32. The council has heard about the importance of improving this watershed (ditch) and why the RCWD is requesting that the city concur with their plans to use watershed law to finance the repairs. 2 P55 • • • • • • CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION March 7, 2011 DRAFT 89 would also like to look at the general benefit derived and use a pool of funds that is 90 collected district wide (taxing authority). 91 92 When the mayor asked how often these improvements occur, Attorney Kolb explained 93 that this is considered a one -time cost; past completion of this project only regular 94 maintenance is expected. Mr. Kolb added that the financing of the project that they 95 propose is more economical (saving approximately $200,000) and they plan to solicit 96 public input on the plans. 97 98 The council will consider the resolution consenting to the proposal at the March 14, 2011 99 council meeting. 100 101 3. 49/J Development Proposal — Economic Development Coordinator Divine 102 introduced Oppidan development representatives Joe Boone, Paul Tuski and Patrick 103 Barrett as well as Attorney Peter Coyle, all present to discuss a grocery development 104 proposal for County Road 49 and J. Ms. Divine explained that there are issues that make 105 the area in question challenging for development and the development team is present to 106 discuss them with the council and seek some direction on the council's interest. 107 108 Attorney Coyle explained that there are questions on infrastructure (roads, water, sewer) 109 as well as gaining control of all the necessary properties. 110 111 Mr. Tuski distributed and then reviewed development plans for the site. A grocery 112 operation is the catalyst for this proposed development and, based on research, they are 113 comfortable the market is there. The cost of necessary infrastructure is one item that 114 they'd like to discuss with the council. 115 116 The mayor recalled that there have been issues raised regarding development of this site 117 in the past, mainly relating to neighborhood intrusion (24 hour operation, lighting and 118 noise). 119 120 A member of the development team replied that they have dealt with similar concerns in 121 the past. He is comfortable that they can deal with those concerns and he provided the 122 council with a picture of a grocery site in St. Paul that indicated how they dealt with 123 keeping lighting from intruding on a neighborhood. They are aware of concerns and 124 ready to address them. 125 126 Attorney Coyle remarked that the team is interested in knowing if the proposed 127 development is a basic possibility. They are estimating a cost of about $1.5 million to 128 extend utilities to the area. Those utilities would obviously provide benefit to other 129 properties and so they wonder if the city would be interested in assisting through the use 130 of tax increment. He reminded the council that the state is allowing the use of tax 131 increment for retail but that allowance has an end date that is approaching. For the 132 developer to handle the cost alone would be an impediment to development. 133 3 P5E CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION March 7, 2011 DRAFT 134 The mayor suggested that a discussion about that possibility would be allowed. He asked 135 for an explanation about what is different about this proposal from those rejected in the 136 past? Ms. Divine responded that the project is somewhat smaller than the previous but 137 actually there is not much difference in proposals; she added that the council heard pros 138 and cons from the neighborhood about the project in past discussions and that's to be 139 expected. The mayor suggested that the idea of the site being commercial probably isn't 140 the problem but there seems to be concern about the type of projects they've seen 141 proposed. 142 143 The council heard more about what other development could be seen in the area and how 144 it could come on line; the market dictates a kind of grow as you go process at the current 145 time. 146 147 The developer suggested that they would like to be able to solidify their plans and bring 148 them through the city process for site planning and they'd like to know the council's 149 opinion. The mayor remarked that the proposal seems very similar to the last one the 150 council saw for the site and that was deemed undesirable. He recognizes the site is a 151 good one for a grocery but isn't certain that this plan couldn't get better; it concerns him 152 that the store would be so close to the residential area and that it includes no 153 improvement for the 49 Club property. Another council member added that he has some 154 concerns about the box architecture and other elements so he isn't in a strong support 155 position at this time. 156 157 Staff noted that site planning would be key for this development; staff will continue to 158 work with the developer and report back. 159 160 4. Otter Lake Road extension request - Economic Development Coordinator 161 Divine introduced Bruce Miller, owner and proposed developer of the property on the 162 northeast quadrant of the intersection of I35E and County Road 14, as well as Bill 163 Griffith who is assisting Mr. Miller. The project proposed is a fast food restaurant for 164 which both roadway and utilities would be required. 165 166 Mr. Miller, MFC Properties Corporation, introduced his company that has been in 167 business for 38 years and that manages office, retail and medical office facilities. They 168 have experience in growing areas and in phased development. At the site in question, the 169 company owns 18 acres. It is an area that has been planned for growth for some time and 170 more so now that the interchange improvements are underway. Mr. Miller reviewed the 171 site plan before the council noting that they are ready to submit their plat for approval if 172 they can get an Otter Lake Road extension. The question he brings to the city is how the 173 necessary road work can be achieved. 174 175 Mr. Griffith added the company has set objectives for the site and if those can be met, 176 they're comfortable they can make the financing work. The question is being posed as to 177 how far the roadway should go? Their plans for call 330 feet of roadway only to 178 accommodate the first development — incremental building is really the name of the game 4 P57 • • • • • CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION DRAFT March 7, 2011 179 now. When the mayor asked why the developer isn't interest in extending the roadway 180 further for future development, Mr. Griffith replied it is strictly based on cost, adding that 181 there are watershed issues that would have to be dealt with down the road also. 182 183 Community Development Director Grochala added that more size to the 184 development/roadway would be great but what's being offered is fine and could act as a 185 catalyst for more. The sewer infrastructure costs can be broken down so that 186 developments pay for their use area and size. He added that easements would be required 187 from some adjacent property owners, there could be some assessments involved and 188 eminent domain may be requested. 189 190 Mr. Miller added that the area is ready for development and, from his perspective, the 191 assessments he will pay for the bridge project make this new development more 192 attractive. 193 194 Mr. Grochala noted that the question to the council is if they are interested in the public 195 improvement project attached to development of the restaurant? And is tax increment a 196 tool that could be used? 197 198 Ms. Divine added that the city Economic Development Advisory Committee (EDAC) 199 heard a presentation on this development and have forwarded a recommendation that the 200 city use all available tools to get development going in this climate; they are very 201 supportive. 202 203 Staff was directed to continue to map out a process for future consideration. 204 205 5. Recreation Complex Update — Public Services Director DeGardner reviewed his 206 written report to the council that outlines the original and phased recreation complex 207 plans. 208 209 The mayor asked what would be the best way to start something going on the site. Mr. 210 DeGardner replied that the economy makes the project difficult since a tax levy would be 211 required. The cost of the project is somewhat reduced, however, due to the economy. 212 The mayor added that he can't see the use of dedicated park funds for the recreation 213 complex since they are need elsewhere; he'd prefer a more creative approach. 214 215 A council member noted that the recreation complex plans are very classy but he can see 216 that the price is a problem. He distributed information indicating some of his ideas to get 217 a facility up and going, noting that some are more non - traditional. Also he thinks seeking 218 some (corporate) sponsorship of the facilities is a good idea. 219 220 The mayor remarked that he is interested in seeing some energy develop at the site just to 221 get things moving. He recognizes that funding will be difficult. 222 5 P58 CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION March 7, 2011 DRAFT 223 6. Strategic Planning Update — Administrator Karlson noted that the council has 224 expressed interest in doing a strategic planning session for the city. He has presented the 225 name of an individual that has experience and can be recommended to lead an effort. The 226 council would need to establish goals for the session. The mayor suggested that a 227 facilitator should draw ideas from the council and help them create a plan from them. A 228 council member suggested that having the results of the organizational study may be 229 helpful in this process. Administrator Karlson suggested it would be at least 4 to 6 230 weeks until the results of the organizational study are ready; the council remarked that 231 such a time frame should fit in to when the planning session will occur. 232 233 Finance Director Rolek added that the city's Five Year Plan fits into the discussion of 234 strategic planning. He noted that while there is a framework for the plan (from past 235 consideration), the city needs to add another year and he's suggesting that be done in 236 April. The council will see the draft plan at their next work session, just for review. 237 With the results of the organizational study, an update should be considered. 238 239 7. Even Year Elections - City Clerk Bartell recalled that the council has discussed 240 the concept of changing from odd to even year municipal elections as a cost savings 241 measure. Since the election is established in the city charter and a change would require a 242 charter amendment, the idea was posed to the charter commission. The commission has 243 sent a response and it appears that they are not supportive of a change at this time. 244 245 The council did not indicate an interest in pursuing a change as a necessity. City 246 Administrator Karlson added that the election costs in the staff report don't include staff 247 time which can be significant. 248 249 8. Liquor License Fees - City Clerk Bartell reported that there are two items being 250 presented: a basic review of the city's license fee and the investigation fee issue. The 251 city's current liquor fees are included in the report. A comparison based on research of 252 fees in other cities of similar size and location was reviewed. It is good to look at the fees 253 regularly; a change in fees would be a council decision. Regarding investigation fees, 254 Police Chief Strege briefly reviewed what his department checks and confirmed that the 255 department performs the same intensive check each year and recommends continuing to 256 do that. A council member has concerns about these type of "extra" charges added each 257 year; one overall fee should suffice and, having spoken to other cities about their process, 258 he's found that the renewal investigation cost is generally included in the license fee. It 259 was clarified that the police department in fact does the same amount of investigation on 260 a renewal as on a new license. The Police Department also indicated that the current cost 261 of $250 or $450 is appropriate in regard to their cost to conduct the investigation. The 262 council reviewed the information included in the report comparing the cities investigation 263 costs with those of other cities. Finance Director Rolek added that there is some benefit 264 to the city in charging a separate fee for the investigation; if a license is denied, the cost 265 of the investigation is still paid. 266 6 P59 • • • • • CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION March 7, 2011 DRAFT 267 A council member recommended no change; another member recommended moving to 268 all - inclusive (investigation costs included in license fee). The mayor wanted to see a 269 change but he would prefer to keep charging but a reduced amount. A majority of the 270 council members present concurred to eliminate the investigation fee as a separate charge 271 and in the future consider that it is included in the established license fee. 272 273 9. Hodgson Road Speed Study request — Community Development Director 274 Grochala noted that the council had received a communication from a resident concerned 275 about speeds on Hodgson Road south of Lake Drive (by Egret). Staff is recommending 276 that rather than proceeding immediately with a county speed study, the city wait until 277 spring and put out a speed wagon and gather more data. Police Chief Strege indicated 278 that he has looked at accident data for the area and it is proportionate to amount of traffic. 279 He concurs with doing more investigation on the situation in spring. 280 281 10. Weekly Progress Report — Administrator Karlson reviewed the report. 282 283 11. Regular Council Agenda — The packet was reviewed and there were no changes. 284 285 Council Member Gallup moved to close the meeting for the purpose of discussing labor 286 negotiations. Council Member Roeser seconded the motion. Motion carried. 287 288 These minutes were considered, corrected and approved at the regular Council meeting held on 289 March 28, 2011. 290 291 292 293 294 Julianne Bartell, City Clerk Jeff Reinert, Mayor 295 7 P60 • • • COUNCIL MINUTES March 14, 2011 DRAFT 1 CITY OF LINO LAKES 2 MINUTES 3 4 5 DATE : March 14, 2011 6 TIME STARTED : 6:30 p.m. 7 TIME ENDED : 7:20 p.m. 8 MEMBERS PRESENT : Council Member Gallup, Rafferty, Roeser, and 9 Mayor Reinert 10 MEMBERS ABSENT : Council Member O'Donnell 11 12 Staff members present: City Administrator Jeff Karlson; Director of Administration Dan Tesch; City 13 Attorney Joseph Langel; Community Development Director Michael Grochala; Chief of Police Kent 14 Strege; Environmental Coordinator Marty Asleson; City Planner Jeff Smyser; and City Clerk Julie 15 Bartell 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Council Member Roeser moved to approve Consent Agenda Item 1A, 1B and 1D. Council Member 28 Gallup seconded the motion. Motion carried on a voice vote; Council Member O'Donnell absent. 29 30 1A. Consideration of Expenditures: 31 32 March 14, 2011 (Check No. 90246 - 33 90337, $190,377.24) Approved 34 35 Centennial Fire District (Check No. 4721- 36 4732, $4255,43) Approved 37 38 1C. February 28, 2011 Work Session Minutes Approved 39 40 1D. Resolution No. 11.28, Approving a Certificate 41 of Plat Correction for Century Farm North 3rd Addn Approved 42 43 1B. February 28, 2011 Council Meeting Minutes 44 PUBLIC COMMENT No one was present to address the council regarding a matter not on the agenda. SETTING THE AGENDA The agenda was amended so that Item 6H would be considered prior to Item 6A. CONSENT AGENDA 1 P61 COUNCIL MINUTES March 14, 2011 DRAFT 45 Council Member Roeser moved to approve Consent Item 1B as presented. Council Member Gallup 46 seconded the motion. Motion carried on a voice vote. Mayor Reinert abstained from voting. Council 47 Member O'Donnell absent. 48 49 FINANCE DEPARTMENT REPORT, AL ROLEK 50 51 There was no report from the Finance Department. 52 53 ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT REPORT, DAN TESCH 54 55 3A. Annual appointments to city advisory boards — Administration Director Tesch reported that 56 each year the council interviews applicants and then appoints /reappoints citizens to serve on the city's 57 various advisory boards. The ballot results are presented in the staff report. 58 59 Mayor Reinert noted that once again this year there were great candidates and unfortunately more 60 applicants than positions; he thanked everyone who applied and encourages those not appointed to 61 apply again. 62 63 Council Member Gallup moved to approve the appointments as presented. Council Member Roeser 64 seconded the motion. Motion carried on a voice vote; Council Member O'Donnell absent. 65 66 PUBLIC SAFETY DEPARTMENT REPORT, KENT STREGE 67 68 There was no report from the Public Safety Department. 69 70 PUBLIC SERVICES DEPARTMENT REPORT, RICK DEGARDNER 71 72 There was no report from the Public Services Department. 73 74 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT REPORT, MICHAEL GROCHALA 75 76 6H. Resolution No. 11 -35, Consenting to conduct drainage proceedings for Anoka County 77 Ditch 10 -22 -32 under the Watershed Law — Community Development Director Grochala explained 78 that the council received a couple of presentations on the Rice Creek Watershed District's (RCWD) 79 plan to repair a ditch system that impacts the northwest corner of the city (known as ditch 10- 22 -32). 80 The District is interested in using their watershed law and metropolitan surface water management 81 authority to finance the repairs and state law requires them to get city consent. He noted that the cities 82 of Blaine and Columbus are also involved in this ditch project and both have given local consent. He 83 added that giving consent to use of the watershed law doesn't mean the city is endorsing the project. 84 85 Phil Belfiori, Administrator of the RCWD, addressed the council. He explained that this ditch project 86 is the only project the District plans in Lino Lakes for the next five years. The project is considered 87 maintenance and repair and ranks as a high priority in their system. 88 2 P62 • • • • • • COUNCIL MINUTES March 14, 2011 DRAFT 89 The mayor noted that the council has had the opportunity to review this project at two work sessions 90 and it is a project that is extensive in length and that will provide need repairs to a much used ditch in 91 this city. 92 93 Council Member Roeser moved to approve Resolution No. 11 -35 as presented. Council Member 94 Rafferty seconded the motion. Motion carried on a voice vote; Council Member O'Donnell absent. 95 96 6A) Century Farm North 97 i) Consider First Reading of Ordinance No. 07 -11: Amending Planned Unit Development 98 Zoning and Amending the PUD Development Stage Plan/Preliminary Plat 99 ii) Consider Resolution 11 -27, Approving the PUD Final Plan/ 100 Final Plat for Century Farm North 5th Addition 101 iii) Public Hearing. Consider First Reading of Ordinance No. 06 -11, Approving the Vacation of 102 Drainage and Utility Easement 103 104 City Planner Smyser explained that Items 6Ai, ii and iii relate to the Century Farm North project that 105 was approved by the council in 2003. The project was approved with a mix of housing types. There 106 are four final plats approved at this point owned by the developer. The request before the council is 107 to change those four plats from townhome to single family due to a changing market. To accomplish 108 that change, the zoning ordinance must be amended and four new plats approved. There would be no 109 change to the number of units originally approved for the development nor to the area of land for each 110 dwelling unit. The third action requested of the council is to vacate an easement that will no longer 111 be needed due to the changes. (Mr. Smyser indicated on a map the area impacted by the requested 112 changes.) The council discussed the size of the proposed lots with the understanding that they would 113 not become smaller. 114 115 Mayor Reinert opened the public hearing. There being no one present wishing to speak, the public 116 hearing was closed. 117 118 Council Member Gallup moved to approved first reading of Ordinance No. 07 -11 as presented. 119 Council Member Rafferty seconded the motion. Motion adopted upon a voice vote; Council Member 120 O'Donnell absent. 121 122 Council Member Rafferty moved to approve Resolution No. 11 -27 as presented. Council Member 123 Roeser seconded the motion. Motion adopted on a voice vote; Council Member O'Donnell absent. 124 125 Council Member Gallup moved to approve first reading of Ordinance No. 06 -11 as presented. 126 Council Member Roeser seconded the motion. Motion adopted upon a voice vote; Council Member 127 O'Donnell absent. 128 129 6B) Consider 1st Reading of Ordinance No. 08 -11, Amending Chapter 1010 of the City Code re 130 Regulation of Signs in Election Years — City Planner Smyser explained that staff is presenting an 131 ordinance that would amend the city's sign regulations during election periods. The city's current 132 regulations (for city elections) were identified by the city attorney as problematic because they 3 P63 P64 COUNCIL MINUTES March 14, 2011 DRAFT 133 specified campaign signs and that can raise a constitutional free speech issue. Staff has worked with • 134 the city attorney to develop new language for election year signage. 135 136 A council member noted that he reviewed the Secretary of State's website regarding absentee balloting 137 periods and saw that it is 45 days for some but 30 days for municipal or stand -alone elections. He 138 believes the sign allowance should be concurrent with the balloting period. 139 140 The mayor noted that the 30 day period would seem more appropriate for signs in the city. Another 141 council member agreed. 142 143 City Attorney Langel noted that the primary intent of bringing forward this amendment is to ensure that 144 the city's regulations don't target campaign signs. The sign allowance period as it relates to the 145 absentee balloting period would be a council discussion. 146 147 Council Member Roeser moved to approve first reading of Ordinance No. 08 -11 with an amendment to 148 change the 46 day period to 30 days. Council Member Rafferty seconded the motion. Motion adopted 149 on a voice vote; Council Member O'Donnell absent. 150 151 6C) Extending Deadlines 152 i. Consider Resolution No. 11 -29, Extending Deadlines for Main Street Village Planned Unit 153 Development and Conditional Use Permits 154 ii. Consider Resolution No. 11 -30, Extending Deadlines for The Preserve Planned Unit 155 Development 156 iii. Consider Resolution No. 11 -31, Extending Deadlines for Moon Marsh Planned Unit 157 Development 158 City Planner Smyser noted the three requested extensions. The economy has put things into a dormant 159 state and so these extensions on city requirements are being seen by the council. 160 Council Member Gallup moved to approve Resolution No. 11 -29 as presented. Council Member 161 Roeser seconded the motion. Motion adopted upon a voice vote; Council Member O'Donnell absent. 162 Council Member Gallup moved to approve Resolution No. 11 -30 as presented. Council Member 163 Roeser seconded the motion. Motion adopted upon a voice vote; Council Member O'Donnell absent. 164 Council Member Gallup moved to approve Resolution No. 11 -31 as presented. Council Member 165 Roeser seconded the motion. Motion adopted upon a voice vote; Council Member O'Donnell absent. 166 167 ' 6D) Consider Resolution No. 11 -34, Accepting Lilac St.(CSAH 153) from Anoka County, City 168 Engineer Studenski explained that in the 1990's, Apollo Drive was constructed by Anoka County and 169 it tied into Lake Drive. It's opening eliminated the use of Lilac Street. It was decided during the 170 recent construction of the nearby highway interchange that Lilac Street should be turned back to the 171 city. The turnback will actually mean the city will receive additional maintenance assistance from the 172 county. 173 174 4 • • • • • COUNCIL MINUTES March 14, 2011 DRAFT 175 Council Member Rafferty moved to approve Resolution No. 11 -34 as presented. Council Member 176 Roeser seconded the motion. Motion adopted upon a voice vote; Council Member O'Donnell absent. 177 178 6E) Consider Resolution No. 11 -33, Authorizing execution of Joint Powers Agreement for 179 Wellhead Protection Implementation — Envinronmental Coordinator Asleson explained that the 180 County health department requires the city to have a plan to protect its groundwater. A joint powers 181 agreement is in place with Anoka County that allows them to put together a plan that includes the city. 182 Implementation of that plan is being requested. He noted that the plan is mostly open -ended for the 183 city, allowing the city to chose elements of involvement. 184 185 Council Member Gallup moved to approve Resolution 11 -33 as presented. Council Member Rafferty 186 seconded the motion. Motion adopted upon a voice vote; Council Member O'Donnell absent. 187 188 6F) Consider First Reading of Ordinance No. 09 -11, Adding Section 1011to the City Code, 189 Regulating Construction Site Erosion & Sediment Control and Post Construction Stormwater 190 Management — Environmental Coordinator Asleson and City Engineer Studenski reported. Mr. 191 Asleson explained that the ordinance before the council would add a section to the city code relative to 192 construction stormwater management. As part of the Clean Water Act, every city in the nation is 193 required to obtain a permit and implement a stormwater pollution prevention plan that includes 194 minimum control measures. This ordinance covers two of those control measures. It is important in the 195 effort to keep water clean. The Environmental Board has recommended approval of the ordinance. 196 197 Council Member Rafferty moved to approve first reading of Ordinance No. 09 -11. Council Member 198 Roeser seconded the motion. Motion adopted upon a voice vote; Council Member O'Donnell absent. 199 200 6G) Consider Resolution No. 11 -32 Accepting grant from Statewide Health Improvement 201 Program (SHIP) for construction of a Community Garden — Environmental Coordinator Asleson 202 explained that the city applied for a grant from the Anoka County Health Department for the city's 203 community garden to be used to bring water to the gardens. The grant request has been approved and 204 staff is requesting authorization to accept the funds. 205 206 The mayor explained that the concept of this community garden is new to the area. The garden site is 207 located on city land north of 77th and west of Lake Drive. He recommends that residents who want to 208 be involved should contact city hall. 209 210 A council member noted that he has heard about the Statewide Health Improvement Program (SHIP) 211 and he encourages staff to look for creative ways to apply for those funds. 212 213 Council Member Roeser moved to approve Resolution No. 11 -32 as presented. Council Member 214 Gallup seconded the motion. Motion adopted upon a voice vote; Council Member O'Donnell absent. 215 216 UNFINISHED BUSINESS 217 218 There was no Unfinished Business. 219 5 P65 COUNCIL MINUTES 220 NEW BUSINESS 221 222 There was no New Business. 223 224 COMMUNITY CALENDAR 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 ADJOURN 233 234 There being no further business, Council Member Roeser moved to adjourn the regular meeting at 235 7:20 p.m. Council Member Rafferty seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. 236 237 The council reconvened to a special session the purpose being to discuss the Public Safety Director 238 position. 239 240 These minutes were considered and approved at the regular Council Meeting, March 28, 2011. 241 242 243 244 245 Julianne Bartell, City Clerk Jeff Reinert, Mayor 246 March 14, 2011 DRAFT P66 • Community Calendar- A Look Ahead March 15, 2011 through March 28, 2011 Monday, March 28 5:30 pm, Community Room Council Work Session 4- Monday, March 28 6:30 pm, Council Chambers City Council Meeting 6 • • • • AGENDA ITEM 3A STAFF ORIGINATOR: Daniel Tesch, Director of Administration MEETING DATE: 28 March 2011 TOPIC: Hiring John Swenson, Public Safety Director VOTE REQUIRED: 3/5 BACKGROUND The departure of Dave Pecchia in 2010 created a vacancy for the position of Public Safety Director. The council moved to establish a Public Safety Director Search Committee which was made up of 2 staff members, 2 council members and former Coon Rapids chief Steve Wells. Staff was directed to advertise the vacancy to which the city received 23 applicants. Staff narrowed the number of applicants 8 which were interviewed by the Search Committee. On February 24th the City Council interviewed 3 finalists for the position. At that meeting the council determined that the 3 finalists be scheduled for leadership assessments with Assessment Associates International. Assessment Associates International determined that all 3 finalists were considered qualified candidates. After much consideration the council has directed staff to make an offer of employment to Mr. John Swenson. Mr. Swenson is currently a captain with the White Bear Lake Police Department. We anticipate an April 25th start date. RECOMMENDATION Make an offer of employment as Public Safety Director to Mr. John Swenson, P66 • • • AGENDA ITEM 4A STAFF ORIGINATOR Kent Strege, Police Chief DATE March 28, 2011 TOPIC Centennial School District Contract for Youth Resource Officer VOTES REQUIRED: 3/5 BACKGROUND The Lino Lakes Police Department is requesting that the Lino Lakes City Council approve the Youth Resource Officer Service Agreement with the Centennial School District for the 2010/2011 School year. See attached agreement for further details. OPTIONS 1. Approve request to renew the Youth Resource Officer Service Agreement with the Centennial School District. 2. Return to staff for further review and consideration. RECOMMENDATION Approve request. P67 Council Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: CITY OF LINO LAKES RESOLUTION NO. 11 -36 Approving the Centennial School District Contract for Youth Resource Officer WHEREAS, the City of Lino Lakes and the Centennial School District wish to participate in a Youth Resource Officer Program; and WHEREAS, both the City and the School District agree that a more formalized approach to the Youth Resource Officer Program is needed to improve understanding and promote mutual respect between police, school, staff, counselors, parents and students; and WHEREAS, the purpose of this Agreement is to set forth in writing the terms and conditions of the mutual duties and obligations and to create, fund and implement the position of Youth Resource Officer; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Lino Lakes City Council hereby approves the Centennial School District Contract for a Youth Resource Officer. Jeff Reinert, Mayor Julie Bartell, City Clerk Adopted by the Lino Lakes City Council this 28th day of March, 2011. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Council Member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: The following voted against same: Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. P68 • • • P69 YOUTH RESOURCE OFFICER CITY OF LINO LAKES /CENTENNIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 12 SERVICE CONTRACT This agreement is made this 15 day of February , 2011, pursuant to Minnesota Statute §471.59 by and between the City of Lino Lakes (City) and Independent School District #12 (School District). 1. PURPOSE The City of Lino Lakes and the Centennial School District wish to participate in a Youth Resource Officer Program. Both the City and the School District agree that a more formalized approach to the Youth Resource Officer Program is needed to improve understanding and promote mutual respect between police, school, staff, counselors, parents and students. The purpose of this Agreement is to set forth in writing the terms and conditions of the mutual duties and obligations and to create, fund and implement the position of Youth Resource Officer. 2. FUNDING The School District will fund the following expenses in connection with the Youth Resource Officer: Officer's salary and related benefits are estimated at $67,648.98 for the 2010 -11 school year ($66,530.22 for the 2009 -10 school year). This expenditure shall be determined by the number of hours assigned to the school district. The hourly rate for 2010 -11 shall be $48.88. (2009 -10 shall be $48.07). The School District officials and Lino Lakes Police Chief shall determine the specific days /hours of work. 3. SERVICES The City shall provide the services of one licensed police officer and related support services and supplies to assist the School District in establishing a Youth Resource Officer Program. The Officer will have primary responsibility in serving as a resource person to faculty, classroom members and school administrators in the promoting of positive juvenile behavior. The School District agrees to provide adequate office space, telephone and other reasonable clerical support services. This officer will not act as an education or related service provider under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act or related state law for any student. 4. PAYMENT The City shall provide billing to the School District for services provided in this Agreement on a quarterly basis. 5. TERM This Agreement shall commence on the 7th' day of September, 2010, and shall end onlor about June 10, 2011. Thereafter, it shall be renewed on a yearly basis by mutual agreement. This Agreement may be canceled by either party by a 30 day written notice. 6. GENERAL PROVISIONS it is expressly agreed that the Youth Resource Officer is a City employee and shall not be considered an employee of the School District for any purpose including but not limited to salaries, wages, other compensations or fringe benefits, Workers Compensation, Unemployment Compensation, P.E.R.A, Social Security, Liability Insurance, keeping of personnel records, termination of employment, 1 P70 individual contracts or other contractual rights. The City shall assume all liability for the actions taken by the Officer in the performance of his/her duty as a Peace Officer. The Officer will report to and be directed by the Chief of Police, but will consult regularly with School District Officials. Resolution of unforeseen problems arising in this program shall be negotiated by representatives of the School District and the Chief of Police. 7. SCHEDULING The duty hours of the Youth Resource Officer are flexible and will be primarily coordinated with the school day and activities. The Officer will make daily contact with the Police Department for the purpose of keeping abreast of incident reports and other City activity. During non - school periods, the Officer duties and schedule will be determined by the City. 8. DISCRIMINATION The City and the School Dsitrict agree not to discriminate in providing services under this Agreement on the basis of race, sex, creed, national origin, age, or religion. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement the day and year last written below. CITY OF LINO LAKES CENTENNIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT #12 Chief of Police •-i Date Dr. Paul Stremick Superintendent of Schools I City Representative Date Christina Wilson Date School Board Chairperson 7 7/1/ 1% Suzanne Guthmueller Date School Board Clerk 2 Llund/business office /contracts /youth services officer -Lino • • • Ply YOUTH RESOURCE OFFICER CITY OF LINO LAKES /CENTENNIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 12 SERVICE CONTRACT This agreement is made this 15 day of February , 2011, pursuant to Minnesota Statute §471.59 by and between the City of Lino Lakes (City) and Independent School District #12 (School District). 1. PURPOSE The City of Lino Lakes and the Centennial School District wish to participate in a Youth Resource Officer Program. Both the City and the School District agree that a more formalized approach to the Youth Resource Officer Program is needed to improve understanding and promote mutual respect between police, school, staff, counselors, parents and students. The purpose of this Agreement is to set forth in writing the terms and conditions of the mutual duties and obligations and to create, fund and implement the position of Youth Resource Officer. 2. FUNDING The School District will fund the following expenses in connection with the Youth Resource Officer: Officer's salary and related benefits are estimated at $67,648.98 for the 2010 -11 school year ($66,530.22 for the 2009 -10 school year). This expenditure shall be determined by the number of hours assigned to the school district. The hourly rate for 2010 -11 shall be $48.88. (2009 -10 shall be $48.07). The School District officials and Lino Lakes Police Chief shall determine the specific days /hours of work. 3. SERVICES The City shall provide the services of one licensed police officer and related support services and supplies to assist the School District in establishing a Youth Resource Officer Program. The Officer will have primary responsibility in serving as a resource person to faculty, classroom members and school administrators in the promoting of positive juvenile behavior. The School District agrees to provide adequate office space, telephone and other reasonable clerical support services. This officer will not act as an education or related service provider under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act or related state law for any student. 4. PAYMENT The City shall provide billing to the School District for services provided in this Agreement on a quarterly basis. TERM This Agreement shall commence on the 7th day of September, 2010, and shall end on/or about June 10, 2011. Thereafter, it shall be renewed on a yearly basis by mutual agreement. This Agreement may be canceled by either party by a 30 day written notice. 6. GENERAL PROVISIONS it is expressly agreed that the Youth Resource Officer is a City employee and shall not be considered an employee of the School District for any purpose including but not limited to salaries, wages, other compensations or fringe benefits, Workers Compensation, Unemployment Compensation, P.E.R.A, Social Security, Liability Insurance, keeping of personnel records, termination of employment, 1 P72 individual contracts or other contractual rights. The City shall assume all liability for the actions taken by the Officer in the performance of his/her duty as a Peace Officer. The Officer will report to and be directed by the Chief of Police, but will consult regularly with School District Officials. Resolution of unforeseen problems arising in this program shall be negotiated by representatives of the School District and the Chief of Police. 7. SCHEDULING The duty hours of the Youth Resource Officer are flexible and will be primarily coordinated with the school day and activities. The Officer will make daily contact with the Police Department for the purpose of keeping abreast of incident reports and other City activity. During non - school periods, the Officer duties and schedule will be determined by the City. 8. DISCRIMINATION The City and the School Dsitrict agree not to discriminate in providing services under this Agreement on the basis of race, sex, creed, national origin, age, or religion. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement the day and year last written below. CITY OF LINO LAKES CENTENNIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT #12 Chief of Police Date Dr. Paul Stremick Superintendent of Schools City Representative Date Christina Wilson School Board Chairperson 7t/i J Date 7//% 7 // Suzanne lute School Board Clerk 2 Llund/business office /contracts /youth services officer -Lino • • • • • • AGENDA ITEM 4B STAFF ORIGINATOR Kent Strege, Police Chief DATE March 28, 2011 TOPIC Consideration of Resolution No. 11 -39 supporting an Anoka County joint public safety data system and the associated legislation authorizing county level bonding. VOTES REQUIRED: Simple Majority BACKGROUND The request before you is to approve a resolution supporting the Anoka County Joint Law Enforcement Council (JLEC) coordination of a project that implements a collaborative public safety data system. This system will encompass data collection and processing for the county dispatch center, all law enforcement and fire agencies in Anoka County and the Anoka County Jail. This resolution also supports the bills in both the state House and Senate (HF 429 & SF 275 respectively). These bills modify current State Statute 383E.21 permitting the Anoka County Board to fund countywide public safety improvements and equipment via a countywide levy. The project levy would replace the expiring levy for the 800 MHz radio system and would be less than half the cost of that levy. No further project funds are being sought from the cities. Information points regarding the collaborative project: - The current records management system has been used since 1/1/2000 The current system is utilized by Law Enforcement agencies only Anoka County Dispatch, Law Enforcement, Fire, Jail, Emergency management and County Attorney's Office all utilize much of the same information but have their own systems leading to the need for duplicate entry of the same data and associated errors - These errors have led to a nearly 3 times higher than average mismatch of data in the disparate systems causing inaccurate criminal history data. The first phase of the project is a needs assessment that has been funded by the JLEC and the Fire Prevention Council - The levy will be a separate line item on taxpayer's statements - No new funding from individual cities is being sought P73 OPTIONS 1. Adopt Resolution No. 11 -39 in support of the joint public safety data system and associated bonding legislation. 2. Return the Resolution to staff for further information. RECOMMENDATION Option No. 1 P74 • • • P75 • Council Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: CITY OF LINO LAKES RESOLUTION NO. 11 -39 Expressing support of a county -wide integrated public safety information system and the associated legislation that would continue county level bonding for collaborative public safety projects; WHEREAS, the Anoka County Joint Law Enforcement Council (JLEC) was formed to benefit the public safety of the citizens of Anoka County; and WHEREAS, the JLEC has nearly four decades of experience successfully creating and managing shared services for its member communities; and WHEREAS, the City of Lino Lakes has actively participated in the JLEC through the participation of our chief law enforcement officer and our elected officials; and WHEREAS, the safety of the public and police and fire personnel will be enhanced by improvements in the speed and accuracy of shared public safety information systems; and WHEREAS, the public safety databases are aging and outdated, do not support effective data sharing, and do not support data archiving and crime analysis activities; and WHEREAS, significant public safety staff resources may be redirected from redundant data entry to more effective public safety efforts; and WHEREAS, both residents of and public safety agencies in Anoka County have benefitted from improved public safety, increased effectiveness, and resource conservation due to the resulting economies of scale provided by shared and consolidated services; and WHEREAS, the JLEC desires to implement a comprehensive shared public safety information system in Anoka County whereby law enforcement, fire, jail, dispatch, and emergency preparedness data may be maintained and shared; and WHEREAS, the JLEC and the Anoka County Board support a legislative change to allow the use of the specific bonding authority provided in Minnesota Statute 383E to fund county -wide public safety projects; and 0 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Lino Lakes does with this action, support and endorse a countywide integrated public safety information system; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby support the expansion of the public safety bonding authority provided by MSS 383E to county -wide public safety projects as provided for in HF 429 and SF 275. Jeff Reinert, Mayor Julie Bartell, City Clerk Adopted by the Lino Lakes City Council this 28th day of March, 2011. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Council Member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: The following voted against same: Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. P7'6 • • • Anoka County Public Safety Data System 410 Who is involved in this project? The Anoka County Joint Law Enforcement Council (JLEC) is a joint powers entity comprised of all chief law enforcement officers, the sheriff, county 1 attorney, a fire chief, together with county commissioners and city council members. The JLEC has a successful 40 -year track record of fostering and managing shared criminal justice programs and consolidated services including major crimes investigation, a consolidated police records system for all 11 law enforcement agencies, and a county -wide dispatch center. For this project, we are working together with the Anoka County Fire Protection Council as well. What is the project? The JLEC is seeking to update the public safety records and information systems. To fund this project, we are seeking to revise the bonding authority granted to the Anoka County Board for the implementation of 800 mhz radio communications in 2002 so that the same mechanism can fund future countywide public safety initiatives. The project currently in development would replace or upgrade several dated critical public safety records and information service applications in the communications /dispatch center, the police records system, fire service dispatch and records systems, and jail records. The vision for the future of Anoka County's public safety information systems is one of further consolidation and complete integration providing for seamless collection, dissemination, archiving, and analysis of public safety data. We want the right people to have the right data at the right time. The JLEC and the Fire Prevention Council will be seeking other funding sources for this project including grants, but we anticipate that bonding will be necessary. The JLEC has proposed legislation, with County Board approval, to revise Minn. Stat. §383E.21 which permitted the tax for the public safety levy for 800 mhz radio to appear on a separate line item on property tax statements. This allows our citizens to know exactly where those tax dollars are being spent. • Why is the JLEC proposing this project? Currently, public safety information systems in Anoka County are fragmented with different systems being utilized by different disciplines. Call records in the 911 center are not integrated with either police or fire records, requiring either cumbersome "work- arounds" or manual re- keying of already entered data. The countywide law enforcement records system is at the end of its lifespan and does not provide records management for fire or emergency management. Anoka County's jail records require officers to handwrite data already entered into the police records system so that it may be re -keyed into the jail records system. Each time data is transferred from one system to the next, time is wasted and errors may be introduced. Additionally, because of errors in our records across these multiple systems, Anoka County had the highest rate of suspense files in the metro area in 2010, with 14% of our criminal records not being recorded properly due to data errors. Metro counties with better integration of their systems have rates around 5 %. We are concerned that we do not have accurate criminal history data as a result. P77 How will new systems be selected? To begin the process of selecting a new system, the first phase of the project will be an extensive needs analysis of law enforcement, fire, dispatch, jail and emergency management. This needs assessment will focus not only on what information needs to be stored by each of the individual system but also on how the systems need to communicate with each other and with external sources. We will be seeking to identify the areas in which we can become more efficient and effective in serving the public without increasing staff. The outcomes of the first phase of the project will be a comprehensive needs analysis, a projected cost and timeline for the project, and one or more RFP's to seek a vendor or vendors which can meet the needs identified in the needs analysis. When will the new systems be implemented? Currently, we only have a time estimate of the first phase of the project. We anticipate approximately six months for completing the needs analysis as well as developing the RFP and the RFP selection process. At the beginning of the second phase of the project, we will develop and agree upon timelines prior to contracting with any vendors. How will this project be funded? The funding for the first phase of the project has already been secured from multiple sources including the JLEC and the Fire Prevention Council. The cost of the second phase of the project is currently estimated between $3,500,000 and $5,500,000. A recent project in another metro city that included only law enforcement records system and dispatch cost $1,800,000. We believe that through collaboration and utilization of a shared system, we can not only serve the public more efficiently and effectively, but we can also realize a significant cost savings though the implementation of a shared system. For the second phase of the project, we will be seeking a variety of funding sources including grants, but ultimately bonding will be required. As noted above, we are seeking a legislative change to allow for the use of the same funding mechanism used for the 800 mhz project. To this end, members of Anoka County's legislative delegation have introduced SF 275 and HF 429. This will allow the taxpayer to see the cost of the county -wide public safety records and information system on a separate line on their tax statement. These bills enjoy overwhelming bipartisan support from our legislators as well as the Anoka County Board. Presently the bonds for 800 mhz project will be paid off in 2012. Based on the timing of this project, the payment on the bonds would begin in 2013. Therefore, homeowners will still see a significant decrease on this line item in 2013. The exact amount of the decrease is not known at this time because the final cost of the project has not been determined, nor do we know the amount of grant funding that will be available. However, the cost of the 800 mhz project for a $200,000 home in Anoka County was approximately $7.00 per year. That project was 10.2 million dollars over ten years. The current project is projected to be about half the cost of the 800 mhz project. What support to we need from cities? We are seeking the support of Anoka County cities for 1) the legislative change to allow for transparency in the property tax statements regarding the funding of this project; and 2) the update of the public safety records systems. We are not seeking new funding from the cities for this project. Questions or Comments? Don Abbott Fridley Police Chief/ Committee Chair abbottd(a�ci.fridley. mn.us 763 - 572 -3625 Chris Olson Blaine Police Chief/ Committee Chair COlson anci.blaine.mn.us 763 -785 -6196 Kate McPherson Assistant County Attomey/ Head of Operations kate.mcphersonPco,anoka.mn.us 763 -323 -5592 Jerry Streich Centennial Fire Chief/ JLEC Member ferry.streich(c�centennialfire.orq 651 792 7901 P78 • • • • • AGENDA ITEM 6 A i. ii. STAFF ORIGINATOR: Jeff Smyser C. C. MEETING DATE: March 28, 2011 TOPIC: VOTE: BACKGROUND Century Farm North i. Second Reading, Ordinance No. 07 -11: Amending Planned Unit Development Zoning and Amending the PUD Development Stage Plan/Preliminary Plat, ii. Second Reading, Ordinance No. 06 -11 Vacating Easement i. Ordinance No. 07 -11 (zoning amendment) 3/5 ii. Ordinance No. 06 -11 (easement vacation) 4/5 The City Council approved the first readings of both these ordinances on March 14. Ordinance No. 07 -11 approves converting detached townhome lots to individual single family home lots. Ordinance 06 -11 approves an easement vacation needed to accomplish that. This proposal does not add any dwelling units to the number originally approved in 2003. Nor does it change the area of land for each dwelling unit. OPTIONS 1. Approve second reading of Ordinance No. 07 -11 approving amending the PUD zoning and the PUD Development Stage Plan/Preliminary Plat. 2. Approve the second reading of Ordinance No. 06 -11 approving the vacation of a drainage and utility easement over Lot 5, Block 2, Century Farm North 4th Addn. 3. Deny of the applications. 4. Return to staff with direction. RECOMMENDATION Options 1 and 2 P79 1St Reading: Publication: 2 "d Reading: Effective: Council Member moved for adoption of the following ordinance: CITY OF LINO LAKES ORDINANCE NO. 07-11 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ZONING AND AMENDING THE PUD DEVELOPMENT STAGE PLAN/PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR THE CENTURY FARM NORTH DEVELOPMENT The City Council of the City of Lino Lakes, Anoka County, Minnesota does ordain: Section 1: Findings 1. In 2003 the City Council approved a rezoning to create the Century Farm North Planned Unit Development (PUD) with Ordinance No. 12 -03. The ordinance required that development shall conform with plans listed in Resolution 03 -60, which included a preliminary plat that established the lots and housing types for the PUD. 2. The current property owners have requested amending the previously approved plan as shown on a plan titled "Preliminary Plat Amendment ", dated 12 -15 -10 and submitted to the City on December 16, 2010. Because the PUD rezoning ordinance referred specifically to the plans, amending the plans is considered an amendment of the PUD zoning. 3. The amendment includes changing lots from detached townhomes to single family lots. 4. The City Council makes the following findings regarding the application for amending the Century Farm North PUD zoning, based on the factors listed in Section 2, Subd. l E of the Lino Lakes zoning ordinance: 1. The proposed action has been considered in relation to the specific policies and provisions of and has been found to be consistent with the official City Comprehensive Plan. The site is guided for low and medium density residential uses, the original approval was consistent with those uses, and the amendment does not change the uses. 2. The proposed use is or will be compatible with present and future land uses of the area. The site is guided for low and medium density residential uses. Existing and anticipated future land uses in the area are considered compatible with the proposed amendment. 3. The proposed use will conform with all performance standards contained in the zoning ordinance and other requirements, as determined by review of the application. P80 • • • • • • 4. The proposed use can be accommodated with existing public services and will not overburden the City's service capacity. Adequate utilities are currently available on the site, and the proposed amendment will be consistent with the design of the utilities. 5. Traffic generation by the proposed use is within capabilities of streets serving the property in conjunction with the public improvements already installed or proposed. Section 2: Amendment of Century Farm North PUD Zoning Approved The PUD zoning for Century Farm North, as approved by the City Council on March 10, 2003 with Ordinance No. 12 -03 is hereby amended by changing detached townhome lots to single family detached lots as shown on the submitted Preliminary Plat Amendment dated 12 -15 -10 and submitted to the City on December 16, 2010. Except as hereby amended, development shall conform to previously approved plans and amendments. Section 3: Amendment of PUD Development Stage Plan/Preliminary Plat Approved The PUD Development Plan/Preliminary Plat for Century Farm North is hereby amended by changing detached townhome lots to single family detached lots as shown on the same Preliminary Plat Amendment dated 12 -15 -10 and submitted to the City on December 16, 2010. Except as hereby amended, conditions of previous approvals and amendments continue to apply. Section 4: As Amended, Zoning Ordinance Stands As above amended, said Zoning Ordinance shall stand as initially passed and previously amended. Section 5 This ordinance shall be in force and effect from and after its passage and publication according to the Lino Lakes City Charter. Jeff Reinert, Mayor Attest: Julianne Bartell, City Clerk Adopted by the Lino Lakes City Council this 28th day of March, 2011. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing ordinance was duly seconded by Council Member and upon a vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: The following voted against same: Whereupon said ordinance was declared duly passed and adopted. Ordinance No. 07 -11, page 2 P81 ls' Reading: Publication: 2 °d Reading: Effective: Council Member moved for adoption of the following ordinance: CITY OF LINO LAKES ORDINANCE NO. 06-11 ORDINANCE VACATING DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT LOT 5, BLOCK 2, CENTURY FARM NORTH 4TH ADDITION. The City Council of the City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota does ordain: Section 1 Findings 1. The City Council of Lino Lakes has determined to vacate in its entirety the drainage and utility easement described as: Drainage and utility easement over all of Lot 5, Block 2, Century Farm North 4th Addition. 2. A public hearing was held on March 14, 2011 before the City Council in the City Hall Council Chambers after due published and posted notice had been given and a reasonable attempt was made to give personal notice to all affected property owners, and all persons interested were given an opportunity to be heard; and 3. It appears to be in the best interest of the City to vacate such drainage and utility easement; and 4. Four -fifths of all members of the City Council concur in this ordinance. Section 2 Easement Vacated The drainage and utility easement described herein is hereby vacated. Section 3 This ordinance shall be in force and effect from and after its passage and publication according to the Lino Lakes City Charter. Jeff Reinert, Mayor Attest: Julianne Bartell, City Clerk P82 • • • • • Adopted by the Lino Lakes City Council this 28th day of March, 2011. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing ordinance was duly seconded by Council Member and upon a vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: The following voted against same: Whereupon said ordinance was declared duly passed and ado Ordinance No. 06 -11, page 2 P83 • • AGENDA ITEM 6.B.i STAFF ORIGINATOR: Marty Asleson; Jim Studenski MEETING DATE: March 28, 2011 TOPIC: Second Reading of Ordinance No. 09 -111 Establishing City Code Section 1011 Regulating Construction Site Erosion and Sediment Control and Post Construction Stormwater Management. VOTE REQUIRED: 3/5 BACKGROUND In 2003, as part of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program required by the federal Clean Water Act, most cities, including Lino Lakes, were required to obtain a Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) permit, administered in Minnesota by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). This permit regulates the discharge of stormwater runoff to the waters of the State. The permit requires that each MS4 develop a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for the reduction of pollutants discharged from the storm sewer system. The SWPPP includes six (6) minimum control measures (MCM): 1) Public education and outreach; 2) Public participation; 3) Illicit discharge detection and elimination; 4) Construction site Stormwater runoff control; 5) Post - construction Stormwater management in new development and redevelopment; and 6) Pollution prevention /good housekeeping for municipal operations. MCM 4 requires reduction of pollutants from construction activities within the MS4's jurisdiction and MCM 5 requires post construction stormwater runoff regulations. Compliance with these requirements means having an ordinance as well as sanctions to ensure compliance The proposed ordinance establishes updated development requirements for both erosion and sediment control as well as stormwater management to meet the requirements of the NPDES permit. Elements of these requirements are currently contained in the City Zoning and Subdivision Codes or as policy statements in the City's Local Water Management Plan. Adoption of the ordinance will consolidate stormwater management requirements iin a separate P84 section of city code; update the requirements to conform with NPDES standards; and complement the Rice Creek Watershed District requirements. The proposed ordinance was reviewed by the City Environmental Board on January 25, 2011 and February 23, 2011. The board recommended the approval of the ordinance to meet the requirements of the City's MS4 permit. The first reading of Ordinance 09 -11 occurred at the March 14 City Council Meeting. The Council approved the first reading. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approving the 2nd reading of Ordinance 09 -11. ATTACHMENTS 1. Ordinance 09 -11 P85 • • • • • 1St Reading: Publication: 2 "d Reading: Effective: Council Member moved for adoption of the following ordinance: CITY OF LINO LAKES ORDINANCE NO. 09-11 AN ORDINANCE REGULATING CONSTRUCTION SITE EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL AND POST - CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER MANAGEMENT The City Council of Lino Lakes ordains: Section 1. Chapter 1011 of the City Code is hereby established as follows: Chapter 1011 STORMWATER AND EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL Sections: 1011.01 Statutory Authorization 1011.02 Findings 1011.03 Purpose 1011.04 Definitions 1011.05 Applicability 1011.06 Exemptions 1011.07 Technical Reference 1011.08 Grading, Erosion and Sediment Control Requirements 1011.09 Stormwater Management Requirements 1011.10 Inspections and Maintenance 1011.11 Plan Review Procedure 1011.12 Financial Procedures 1011.13 Enforcement 1011.14 Severability 1011.15 Abrogation and Greater Restrictions 1011.01 STATUTORY AUTHORIZATION This ordinance is adopted pursuant to the authorization and policies contained in Minnesota Statutes Chapters 103B, 103F, and 462 and Minnesota Rules Chapters 7050, 7090, and 8410. This ordinance is intended to meet the current construction site erosion and sediment control and post - construction stormwater management regulatory requirements for construction activity and small construction activity (NPDES Permit) as defined in 40 Code of Federal Regulations pt. 122.26(b)(14)(x) and (b)(15), respectively. P86 1011.01 FINDINGS The City of Lino Lakes finds that uncontrolled stormwater runoff and construction site erosion from land development and land disturbing activity can have significant adverse impacts upon local and regional water resources diminishing the quality of public health, safety, public and private property, and natural resources of the City. Specifically, uncontrolled construction site erosion and stormwater runoff can: (1) Threaten public health, safety, property, and general welfare by increasing runoff volumes, peak flood flows, and overburdening storm sewers, drainage ways, and other storm drainage systems; (2) Diminish the capacity of lakes and streams to support fish, aquatic life, and recreational and water supply uses by increasing pollutant loadings of total sediment, suspended solids, nutrients, heavy metals, bacteria, pathogens, and other urban pollutants; (3) Degrade physical stream habitat by increasing stream bank erosion, increasing stream bed scour, diminishing groundwater recharge, diminishing stream base flows, and increasing stream temperatures; (4) Undermine floodplain management efforts by increasing the incidence and levels of flooding; (5) Alter wetland communities by changing wetland hydrology and increasing pollutant loading; and (6) Generate airborne particulate concentrations that are health threatening or may cause other damage to property or the environment. 1011.01 PURPOSE The general purpose of this ordinance is to set forth regulatory requirements for land development and land disturbing activities aimed at minimizing threats to public health, safety, public and private property, and natural resources within the City from construction site erosion and post - construction stormwater runoff. Specific purposes are to establish performance standards that will: (1) Protect life and property from dangers associated with flooding; (2) Protect public and private property and the natural resources from damage resulting from runoff and construction site erosion; (3) Ensure land development that minimizes the generation of stormwater runoff volumes and peak rates and maximizes pervious areas for stormwater treatment; (4) Promote regional stormwater management by subwatershed; P87 • • • • (5) Provide a single, consistent set of performance standards that apply to all developments; • • (6) Protect water quality from nutrients, heavy metals, bacteria, pathogens, debris, thermal stress, and other urban pollutants; (7) Promote infiltration and groundwater recharge; (8) Protect functional values of all types of natural water bodies (e.g., rivers, streams, wetlands, lakes, seasonal ponds); and (9) Sustain or enhance biodiversity (native plant and animal habitat) and support riparian ecosystems. 1011.04 DEFINITIONS Unless specifically defined below, words or phrases used in this ordinance shall be interpreted so as to give them the same meaning as they have in common usage and to give this ordinance its most reasonable application. For the purpose of this ordinance, the words "must" and "shall" are mandatory and not permissive. All distances, unless otherwise specified, shall be measured horizontally. As used in this ordinance, the following words and terms shall have the meanings ascribed to them in this Section. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMP's) - measures taken to minimize negative effects on water resources and systems as documented in the Minnesota Construction Site Erosion and Sediment Control Planning Handbook (MBWSR, 1988), Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas (MPCA, 2000) and the Minnesota Stormwater Manual (MPCA, 2006) as amended. BETTER SITE DESIGN(BSD) - a set of development or redevelopment site - design principles and techniques that seek to mimic natural conditions by soaking water into the ground close to where it falls, minimizing impervious areas to reduce overall runoff volume, reducing connected impervious areas, and preserving natural drainage patterns and surfaces. BIOFILTRATION— A stormwater quality and quantity BMP that utilizes vegetation and soil to filer and absorb pollutants including nutrients, hydrocarbons and metals and remove water volume through evapotranspiration. CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY- includes construction activity as defined in 40 C.F.R. pt. 122.26(b)(14)(x) and small construction activity as defined in 40 C.F.R. pt. 122.26(b)(15). This includes a disturbance to the land that results in a change in the topography, existing soil cover (both vegetative and non - vegetative), or the existing soil topography that may result in accelerated stormwater runoff, leading to soil erosion and movement of sediment into surface waters or drainage systems. Examples of construction activity may include clearing, grading, filling, and excavating. Construction activity P88 includes the disturbance of less than one acre of total land area that is a part of a larger common plan of development or sale if the larger common plan will ultimately disturb one acre or more. EROSION PREVENTION - means measures employed to prevent erosion including, but not limited to, soil stabilization practices, limited grading, mulch, temporary or permanent cover, and construction phasing. FILTRATION - A stormwater quality BMP that uses either natural media such as soil or vegetation or manufactured media to trap pollutants such as nutrients and particles in surface water. FINAL STABILIZATION- means that all soil disturbing activities at the site have been completed and all soils have be stabilized by a uniform perennial vegetative cover with a density of 70% over the entire pervious surface area, or other equivalent means necessary to prevent soil failure under erosive conditions. LAND DISTURBING ACTIVITY - any disturbance to the ground surface that, through the action of wind or water, may result in soil erosion or the movement of sediment into waters, wetlands or storm sewers or onto adjacent property. Land - disturbing activity includes but is not limited to the demolition of a structure or surface, soil stripping, clearing, grubbing, grading, excavating, filling and the storage of soil or earth materials. The term does not include normal farming practices as part of an ongoing farming operation. IMPERVIOUS SURFACE - means a constructed hard surface that either prevents or retards the entry of water into the soil and causes water to run off the surface in greater quantities and at an increased rate of flow than prior to development. Examples include rooftops, sidewalks, patios, driveways, parking lots, storage areas, and concrete, asphalt, or gravel roads. NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM (NPDES) - means the program for issuing, modifying, revoking, reissuing, terminating, monitoring, and enforcing permits under the Clean Water Act (Sections 301, 318, 402, and 405) and United States Code of Federal Regulations Title 33, Sections 1317, 1328, 1342, and 1345. OWNER - means the person or party possessing the title of the land on which the construction activities will occur; or if the construction activity is for a lease, easement, or mineral rights license holder, the party or individual identified as the lease, easement, or mineral rights license holder; or the contracting government agency responsible for the construction activity. SATURATED SOIL - means the highest seasonal elevation in the soil that is in a reduced chemical state because of soil voids being filled with water. Saturated soil is evidenced by the presence of mottled features or other information. P89 • • • • • • SEDIMENT CONTROL - means methods employed to prevent sediment from leaving the site. Sediment control practices include silt fences, sediment traps, earth dikes, drainage swales, check dams, subsurface drains, pipe slope drains, storm drain inlet protection, and temporary or permanent sedimentation basins. STABILIZED - means the exposed ground surface has been covered by appropriate materials such as mulch, staked sod, riprap, erosion control blanket, mats or other material that prevents erosion from occurring. Applying mulch, hydromulch, tackifier, polyacrylamide, or similar erosion prevention practices is not acceptable stabilization in temporary or permanent drainage ditches or areas where concentrated overland flow occurs. Grass seeding is not stabilization. STANDARD PLATES - means general drawings having or showing similar characteristics or qualities that are representative of a construction activity or practice. STORMWATER - is defined under Minn. R. 7077.0105, sub. 41(b) and includes precipitation runoff, stormwater runoff, snowmelt runoff, and any other surface runoff and drainage. STORMWATER FACILITY, PRIVATE — means any BMP that is maintained by a private property owner, or other private entity and not maintained by a public agency. STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN - means a plan for stormwater discharge that includes erosion prevention measures, sediment controls and Permanent Stormwater Management Systems that, when implemented, will decrease soil erosion on a parcel of land and decrease off -site nonpoint pollution. SURFACE WATER OR WATERS - means all streams, lakes, ponds, marshes, wetlands, reservoirs, springs, rivers, drainage systems, waterways, watercourses, and irrigation systems whether natural or artificial, public or private. UNDERGROUND WATERS - means water contained below the surface of the earth in the saturated zone including, without limitation, all waters whether under confined, unconfined, or perched conditions, in near surface unconsolidated sediment or regolith, or in rock formations deeper underground. The term ground water shall be synonymous with underground water. WATERS OF THE STATE - (as defined in Minn. Stat. §115.01, sub. 22) means all streams, lakes, ponds, marshes, watercourses, waterways, wells, springs, reservoirs, aquifers, irrigation systems, drainage systems, and all other bodies or accumulations of water, surface or underground, natural or artificial, public or private, which are contained within, flow through, or border upon the state or any portion thereof. WATER QUANTITY BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICE — the use of on -site runoff management practices such as biofiltration, infiltration, buffers /conservation areas, P90 impervious disconnection, greenway connections to satisfy stormwater management requirements. WETLAND - area identified as wetland under Minnesota Statutes section 103G.005, subdivision 19. 1011.05 APPLICABILITY All land disturbing activity of any size shall be subject to standard erosion and sediment control BMPs. A Grading, Erosion and Sediment Control Permit and/or a Stormwater Management Permit shall be required for projects that meet or exceed the thresholds established in Sections 1011.08 and 1011.09. 1011.06 EXEMPTIONS The following land disturbing activities will be exempt from the Grading, Erosion and Sediment Control and Stormwater Management Permit requirements of this Ordinance: (1) Cemetery graves. (2) Routine agricultural activity such as tilling, planting, or harvesting of agricultural, horticultural, or silvicultural (forestry) crops. (3) Emergency work necessary to protect life, limb, or property. 1011.07 TECHNICAL REFERENCE The following documents shall be used for technical reference: (1) The Lino Lakes Surface Water Management Plan. (2) The Lino Lakes Engineering Design Standards. (3) The Lino Lakes Stormwater Design Standards. 1011.08 GRADING, EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL REQUIREMENTS (1) Grading, Erosion and Sediment Control - A Grading, Erosion and Sediment Control Permit including an Grading, Erosion and Sediment Control Plan shall be required for all proposed land disturbing activity unless otherwise exempted in this ordinance that meets any or all of the following: (a) Includes excavation, filling, or stockpiling of erodible material in excess of 100 cubic yards per acre; and /or P91 • • • • (b) Involves the laying, repairing, replacing, or enlarging of an underground utility, pipe or other facility, or the disturbance of road ditch, grass swale, or other open channel for a distance of 500 feet or more; or (c) Is a land disturbing activity, regardless of size, that the City determines is likely to cause an adverse impact to an environmentally sensitive area or other property. (2) Grading, Erosion and Sediment Control Plan Requirements - The plan shall be prepared and signed by a duly licensed professional engineer in the state of Minnesota. The following exhibits must accompany the permit application. 2 plan sets, full size (22 inches by 34 inches); one plan set, reduced to maximum size of 11 inches by 17 inches. Additional copies may be required in accordance with applicable zoning and subdivision provisions of city code. All plan sets shall also be submitted electronically in a .dwg format or as otherwise determined by the city engineer. The minimum requirements of the ESC Plan shall be consistent with the most recent version of the NPDES Permit requirements and include the following information: (a) Project name and type (residential, commercial, industrial, road construction, or other); (b) Project location; (c) County parcel identification number (legal description); (d) Names and addresses of the record owner, developer, land surveyor, engineer, designer of the plat, and any agents, contractors, and subcontractors who will be responsible for project implementation; (e) Estimated start date, time frames, and schedules for each construction phase, and completion date; (f) Copies of permits or permit applications required by any other governmental entity or agencies including mitigation measures required as a result of any review for the project (e.g., wetland mitigation, EAW, EIS, archaeology survey); (g) An 8.5 by 11 inch United States Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5 minute quad, aerial photo, or equivalent map indicating site boundaries and existing elevations, Map shall identify all natural and artificial water features (e.g., stormwater ponds, drain tiles) on site and within one -half mile of the project boundary, including, but not limited to lakes, ponds, streams (including intermittent streams), wetlands, and ditches. (h) Existing Conditions Map. An existing site map and calculations, drawn to a legible scale and clearly labeled with a north arrow and date of preparation. The plan, based on a Certificate of Survey, shall include the following information: P92 1. Property lines and lot dimensions. 2. Existing zoning classifications for land within and abutting the development, including shoreland, floodway, flood fringe, or general floodplain, and other natural resource overlay districts. 3. All buildings and outdoor uses including all dimensions and setbacks. 4. All public and private roads, interior roads, driveways and parking lots. 5. Show ordinary high water marks of all navigable waters, 100 -year flood elevations, and delineated wetland boundaries, if any. If not available, appropriate flood zone determination or wetland delineation, or both, may be required at the applicant's expense. 6. Identify all special waters and impaired waters as identified in the most recent listing by the MPCA that receive runoff from the project within one mile of the proj ect. 7. Location of drainage areas, existing storm sewer facilities, including pipes, manholes, catch basins, ponds, swales and drainage channels within 100 feet of the subject property. Existing pipes sizes, grades, rim and invert elevations and normal and high water elevations must be included. 8. Existing contours at two foot intervals shown as dashed lines for the subject property and extending 100 feet beyond the outside boundary of the proposed plat. 9. Steep slopes where areas with an average slope of more than twelve percent over a distance of at least 50 feet, or bluff areas as defined in the Shoreland Ordinance whichever is applicable. 10. Wooded areas , high quality native plant communities, or other officially designated natural resource areas. (i) Proposed Conditions Map 1. Maps identifying areas discussed in (h)1 through (h)10 above. 2. Location, size, and approximate grade of proposed public sewer and water mains. 3. Elevations, sections, profiles, and details as needed to describe all natural and artificial features of the project. 4. Proposed grade elevations at two foot intervals shown as solid lines P93 • • • • 5. An estimate of the total volume (cubic yards) of materials proposed to be imported to or exported from the site. 6. Provisions for groundwater management (dewatering), including sub- surface drains, disposals, ponding and flood controls. 7. Spot elevations at drainage break points and directional arrows indicating site swale and lot drainage. 8. Proposed lot lines, lot and block numbers, building style, building pad location and elevations at the lowest floor and garage slab, if applicable, for each lot. 9. Locations, sizes, grades, rim and invert elevations of all proposed stormwater facilities, including ponds, proposed to serve the subject property. 10. The location of all oversize, non - typical easements including conservation easements, if applicable. 11. Show the boundary of the 100 year flood elevations of all waterbodies. 12. Locations of all stormwater management practices, infiltration areas, and areas not to be disturbed during construction. 13. Normal water level, high water level, and emergency overflow elevations for the site and all associated ponding systems. 14. Location of areas where construction will be phased to minimize duration of exposed soil areas. Include map and calculations as necessary of areas of grubbing, clearing, tree removal, grading, excavation, fill, and other disturbance; areas of soil or earth material storage; quantities of soil or earth material to be removed, placed, stored, or otherwise moved on site, and delineated limits of disturbance. 15. Location and type of all temporary and permanent erosion prevention, sediment control, stormwater runoff, and soil stabilization BMPs, along with procedures to be used to establish additional temporary BMPs as necessary for the site conditions during construction. Standard plates and/or specifications for the BMP's used on the project must be included in the final plans and specifications for the project. Location and design of temporary sediment basins where 10 acres or more (5 acres or more for special or impaired waters) are disturbed and drained to a single point. When site restrictions do not allow for a temporary sediment basin or less than the required acreage is being developed, temporary sediment basins where appropriate are encouraged, but not required in areas with steep slopes or highly erodible soils or to take equivalent measures such as smaller basins, check dams, and vegetated buffer strips. 16. Methods to be used for final stabilization of all exposed soil areas. p94 17. Documentation that the project applicant has applied for the NPDES Permit from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA), when applicable. 18. A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan for projects that require an NPDES Permit. (3) Grading, Erosion and Sediment Control Plan Design Standards Grading, Erosion and Sediment Control Plans must comply with the following criteria: (a) All plans shall be consistent with National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Permit (NPDES) requirements, the Lino Lakes Engineering Design Standards, the Lino Lakes Stormwater Design Standards, and the filing or approval requirements of Rice Creek Watershed District, Vadnais Lakes Watershed Management Organization, Anoka County, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Minnesota Department of Transportation, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, State of Minnesota Stormwater Manual or other regulatory agencies. (b) Natural site topography and soil conditions must be specifically addressed to reduce erosion and sedimentation during construction and after project completion. (c) Site erosion and sediment control practices must be consistent with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency document "Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas" (1994), as amended, and City - specific written design guidance and be sufficient to retain sediment on -site. (d) The project must be phased as best possible to minimize disturbed areas and removal of existing vegetation until necessary for project progress. (e) The City may require additional erosion and sediment control measures on areas with a continuous slope leading to a sensitive, impaired or special water body, stream, ditch or wetland to assure retention of sediment on site. (f) The plan must include conditions adequate to protect facilities to be used for post - construction stormwater infiltration. (g) The plan must include conditions to minimize off -site sediment transport on trucks and equipment. (h) The plan must minimize work in and adjacent to water bodies and wetlands. (i) Stable slopes shall be maintained throughout the construction process. (j) Steep slopes and the need for high cuts and fills shall be avoided (no slopes greater than 3(h):1(v), except as approved by the City engineer). p95 • • • • • (k) Protection shall be provided to minimize disturbance to surrounding soils, root systems and trunks of trees adjacent to site activity that are intended to be left standing. (1) Compaction of site soils shall be minimized. (m) Using and maintaining temporary and permanent soil stabilization. (n) All imported materials shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to placement on the site. (o) Appropriate on -site containment must be provided for all trash, solid waste, construction debris, floating debris, and hazardous materials. Disposal of collected sediment shall be deposited only in approved locations. (4) Construction Activity Requirements. Any activity subject to a permit under this ordinance must conform to the standards of the NPDES general permit regarding construction -site erosion and sediment control. (5) Final Stabilization. (a) Erosion and sediment control measures must be maintained until final vegetation and ground cover is established to a density of 70 %. (b) All temporary erosion and sediment control BMPs will be removed after all disturbed areas have been permanently stabilized. 1011.09 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENTS (1) Stormwater Management - A Stormwater Management Permit shall be required for all proposed land development activity including public linear projects except for mill and overlay of public roadway, sidewalk, or trail that does not create additional impervious surface, or unless otherwise exempted in this ordinance, which meets any or all of the following: (a) Creation of more than 10,000 sq. ft. (0.23 acre) of impervious surface, including smaller individual sites that are part of a common plan of development that may be constructed at different times. (b) The site is within the 100 -year floodplain; within 1,000 feet of a public water or protected wetland; impacts a wetland; and /or within 300 feet of Rice Creek, Clearwater Creek, Hardwood Creek, or a public ditch. P96 (c) If redevelopment will disturb fifty percent or more of existing impervious surface or increase impervious surface by fifty percent or more. For the purpose of this paragraph, the extent of disturbance is the area of exposure of underlying soils. (d) Any land disturbing activity, regardless of size, that the City determines would otherwise cause an adverse impact to an environmentally sensitive area or other property. (2) Stormwater Management Criteria - Site plans for new development of any kind will be assessed for stormwater quantity control and stormwater quality management. The general policy on stormwater runoff rates is to reduce the impacts of development by maintaining predevelopment hydrological conditions in the following ways: P97 • (a) Decrease runoff volume. (b) Decrease erosion and sedimentation. (c) Decrease flow frequency, duration, and peak runoff rates. (d) Increase infiltration (groundwater recharge) or filtration. (e) Maintain existing flow patterns. (f) Reduce time to peak flows by increasing the time of concentration to and • through storm sewers. (g) Storage of stormwater runoff on site. (h) Avoid channel erosion. (i) The proposed project must not adversely affect water level off the site during or after construction. (3) Stormwater Management Plan Requirements — The Stormwater Management Plan shall be prepared and signed by a duly licensed engineer in the state of Minnesota. The following exhibits must accompany the permit application. 2 plan sets, full size (22 inches by 34 inches); one plan set, reduced to maximum size of 11 inches by 17 inches. Additional copies may be required in accordance with the applicable zoning and/or subdivision provisions of city code. The minimum information requirements of the Stormwater Management Plan shall be consistent with the most recent version of the NPDES Permit requirements and include the following information: (a) A Grading, Erosion and Sediment Control Plan and, for projects that require a NPDES permit, a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan. • P98 0 (b) Bankfull discharge rate of creek, stream, or river if there is a water course on the site or if the site discharges directly to the water course. (c) Existing and Proposed hydrologic calculations for total runoff volume and peak discharge rates by subwatershed for the 2 -year 24 -hour frequency event, 10 -year 24 -hour frequency event, and 100 -yr 24 -hour frequency event or the 100 -year 10 -day snowmelt. These shall include: • detention. detention. 1. Assumed runoff curve numbers. 2. Time of concentration used in calculations. 3. Pre - existing total runoff volume and peak discharge rates. 4. Configuration of all drainage areas. 5. Total amount of new impervious surfaces created by the project. 6. Post - construction total runoff volume and peak discharge rates with no 7. Post - construction total runoff volume and peak discharge rates with (d) Locations of all stormwater management practices, infiltration areas, and areas not to be disturbed during construction. (e) Location of all drain tiles on the project site shall be identified. (f) Location and engineered designs for structural stormwater management practices including stormwater treatment devices that remove oil and floatable material (e.g., basin outlets with submerged inlets). (g) Normal water level, high water level, and emergency overflow elevations for the site and all ponding systems. (h) Layout of proposed streets showing centerline gradients, section widths and typical cross sections. (i) Geotechnical analysis including soil borings at all proposed stormwater management facility locations. (j) Methods to be used for final stabilization of all exposed soil areas. • (k) Narrative addressing incorporation of infiltration BMPs. (1) Completed City worksheet explaining Better Site Design techniques that were evaluated during project design, the results of the evaluation of each and, for any techniques deemed infeasible. (m) Date of plan preparation and dates of all revisions. (n) A long -term maintenance plan and schedule for all permanent stormwater practices, along with the identity of the party responsible for the maintenance of the project. (o) A snow management plan identifying where and how snow will be stored /removed in order to protect stormwater facilities and BMPs. (4) Stormwater Management Performance Standards. The applicant must meet the following stormwater performance standards. (a) Use of Natural Topography. The applicant shall incorporate the use of natural topography and land cover such as natural swales and depressions as they exist before development to the degree that they can accommodate the additional flow of water without compromising the integrity or quality of the receiving waterbody. (b) Minimize Impact to Natural Features. The development shall minimize impact to significant natural features. Applicant shall review the site for natural features protected under Lino Lakes, State or Federal requirements, including steep slopes, wetlands, wooded areas, endangered or threatened species, or species of concern habitat, areas designated by the County Biological Survey, greenways, parks and open space, groundwater recharge areas, wellhead or surface water protection areas or regional stormwater pond locations. (c) Conveyance System. Wherever possible untreated and treated stormwater runoff shall be conveyed in facilities open to the atmosphere (e.g. swales, vegetated buffer strips, energy- dissipating structures, etc.) rather than through enclosed pipes, so as to decrease runoff velocity, allow for natural infiltration, allow suspended sediment particles to settle, and to remove pollutants. (d) Stormwater Basins. When a stormwater basin is necessary, regional siting is preferred when regional management would not divert supply away from a local recharge area or groundwater- dependent natural resource. In evaluating the appropriateness of peak flow and water quality management in an existing regional basin, the City will consider whether it previously approved the basin and whether the basin was designed for build -out of the site to the extent proposed. (e) Landlocked Basins. A landlocked basin may be provided an outlet only if it: P99 • • • • • 1. Retains a hydrologic regime that complies with the requirements of the Local Governmental Unit (LGU) responsible for administration of the Wetland Conservation Act (WCA); and 2. Provides sufficient dead storage volume to retain back to back 100 year, 24 hour rainfalls and runoff; and 3. Does not create adverse downstream flooding or water quality conditions as a result of increased discharge rate or volume, or other factors. (f) All plans shall be consistent with National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Permit (NPDES) requirements, the Lino Lakes Engineering Design Standards, the Lino Lakes Stormwater Design Standards, and the filing or approval requirements of Rice Creek Watershed District, Vadnais Lakes Watershed Management Organization, Anoka County, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Minnesota Department of Transportation, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, State of Minnesota Stormwater Manual or other regulatory agencies. (5) Stormwater Management Plan Modeling Requirements. (a) A hydrograph method or computer program based on Natural Resources Conservation Service Technical Release #20 (TR -20) and subsequent guidance must be used to analyze stormwater runoff for the design or analysis of flows and water levels within and off the project site. Composite Curve Numbers shall not include directly connected impervious surfaces. (b) In determining Curve Numbers to model runoff in the post - development condition, the Hydrologic Soil Group (HSG) of areas within construction limits is to be shifted down one classification (or 1/2 classification for HSG A) to account for the impacts of grading on soil structure unless the project specifications incorporate soil amendments in accordance with Rice Creek Watershed District Soil Amendment Guidelines. (c) The 100 -year critical event analysis of flood levels, storage volumes, and flow rates for waterbodies and stormwater management basins must include both the 24- hour rainfall and the 10 -day snowmelt events. The 10 -day snowmelt event is simulated by a 7.2 -inch, 10 -day spring runoff event during which it is assumed the ground is frozen solid and no infiltration occurs (CN set to 100 for all areas). (6) Water Quality And Volume Control. (a) Activity creating impervious surface shall address the use of Better Site Design (BSD) techniques as outlined in Chapter 4, "Minnesota Stormwater Manual" (MPCA, 2006 and subsequent revisions). Better Site Design involves techniques applied early in the design process to reduce impervious cover, conserve natural areas and use pervious areas to more effectively treat stormwater runoff and promote a treatment train approach to runoff management. (b) Better Site Design principles will be incorporated and water quantity BMPs (as defined in this ordinance) must be incorporated to the following standards: 1. BMP volume must retain the one -year event by providing at least the volume equal to the runoff from a 2.3 -inch, 24 -hour storm over the tributary area within the site under proposed conditions. a. Infiltration BMPs (see City BMP standard plates and design criteria) are to be incorporated in areas with A & B hydrologic soil groups. Stormwater from impervious surfaces other than rooftops must be pretreated before discharge to infiltration BMPs, to remove sediment and floatables, or other materials that would restrict the BMP's capacity or contaminate ground water. b. In the following areas, the volume requirements shall be provided by bio- filtration features or two -cell wetland treatment systems (see City standard plates and design standards): (i) Areas of C or D hydrologic soil groups that cannot be routed by a gravity system to onsite A or B hydrologic soil groups; Areas with a groundwater table within three (3) feet of surface, or otherwise at an elevation that poses a threat of groundwater contamination or renders the infiltration BMP ineffective; (ii) Areas where soil contamination is present or land use history indicates a likely threat of soil contamination. (c) In addition to the BMPs required under (6)(b), volume control measures are required reducing runoff by at least the volume from 0.5- inches of rainfall over impervious surfaces on the site (0.5 -inch multiplied by impervious area). Volume reduction required under this paragraph may be achieved only by the following measures: Reestablishment of Effectively Drained Wetlands and Floodplain Meadows Upland Restoration/Conservation, Restoration of Degraded Wetlands, Impervious Disconnection, Soil Amendments /Tilling. Volume Reduction Measures Volume Calculation Reestablishment of Effectively Drained Wetlands and Floodplain Meadows 1.0" x surface area (ac) for floodplain meadows and seasonally flooded, scrub shrub, and forested wetlands 0.5" x surface area (ac) for fully vegetated Type 2 and 3 wetlands Upland Restoration/Conservation 0.85" x surface area (ac) Restoration of Degraded Wetlands 0.25" x surface area (ac) Impervious Disconnection Up to 0.5" x disconnected P101 • • • • impervious area (ac) Soil Amendments /Tilling 0.3" x surface area amended (ac) (d) The proposed activity may not reduce hydraulic efficiency of the drainage - ways at any point upgradient of the applicant's parcel boundary. (e) The property owner must record a declaration, or a public owner execute a maintenance agreement, that prohibits plowed snow storage in a location from which runoff will be conveyed without adequate pretreatment (minimum of 25 feet of overland drainage on grassland or other rough vegetated surface to trap flow) or sheet flow directly into a wetland. This requirement does not apply to snow removed from public roadways. (f) Soil amendment, excavation or filling pursuant to development may not impede groundwater flow so as to create a substantial risk of loss of function to any wetland. (g) The runoff volume infiltration/detention standard of paragraph (b) is modified for public linear (roadway, sidewalk and trail) projects not part of an industrial, commercial, institutional or residential development. Public linear projects shall meet the requirements of the Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) or Vadnais Lakes Area Water Management Organization (VLAWMO) as applicable. (7) Peak Stormwater Runoff Control. Stormwater runoff rates for the proposed project at the site boundary, in aggregate, must not exceed existing runoff rates for the critical two -year and 100 -year frequency events. Any increase in a critical event rate at a specific point of discharge from the site must be limited and cause no adverse down gradient impact. The following curve numbers shall be utilized for existing condition modeling of those site areas not covered by impervious surface in the existing condition: Curve Numbers for Use with Existing Condition Pervious Areas Hydrologic Soil Group Runoff Curve Number* A 39 B 61 C 74 D 80 * Curve numbers from USDA -NRCS, Technical Release 55 (8) Design Criteria (a) Infiltration BMPs must be designed to provide: 1. Adequate pretreatment /sediment fore bays shall be provided before discharge of runoff to the primary infiltration area(s) or pond inlet(s) to capture sediment for ease of maintenance activity; P102 2. Drawdown within 48 -hours or 72 -hours from the end of a storm event, for surface or sub - surface features, respectively. Soil infiltration rates shall be based on the appropriate HSG classification and associated infiltration rates (see Table 1 in Appendix A). Infiltration area will be limited to the horizontal areas subject to prolonged wetting; and 3. A minimum of three feet of separation from the seasonal high water table. 4. Design and placement in accordance with the Minnesota Department of Health guidance called "Evaluating Proposed Stormwater Infiltration Projects in Vulnerable Wellhead Protection Areas." (b) Permanent sedimentation and water quality ponds must be designed to provide: 1. Water quality features consistent with NURP criteria and City wet pond criteria; 2. A permanent wet pool with dead storage at least equal to the runoff from a 2.5 -inch rainfall over the area tributary to the pond; and 3. An outlet structure capable of preventing migration of floating debris and oils for at least the one -year storm. (c) Detention basins must be designed to provide: 1. An outlet structure to control the 2 -year & 100 -year frequency events to existing peak runoff sites; and 2. An identified overflow spillway sufficiently stabilized to convey flows greater than the 100 -year critical storm event. (d) An outfall structure discharging to a wetland, public water or public water wetland must incorporate a stilling- basin, surge - basin, energy dissipater, placement of ungrouted natural rock riprap or other feature to minimize disturbance and erosion of natural shoreline and bed resulting from stormwater discharges. (e) All new residential, commercial, industrial and other habitable or non - habitable structures, and all stormwater basins, must be constructed so that the lowest floor and lowest entry elevations of structures comply with the following table: P103 • Local Detention Regional Basins & Rain- Ground Elevations Wetlands Infiltration Basins gardens Water • • P104 Elevation 100yr EOF 100yr EOF Bottom 100yr EOF EOF Bottom Low Floor Freeboard 2 -ft 1 -ft 0 -ft NA 0 -ft NA NA NA 4 -ft Low Entry Freeboard NA NA 2 -ft 1 -ft NA 2 -ft 1 -ft 0.5 -ft NA Within a landlocked basin, lowest floor elevations must be at least one foot above the surveyed basin overflow elevation. Where a structure is proposed below the runout elevation of a land- locked basin, the low -floor elevation will be a minimum of two feet above the high water level as determined from an estimate of high water levels determined from the highest of either the 100 -year, ten -day runoff event or back -to -back 100 -year, 24 -hour rainfalls. Aerial photos, vegetation, soils, and topography will be used to derive a "normal" water elevation for the basin for the purpose of computing the 100 - year elevation. (f) All stormwater management structures and facilities must be designed for maintenance access and properly maintained in perpetuity to assure that they continue to function as designed. (g) Before work under the permit is deemed complete, as- builts must be submitted demonstrating that at the time of final stabilization, stormwater facilities conform to design specifications. (9) Drainage And Utility Easements (a) If a stormwater management plan involves direction of some or all runoff off of the site, it shall be the responsibility of the applicant to obtain from adjacent property owners any necessary easements or other property interests concerning flowage of water. (b) Easements are required for all stormwater management facilities, stormwater conveyances and on -site floodplain and shall extend a minimum of 10 feet beyond the basin's 100 -year storm high water level elevation. (c) Easements are required for all outlet swales and ditches, and for overland overflow routes located downstream of basins located on site. (d) If the storm sewer is to be installed less than 10 feet deep within private property, the easement shall be a minimum of 20 feet wide. If the storm sewer is 10 feet or greater, the easement shall be twice as wide as the depth. (e) Easements necessary for maintenance vehicle access are required for all of the above where not directly available on a public road. (10) Exceptions. (a) Rate control criteria of section 1011.09 (7) may be waived if the site discharges directly to a water body with large storage capacity (such as a public water) that has a time -to -peak elevation greater than that for an on -site pond and the volume discharged from the on -site pond is negligible, relative to the volume of runoff entering the water body. 1011.10 INSPECTIONS AND MAINTENANCE (1) Inspections. The applicant is responsible for inspections and record keeping in accordance with the NPDES Permit requirements. The City shall conduct inspections on a regular basis to ensure that both stormwater and erosion and sediment control measures are properly installed and maintained prior to construction, during construction, and at the completion of the project. In all cases the inspectors will attempt to work with the applicant or developer to maintain proper stormwater management. Mandatory inspections, conducted by the city, are required as follows: (a) Before any land disturbing activity begins; (b) Five (5) working days after footing inspections; (c) At the completion of the project; and (d) Prior to the release of financial securities. (2) Post - Construction Inspection and Maintenance of Stormwater Facilities. (a) Private Stormwater Facilities. No private stormwater facility may be approved unless a maintenance agreement is provided that defines who will conduct maintenance, the type of maintenance, and the maintenance intervals. All private Stormwater facilities shall be inspected by the owner and maintained in proper condition consistent with the performance standards for which they were originally designed. 1. Facility Access. Access to all stormwater facilities must be inspected annually and maintained as necessary. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to obtain any necessary easements or other property interests to allow access to the facilities for inspection or maintenance for both the responsible party and the City. 2. Maintenance. All settled materials from ponds, sumps, grit chambers, and other devices, including settled solids, shall be removed and properly disposed of once capacity is reduced by 30 %. 3. Inspection. All private stormwater facilities must submit an as -built record plan of the facility and must provide documentation to the City of an inspection during construction, during the first year of operation, and at least once every five years P105 • • • • thereafter. Private facilities are subject to City inspection at any time to ensure compliance. • (b) Public Stormwater Facilities 1. Acceptance of Publicly Owned Facilities Before work under the permit is deemed complete, as- builts and certification must be submitted demonstrating at the time of final stabilization that the stormwater facilities conform to design specifications. A final inspection shall be required before the City accepts ownership of the stormwater facilities. 2. Inventory of Stormwater Facilities. The City shall inventory and maintain a database for all public stormwater facilities within the City requiring maintenance to ensure compliance with this ordinance. 3. Maintenance. The City shall perform maintenance of publicly owned stormwater facilities within the City as provided for in the local surface water management plan. 1011.11 PLAN REVIEW PROCEDURE (1) Plan Review. The applicant shall not commence any construction activity subject to this ordinance until the Stormwater Management plan and /or the Grading, Erosion and Sediment Control plan have been approved by the City. The submittal shall be processed in accordance with Section 2 of the Zoning Ordinance or Section 1011.00 of City Code as applicable. City approval is contingent on issuance of all other permits required by the City or other agencies having jurisdiction on the project. The following standards shall apply to all developments within the City: (2) Plan Approval. If the City determines that the stormwater management plan and /or the Grading, Erosion and Sediment Control plan meets the requirements of this ordinance, the City shall issue a plan approval valid for a specified period of time that authorizes the land disturbance activity contingent on the implementation and completion of this plan. (3) Plan Denial. If the City determines that the plan does not meet the requirements of this ordinance, the City shall not issue plan approval for the land disturbance activity. This plan must be resubmitted for approval before the land disturbance activity begins. All land use and building permits shall be suspended until the developer has an approved ESC or Stormwater Management permit. (4) Modification of Plan. The applicant must amend the plan as necessary to include additional requirements such as additional or modified BMPs designed to correct problems identified or address situations whenever: P106 (a) A change in design, construction, operation, maintenance, weather, or seasonal conditions that has a significant effect on the discharge or pollutants to surface waters or underground waters (b) Inspections or investigations indicate the plans are not effective in eliminating or significantly minimizing the discharge or pollutants to surface waters or underground waters or that the discharges are causing water quality degradation; or (c) The plan is not achieving the general objectives of minimizing pollutants in stormwater discharges associated with construction activity; or (d) The plan is not consistent with the terms and conditions of this ordinance. 1011.12 FINANCIAL SECURITIES The applicant shall be subject to the financial security provisions of the City of Lino Lakes Development Agreement, Site Improvement Performance Agreement and/or the Lino Lakes Public Improvement Financing Policy, as applicable. 1011.13 ENFORCEMENT (1) Notification of Failure of the Permit. The City shall notify the permit holder of the failure of the permit's measures. (a) Initial Contact. The initial contact will be to the party or parties listed on the application and/or the SWPPP as contacts. Except during an emergency action, forty - eight (48) hours after notification by the City or seventy -two (72) hours after the failure of erosion and sediment control measures, whichever is less, the City at its discretion may begin corrective work. Such notification should be in writing, but if it is verbal, a written notification should follow as quickly as practical. If after making a good faith effort to notify the responsible party or parties, the City has been unable to establish contact, the City may proceed with corrective work. There are conditions when time is of the essence in controlling erosion. During such a condition the City may take immediate action and then notify the applicant as soon as possible. (b) Emergency Action. If circumstances exist such that non - compliance with this ordinance poses an immediate danger to the public health, safety and welfare, as determined by the city, the city may take emergency preventative action. The city shall also take every reasonable action possible to contact and direct the applicant to take any necessary action. Any cost to the city may be recovered from the applicant's financial security. (c) Erosion Off Site. If erosion breaches the perimeter of the site, the applicant shall clean up and repair or supplement with functional BMPs within 24 hours of discovery or immediately as conditions allow. If, in the discretion of the City, the permit holder does not repair the damage caused by the erosion, the City may do the P107 • • • • • • remedial work required and charge the cost to the applicant. When restoration to wetlands and other resources are required, the applicant shall be required to work with the appropriate agency to ensure that the work is done properly. (d) Erosion Into Streets, Wetlands, or Water Bodies. If eroded soils (including tracked soils from construction activities) enter or appear likely to enter streets, wetlands, or other water bodies, cleanup and repair shall be immediate. The applicant shall provide all traffic control and flagging required to protect the traveling public during the cleanup operations. (e) Failure to do Corrective Work. When an applicant fails to conform to any provision of this policy within the time stipulated, the City may take the following actions: 1. Issue a stop work order, withhold the scheduling of inspections, and /or the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 2. Revoke any permit issued by the City to the applicant for the site in question or any other of the applicant's sites within the City's jurisdiction. 3. Correct the deficiency or hire a contractor to correct the deficiency. 4. Require reimbursement to the City for all costs incurred in correcting stormwater pollution control deficiencies. If payment is not made within thirty (30) days after costs are incurred by the City, payment will be made from the applicant's financial securities as described above. 5. If there is an insufficient financial amount in the applicant's financial securities as described above, then the City may assess the remaining amount against the property. As a condition of the permit, the owner shall waive notice of any assessment hearing to be conducted by the City, concur that the benefit to the property exceeds the amount of the proposed assessment, and waive all rights by virtue of Minnesota Statute 429.081 to challenge the amount or validity of assessment. (2) Enforcement. The City shall be responsible for enforcing this ordinance. (a) Penalties - Any person, firm, or corporation failing to comply with or violating any of these regulations shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and be subject to a fine or imprisonment or both. All land use and building permits shall be suspended until the applicant has corrected the violation. Each day that a separate violation exists shall constitute a separate offense. (b) Right -of -Entry and Inspection. P108 1. Powers. The issuance of a permit constitutes a right -of -entry for the City or its contractor to enter upon the construction site. The applicant shall allow the City and their authorized representatives, upon presentation of credentials, to: 2. Enter upon the permitted site for the purpose of obtaining information, examination of records, conducting investigations or surveys. 3. Bring such equipment upon the permitted site as is necessary to conduct such surveys and investigations. 4. Examine and copy any books, papers, records, or memoranda pertaining to activities or records required to be kept under the terms and conditions of the permitted site. 5. Inspect the stormwater pollution control measures. 6. Sample and monitor any items or activities pertaining to stormwater pollution control measures. 7. Correcting deficiencies in stormwater and erosion and sediment control measures. 1011.14 SEVERABILITY. The provisions of this ordinance are severable, and if any provisions of this ordinance or application of any provision of this ordinance to any circumstance are held invalid, the application of such provision to other circumstances and the remainder of this ordinance must not be affected thereby. 1011.15 ABROGATION AND GREATER RESTRICTIONS. In the event of any conflict between the provisions of this chapter and the provisions of any other City ordinance adopted by the City Council, the more restrictive standard prevails. P109 • • • • • Appendix A Table 1 Hydrologic Soil Group .. Sol l Textures* Corresponding Unified Soil Classification ** . ' Infiltration Rate [inches/hour] 1.6 A Gravel, sand, sandy gravel, silty gravel, loamy sand, sandy loam GW — Well- graded gravel or well - graded gravel with sand GP — Poorly graded gravel or poorly graded gravel with sand GM — Silty gravel or silty gravel with sand SW — Well- graded sand or well- graded sand with gravel SP — Poorly graded sand or poorly graded sand with gravel 0 8 B Loam, silt loam SM — Silty sand or silty sand with gravel 0.6 ML — Silt OL — Organic silt or organic silt with sand or gravel or gravelly organic silt 0.3 C Sandy clay loam GC — Clayey gravel or clayey gravel with sand SC — Clayey sand or clayey sand with gravel 0.2 D Clay, clay loam, silty clay loam, sandy clay, silty clay CL — Lean clay or lean clay with sand or gravel or gravelly lean clay CH — Fat clay or fat clay with sand or gravel or gravelly fat clay OH — Organic clay or organic clay with sand or gravel or gravelly organic clay MH — Elastic silt or elastic silt with sand or gravel < 0.2 Source: Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Minnesota Stormwater Manual. Thirty guidance manuals and many other stormwater references were reviewed by the MPCA when it compiled the recommended infiltration rates. All of these sources use the following studies as the basis for their recommended infiltration rates: Rawls, Brakensiek and Saxton (1982); Rawls, Gimenez and Grossman (1998); Bouwer and Rice (1984); and Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds (NRCS). The rates presented in this infiltration table use the information compiled from these sources as well as eight years of infiltration rates collected from various infiltration practices in the South Washington Watershed District. * U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, 2005. National Soil Survey Handbook, title 430 -VI. (Online) Available: http: / /soils.usda.gov /technical /handbook /. ** ASTM standard D2487 -00 P110 Section 2. Effective Date This ordinance shall be in force and effect from and after its passage and publication according to the Lino Lakes City Charter. Jeff Reinert, Mayor Attest: Julianne Bartell, City Clerk Adopted by the Lino Lakes City Council this day of , 2011. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing ordinance was duly seconded by Council Member and upon a vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: The following voted against same: Whereupon said ordinance was declared duly passed and adopted. P111 • • • • • • AGENDA ITEM 6.B. ii STAFF ORIGINATOR: Marty Asleson CC MEETING DATE: March 28, 2011 TOPIC: Resolution Number 11 -37 Summary of Ordinance 09 -11 for publication purposes VOTE: BACKGROUND 4/5 The City Council approved the first reading of this ordinance on Marchl4, 2011, and the second reading of the ordinance is on this agenda as item 6.0 (.1.) Since the ordinance is lengthy, and publication in the newspaper is required, the city may adopt a resolution that summarizes the ordinance for publication purposes. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of Resolution Number 37 -11, to summarize Ordinance Number 09 -11 for publication purposes. ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution 11 -37 2. Proposed Summary P112 Council Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: CITY OF LINO LAKES RESOLUTION NO. 11 -37 RESOLUTION APPROVING A SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. 09 -11 FOR PUBLICATION WHEREAS, the City Council has approved the first and second reading of Ordinance No. 09 -11, establishing City Code Section 1011 Regulating Construction Site Erosion and Sediment Control and Post Construction Stormwater Management. WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 09 -11 is lengthy and MN Statute 412.191 provides for a city to publish a summary of an ordinance, and WHEREAS, the City Council determines that the summary clearly informs the public of the intent and effect of the ordinance, and WHEREAS, the publication in the official newspaper will include a notice that a full printed copy of the ordinance is available at City Hall. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the City Council approves the summary in Attachment A for publication according to state law and the City Charter. Passed by the Lino Lakes City Council this 28th day of March 2011. Jeff Reinert, Mayor ATTEST: Julie Bartell, City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Council Member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: The following voted against same: Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. P113 • • • • • ATTACHMENT A, RESOLUTION 09 -11 CITY OF LINO LAKES COUNTY OF ANOKA SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. 09 -11 AN ORDINANCE Regulating Construction Site Erosion and Sediment Control and Post Construction Stormwater Management The purpose for establishing Chapter 1011 of the City Code is to Regulate Construction Site Erosion and Sediment Control and Post Construction Stormwater Management Section 1011.01 Establishes statutory authorization for ordinance 09 -11. Section 1011.02 Presents findings. Section 1011.03 Defines a purpose for Chapter 1011. Section 1011.04 Lists definitions. Section. 1011.05 Describes applicability. Section 1011.06 Lists exemptions. Section 1011.07 Cites technical reference. Section 1011.08 Defines grading, erosion and sediment control requirements. Section 1011.09 Defines stormwater management requirements. Section 1011.10 Defines inspection and maintenance requirements. Section 1011.11 Establishes plan review procedures. Section 1011 12 Defines financial procedures. Section 1011.13 Describes enforcement procedures. Section 1011.14 Establishes a severability clause for the ordinance. Section 1011.15 Establishes abrogation and greater restriction for the ordinance. Passed by the Lino Lakes City Council on March 28, 2011. This is a summary of the adopted ordinance. A full printed copy of the ordinance is available at City Hall. P114 • • STAFF ORIGINATOR: CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: TOPIC: ACTION REQUIRED: BACKGROUND AGENDA ITEM 6C Michael Grochala March 28, 2011 Consideration of Resolution No. 11 -38 Accepting Corridor Study Report and Recommendations, CSAH 34 (Birch Street) Corridor Study Simple Majority The 2008 -2009 Council Goals, Objectives and Management Action Plan included the objective to "Initiate an Access Management Plan for Birch Street (CSAH 34) that includes provisions for pedestrian and bicycle safety improvements ". Additionally, the city received a petition in early 2008 requesting improvements to the Ware Road and Birch Street intersection. In response the City Council approved Resolution No. 08 -34, directing staff to work with Anoka County on a corridor study and incorporate the Ware /Birch intersection. In April of 2009 the council passed Resolution No. 09 -21 entering into a Joint Powers Agreement with Anoka County to prepare a Corridor Study for Birch Street. In April of 2010 the council discussed the draft report and expressed concerns regarding the ultimate plan which proposed a four lane divided (raised median) roadway. The council noted that short term improvements that balanced safety with convenience would be more appropriate. Over the past year city staff has worked with Anoka County and SRF Consulting Group to incorporate the City Council's comments into the final draft report. The project team has worked to develop a staged approach to improvements that can be implemented as conditions warrant. A decision on the implementation of raised medians will be deferred by the county and city until the impact of other improvements are understood and actual future needs are more defined. A copy of the executive summary is attached which includes a table identifying proposed improvements, triggers and estimated costs. The draft report recommendations were reviewed by the council on March 7, 2011. RECOMMENDATION Staff is recommending approval of Resolution No. 11 -38 ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution No. 11 -38 2. CSAH 34 Corridor Study Executive Summary P116 • • • • Council Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: CITY OF LINO LAKES RESOLUTION NO. 11 -38 RESOLUTION ACCEPTING CORRIDOR STUDY REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS CSAH 34 (BIRCH STREET) CORRIDOR STUDY WHEREAS, Anoka County and the City of Lino Lakes have long exhibited concern for the safety of the corridor along CSAH 34 (Birch Street) from CSAH 49 to CR 54, in the City of Lino Lakes; and WHEREAS, the County and the City entered into a Joint Powers Agreement to conduct a study of the corridor and develop recommendations for the improvement of the corridor; and WHEREAS, SRF Consulting Group Inc. has completed said study. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA: 111111 1. that the City Council hereby accepts the CSAH 34 (Birch Street) report, dated March 2011, and the recommendations contained therein. Jeff Reinert, Mayor Julianne Bartell, City Clerk Adopted by the Lino Lakes City Council this 28th day of May, 2011. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Council Member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: The following voted against same: Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. • P117 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CSAH 34 CORRIDOR STUDY NEEDS, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES A. Public Input There were many opportunities for public participation throughout the study process. This input was recorded, shared with the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), and incorporated into the corridor improvement plan. The following list is a summary of the key public input received early in the study process: Consensus on Needs • CSAH 34 is experiencing high levels of congestion during the peak periods. • It can be difficult to access CSAH 34 from intersecting roadways (Ware Road, West Shadow Lake Drive, CSAH 21, etc.). • Vehicular safety is an important concern and there is a need for short-term improvements (e.g., left turn lanes, traffic signals, bypass lanes). • Pedestrian and bicycle safety is a concern; many residents feel that there should be more pedestrian trails along and safe crossings of CSAH 34. • There is support for minimizing impacts to natural resources within the corridor. B. Recommended Corridor Improvements and Implementation Strategies Four roadway and trail alternatives were prepared and evaluated during the course of the corridor study. These alternatives were developed to accommodate projected future traffic volumes in order to ensure mobility, improve safety, and coordinate improvements with development. The recommended improvements address the needs and issues identified during the planning process (see Figure 1 for plan recommendations). Stakeholder in general, supported most of the TAC's corridor improvement recommendations, including the following: • Traffic signals should be constructed at Ware Road and West Shadow Lake Drive when warranted. It is anticipated that future signals will also be needed at Black Duck Drive, CSAH 21 and CSAH 54. • Raised medians are appropriate at signalized locations with turn lanes. • Turn lanes should be provided at major intersections to separate through and turning traffic (painted or channelized, as appropriate). • Modification or elimination of access should be considered as opportunities arise. • The county's access and intersection spacing guidelines should be used in new development areas and as property redevelops. • Frontage and backage roads should be constructed as development occurs to support local traffic and to manage access onto CSAH 34. • A four -lane roadway on CSAH 34 between CSAH 49 and Black Duck Drive is needed to accommodate both existing and future traffic volumes. A two -lane roadway between P118 • • • • • Black Duck Drive and CSAH 54 will serve both existing and future traffic volumes if access is managed according to county guidelines. • A two -lane divided roadway (with raised medians) from CSAH 21 to CSAH 54 is recommended, since the undeveloped nature of the area provides an opportunity to incorporate county access spacing into future development. • Trail system improvements on both sides of the CSAH 34 corridor are recommended along with crossings of CSAH 34 at signalized intersections. • Limited landscaping /streetscaping may be appropriate in select locations along the corridor. It should be noted that the Lino Lakes City Council expressed concern and a lack of support for a four -lane divided roadway, due to potential property impacts. However, raised medians were considered appropriate at some locations, such as signalized intersections. Based on current and forecasted corridor conditions, it is recommended that any major reconstruction of the CSAH 34 corridor consider raised medians in its design, if it is to achieve maximum safety and mobility benefits. However, a decision on the implementation of raised medians will be deferred by the county and city until the impact of other improvements are understood and actual future needs (traffic and/or land use development) are more defined. The recommended corridor improvements for CSAH 34 were developed based on projected future (2030) conditions and it is likely that improvements will be implemented as safety and operational needs dictate, and as funding becomes available. Therefore, the corridor recommendations are framed as conceptual improvements that can be implemented over time, as opportunities arise, and/or conditions along the corridor require. As noted on Table 1, some of the proposed improvements have clear thresholds as to when they should be implemented (e.g., traffic signals) and some are more subjective (e.g., bicycle /pedestrian and/or streetscape). Implementation of improvements without clear thresholds to trigger the project will be based on apparent need, as mutually agreed upon between the county and the city. P119 ESTIMATED COST $250,000 to $1.0 million per intersection Minimal cost for roadway section $5.0 million per mile $100,000 to $500,000 per turn lane Varies dependent on Access Management Strategy See costs above for traffic signal and turn lane improvements. Minimal cost for roadway delineation $160,000 per mile for trail, $185,000 to $1.0 million for pedestrian underpass Varies depending on level of streetscape desired TRIGGER - Development - Traffic /safety issues - Minnesota Mannaul on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MMUTCD) Warrants - Availability of Funding - Mn/DOT sets speeds limits on state and local roadways. - Monitor speeds and request a Mn/DOT speed study when the difference between posted and the 85th percentile speeds approach 10 mph. - Consider additional lane in each direction along CSAH 34 when traffic volumes reach 10 to 12,000 vehicles per day. - Traffic volumes - Safety/crash experience - Sight distance - Development/redevelopment - Safety/crash experience - Congestion - Safety/crash experience - Development - In conjunction with other planned roadway or trail improvements - Availability of funding - In conjunction with other planned roadway or trail improvements - Availability of funding LOCATION CSAH 34 Intersections with: • CSAH 49 • Ware Road • West Shadow Lake Drive • Black Duck Drive • CSAH 21 • CSAH 54 Western Segment of Corridor (West of Black Duck Drive) Western Segment of Corridor (West of Black Duck Drive) Major Intersections along Corridor as Development Occurs Entire Corridor CSAH 34 Intersections with: • CSAH 49 • Ware Road • S -Curve (Deerwood Ln - E. Shadow Lk. Court) Entire Corridor Entire Corridor (with emphasis areas at Ware Road and CSAH 21) 1 DESCRIPTION Traffic Signal Improvements (Includes new and revised signals) Posted Speed Limit Modifications Capacity Improvements: Additional Lanes (Through Lanes) Turn Lanes (Left and Right) Improvements Access Management Strategies Safety Improvement Strategies • Traffic Signal Improvements • Turn Lane Improvements • Improved Roadway Delineation Bicycle/Pedestrian Trail Improvements Streetscape Improvements P120 • • • (0 (D Recommended Corridor Plan J.1M n1FIgureslFgureO/ RemmmendedConidorP6n.mTd ..4, .4 , fr.....‘ 1 ' ' 4* . 4. 1 I . . , ., 'ir:i'4' . I. . - , ..',V . * . -.., . . t .,,41.`f. . _ ., - +, ,. , . , _ . „ . . • - T,-.L1 ' ' •••"'',. ",'"---1. - it.4 ic• t - : ' - r • 4 . - t . ,. . r - : : L , , 47, -"::'-'"' - . ' ' tAr ' 1-fr.1 k . ; •''' lir ',,,,,i -'' '''''‘ ' : 1 r: rr - , orr, , . , . , 1 . , , ,,_ . 7; 7-`` - ^Irfrl '''. •'." '' -' i t .-...' ' - .•." -4'11,/' , ,4 „-- A _ . , , ,.. ,.• ,i.,,,. , ..„ . ,,. ,,.., t ,,, ,, ,. - •..,..,...,. , , - •, f f 1.1 ri ' , " ' ' -' '.:1' ' '..' ''''', ..1.: n' ;. - 0, i _,, ; , , - , „ :,:,...,7_____. ,,,,,g1:..., .,.;; ,.. ,. . , . „, , ,,, ir-4,:, t ti A:it ' . "0 .,” ' ,/ - tr-4; cie <.r- ' ' r „t• ' r . 1101." .,,,, '`'. , 4-- . 0 - ,. ":0, 1, ,A , - ../4/,=.14- ' ' p • 1 .04' .>. "... 1 .2.'1' ' i c?-- N. ..- ., , 4 :1 '..--cs..e" .:. '' , .,",'"A;,'' - .- _,..,, -,. I f,,-- ... - ,-,,- - , ,.... : . r . . ' 7-- zz''' ..,,r -r, *, : t ' t*. - -- il - ,- , -.. 0 - A . ), . cc -, ..„.- ,..., . . .t, , -,, „- -,s,v, ,-.- ' , , _ r. z.. -. '. - . , _ ..., 24 4,1' ' ,a,,..i. J -4, ,, . , I •,:k, / „„ r, t re- .1,-.1*--"; • - -, ..,_ v, , 41 ''`.1,0 4- 4, • - 'y RP E Iv- % • "„\----,, - 41W- '''' ' 0,- ',' -., ,,,''' ,.* .11:" A $4 ,, i'.. 7,. ,..Y -P4RKVVY ' • 7 ''' ,.. , -1*- ' - \-,4" - * --ku4. , At 1'6° ."" ' • '4 ' ' )1 ' ist ' : 1,-7 ,,,,' -0 „••• -,ST-W7 ' ' . -A , 0.-i.i. ,- , ., ..„.- ..., . , '"4 - - -='"` '..-- *r" .- 4 ■Y ''- ,I ,,, r• ,` ' ... r '''''-' 44 '' • ' t '.." ' ,'.".tt;••••:,.. I +Cr t 1 (.. 'Ittr■ 41 ' '' tt 7-,..'" ' '--:"....'' ''Itr. - " '' 4.44" 4. :.- ".." - ' ' l',:4'''"--1;-• - , , ' '''-' -`" = <4" '` '. St, , . ' fir 4, , ', 4., I ,..,, ,„, -", f ,, r,&• ak ' , 1 , ,41' -- r- ; . . - ,.' ., ' p , __,•,;,,,- ,,,A,,,,,4,51?-; '.---, ' - ,, ,. 2t •'"' 'el4 ''')5. • ' ' - ...... ri- . ,,r ‘.., , . I . a :- ....,,,,, Jr , ... Mk i • `I r Z's -,r"" ,- < t. ' '' .fdr",10 ra.-•*4,4r.'=" -5'`'''`Y,14,--47,A•ge - - ."":' ' , -- ,,r.. - ibr,t, . ' ._r• , ",. •-, . N':' . ' - . ..rt . - •,- , - ,,,,,'.1,7,4!„.4.„•.,.. e ' `,4,'..,..v.r.„ ''.. - ' e-:= n - --... Nto- I •t; ' w! - , ,ti, -„, 1- --,,, ,' ' 1 r ';, 1 ° ' '° " ...-1' '11:-. ' ' , - 4,- .. u_ ---- T ,-,----,..,-.,-, i T-• -, ' ,,. ":‘,. , ""•• -. r - -.: - - ''.! 4' ' ' , I < 1 11'. 1 I • 5. tA34; 1 ''' • -7.r-::: ;'4•4;< -...r.,.., .r 4. -,,-,.,-.,..- . . r- r - - ' =-c- .-,,-,.7-..,- -7,, ' . ,,.,› ,.. .„:-.. -' -‘, Aii--„, '- --4 i. \-- , •-. A4 0 ' , ii, - ■ _, , -- . ' .4..if „.• ,.„ , tzfit.- __-- -.. ----; 4,-- ... ` ` t C - ' • ` ' . . . ... nrn- .<14_, „pHEASA14711; ' .< A .... ,. • . . ei FTST '-\::' op'' 'e* • . e t ‘4:,f, • ,L,..,, _ 411.1: ‘,. " - lt,' , Ili(1) BIRCH et -. 1 • 44 " - ' 4,, -• `'''' .', ' ,t'`'' • - ,,,,„=', hi' ' „, ,;""4, ,..'::- 1.' ,_ , '..40 - : :• - , 4 3 lir' ei• MN " I > ma ... *C ye 'tc,, ' ' , , '''''''' k - '-'r.'-' ' --''' ''''''''' '''*4; ." ' 1) it,:^' : ' ; ''' '''' ' if: ' ' 4P0 .`..,46.°` '''' . ' ' "Ir'' ' -7: 11:11111100 , : ' i'' : , . -, I' co ' ' 'a ' 1t2 , ' 4.1.1174.0,1„,"' • . ,tztr '' • ' CS1. ,..' ,. , '' - _ ' - f., 1 t. ‘4",,,..1 F k 7 - '- •" ' ' -1116,j * ' ' ' . t ' '0•• ' V' ' 1 'r 41' ill . -r(6"` T : ` ,_ ,.. .,. r •-, . ' t,', ' : . • ...,‘ ' ',... , r. k 4 ",„<„,•_.,.. „ _ ' v._ ,,,,.. ,..........r . , , ._. ... ."4„ . ••,. Lt...1 > „NM, - 0 " -..., *-* „1.... ';t.,. ... ..;-' e rvi i , - „....r, __I ` • . .„ ' . +1, ..- , i ' ' ' ::.o. ' - ' '.... ; - r ' ..^ 1 ' . ' 4 ,;,.. ,C.' ''''' . 4A ` A '-' ,--- - r N A ' ''' Nr`. - - 4'- ' ; I ' . / ' = P- '-' • : :. 14:1) II' ' ' ' .• • - 4/, ” - V-1..- ' ;,.`r7",..4.7 ilk I • i Ni ile .. II : a • ..6 . Ar. r -', "7' 4. ''.. ''''' * *". •FP' ' • • '• S. ' "e' , 1 ' ' iZ / I-, ' - -•.• iltr 1 i -• -0- tr `,....P Ft.*. - -.. ,;."14 , ---5. . :1.;„ ' ....,, ll■ .. MIL- or ' - ' , - . . ' - ' .f. OR E ".... ' ir , 4: ,r- . .. - - . . - . , ,,,. ‘ ° e ' 0 . < ' ' H LLY . ., „. ., ,-, A - - ' - ,, 'r'• '• - ' " 0 ., ri' -•$•'*, ''''.. r ' r ) • - ...: -. - • ,-, • . , '''' * -- - ,._ , ' „ - - ,i,,,„ j -. ..k:,`,RD •.'- *, - ° '''' - - ..,,,:,,, - '. • Twr ' - _ , _._ ,..... ;7, , 441,,,, •,-..,...,,,... „:.--..44:‘, ..., is , . 4 -ow' ...„ y,- -i-:`'"'' "4 - : ' ,- 5- - . - - f 1,4 1, :410. 0 *„.." ' **A•i;! - , ' "It''=„L!..-A",i'...i"- -. 3'-‘,.....e, -4-- •,.' , _ - -- - '' -, ' 4„, . . ...„,,,...., RED 't c'T E ii T -'' -7...-,-.404 - -- ---1-....„0-4 79 Future Existing/Proposed TFour wo uo r- - LLaanu:i l R_RAoocaImprovement acddewswsaaySignal ,*t` '. AdyIntersection _.r. Locations Where Loca . , ' . f Way is Needed ' Right-of-Way - 14 „ ""' "'-'' -*.•IL" -""4"4-- '''• 4, "?'",4 - , c .. ' • . .‘.... , ,. , f , ' ill j - % - . dn i jt t ei or sn ea ei t Sites i o n * "...too"), - -- .• *-1?!, -!-... vc*,' A. w-- .-.-m•--- -'`'`' ' . . , , - . . " - .! Roadways , , 0.5 , _ . - 0 0 25 pFFouuttteuunrreetiaSafety sAD-d- General Corridor-Vyide. Recommendations , ,, .,,, ,.--' .-: - , , . , -Raised medians at signalized intersections ,.. i I -Turn lanes at major intersections '..- ,,, -- . COUNTYRt - 1 s at signalized intersections -Trails/sidewalks along both sides.ofdth.erd : , . . ".'-' • '', Miles '13 FsiokN 2009 3.1/ 4F-uAt uccreesRsolandt I nil .ikerial- , -Trail/sidewalk crossings ,,,.. . , , ' ' -Limited landscaping/streetscaping ' - ' " - -Access modification/elim.dinnastipoend,iansgguideli opportunities arise .. r -County access/intersecti unnes used for , .... -. -1.1. new development areas ,- -- - A t - ., ,,,. ,,,,,,,.. , _6,_,,,,,5 ,,,, cL r r r e r r Jr. (D O,n , CD a Vi O D % — (D (D C `c V a Q N 7 a O n O o* O 0 (D 0 -p (Daavn, ) fa, 0 m(∎2w0u",3N= 3— .13.O0 v •0 v a,�O200 l _;' a)0(1)—(c)5 (0 = a5 N Et. g . N 0 cr (cD = Q. (n al. (D = .-.* St N N "0 p v (Q 5- Q D a O "a 0 Q- • ('1 =.van F' • v�D, (n (D 2 (Q 0 (D Z (p O a .+ 0 c� 5.� C) CD (D 00 5. Q- CD a) 0 -. .nom.oa O 0 = N (D a) 0 0. .71. O (D 4TI- AVE S OAK 1 JOYERLN 4 C NTERVILLE RDA 20TH AVE S • • • • • AGENDA ITEM 6D STAFF ORIGINATOR: Michael Grochala CITY COUNCIL DATE: TOPIC: March 28, 2011 Consideration of Resolution No. 11 -39 Related to Special Legislation for Tax Increment Financing in the City of Lino Lakes VOTE REQUIRED: 3/5 BACKGROUND: In January staff presented information to the City Council regarding the potential for the City to seek special legislation from the state legislature that would extend the duration of Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 -10 through 2023 and devote the tax increment to payment of debt service on the Legacy at Woods Edge improvements and the 35W interchange. Staff requested permission from the council to pursue this legislation. The council concurred that staff should proceed with pursuing this legislation. Staff has since testified at public hearings at the State Legislature regarding our bills, identified as House File No. 861 and Senate File No. 653. The legislation was incorporated into the House of Representatives Property Tax Division Report and has now been incorporated into the Omnibus Tax Bill. Staff also attended the Anoka County Board meeting in March and the County Board passed a Resolution stating it had no objections to the extension of the TIF district. This Resolution was distributed to the Anoka County legislative delegation. This resolution takes formal action to show City support for the special legislation. RECOMMENDATION Staff is recommending approval of Resolution No. 11 -39 ATTACHMENTS Resolution No. 11 -39 P121 Council Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: CITY OF LINO LAKES COUNTY OF ANOKA RESOLUTION NO. 11 -39 RESOLUTION RELATED TO SPECIAL LEGISLATION FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING IN CITY OF LINO LAKES WHEREAS, the City of Lino Lakes (the "City ") has requested special legislation that would allow the City to extend the duration of its Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 -10 (the "TIF District "), which TIF District would otherwise be required to be decertified at the end of 2013; and WHEREAS, such legislation has been introduced in the House of Representatives as HF No. 861, and in the Senate as SF No. 653 (referred to as the "Special Legislation "); and WHEREAS, the Special Legislation allows the City to extend the duration of the TIF District through 2023, so long as the extended tax increments are applied to pay debt service on bonds that were issued to finance public improvements serving the development known as Legacy at Woods Edge, and bonds issued to finance the interchange of Anoka County Highway 23 and marked Interstate Highway 35W; and WHEREAS, the undeveloped portions of the Legacy at Woods Edge development have been tax forfeited, and the Special Legislation will help the City in efforts to return that property to the tax rolls and create long -term future tax base. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Lino Lakes as follows: 1. The City supports efforts to obtain approval of the Special Legislation in the 2011 legislative session. 2. City staff is authorized and directed to provide copies of this resolution to the County and any appropriate legislative bodies. Approved this , day of , 2011 Jeff Reinert, Mayor P122 • • • ATTEST: Julie Bartell, City Clerk Adopted by the Lino Lakes City Council this 28th day of March, 2011. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Council Member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: The following voted against same: Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. • • P123