HomeMy WebLinkAboutWK - April 22, 2014AN66W
1685 CROSSTOWN BOULtVAKU N.W. • ANDUVtK, MINNtSUTA 55304 • (763) 755 -5100
FAX (763) 755 -8923 • WWW.ANDOVERMN.GOV
City Council Workshop
Tuesday, April 22, 2014
Conference Rooms A & B
1. Call to Order — 6:00 p.m.
2. Discuss City Code Regulating Poultry
3. Discuss Crooked Lake Elementary School Hockey Rink as a CIP Improvement
4. Consider Locations & Layout of Way Finding Signs /14 -16, Cont. - Engineering
5. 2015 -2019 Capital Improvement Plan Development Discussion
6. 2015 Budget Levy Development Discussion
7. 2014 General Fund Budget Progress Report
8. March 2014 City Investment Review
9. Other Business
10. Adjournment
1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W.. ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 • (763) 755 -5100
FAX (763) 755 -8923 • WWW.CI.ANDOVER.MN.US
TO: Mayor and Councilmembers
CC: Jim Dickinson, City Administrator
FROM: David L. Carlberg, Community Deve o ent Director
SUBJECT: Discuss City Code Regulating Poultry
DATE: April 22, 2014
INTRODUCTION
Steve Sachs, 13905 Northwood Drive NW appeared before the City Council on March 18,
2014 during the Resident Forum portion of the agenda requesting the Council consider a
code amendment to allow him to keep poultry (chickens) in his back yard. Council directed
this item be placed on a Council Work Session.
DISCUSSION
City Code 12 -12 allows the keeping of poultry on residential properties without municipal
sewer and water in the R -1, R -2 and R -3 zoning districts as a permitted use. Mr. Sachs'
property is zoned R -4, Single Family Urban and has municipal sanitary sewer. Therefore,
the keeping of poultry is not allowed on his property.
City Council has discussed on a number of occasions the keeping of poultry in urban areas
of the City. Most recently last year when the Andover Backyard Chicken group inquired
about the City's regulations and the process to request an amendment to the code. Council
has consistently supported in the past not allowing poultry in the urban areas of the City.
Staff has attached some recent articles and other resource information for Council
consideration on this topic.
ACTION REQUESTED
Provide direction to staff on how Council would like to proceed.
Re' .LYE lly submitted
David L. Carlberg
Steve Sachs, 13905 Northwood Drive NW, Andover, MN 55304
REGULAR ANDOVER CITY COUNCIL MEETING — MARCH 18, 2014
MINUTES
The Regular Bi- Monthly Meeting of the Andover City Council was called to order by Mayor Mike
Gamache, March 18, 2014, 7:00 p.m., at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW,
Andover, Minnesota.
Councilmembers present: Mike Knight, Sheri Bukkila, Julie Trude and Tony Howard
Councilmember absent: None
Also present: City Administrator, Jim Dickinson
Community Development Director, Dave Carlberg
Assistant Public Works Director, Todd Haas
City Attorneyn Scott Baumgartner
Others
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
RESIDENT FORUM
Steven Sachs, 13905 Northwood Drive NW, stated he was before the meeting to request a zoning
variance on his lot which would allow him to raise five chickens. He stated he has a half acre with a
well. He noted he is willing to pay for a permit or get a letter from his neighbors stating they are in
favor of the variance. Mayor Gamache stated the process to actually ask for a variance begins with
staff. Mr. Sachs stated he talked to staff and they told him to come before the Council.
Mr'. Carlberg stated this might be more of a request to amend City Code than a variance request to
allow chickens. Mr. Sachs noted other cities in Minnesota that allow chickens and thought the City
discussed this several years ago. Councilmember Trude stated they did with the Agricultural and
Farm Zoning and felt these were the areas chickens should be allowed.
Mr. Carlberg reviewed with the Council previous discussions that he was aware of.
Councilmember Bukkila stated she has had this issue brought to her in the past and in terms of
changes, they do start at the Council level but usually she would ask groups of people how they feel
about the idea of having chickens in their neighborhood and repeatedly there is an absolute no from
those she talks to. She stated because of that, she does not have interest in supporting this or moving
ahead with this.
Councilmember Trude stated they already have so many complaints regarding dogs and cats and the
Regular Andover City Council Meeting
Minutes —March 18, 2014
Page 2
City does not want to add to the problem by allowing chickens. Mr. Sachs asked if this could be
decided on an individual basis rather than by an ordinance change. Mayor Gamache stated right now
the ordinance they have in place is based on where in the City you are located and the type of utilities
that resident has.
Councilmember Howard stated he would be willing to talk about this item at a worksession meeting.
Mr. Dickinson stated this could be brought to a future worksession if the Council would like to
discuss this further.
Councilmember Bukkila stated she would not be in favor of chickens in an R -4 District which is
where Mr. Sachs is located. She thought the proper place to discuss this would be a council
workshop. The Council directed staff to place This discussion on a future workshop meeting agenda.
AGENDA APPROVAL
Staff added supplemental information to the Sheriff's Report.
Motion by Bukkila, Seconded by Howard, to approve the Agenda as amended above. Motion carried
unanimously.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
February 25, 2014, Workshop Meeting: Correct as written.
Motion by Knight, Seconded by Bukkila, to approve the minutes as presented. Motion carried
unanimously.
March 4, 2014, Regular Meeting: Correct as written.
Motion by Howard, Seconded by Trade, to approve the minutes as presented. Motion carried
unanimously.
CONSENT ITEMS
Item 2 Approve Payment of Claims
Item 3 Award Bid/14- 3/2014 Crack Sealing (See Resolution R016 -14)
Item 4 Award Bid/14- 4/2014 Seal Coating (See Resolution R017 -14)
Item 5 Approve Plans & specs /Order Advertisement for Bids /14 -2 & 14- 2A/2014 Street
Reconstruction & 159 "' Avenue NW Culvert Replacement (See Resolution R018-
14)
Item 6 Approve Resolution/14- 6/2014 Local Trails Connection Grant
Application/Andover Station North Trail Connection (See Resolution R019 -14)
Item 7 Approve Final Plat — Bent Creek Shores (See Resolution R020 -14)
Back -yard chicken trend comes home to roost I Star Tribune
ill Log In I Register I My account. I Subscribe Digital • Home delivery I Today s'
Page 1 of 5
Search v Al content I:) Business listings . Search Lj Sne index
StarTribune i home + garden so °ns off
Chimney Inspection and
Fireplace Flue From
News Local Sports Business Politics Opinion Lifestyle Entertainment obituaries classifieds Autos Housing Jobs
Weekly ads Taste Home . Garden Travel Health Kids' Health We Relationships Steals slogs • Columns
Home > Lifestyle > Home +Garden
Back -yard chicken trend comes home to roost
Article by: KIM PALMER. Star Tribune i Updated: October 8,2013- 3:09 PM
Back -yard coops are still popular, but some owners get rid of birds when winter
approaches.
from the homepage
SL Paul police reopening Investigation into priest's
Point
U.S. Rep. Ellison arrested during immigration rally
Obama to 6oehner: No talks until government
opens
0 comments Qresizetext0 print buyrepritds Recommend 0
With cold weather approaching, a lot of local chicken owners are
seeking new homes for their birds.
"Winter is difficult," said Mandy Meyer of New Prague, who advertised
her daughter's chickens on Craigslist last week.
Coops require more cleaning in winter, plus there's extra shoveling,
heating and making sure the birds have fresh, unfrozen water. Now
that her daughter is heading off to college, Meyer is hoping to
downsize the flock of 16 hens and one rooster, "Cluck Gable."
Tveet 0 'Lhwa 19
related content
Some birds come from owners
who don't realize that chickens
most read most emailed most watched
Ponder:'I'm a man of
faith'
http: / /www.startribune.com /lifestyle /homegardenl2269435 81.html ?page = all &i)rei)aae =l &
10/8/2013
Back -yard chicken trend comes home to roost I Star Tribune
But she won't sell them for meat, she said. "If I can't find someone
who wants 'am, I'll just hang on to 'am."
Not all chicken - keepers hang onto their surplus poultry until they can
find good homes, however. The recent boom in back -yard chickens.
fueled by the local food movement, has produced a boomlet of
unwanted birds that swells at this time of year.
"The numbers escalate in August as back -to- school mentality sets in,
then increase as the fall progresses and explode when the cold
weather actually hits," said Mary Britton Clouse, founder of Chicken
Run Rescue, a home -based shelter program in Minneapolis.
Chicken Run has seen its numbers increase dramatically in recent
years, coinciding with the rise in urban hipsters and locavore foodies
who have been inspired to try their hand at small back -yard poultry
operations.
In 2001, Chicken Run rescued just six birds. Last year, Clouse and
her husband, Bert, fielded almost 500 surrender requests for "urban
fans animals; mostly chickens, and rescued more than 30, many
with "special needs," such as chickens that lost feet to frostbite or
reproductive cancers linked to constant egg - laying. Some of the
rescues have been waiting for new homes for more than a year, she
said. (In the meantime, they live in the couple's back -yard coop and,
during the cold months, in their basement.)
"I knew this was going to happen,' Clouse said of the explosion in
surrendered and abandoned chickens. "All the other sanctuaries and
shelters have noticed an increase. It's like watching a train wreck in
slow motion.'
Chicken Run takes requests from Minneapolis Animal Control, the
Animal Humane Society and wildlife rehab clinics. Some of the birds
come from cockfighting seizures, but many have been abandoned or
neglected by owners who don't understand what's required or realize
that chickens are "a long -term commitment," according to Clouse.
Some new coop converts discover that keeping fowl is more work
than they expected. Others give up their hens after they stop laying
eggs — or after they get sick and require expensive medical care.
And quite a few folks discover that the baby chick they bought to lay
eggs is never going to.
"'Whoopsl I have a rooster.' That's a big one," Clouse said "People
get chicks from hatcheries, and they mis -sex the birds. Or they throw
in a baby rooster for extra body heat" during shipping.
'Interest is increasing'
Still, the popularity of back -yard chickens shows no signs of abating.
More cities and suburbs now allow small coops, and other
municipalities continue to debate whether chickens belong in
residential neighborhoods. Two Lake Minnetonka communities,
Deephaven and Woodland, recently took up the issue. Farther north,
Centerville and Circle Pines recently began allowing back -yard coops,
with municipal approval.
"At our store here, I would say interest is increasing," said Audrey
Matson, owner of Egg /Plant Urban Farm Supply in St. Paul. "I do not
think back -yard chickens and beekeeping have peaked."
Many of her customers initially want chickens for the eggs but end up
keeping them as pets once their egg production drops off. "A lot are
surprised to find they like them as as pets. They're fun to have around
and fun to watch. They have personalities."
And there's a brisk chicken trade on Craigslist and other online
forums.
Tim Schmit of Nowthen typically sells his chickens via Craigslisl in the
fall and buys new ones in the spring. He hasn't had trouble finding
homes for his birds, he said. "People buy them."
Pets or producers
At Bourgeois of St. Louis Park, a k "the Chicken Enthusiast," has
taught classes on urban chicken - keeping for four years. Over that
time, his curriculum has evolved to include a cautionary section. "I
cover all the reasons you should not get chickens," he said, to deter
those with unrealistic expectations. Such as?
http: / /www.startri
Page 2 of 5
-are a long -term commitment;
Clouse Said.
b Access Vikings: Ponder
BRUCE @sure • Out. Freeman in
bbisping�sGrtribune.com
x Rand: 5 reasons Freeman
' makes sense for Vikings
i
Reusse: Don't expect to
Ponder past Sunday
Several of the chickens being
housed by Mary Britton
Clouse and Bert Clouse of
Furloughed federal
Chicken Run Rescue, at their , employees are red up
north
north Minneapolis home.
Bruce Blsping /Star Tribune
More Video
more from home +
garden ^
The Dirt: Help collect prairie
seeds, and a lily bulb sale
-IlgdS (lnTTi t X
The Toolbox: Anti - Slip
spray; 'Amy Butler Stencils';
icemaker repair
x ' ea.
°° tJ .
Helping birds make ° °�
seasonal transition
t�
1,40, wNIMN IerweNel lee reelbeelN the
+DVEarSEME,N.
calendar of events))
Search all events a Advanced
Search
Tue Gabberts Design Series
08
Wed Pet Loss Support Group
09
Microchip and Nail Trim...
Thu
10 Microchip and Nail Trim...
Fn
11 Minnesota Humane Society
Sat Introduction to Pet Dog...
12
Sun Southvest Metro Animal...
13 Hoppy Hour
Mon
14 Second Chance Animal...
Search by category Choose v
Tell us about an event Tell us about a venue
3581.htm1 ?page= a11&prepage =1 &
10/8/2013
Back -yard chicken trend comes home to roost I Star Tribune
"No. 1. They stop laying eggs after four or five years. But they live 10
to 12 years," he said. "You will have an unproductive hen, and you
need to be OK with that."
"No. 2. It is some work," he added. "If you want to make no effort at
all, you shouldn't, have gotten chickens in the first place. I bet I have
deterred some people."
There are also some health risks, both to humans and the birds,
associated with keeping chickens in urban areas, according to Alyssa
Herreid, a graduate student in public health at the University of
Minnesota, who has been surveying back -yard chicken keepers in
Minneapolis and St. Paul as part of her master's project on disease
transmission in urban poultry.
"My biggest finding is that a lot of people don't know about diseases
and are completely unconcerned," she said. Most of them report
getting their information via the Internet. "We need a better way to
inform these back -yard chicken keepers."
Dr. John Baillie, a veterinarian with Cedar Pet Clinic Lake Elmo and
president of the Minnesota Veterinary Medical Association, is seeing
a lot more chickens in his practice.
"It's been a noticeable increase over the last three years," he said.
Most of his feathered patients are wanted pets, he said, and their
owners are conscientious. "By the time they come to see me, they're
pretty committed to their birds." .
Common avian health problems include respiratory problems, trauma
injuries caused by dogs or wild animals, frostbite and reproductive
problems. "Birds' bodies aren't designed to lay eggs daily for five to
six years," he said. Selective breeding has resulted in birds that
produce eggs to the point of exhaustion and disease.
That's one reason the Clouses don't eat eggs and don't believe
chickens should be kept to produce eggs at all. "We don't want
anybody eating eggs. People think an endless supply of eggs is
natural, but there's nothing natural about it," she said. "People are
using them [chickens] for food, but they don't know or understand
what impact that has on the animal."
The Clouses recently started spaying their hens, and allow adoptions
only to people who want chickens as companion animals. "Our
rescues need homes, not jobs," she said.
Kim Palmer • 612- 673 -4784
0 comments Oresizetexto print buyreprints
From Around the Web sponsored links
New Officer Saves Drowning Deer (Vetstreet)
Eminem's Daughter, Hailie Scott, Crowned Homecoming
Queen (E! Online)
Video of Lab and Boy With Down's Syndrome Goes Viral
(Vetstreet)
Fox News prime -Ume lineup changes for first time in 11
years (The Motley Fool)
Case in Point: Pitched roofs or math —what matters for
solar? (The Washington Post)
Why Do Dogs Scratch Their Beds Before Laying Down?
(eHow)
Recommend _0: Tweet 0!
More from Star Tribune
Whistleblower: 92- year -ofd's insurance policy yanked
after 40 years of savings (Local)
How emotional intelligence affects your relationships
(StarTdbune.com)
The Drive: Don't veer for deer, experts say (Local)
Find a runner in the Twin Cities Marathon or 10 -mile
race (StarTribune.com)
9- year -old Minn. stowaways history: car theft,
sneaking into water park (Local)
Frugality on verge of fracturing couple
(SlarTribune.com)
(?f
HEATING
IN
STORES
NOW!
INSTALL NOW &
BE READY WHEN
COLD WEATHER HITS
TSC
Shop Now
ADVERTISEMENT
Page 3 of 5
Get your Vikings
gead
Shop Now D
digital
access ))
$8
far 8 wks
Save on Star
Tribune
Unlimited Digital
Accessl ))
stte�eals��N
Save
Now!
Save 50% off or
morel»
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Comprehensive
Star Tribune
coverageof
Minnesota's
people, places
and compar ips
ADVERTISEMENT
http: / /www.startribtme.com/ lifestyle /home);arden/226943581.htm1 ?pace= all &prepaee =l &... 10/8/2.01 �
Chickens faring well in yard since new ordinance I The Princeton Union -Eagle Page 1 of 5
Uncategorized
Chickens faring well in
yard since new
ordinance
By Jeff Hage
July 18, 2013 at 3:19 pm
Like 30 Tweet 1 0
Joel Stottrup /Union -Eagle
Dic Mogen holds a Silver Laced Wyandotte hen while daughter Elsa, left and son Beck, center, each hold a Orpington
hen. Between Elsa and Beck is Gloria Mogen. At far right is family friend, Cooper Nowak. The Wogens are raising the
chickens in the brooder they are standing in front of in their yard in Princeton.
A mnthor and cnn InnVnn at nhntne of rhinLpne in a harV /nrri hnmpctpa)dinn
http: / /unioiieagle.com /2013/07/ chickens - faring - well -in- yard - since- new - ordinance/ 7/23/2013
Chickens faring well in yard since new ordinance I The Princeton Union -Eagle Page 2 of 5
Also helping that happen was the city passing a chicken - keeping ordinance three
months ago..
The city had allowed chickens only in its A -1 and A -2 agricultural zones until it
passed its ordinance in April this year to allow, through a permit, a limited number of
chickens at R -2 zoned residences.
It wasn't the Wogens who had requested the city pass the new chicken ordinance,
but rather a woman who was living in the same residential zone. She told Princeton
city officials she wanted to be able to have chickens in her yard not only to produce
eggs but also to eat grubs and insects in her garden and provide natural fertilizer.
The city Planning Commission, with assistance from Community Development
Director Carie Fuhrman, then researched chicken ordinances in other cities and
came up with one to recommend to the council. The ordinance that the council
approved has a permit system with the conditions spelled out. They include a
maximum of four chickens per residence and that none may be a rooster. Other
restrictions cover the type of enclosure and run area, cleanliness and storage of
chicken feed.
The woman who initially asked the city to pass the ordinance never did seek a
permit.
Eric Wogen admitted last week that he was already in violation of the ordinance for
having five chickens at his place and said the family will have to find a new home for
one of the hens. The Wogens got their chicks through the Farmers Co -op in
Foreston. Eric Wogen said the vendor added an extra chick to the order in case one
chick did not survive. All five chicks not only survived but grew faster than what Eric
Wogen said he expected, ending up being full -size laying hens within three months.
"It's fun watching them grow," said Eric and Amy Wogen's son Beck, 9, who is in
charge of watering and feeding the hens. Besides chicken feed, the Wogen children
bring the hens table scraps and grasshoppers.
The idea of having backyard chickens at the home originated with Amy Wogen and
Beck. The two had been looking at a backyard homesteading publication and saw
photos of chickens and became interested in having them, Eric Wogen said.
Once all of the Wogen family members were on board with the idea (the couple also
has two daughters Elsa, 6, and Gloria, 3), they went about preparing. The family
found plans on the Internet for building chicken coops, and picked a design. Eric
htti)://unioneaRle.com/2013/07/chickens-farine-well-in-vard-
Chickens faring well in yard since new ordinance I The Princeton Union -Eagle Page 3 of 5
"It's been a good experience," Eric Wogen said, adding that he likes the city's rules on
having backyard chickens. "Basically, it's how to be a good neighbor when you have
some chickens."
But if he could change the ordinance, he said, he would lower the $250 permit fee.
Eric Wogen suspects the size of the fee has kept more people from seeking a permit
to have chickens.
The Wogens' five chickens consist of three Orpingtons and two silver laced
Wyandottes. Eric Wogen said the Orpingtons are the more docile of the two breeds
but that one of the Orpingtons will be leaving in order to meet the ordinance's limit.
Eric Wogen said the two breeds are "hardy" and that he thinks they will be able to
survive winter in the coop's upper part. He added that he will have to install a heat
lamp up there in the winter, figuring that otherwise the chickens won't be warm
enough to lay eggs, which they have not yet begun doing.
There is another side to having livestock: what to do with them when the owner no
longer wants them. Livestock animals traditionally end up in slaughterhouses, and
Eric Wogen indicated last week that his family had not yet come to grips with that
idea for their chickens.
"It remains to be seen if I can sell the family on butchering the chickens after they're
donedaying," he said.
Like 30 Tweet ; 1 0
Related posts:
http: / /unioneaf4le. coml20l 3 /07/ chickens- farine- well -in -vard- since - new - ordinance/
StarTribune - Print Page
StarTribune
Some suburbs start to allow backyard
chicken coops
Article by: Shannon Prather
StarTribune
June 18, 2013 - 3:49 PM
Charles Reinhardt admits he got busted for it about five years ago.
He'd kept it under wraps for years right under his neighbors' noses.
Then he slipped up and shared his secret with some neigtbodwod
kids. Within days, it had Flown the coop.
'I had chickens. I let the neighbor kids come over and give them
some corn and someone turned me in to the city; Reinhardt said.
Charles Reinhartlt was once cited for violating a Centerville
ordinance for raising chickens on his property. The dry
recently passed an ordinance allowing chickens.
MARLIN LEVISON . Star Tribune
Initially, he was irked at the warning letter from Centerville City Hall. He complied and got rid of his chickens. Then he
decided to challenge the system.
It took several years but he finally persuaded the Centerville City Council to pass an ordinance allowing chickens. He's the
first resident in the northern Anoka County suburb to apply for a Iwo -year permit, at a cost of $75. He's already brought home
four young hens to roost, the maximum allowed. He hopes to have fresh eggs within a few weeks.
'I am a rebel. I will push things.* Reinhardt says, a little tongue in cheek. "Actually, I kind of worried people would laugh at me
and think I am weird. But I Nought: I am 44 years old. I don't care what people think. You only live once. There is no reason I
should have to move to have something as simple as that'
Call it the rise of the suburban farmer. Urban fanning has grown in popularity during the past decade as more health.
conscious people clamor for locally grown and organic food options. Both Minneapolis and St. Paul allow back -yard chickens
with permitting and other conditions.
Now, some suburban city councils are following suit, but with provisions designed to protect neighbors from unwelcome noise
and nuisance. Circle Pines and Centerville enacted ordinances that take effect this month allowing up to four hens —no
roosters permitted. The city of Farmington in the south metro has also enacted a chicken ordinance this spring, allowing up to
three hens at homes with certain zoning designations. Eagan also has started allowing chickens.
But not every city council has fallen for the charms of the chicken.
Blaine and Coon Rapids do not allow them on standard residential lots, according to their city clerks. Both city councils have
discussed changing that in recent years but took no action.
Audrey Matson, owner of Eggplant Urban Farm Supply, said the suburbs can actually be more skittish than big cities when it
comes to allowing back -yard coops.
"The suburbs are less likely to allow it even though they have more space; Matson said. "There's just concern there's going
to be problems with smelly, badly -made coops and eyesores."
Matson, who has spoken to city councils on behalf of wannabe chicken owners, says a little education helps local leaders
understand that back -yard chicken fanning can be quiet, neat and unobtrusive to neighbors. .f
Matson said she's definitely seeing more suburban customers asking about chickens.
Even then, it's still a rare breed of suburban homeowner who takes the leap, one city manager says.
"We don't expect there will be a lot of applications for this," said Centerville's Dallas Larson. 'if we get two or three
applications in the course of a year, that may be about right. There is a lot of work that goes with [chicken farming]. There are
a few people in that organic gardening group that will find it appealing.'
And there are hoops to jump through.
Circe Pines' new ordinance requires that 70 percent of neighbors grant permission before a $75 two -year permit is issued. It
also requires a 10,000- square -foot minimum lot size and an enclosed coop or run.
"The council wanted their neighbors to have some say; said City Administrator Jim Keinath.
Farmington limits chickens to larger residential properties zoned R -1. The Farmington Planning and Zoning Commission must
approve applications. The commission heard its first request last week
"I don't expect it will go gangbusters; said assistant city planner Tony Wippler. "There is a select group of people who raise
chickens and I don't think it's widespread. I do know more and more cornmurtlbes are doing these things."
Reinhardt said he decided he wanted chickens after seeing them in friends' back yams.
"I kind of like them. They made me feel relaxed; said the disabled amry veteran.
He said he's looking forward to the homegrown eggs. He's embraced the homegrown food movement and feels the less
chemicals and pesticides, the better.
He anticipates his hens will lay about two dozen eggs a week. He uses the manure to fertilize his large vegetable garden.
His four hens, which he bought as chicks, are four different breeds — a gold star, silver laced wine dot, Americana, and
Rhode Island red.
'I don't have names for them, but I know their personalities. I know how they act'
Shannon Prather • 612 -673 -4804
02013 Star Tribune
http://www.startribune.com/printarticle/?id=212021271
Page 1 of 1
Print - Chicken advocate sees uptick in strays, abandonment I kare I Isom Page 1 of 1
Print - Chicken advocate sees uptick in strays, abandonment
kare11.com kare11.com
Chicken advocate sees uptick in strays, abandonment
7:35 PM, Jul 18, 2013
MINNEAPOLIS - A woman in North Minneapolis has a heart for hens and a soft spot for
roosters.
"They are like dogs with feathers," said Mary Britton Clouse. "They are wonderful pets."
In her home, she houses 21 chickens. But for this animal lover, this is more than a hobby,
it's a rescue mission.
"This one was left abandoned in a backyard," says Mary while holding up a rooster in her
home.
In 2001, Mary started the Chicken Run Rescue, one of the first urban chicken rescue
organizations in the country. But never before has she seen the need this great.
"People take them as pets for egg - laying or for fun," she says. "But many become strays or
are left abandoned."
Often times, the work becomes too much for owners or hens develop reproductive problems
after being forced to lay too many eggs.
Mary says she was asked to take in 500 chickens last year alone.
"We think urban gardens are a wonderful thing, but the mistake is thinking that farm animals
are a part of that."
She has transformed her backyard into a sanctuary and her basement into a cool place to
roam on hot, summer days.
"I'm passionate about this," she says. "I'm doing something that's making a difference."
Find more information about the Chicken Run Rescue on their facebook page.
http: / /cpf cleanprint.net/cpf /cpDaction= print &type= filePrint &kev= aannett
StarTribune - Print Page
StarTribune
Chickens feed controversy in the
suburbs
Article by: MARY JANE SMETANKA
StarTribune
August 20, 2010 -10:59 PM
Are chickens fit only for a farm, or are they egg - laying pets that
belong in suburban back yards?
That question has landed on city council agendas across
Minnesota, driven by chicken' enthusiasts who name their birds
and Create Facebook pages to fight city chicken bans.
In White Bear Lake and Bloomington, residents have asked for
looser rules that would allow for backyard hens. There have been
so many similar requests that the League of Minnesota Cities has
been researching chicken ordinances around the state.
The discussion can get heated, especially between people who
grew up on farms and those who see backyard chickens as
charming pets and bearers of organic eggs.
"It's a hot topic," said Rachel Carson, research staff attorney for
the League of Minnesota Cities. "The classic debate seems to be
between one side that says [chickens are] noisy and they don't
want to smell chicken poop. The other side says dogs are much
more noisy, and they have bigger poop."
Most Minnesota cities still prohibit chickens within their borders,
including Eden Prairie and Golden Valley, each of which briefly
discussed changes but stuck to their chicken bans.
While Bear Lake is debating an ordinance that would allow
residents to keep up to six hens.
And in Bloomington, the City Council next month will Consider
letting residents keep up to four hens in coops that are shielded
from neighbors and at least 30 feet from the property line. Existing
rules make it impossible for most homeowners in the city to have
chickens.
Jeanie Mellem pushed Bloomington to reconsider its rules after
she was cited in February for having four hens — named Gretchen,
Grace, Carolyn and Emma -- in a back -yard coop.
Mary Britton Clouse. who operates Chicken Run Rescue in
Mimmapolis, love'Weshbum' a kiss. Chickens, she said,
"are a hell of a lot of work'
Elizabeth Flores. Star Tribune
Albert Clouse held Pierce Buger, a chicken that was found
lying in the road at Pierce Buller Road.
Elizabeth Flores, Star Tribune
Delighted with the city's proposal to relax its miss, she was shaken
at a Planning Commission hearing this week when a commissioner who grew up on a farm adamantly opposed the change.
"People seem to either hale them or love [chickens]," Mellem said. "I'm doing my best to educate people. A lot of people don't
know a lot about chickens."
Mellem finds "the ladies" a soothing addition to her yard. She pets the hens, gives eggs to neighbors and allows neighbor
kids to visit. Their soft clucking is relaxing, she says, and she enjoys watching them.
"Maybe it's a simpler life," Mellem said last spnng. "Until you do it, you just don't understand."
After she was ordered to get rid of the chickens, Mellem created a "Help the Chickens Stay in Bloomington!" page on
Facebook. The page has become a rallying point for 600 chicken fans, including people in Golden Valley and Eden Prairie
who unsuccessfully pushed those cities to change their ordinances.
Nothing but scratch and eat
Jill Rasmussen of Eden Prairie got chickens partly because she thought they would be good for her sons. She said she
checked city ordinances but understood that unless someone complained. there was no problem. Someone complained.
When the issue went to the City Council in July, Rasmussen said, 'They all just shook their head... and said'We don't want
to pursue this .' *
Rasmussen said she knows other Eden Prairie residents have chickens, but said they were afraid to come forward for fear of
losing their birds. The neighbor who complained about her hens is moving and she said that with no one else objecting, she
hopes to keep herfour hens.
In Golden Valley, Pam Lapham started with five chickens and soon had 10.
"It's hard to stop at five because there are so many cool breeds out there,' she said.
When a neighbor complained in April, she was cited for having farm animals. She asked the city to reconsider but said only
one council member was sympathetic.
"All the rest disliked chickens," she said.
Lapham doesn't understand that.
"They're so gentle," she said. "There's something so calming about them. Our lives are so busy now. They have nothing to do
but scratch in the dirt and eat bugs. They come and sit in my lap."
httD://www.startribune.com/Driiatarticle/9id=1 0120.5 654
Page 1 of 2
StarTribune - Print Page
She has placed her chickens with a friend in another city.
Dark side of the boom
While Mellem and other urban chicken fans build covered runs and heated coops for their pets — Mellem is building a coop at
her cabin so the birds can travel with her family — groups Eke the Animal Humane Society in Golden Valley and Chicken Run
Rescue in Minneapolis are seeing the ugly side of the chicken boom.
The Animal Humane Society has taken in 89 chickens so far this year, many more than in past years. They come from school
hatching projects or'Yrom back -yard situations where it was too much work or people lost interest," said the society's Came
Eibera.
All the birds go to Chicken Run Rescue, which has a permit to keep up to 20 birds at a time.
Chicken Run Rescue's Mary Britton Clouse has seen chickens abandoned in carriers on the street and flying loose in a
downtown Minneapolis parking ramp. This year, Clouse said, she has five foster homes to handle the overflow from her
home, where the chickens line up at night to march dawn the stairs to basement coops.
More chickens will show up this fall, she said, when 'kids are going back to school and mom doesn't want to be bothered
anymore. And then there will be another burst when there's a subzero day."
Chickens are "a hell of a lot of work" to care for. Clouse said, and live 12 to 14 years. She condemns cities that prohibit
roosters — almost all do, because of their crowing — calls g them partners with hatchery businesses that slaughter millions of
roasters every year because they don't lay eggs.
She admits to being conflicted by chickens' spreading popularity. Too many people don't know what they're doing and aren't
committed to the animals, she said. But she helps teach classes on keeping chickens and sometimes offers tours of the
rescue operation.
"We want people to know them and love them, and understand them for who they are, not what they can lake from them,"
Clouse said. "All we can do is help as many birds as we can, and teach people what they are getting into."
Mary Jane Smetanka • 612 -673 -7380
® 2013 star Tnbune
httn://www.startribune.com/nriiit,qrticle,/?id=I 01 2056 54
Page 2 of 2
CHICKEN COOPS: Golden Valley City Council OKs residential roosts - KMSP -TV Page 1 of 2
�xy� �.
MEMBER CENTER: CreMe ACCamt • • • {ryy �ry�� ®�_-- _.,__,._,
CHICKEN COOPS: Golden Valley City
Council OKs residential roosts
Posted: Jun 04, 2013 10:06 PM CDT
Updated: Jun 04, 2013 10:06 PM CDT
by Maury Glover- bio I email
Keeping a chicken coop is an urban farming vend mat many communities are egging on, and the Golden
Valley City Council passed an ordinance by a 3.2 vote on Tuesday night to allow residential roosts.
Both Minneapolis and St. Paul allow homeowners to house their own poultry, and the urban farmers who
spoke with FOX 9 News say its fun to have feathered trends .' around.
"1 thought it sounded fun and they are muds more fun than I even imagined," said Stephanie King.
When King first began to consider keeping a coop a couple of years ago, almost everything she read said it
would be easy to raise her own chickens. Now, she has twee that literally eat out GT of the palm of her hand in
the back yard of her Richfield home.
"They fertilize everywhere. They eat weeds. They till everything whether you want them to or not," she said.
'They are better pets than they gel credit far.'
Golden Valley may soon be the latest community to join the chicken - friendly flock. Over the past few years,
more than half a dozen cities across the metro have passed laws legalizing urban poultry — and the movement
appears to be growing in popularity.
"I see it among young people I teach at the University of Minnesota," said City Councilwoman Paula Pentel.
They want to know where their food comes from. They are very interested in producing it themselves."
The Golden Valley proposal would allow residents to have up to four hens — but no roosters — as long as they
have their chicken coop inspected and pay a permit fee. Although the plan ruffed some feathers in the past
because some residents believe the birds could bring down property values, supporters on the City Council
believe it will pass this time around.
"I think its a great idea," Pentel said. "I really am in favor of local food and growing vegetables, and here's
another facet of that. Next will be goats."
The Golden Valley ordinance will receive a second hearing at the end of June. If it passes there, it could go
into effect by this fall.
RECOMMENDED VIDEOS
by Taboola
FROM AROUND THE WEB
5 Signs You'll Get Cancer (Newsmax)
Do These 7 Things and You'll Get
Alzheimer's (Newsmax Health)
Eat These 3 Super Foods To Burn Fat Like
A Furnace (Perfect Living)
The Unhealthiest "Healthy" Foods (Slack)
Men Only: Forget About Sit -Ups, Crunches,
and Impossible Diets (Hunter Fitness)
Why Stylists Hate Boxed Haircolor
(Hair Color For Women)
httn- /hnnniw mvfnxttntinr.iti
YOU MIGHT BE INTERESTED IN
' SHOREVIEW SHOOTING: Lawyer shot by
ex- boyfriend during move -out
Woman who escaped police via ceiling hid
heroin needle where?
' 500jobs reaching $60k range coming to
Shakopee
Minn- court of appeals upholds DWI of
woman fleeing abuse
Charges in Murder Outside Malinas Sports
Bar in SL Paul
Family: Owner of Malina's Sports Bar killed
in shooting
by Taboola
City of Ea an in
To: Dianne Miller, Assistant City Administrator
From: Christina M. Scipioni, City Clerk/Administrative Services Coordinator
Date: September 7, 2012
Subject: Research on Ordinances Regarding Backyard Chickens
Per the direction of the City Council at the June 5, 2012 City Council Listening Session, 17
Minnesota cities that allow backyard chickens have been surveyed. Below is a summary of their
responses, as well as public policy considerations for the City Council. Attached is a spreadsheet
with each city's response.
Summary of Ordinances in Other Cities
A common requirement in all of the surveyed cities' ordinances is that backyard chickens be
properly fenced and kept from wandering onto other properties. Many cities also require chicken
coops and runs be screened from neighboring properties and set back from property lines and
other residential dwellings. Several cities require a 50 -foot setback from other dwellings and a
10 -foot setback from property lines. Other cities require the same setback for chicken coops as
for small sheds and other structures that do not require a building permit.
A survey of 17 Minnesota cities that allow backyard chickens revealed several other common
policy considerations:
Limitations on the number of residential chickens
0 14 cities limit the number of chickens allowed on residential properties. Cities
either tie the limitation to the size of the property (i.e. Minnetonka allows 5
chickens per half acre) or have one limitation for all residential properties (i.e.
Bloomington allows up to 4 chickens, regardless of lot size).
o Three cities, Minneapolis, St. Paul and Oakdale, require the number of chickens
be reasonable for the property size, but do not have specific limitations.
Reasonableness is determined by requiring a property inspection and/or requiring
permit approval from neighboring properties.
Permit requirements
o Of those surveyed, eight cities require permits for any number of chickens. All of
these cities issue these permits administratively (except for Hastings, which
allows chickens in residential only as an accessory use to schools and museums).
Permit applications typically require a scale drawing of the coop location, which
is reviewed by city planners to ensure it meets setback requirements,
I
• Three cities only require a permit if residents want over a certain number of
chickens. New Hope allows three chickens without a permit; Robbinsdale and
West St. Paul allow two chickens without a permit. In these cities, permits to
harbor additional chickens must receive council approval.
• Six cities do not require a permit to harbor a chicken. All of these cities limit the
number of chickens allowed per property. These cities do not give property
owners the ability to add additional chickens via a permitting process.
• Prohibition of roosters
o Eight cities prohibit roosters, citing concerns about noise. Five cities allow
roosters with additional requirements for acreage or permit approval. Three cities
allow roosters without any additional restrictions. One of these cities, Richfield, is
currently considering an ordinance amendment to prohibit roosters. The majority
of chicken - related complaints in Richfield stem from rooster noise.
• Prohibition of slaughter
• Of those surveyed, five cities prohibit the slaughter of chickens. Those cities cited
concerns about the chickens' welfare and potential nuisances as reasons to
prohibit slaughter.
• The 12 cities that do not prohibit the slaughter of chickens had various reasons for
allowing it. Some cities have not had an issue with complaints about the
slaughtering of chickens, thus, thought has not been given to prohibiting it. Other
cities allow slaughter if it's for religious purposes or for personal consumption
only.
Feedback on Complaints
The cities surveyed, including neighboring communities, voiced few concerns about the number
of complaints received related to chickens. Bloomington, which began allowing chickens in
2011, reported receiving between six to 10 complaints a year. Typically, complaints in
Bloomington are about rooster noise, loose chickens, setback issues and chickens in garages.
Bloomington did not report any issues with bringing properties into compliance once a complaint
had been received. Burnsville began allowing chickens in 2008 and receives one to two phone
calls a year from residents who want to know if their neighbor has a permit for chickens.
Rosemount experienced one instance where a property owner had one too many chickens, but
hasn't had any chicken- related complaints.
In cities that allow roosters, the most common complaint has been the noise from the roosters.
Some cities also reported the occasional wandering chicken. The cities that require permits
reported receiving a few complaints a year of unpermitted chickens, which is usually because the
property owner didn't realize a permit is required.
Enforcement
All the cities surveyed enforce their chicken ordinances by investigating complaints. Animal
control officers, community service officers or code enforcement officers investigate complaints.
The investigation process is similar throughout the cities. Once a complaint is received, the city
visits the property. If an ordinance violation is discovered, the city gives the property owner time
a
to come into compliance with the ordinance. If the property owner does not bring his or her
property into compliance, a citation for an ordinance violation is issued. All the cities surveyed
reported the vast majority of property owners achieved compliance with the ordinance before a
citation was necessary,
If chickens are found roaming at large, most cities hold them for five days and then humanely
dispose of or sell the chickens.
Issues with Homeowners Associations
Only St. Paul addresses potential conflicts with homeowners associations (HOA) in its
Administrative Rules and Regulations. All other cities have not experienced any issues with
HOAs. St. Paul puts a reminder on its permit application for property owners to check with their
HOA before applying for a permit. St. Paul will revoke a permit if an HOA informs the city a
property is out of compliance with HOA rules, When a permit is revoked, the property owner has
a right to an administrative hearing. The administrative hearing allows the property owner to
dispute an HOA's claims that chickens are prohibited.
Limiting the initial number of chicken permits
None of the cities surveyed phased in new chicken permit regulations. Cities that recently began
permitting chickens did not report receiving a large number of applications when their
regulations changed. Burnsville has issued 8 permits since allowing chickens in 2009.
Maplewood has issued 6 permits since allowing chickens in mid - 20.11.
Educational requirement
None of the cities survived required a class or educational component before issuing a permit.
Some cities thought a class would not be needed because chickens require a lot to set -up, making
it cost - prohibitive for a casual chicken enthusiast. Other cities thought an educational component
would be helpful, since most of their complaints come from chicken owners who didn't know
enough about chickens before purchasing them. However, cities noted it would be difficult to
require a class because there are a limited number of places that provide education on raising
chickens.
Response to letter from University of Minnesota Extension Services addressing diseases
from chickens and potential nuisances
In response to public health concerns, some cities prohibit chickens from being kept inside
dwellings and garages. According to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), birds can spread
germs to people, but illnesses caused by touching or owning birds is rare. The CDC states
humans that come into contact with chickens and don't wash their hands afterward are at risk for
contracting the bacterium Salmonella. The risk is greater when handling baby chicks. To reduce
the risk, the CDC recommends proper hand washing, keeping chickens away from human food
and food preparation areas, frequently cleaning chicken coops, and prohibiting chickens from
wandering freely in a home. Additionally, the CDC does not recommend chickens for
�0
households with children under 5 years old, as they tend to place their hands in their mouth
without washing them. '
None of the cities surveyed received complaints about chicken odors or cleanliness. Typically,
cities have provisions in their animal ordinances that prohibit people from keeping chickens in an
unsanitary manner, Many cities also have provisions requiring chicken feed to be stored in
rodent -proof containers. These provisions would allow cities to require clean-up, if a complaint
about coop cleanliness or rodents was received.
GreenStep Cities program implications
One best practice in the Minnesota GreenStep Cities program is to strengthen local food and
fiber production access. An associated action item is for cities to commit resources /conduct a
food campaign to measurably increase one of more of the following:
a) Purchases of food with at least one of the following attributes: Minnesota- grown,
organic, humanely raised, grown by fairly compensated growers.
b) Institutional buying of local foods by schools, hospitals /nursing homes, restaurants and
hotels, or grocery stores.
c) Sales of local food in markets, rural grocery stores, urban convenience stores, and
restaurants
Maplewood and Burnsville's backyard chicken ordinances accomplish this action item. Eagan
does not currently meet this specific action item, but does meet two other action items associated
with strengthening local food and fiber production access, and thus meets the overall
requirements to achieve the best practice.
Public Policy Considerations
1. Should the City amend its ordinances to allow backyard chickens?
2. If the Council determines backyard chickens should be allowed in the City, the following
additional policy considerations will need to be discussed:
a. Should permits be required to harbor chickens?
b. If permits are required, should they be issued administratively or by Council?
c. Should inspections be required when a permit is issued or at renewal?
d. How many chickens should be allowed on a residential lot?
e. What setbacks are necessary?
f What type of screening and /or fencing should be required?
g. Should the City require an educational component before issuing a permit?
h. Should roosters be prohibited?
i. Should slaughtering be prohibited?
j. Should the City require a minimum or maximum coop size?
k. Should the City address potential issues with HOAs in its ordinance?
' Diseases from birds. (2010, July 28), Retrieved August 20, 2012, from Centers for Disease Control:
http: / /www. cde, gov /liealtliypets /animals /birds.htm
w
Survey of Cities that Allow Backyard Chickens
September 7, 2012
Number of
Permit Requires
Require
Phased in
Chickens
Admin or Council
Roosters
Slaughter
Educational
numherof
GeV
Allowed
Permit Required
Permit Fee
Approval
Allowed
Prohibited
Component
permitsissued
Erdorcementlssues
How ordinance is enforced
Issues with HCAs
Receive about 6 to 10 complaints
per year; typlmI complaints are
about roosters (noise), not meeting
setbacks, Icose chickens, and
chickens to ganges(which is
Public Health enforces; Handled
Bloomington
4
No
N/A
N/A
No
Yes
N/A
N/A
prohibited)
as a nuisance violation
None experienced
No- Issued 8
None; 1 -2 calls peryearfrom
$50 fora 2 -year
_
_permits since
residents who wantto know iftheir
Animal Control enforces;
Burnsville
4
Yes
permit
Administrative
No
No
No
2009
neighbor has a permit
handled as a nuisance violation
None experienced
Duluth
5
Yes
$10
Administrative
No
Yes
No
No
No response po
No response
No response
4 per acre -
No -1 permit
accessary use to
issued for a
museum or
historical
Hasn't experienced many
Hasn't experienced any issues tc
Hastings
school
Yes
$100
Council
No
No
No
museum
enforcement issues
enforce
None experlenced
Animal control onicer enforces
non - licensed chickens and
No enforcement Issues; some
community development
No- Issued 6
chickens at large, but that was an
enforces permitted chickens;
$75 Initial app
permits since
issue before the ordinance (they
follow -up with chicken owner
Maplewood
1 10
Yes
1 $50 renewal
Administrative
1 No
Yes
No
2011
aren't licensed chickens)
before citation
None experienced
6 chickens
allowed on et
Yes - on at least
None; a few complaints peryear
least l acre
here zoned ag
that a resident has chickens in
zoned ag or ag-
orag-
zoning district where it's not
Co-n plaints investigated
Me ple Grove
residential
No
N/A
N/A
residential
No
N/A
N/A
allowed
similarly to a nuisance violation
Noneexperienced
Animal control enforces;
chicken ownergiven a set
amount of time to come inte
Whatever the
$50 initial app
compliance or permit is revoked
neigh bon allow
$40 renewal
Yes, if
Not many problems or complaints
and owner receives ordinance
(coop needs
$150 fora 5 -year
neighbors
No, ifit's for
(they inspect coops every year,
violation citation (revocation
Minneapolis
zoning approval)
Yes
permit
Administrative
approve
religious reasons
No
No
which decreases the complaints)
and citation is very rare)
None experienced
Main problem is chicks growing up
5 per half acre
into
roosters and musing noise
(prorated by
Issues;
one problem with chickens at
Minnetonka
property acreage)
No
N/A
N/A
No
No
N/A
N/A large
in 23 years
Animal central enforces
None experienced
3 or fewerwith
Receive some resident questions,
Animal control enforces;
ompermit4or
3orfewerno;4or
$75 initial app
more than enforcement issues; researches
complaint, written
New Hope
more with permit
more yes
$25 renewal
Council
No
Yes
No
No occasionally
have chickens -at -large
waming, then citation
None experienced
Survey of Cities that Allow Backyard Chickens
September 7, 2012
Numberof
Permit Requires
Require
Phased in
Chickens
Admin or Council
Roosters
Slaughter
Educational
nemberof
City
Allowed
Permit Required
Permit Fee
Approval
Allowed
Prohibited
Component
permits issued
Enforcement Issues
How ordinance is enforced
Issues with HOAs
Citations issued similarly to
Whateverthe
-
barking dog Complaints; permit
neighbors allow;
an be revoked if there are too
Oakdale
typially4 -3
Yes
None
Administrative
Yes
No
No
No
Rooster noise is a typical Complaint
many complaints
None experienced
Minimum 3 -acre
lot, up to 25
Ramsey
chickens
No
N/A
N/A
yes
No
N/A
N/A
No response
No response
No response
Yes, but an
upcoming
ordinance
-
Nothing major, a few Complaints
Code Compliance Officers
amendment
a bout chickens running t large; g n;
(within the Police Department)
would prohibit
rooster noise tends to be the most
enforce; hand led as a nuisance
Richfield
3
No
N/A
N/A
them
No
N/A
N/A
Common complaint
violation
None experienced
2 without a
Community Service Officer or
permit; more
Council approval
Code Enforcement would
than 2with a
more than 2
$2S permit
after public
discuss the Issue with the
Robbinsdale
permit
requires a permit
$50 investigation
hearing
Yes, by permit
No
No
No
No enforcement issues
owner, if that was needed
None expedenoed
One enforcement Issue when
someone had one chicken too
Community Service Officers
many; haven't received any
Investigate complaints; gives
Rosemount
3
No
N/A
N/A
No
No
N/A
N/A
Complaints
warning notices then citations
None experienced
No enforcement Issues /complaints
With the licensed owners; received
Code Enforcement officer
Not on
some complaints that there are too
Investigates complaints; give
Properties less
many chickens, a rooster or no
warning notices, then citations
Shoreview
4
Yes
$30(2 years)
Administadve
than 2acres
Yes
No
No
permit
if not brought into compliance
None experienced
The Permit application
includes a disclaimer to
Stay, chickens are sometimes not
check with HOA before
Limited to the
3 o fewer.
picked up by owners; investigating
applying for permit; ifa
erof
$25 initial app
complaints of no permits is labor
permit is issued that isn't
Chickens a
$15 renewal
intensive; most chicken - related
in compliance with HOA
y an
complaints Come from properties
-
rules the City revokes the
ly hold
More than 3:
where the owner wasn'twell-
permit; the revocation
max is
$72 initial app
educated before purchasing
Animal Control enforces;
process includes an
St Paul
)
Yes
$25 renewal
Administrative
No
No
No
No
chickens
handled as a nuisance violation
administrative hearing
ff2withoaa
Licensing or Code Enforcement
aa
-
a rchesthemmplaint,
more
Council approval
fo
llows -up with owner, issues
itha
more than2 $136
-more than2
aftera public
administrative
citation if not
Wert St Pauit
requires a permit
chickens
hearing
Yes
No
No
No No
enforcement issues corrected
None
experienced
We respectfully request that the Eagan City Council amend the city
code to permit backyard chickens in a clean, safe, and sanitary
environment.
Included in this packet:
• Presenters Available for the Listening Session
• Petition Comments
• Letter from KID Athow to City of Eagan Mayor, Council Members and City
Attorney
• Letter from Jody Emmings, Hot House Metal, Saint Paul, MN
• Backyard Chickens and Sustainability
• Proposal
• Suggested Ordinance Considerations
• Examples of Local Coops
• Dakota County, and other Metro Cities Allowing Backyard Hens
• Sources Contacted
• Letter from University of Minnesota Extension Experts
• Petition Signatures
l6
Lr
Petition Comments
qty Sl, Paul suburban hens
'ree *s who ru "to Ore
deck. P4Y neighbors 'a
compost their waste and dig it into my gardens In 5 pears Y Hoe oev�r hart �nyprobiems
mell , rodents or
-Janice Cole (local St, Paul author and blogger)
In addition to all of the great reasons listed here for backyard chicken keepinq, I'd like to
-Christine Solomon
I have
Our nefqh pFs� also give us their food scraps
for the
-Barb Gasterland
I think that food security Is important, I have chickens in MpIs and am grateful to have on site
weeders for my gardens (fie`
The Eggs are wonderful (no recalls for these eggs!). But most surprising' is the sense
of community my chickens have helped foster in my neighborhood. In addition, watching
chickens being chickens is very relaxing, (The little neighbor boy loves to visit my chickens and
asks his mom for seconds when she cooks up the eggs from my chickens that I have shared with
-Theresa Rooney them,) Please allow chickens in Eagan. Thank you,
14gfA40M - " _-
4MY'NYrVWkY No one would have any idea we have
them unless they come into my backyard and see them.
Having backyard chickens has been WEWve jt
oe & ".
- 7 . .....
, Z 9XP
I J-1-9 U. IN 'k I hate to Martinez C9 - � 1:1. to see people denied this positive experience,
If Bloomington can reform their laws regarding chicken ownership, Eagan"sure can do it, too.
More and more cities across the country are allowing chicken ownership.
Co
— (de
— . 1 9t1, i s—e, 1 i
W Karen Valero
1T I
To: City of Eagan Mayor, Council Members, City Attorney
From: KID Athow 1490 Summit Ave. Saint Paul, MN
May 31, 201.2
Re: Chickens as a backyard pet and producer: not just for the rural farm
Dear City of Eagan Representatives,
Chickens as a backyard pet and producer: not just for the rural farm
As an urban chicken owner and beekeeper for the past few years, I have had the
opportunity to connect with my community in unexpected and meaningful
ways. As a resident of busy Summit Ave., many folks pass by my home on any
given clay. Some folks stop and talk as I garden my native yard during the warm
months or shovel my walk in winter. During these conversations about my
garden and its design, I reveal that my home is part of a holistic system
including native plants, beneficial insects, (bees, composting worms), some not -
so- beneficial insects, and chickens. Once people find out that my back yard is
home to my chickens, they are interested to learn more and gladly take me up
on my offer to visit with my friendly backyard flock. Children in particular enjoy
molding and petting the birds as well as collecting a few eggs. Some of my
neighbors bring their visiting children or grandchildren over to see my backyard
flock, They also enjoy the fresh eggs and honey that my critters provide.
Additionally, I have connected with the local college of Saint Thomas and am
now an annual field trip for one of their classes. School groups come by to learn
more about urban farming and how they themselves may be able to replicate
parts of my urban farm into their home settings. The entire experience of urban
farming has been a community- builder and opened up connections with my
neighbors both near and far, that otherwise would not have happened. I
strongly encourage others to embrace the urban /suburban farm and include
chickens in their design both as pets and as insect - controllers and natural
fertilizers,
Sincerely,
KD Athow
H
May 31, 2012
To the Eagan City Council Members;
Our family lives in Saint Paul and we share our backyard with seven wonderful
chickens. Our journey began a little over a year ago, when my youngest son, Fred, wait to
Eggplant Farm Store with a neighbor and came home begging for pet chickens. Although I had
never heard of anyone having pet chickens, I did like the idea of outdoor pets, like the pet
rabbits I had when I was little who lived outside in the hutch.
The experience of raising chickens has been such a pleasure and affected our family in
so many ways. My four children range in ages from 8 -17 years old and each one of them has
been impacted. Now that the kids were older, the backyard swing set and sandbox stopped
being used, and chickens gave our whole family a new connection to being outside and working
together. They each have their own chicken and so they have a shared responsibility to feed the
hens, clean the coop, let the chickens out in the morning and in the night, nurse the sick ones,
collect the eggs. They have become experts on not only chicken breeds and care, but are proud
farmers who are creating a habitat for their beloved animals. They love sharing the eggs with
neighbors and have become great chefs of all kinds of gourmet egg dishes,
Many people do not imagine chickens as "pets." -file connection one can have with a
chicken, just like a cat or dog, was so surprising to me. My former idea of chickens was a mass
of them running around frantically skittish and noisy. My experience has revised all my
impressions. They have personalities, and because we share our yard with them, and are
interacting in our shared environment every day, the relationships are deep. They are outgoing
and run up to greet us when we come out our back door.
They are calm in our presence; love to be held and fed (of course) and their sounds
communicate all kinds of messages. Our Australorp , Kahlifia, struts around the yard and sings
her "egg song" before she lays her egg. Our Buff Orpington, Peanut, purrs when she comes up
to greet you. Our Cochin, Frizzle, who is always broody is the quiet clucker, and our
Americaunas, Heidi and Coco are generally silent, but have a sweet grunting bear noise they
make when they are thrown scraps. When we went around our neighborhood to ask our
neighbors to sign their permission to our permit, one concern, we heard was about noise, I can
tell you that immediate neighbors on both sides of our house have told me since that they love
listening to the chickens every morning.
Someone said to me once that having chickens in your backyard is like having an
aquarium, It is true, and that they are fascinating to watch. They are busy creatures, always
scratching the dirt, chasing butterflies, chasing each other, bathing in the dust, preening and
sunning themselves, And their social hierarchies are real and fascinating. This has been another
wonderful surprise to having chickens as pets. Our experience has been so rich for our whole
family and we would highly recommend it to others.
Jody Emmings
Hot House Metal
651 -644 -9303
www, hothougemeta I.com
V—A
Backyard Chickens and Sustainability
1. Better food source for eggs While the nutritional superiority of organic
and homegrown eggs vs. conventional store - bought eggs may be debatable, it is
certainly true that any harmful affects of antibiotics, hormones, or other
chemical additives would be avoided with homegrown eggs.
2. Compost fertilizer Chicken manure is a sought after fertilizer. When
chickens are allowed to visit a compost pile, they will perform needed labor: toss
the compost pile, shred leaves, and remove unwanted grubs or maggots.
3. Organic waste consumption (bio- recycling). Backyard chickens love
eating scraps from the kitchen. This reduces our landfill waste and becomes
valuable fertilizer for better plants, grass and gardens.
4. Organic insect and weed control (no dangerous pesticides and
herbicides!). If chickens are allowed to roam a small backyard lawn even for a
short period, they can perform the useful tasks of weed and insect removal.
Similarly, chickens spending a short time in the yard will help rid it of many
unwanted insects and grubs, Mosquitoes have reduced chance in shallow water
exposed to chickens since the birds will feast on the insects in addition to
disturbing the larvae.
5. Low impact pet Contrary to their commercially raised counterparts,
backyard chickens are a decidedly easy to care for "low impact" pet with sweet,
funny, gentle personalities! A two - gallon water supply will last almost a week in
average weather (for a flock of six), and chicken feed is, well, as cheap as
chicken feed. Typically these are the only resources required once an adequate
coop is built.
6. dock role in a backyard ecosystem Backyard chickens can be part of
a larger backyard ecosystem not only in their feeding, grazing, and waste
recycling roles, but also by being a component in a symbiotic relationship with
other pets, namely dogs. All herding dogs and many other mixed breed dogs
gain great pleasure and purpose in watching over backyard chickens, whether
they are in the coop or out on the occasional graze." Guarding" the flock can be
perceived as a job and for the herding dog and can distract the hyperactive
herding dog from other annoying behaviors.
mum
We respectfully request that City Council amend the city code to permit backyard
chickens in Eagan and residents be allowed up to 6 hens in a clean, safe, and sanitary
environment.
We would like to dispel the myths associated with backyard chickens and show that
there is no valid argument for banning responsible residential ownership and educate
people in the tremendous personal and environmental benefits to raising them,
"Chickens suffer from a PR problem. People think they are dirty, noisy and
smelly. The truth, a few cared for hens are cleaner and quieter than one big
dog or the three neighborhood cats that poop in the flower bed. Plus you get
eggs., .,
..YY
"The Wall Street journal
Noise: Fact- Roosters are not required for hens to lay eggs -and are not being
requested as part of this petition. Several laying hens make less noise than a normal
human conversation; and far less noise than a dog, yowling cat, lawnmower or snow
blower.
Smell: Fact— Chickens themselves do not smell. It is only their waste that smells which
is no different than that of a dog, cat, or rabbit. An average dog produces
approximately 12 ounces of solid waste a day. An average chicken produces only about
10% of that at 1.5 ounces.
Fact— Chicken manure is excellent fertilizer and compost material. Dog manure
is not compostable due to harmful bacteria that can infect humans. Dog waste is
considered a major source of bacterial pollution in urban watersheds, while chicken
waste is an environmental bonus,
Fact— Most people immediately think of chicken fam7sand their odors. This is
not the same as with backyard chickens. It requires hundreds or thousands of chickens
kept in unsanitary conditions to produce the ammonia most people associate with
chickens. A backyard chicken coop with 6 or less chickens will not create the odor issue
that concerns most people.
Rodents and predators: Fact— Rodents and predators already exist in Eagan. They
are attracted to ANY unprotected food source such as bird seed, dog, cat and rabbit
food, open trash cans, fruit trees and even ponds containing koi. There are plenty of
preventative measures readily available to eliminate concern with chicken feed as there
are for bird seed and dog food, Additionally, wild turkeys, squirrels, rabbits, and
chipmunks run wild in Eagan without an increase in coyote population- -and at sundown,
chickens go into their coops to sleep.
Health Hazard: Fact— According to the CDC the H5N7. virus (Avian Flu) does not
usually infect people... Highly pathogenic avian influenza A (1-151\11) viruses have NEVER
been detected among wild birds, domestic poultry, or people in the United
States. Source: www.cdc,gov /flu /avian/ And, research shows that there are more
diseases that can spread from dogs and cats than from chickens,
0�
Suggested ordinance Considerations:
• Pilot program —Limit to 25 permits for the first year if needed.
• Number of hens --Due to shipping regulations for the only site with
guaranteed gender - determined chicks, please consider the following
minimums: 3 standard, 5 bantams (miniature breeds), and 4 mixed.
AvJw:mypetchidcQn.c„om This helps to avoid accidental rooster purchase.
• Require permit applicants to take a class (as a pre- requisite)-
Ensure people understand ordinance requirements, types of hens suitable for
MN (ie, winter hardy), coop requirements, and general care to avoid
abandonment and improper care. I would volunteermy own time to do this for
Eagan residents or, there are many classes given very Inexpensively all through the
metro area —for example, see Egg /Plant Urban Supply Store in Sant Paul.
htto_ /A mllantsupply cam/
• No slaughtering permitted —not only is this dangerous to do on one's
own but it will also avoid potential animal suffering, and improper care and
keeping.
• No roosters — Roosters are not needed for hens to lay eggs
• To save Eagan time and money, copy a current successful city
ordinance:
Burnsville -ht : rliMg- 111i:lie.rs.comicodebool_Andex. h_p ?both__ ids = =1b$
LaJPrairie ^ htt}>_// I,apra,irieiTiacoin;site5i_def; lull( filsa /L.aPra rieC :?OC..h,i lcen ?OOritit5anc ;nd,f'
• City of Duluth (Chapter 6, Article VII, Sections 6 -79, 6- 79.1)
I] ttp: // \i'FYN'.1711.II11 COde.CS7111 /resources /ga'te��'ag. asp ?pi<I =50009 ��sid - -2:;
• Fergus Falls, Ordinance No 1o8, Sixth Series
h{ t17;// 4Vla+ lV. et. lC' I' gl lS-�<<�Il:;..ua:n.,us /vertic�il /Sites] o?SCS3A�759- t:r,35D-4I'•AL' .A39F-
L;A24I32 F5;33 C)D %711 /t.tploruls/ %7B6gADBD 6;, -75rS- 4D2i'- i3I31D- rF6,54()c)6D 4<)C°,,7D.L?OC
• Grand Rapids (Chapter 1U, Article III) IAtp: // Iihrar i.municode.con,/default-
i:estjh<»ne.htlu ?infobase= a.3419�doc_- ytctian= whatsne�w
Minneapolis (Title 4, Chapter70)
http: / /t4�rev.u� unicode.coln /lCe:; Dore. es/ ;;ate��a }-.asp?pid= 11,t90 &-sid ='ag
Q J,
s.y:. ��?� —....
i
y _ v.f,'
,. ♦ 1� r�yJyp t Yb
CITY
BACKYARD CHICKENS:ALkOWED
Andover
Residents preparing to present
YES
ME
YES
-;;;;
YES
Duluth
_
YES
Fridley
YES
Golden Valle
_
_
Currently under consideration
YES
Maple Grove
_ _
Ma I
YES
YES
Minneapolis
YES
Minnetonka
_
YES
Montrose
YES
New ort
_
YES
YES
Oakdale
YES
Otsego
YES
Ramse
YES
YES
Robbinsdale
_
YES
YES
Roseville
YES
_
YES
YES
Vadnais He! hts
YES
YES
YES
YES
Ke
Other Metro Area Cities Permitting
Backyard Hens
%us
Sources Contacted
University of Minnesota
College of Food, Agricultural and Natural Resource Sciences
Sally Noll, Poultry Extension Specialist, Minnesota Extension, Department of Animal Science
Rob Porter, DVM, PhD, Diplomate American College of Poultry Veterinarians, Veterinary
Diagnostic Laboratory
Wayne Martin, Minnesota Extension, Alternative Livestoci< Systems
Todd Arnold, Associate Professor Dept. of Fisheries, Wildlife, and Conservation Biology
State of Minnesota Green Cities
Timothy Farnan (MPCA), Waste Prevention Specialist, MN Pollution Control
Philipp Muessig, GreenStep Cities Program Coordinator
City of Eacian Energy and Environment Advismy Commission
Amir Nadav, Commission Member
City of St Paul
Erik Stever, Animal Control Officer, City of St Paul
Permits requested: Approximately 200
Issues reported with legally permitted hens:
Stalementfrom Mr. Stever "No corirplarnfs, tto,odnls, aCardina /makes
mare no>`se �fian�a„ �riia // f/oc� ofhens
City of Burnsville
Lynn Lembke, Services Manager, City of Burnsville
• Permit requests pending: 7
• Issues reported with legally permitted hens: 0
Statement from Ms Lembcke '' ° ° %f has been a nonrrssue "
City of Maplewood
Shann Finwall, Environmental Planner, City of Maplewood
• Permits requested: 4
• Issues reported with legally permitted hens: 0
City of Ann Arbor MI
Councilman Steve Kunselman (Proponent for Ann Arbor's pro- chicl<en ordinance)
• Sel regu /aaJnggctivity— neighbors will alert authorities if hens become an issue
• No issues since being overturned in 2008
• Those who h7fdally apposed are noticing it is 'not a big deal'and satisfies
residents who avant to five mare sustainably
• public meetings can be held at libraries to educate those interested in garden
Chickens
•
Has not opened door for requests for other "farm "type aninnals (pigs, goats,
etc.)
d111
UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA
TENSION
Driven to Discover"
College of Food,
May 29, 2012
Agricultural and
To: Interested Parties
Natural Resource
Sciences
From: University of Minnesota Extension Specialists
DEPARTMENT OF
ANIMAL SCIENCE
Re, Backyard or Urban Poultry Keeping Concerns
305 E A
ccke ve nue
1364 P.cklcs Ave
Several common concerns have been expressed by town and city governments
St. Paul, MN 55108 -611.8
when they are asked to consider the request to keep poultry in urban settings. The
PHONE
purpose of this letter is to provide information regarding these concerns which
(612) 624 -2722
typically include transmission of diseases from poultry to humans as well as nuisance
concerns of noise, odor, and pests; generation and disposal of waste.
FAX
(612) 625 -5789
Poultry diseases and transmission to humans
WEB
mvw.extension.unul.etiu
The main diseases of concern include sahTlonellosis campylobacteriosis,
chlamydophilosis (also known as psittacosis), and avian influenza. Illness
Located the
associated with salmonella and campylobacter is typically the result of eating
St. Petit/ itu/ C Caw ur
contaminated food which has been improperly cooked or prepared. Salmonella and
Campylobacter can exist in the gut of the bird and hence contact with the fecal
material is a concern; however, neither is present in the gut of most poultry. There
are sporadic reports of children contracting Salmonella by handling baby chicks.
People, especially children should wash their hands before and after handling poultry
to prevent transmission in either direction. Chlamydophilosis or psittacosis is rarely
diagnosed in domestic poultry, usually turkeys or pigeons, and is generally not a
disease of chickens, Most cases of Chlamydophila infection are diagnosed in
psittacine bird (parrots, etc.) and only on rare occasion. Contact with respiratory
secretions or fecal material' of sick birds can spread the disease. Avian Influenza is a
respiratory disease in birds and there are many different subtypes of influenza virus.
Most subtypes are not transmitted to humans (zoonotic). One subtype, occurring in
Europe and the Far East, can be transmitted from birds to humans. This subtype has
never been diagnosed in the United States, but there are both national and state
programs to regularly monitor U.S. poultry and wild birds for the presence of this
subtype.
Parasites of poultry must live on or inside birds to survive and do not infect people.
External parasites that can infest poultry are not infectious for people. Common
external parasites such as the northern fowl mite strictly live on birds and are not
infectious for people. Intestinal parasites, such as coccidia and roundworms, can live
in the digestive tract of poultry, but do not infect humans, dogs or cats.
30
Nuisance concerns
These concerns include noise, manure, odor, and pests, For noise, male (rooster)
and female (hen) chickens vary in their vocalizations, Mature roosters will crow while
hens make a clucking noise. The clucking tends to be soft in tone but the hens can
have a loud call -alarm call if startled or threatened. These calls occur over a short
time period and end when the threat ends or is identified. Typically there will be little
vocalization during the night time hours unless the birds are startled.
Odor can be associated with chicken manure if allowed to accumulate. A small
number of birds will not generate much manure and with periodic cleaning of the
coop this should not be an issue. The manure and bedding that is removed can be
used as a fertilizer in the fresh form or after composting. Because the birds produce
manure, there is the concern that flies will be attracted and proliferate in the manure,
Wet feed can also attract flies. Proper coop management, maintaining dry bedding
and removing soiled bedding and wet feed from the coop should minimize the fly
population in a small flock. Proper coop management will also minimize potential
problems with rodents such as house mice and Norway rats. Larger pests /predators,
such as foxes, raccoons, and coyotes that already re$ide in urban areas may take an
occasional chicken but the small populations of poultry kept in any one area are
unlikely to attract and sustain any number of predators.
Prepared by:
Sally Noll, Poultry Extension Specialist, Minnesota Extension, Department of Animal Science
Rob Porter, DVM, PhD, Diplomate American College of Poultry Veterinarians, Veterinary
Diagnostic Laboratory
Wayne Martin, Minnesota Extension, Alternative Livestock Systems
Todd Arnold, Associate Professor Dept. of Fisheries, Wildlife, and Conservation Biology
Additional information is available at the following websites:
D!tR:I/W\vw.ailsci.umii.edu/i)oultry /publicafions.hti-n
http: / /v✓ww1 extension umn edu /food - safety /sanitation/
http:/ /wwwl.extetision umn edu /food /small farms /livestock /poultry/
IJhaiveas8ity OfAli'ancsota, U.S. Department of Agriculture, and Alrranesota coutattes Cooperating
3,
Petition Si natures
Name:;,
stunfr
Signed
Pathik Shah
Minnesota
55121
,
United States
4/18/2012
Wend Johnson
T
Minnesota
55121
United States
4/18/2012
ka e kath
Minnesota
55121
United States
4/19/2012
Melinda Lockard
Minnesota
55121
Uitd States
4/20/2012
Rand Walker
Minnesota
55121
United States
4/20/2012
Prachi shah
Eagan
Minnesota
55121
United States
4/25/2012
Claire Anderson
Eagan
Minnesota
55121
United States
5/12/2012
Lori McCahev_
Eagan
Minnesota _
55122
United States
4/21/2012
Darcy Schatz
Eagan
Minnesota
55122
United States
4/21/2012
Ken Bietz
Eagan
Minnesota
55122
United States
4/27/2012
gary Wilkie
Ea an
Minnesota
55122
United States
4/27/2012
Laurie Hennes
Ea an
Minnesota
55122
United States
4/27/2012
Kimberly Tyl
Eagan
Minnesota
55122
United States
4/27/2012
Kim Prindle
Eagan
Minnesota
55122
United States
4/30/2012
Angela Hanson
Eagan
Minnesota
_ 55122
United States
5/6/2012
Nicole Hanson
Eagan
Minnesota
55122
United States
5/7/2012
Krista Hanson
Eagan _Minnesota
55122
United States
5!7/2012
Sarah Johnson
Eagan
Minnesota
55122
United States
517!2012
Jenny Ingersoll
Ea an
Minnesota
55122
United States
5/7!2012
Jessi Hackenmueller
Eac ian
Minnesota
55122
United States
5/7/2012
Beverly Slefferman
Eagan
Minnesota
55122
United States
5/8/2012
Penny Kennealy
Eagan
Minnesota
55122
United States
5!18/2012
Randall Landsman
Eagan
Minnesota
55122
United States
5130!2012
Sean Steichen
Eagan
Minnesota
55122
United States
_ 5/3012012
Kimberly Bernard
Eagan
Minnesota
55123
United States
4!18/2012
Linda Kics
Eagan
Minnesota
55123
United States
4/18/2012
Kim Kuppenbonder
Eagan
Minnesota
55123
United States
4/18/2012
Irina Bernard —
Eagan
Minnesota _
55123
_
United States
4/18/2012
Gordon Craft
Eagan
Minnesota
55123
United States
4/19/2012
maiy c shearon
Eagan
Minnesota
55123
United States
4/19/2012
Sunny Lambert _
Ea an
Minnesota
55123
United States
4/26/2012
Diana Northfield
Ea an
Minnesota
55123
United States
4/30/2012
Bruce Goff _
Eagan
Minnesota
55123
United States
_
5/1/2012
Heather Goff
_Eagan
Minnesota
55123
United States
5/2!2012
Michelle Whalen
Eagan
Minnesota
55123
United States
5/7/2012
Ann Hortsch
Eagan
Minnesota
55123
United States
5/13/2012
Robert Rose
Eagan
Minnesota
55123
United States
5/17/2012
Kim Gustafson _
Eagan
Minnesota _
55123
United States
5/19!2012
Dzintris Kics
_Eagan
Minnesota
55123
United States
5/23/2012
Nancy Homes
Ea an
Minnesota
55123
United States
5/24/2012
brianna kics _
Ea an
Minnesota
55123
United States
5/30/2_012
Alyssa Kics
_Eagan
Minnesota
55123
United States
5/30/2012
Eric Johnson
Eagan _
Minnesota
55123
United States
5 /3012012
Nicole Twito
Eagan _
Minnesota
_ 55123
United States
5/30/2012
Megan Richardson
Cagan
Minnesota
55123
United States__
5/3012012
Ken zaffke
Ea an
Minnesota
55123
United States
John Wutke
Afton
Minnesota
_ 55001
United Status
_5!30/2012
5/25/2012
Julie Seidl
__Cottage Grove
Minnesota
55016
United States
4/30/2012
Jeff Mack
Cottage Grove
Minnesota
55016
United States
5/14/2012
Anita Hagstrnm� __
Farmington
Minnesota
55024
United States
5/712012_
Kim Cashman
- --
Farmington
Minnesota
55024
_
United States
5/25/201 ?_
Barbara Harhnann
Lakeville
Minnesota
5.5044
United States
4/21/2012
i
30,
?3
Jane Jensen _
Lakeville
Minnesota
55044
United States
5/7/2012
Linda Stan land
Rosemount
Minnesota_
55068
United States
4/26/2012
Am DaY
Rosemount
Minnesota
55068
United States
5/7/2012
Kristina Schnabel _
Saint Paul
Minnesota
55104
United States
4/18/2012
Audrey Matson
Saint Paul
Minnesota
55104
United States
4/19/2012
Christine Miller — _ _
Saint Paul
Minnesota
55104
United States
4/22/2012
Jody Emmings
Saint Paul
Minnesota
55104
United States
4/27/2012
Dani Porter Born
Saint Paul
Minnesota
55105
United States
4/19!2012
Christine Salomon
Saint Paul
Minnesota
55105
United States
4/19/2012
Kathryn Athow
Saint Paul
Minnesota
55105
United States
4/19/2012
Timothy Lynch
Saint paul
Minnesota
55105
_
United States
Cynthia Lyncli
St. Paul
Minnesota
55105
United States
_4/19/2012
4/19/2012
Dan Karel
St. Paul
Minnesota
55105
United States
5/30/2012
Natasha Simeon
St Paul
Minnesota
55106
United States
4/19/2012
br an Blake _
st paul
Minnesota
55106
United States
5/30/2012
Trevor Christensen _
St Paul
Minnesota
55108
United States
4/19/2012
Janke Cole
St. Paul
Minnesota
55110
United States
4/20/2012
Andrew Yurista
New Brighton
Minnesota
55112
United States
4/19/2012
JuliAnne Owens
St Paul
Minnesota
_ 55113
United States
4/1912012
Michael Joyce
Roseville
Minnesota
55113
United States
4/27/2012
Robin Solomon
St Paul
Minnesota
551116
United States
4/19/2012
Nita Bernarad
St aul
Minnesota
55116
United States
4/19/2012
Debra Nash
apple valle
Minnesota
55124
United States
4/19/2012
Art Has eslaghh_
woodbu _
Minnesota
55125
United States
5/2/2012
Michael Balwanz
Shoreview
Minnesota
55126
United States
5/30/2012
Vadnais
Christopher Muench
Heights
Minnesota
55127
United States
4/30/2012
Debra Jacoboski
anoka _
Mi nnesota
55303
United States
5/30/2012
Nicole Corder
Andover
Minnesota
55304
United States
4/24/2012
E Blankets
Chanhassen
Minnesota
55317
United States
4/19/2012
Brandon Campbell _
Chaska
Minnesota
55318
United States
5/30/2012
Lori DuBa
Elk River
Minnesota
55330
United States
4/21/2012
Ben Simmons
Eden Prairie
Minnesota
55347
United States
5/30/2012
Angela Delaney
. der
Minnesota
55360
United States
5/6/2012
Jessica Ferris
Shakopee —
Minnesota
55379
United States
5/7/2012
Wade Ferris
Shakopee
Minnesota
55379
United States
5/7/2012
Candace Gullett
Minneapolis
Minnesota
55404
United States
4/27/2012
Barbara Gasferland
Minnea olis
_Minnesota
55405
United States
4/19/2012 ,
Abhra'eet Ro
Minneapolis
Minnesota
United States
5/30/2012
theresa rooney_
Minneapolis
Minnesota
55405
55406
United States
4/1912012
Angie Hanson
Minneapolis
Minnesota
55407
United States
5/6/2012
Kell Muchowski
Minnea olis
Minnesota
55407
United States
5/24/2012
Jake Knaus
Minneapolis
Minnesota
55417
United States
4/19/2012
_Jen Berg
Minneapolis
Minnesota
55417
United States
5/30/2012
Colleen McLean
Minneapolis
Minnesota
55419
United States
5/14/2012
Andrew Pe Blow
Bloomington
Minnesota
55420
United States
Cleon Wahlin
Golden Valle
Minnesota
55422
States
_5/18/2012
4/30/2012
Mike Anenson
Richfield_
Minnesota
_ 55423
_United
United States
4/27/2012
Karen Valerio
Bloomington
Minnesota
55431
_
United States
4/19/2012
Cara Gusova
Bloomin ton
Minnesota
55431
United States
5/6/2012
Sara Sangiovanni
Fridley
Minnesota
55432
United States__4
/20/2012
Cecily Johnson
Edina
Minnesota
55435
United States
5/25/2012
Jeanie Mel(em
Bloomington
Minnesota
_ 55438
^
United States
4/30/20_12
mackenzie bernsfein
Duluth _
Minnesota
55805
United States
4119/2012
Richard Hanson
- St_J.oseph
Minnesota
56374
United States
5!6/2012
?3
Marilyn Hanson
Sapulpa
Oklahoma _
74066
United States
5/9/2012
Munir Captain
Dallas
Texas
75243
United States
4119/2012
Nora Keys
Houston
Texas
77070
United States
4/19/2012
Edward Laurson
Denver
Colorado
80235_
United States
Ton Bernard — _
Kuna
Idaho
83634
United States
_4/19/2012
4/27/2012
Alesha Turner
El Ca•on
California
92020
United States
4/1912012
Shane Thom son__
sf
California
94121
United States
4/19/2012
lisa salazar
Foster Ci
California
_ 94404
United Slates
4/20/2012
Lukas Martinelli
Pleasant Hill
Califomia
94523
United States
4/24/2012
Michelle Aviles
Wahiawa
Hawaii _
96786
United States
4/19/2012
Trisha Wren_
McMinnville
Ore on
_97128
United States
4/27/2012
Brian Wren _
Port Orchard
Washin ton
98367
United States
5/1/2012
Rhonda Driscoll
Fairbanks
Alaska
99709
United States
4/18/2012
Concerned Citizen
New City
New York
10956-
2406
United States
5/8/2012
Jackie Tryg eseth
Sauk Cl
Wisconsin
53583
9560
United States
4/19/2012
Bradford Gran
St Paul
Minnesota
55113•
6631
United States
7/2012
Raquel Coto
Buffalo
New York
14226
United States
2/2012
.Phyllis Nagler
High Springs
Florida
32643
United States
9/2012
Sami Si norino
Kokomo
Indiana
46902
United States
r44/20/2012
Aaron Wilkinson
Lewisville
Indiana
47352
United States
812012
I nn kelm
Baroda
Michi an
491 -01
United States
0/2012
Christine Milliken
North Port
Florida
34291
United States
4/20/2_012
Chanfal Buslot
Hasselt
35100
Bol ium
4/19/2012
Daniela Bress _
Salz itter
38226
German
4/21/2012
Lena Rehber er
Grebenhain
44056
German
4/19/2012
Jenna Grabey
Ilfracombe
EX34 8LY
United
Kin door
4/19/2012
Elizabeth O'Halloran
Kett erin
NN16
ODA
United
Kin dom
4/20/2012
Ana Mesner
L ubl'ana
1000
Slovenia
M19 /2012
Jac ui Trevillian
Melton West
_
3337
Australia
4/20/2012
I
�
t
lb
ei
Agenda Information Memo
October 16, 2012, Eagan City Council Meeting
VI. OLD BUSINESS
A. ORDINANCE AMENDMENT — AN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER
10.12, ADDING SUBDIVISION 4 RELATIVE TO HARBORING OF CHICKENS
AND A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A CHICKEN PERMIT FEE
ACTIONS TO BE CONSIDERED:
To approve an Ordinance Amendment to City Code Chapter 10.12 relative to harboring of
chickens and direct the City Attorney to publish the ordinance amendment summary.
• To approve a Resolution adopting a fee for chicken permits.
FACTS:
➢ At the June 5, 2012 Listening Session, the City Council received a request from a group
of citizens to consider an ordinance amendment to allow backyard chickens. City Code
currently allows chickens only on properties of at least 5 acres zoned agricultural.
➢ Per the direction of the City Council at the September 11, 2012 Special City Council
meeting, the City Attorney drafted an ordinance amendment to allow harboring chickens
on residential properties.
➢ Per the direction of the City Council, the proposed Resolution sets a $50.00 annual fee
for a chicken permit, which is the same fee currently charged for a carrier pigeon permit.
➢ During the preparation of the ordinance amendment, the City Attorney discovered
additional public policy questions for Council consideration, which are outlined below.
➢ If the Council approves the .proposed ordinance amendment, it goes into effect upon its
publication on October 26, 2012.
Public Policy Considerations
In drafting the ordinance, the following issues were identified as not having specific Council
direction or discussion at the September i l meeting. Without specific direction, the City
Attorney's office and staff sought to ensure that the amendment would be consistent with other
areas of City Code. The issues are being called out should the Council wish to make any changes
to the amendment being proposed:
➢ The proposed ordinance amendment allows chickens only on the properties of single -
family dwellings. Thus, chickens would not be allowed on other types of residential
properties ( twinhomes, townhomes and apartments).
IFIN
➢ The Council directed the ordinance amendment require the coop design be "reasonably
consistent with the design of the primary dwelling." In drafting the ordinance
amendment, the City Attorney addressed the Council's concern about unsightly coops by
requiring the exterior finish be resistant to weather and decay. If the structure is larger
than 120 square feet, the accessory structure regulations require finish materials similar
and compatible to those on the dwelling.
➢ At the suggestion of the City Attorney, the proposed ordinance amendment does not
allow chicken coops in front yards. This is different than the 30 -foot front yard setback
directed by Council, but it keeps the chicken coop setbacks consistent with other
accessory structure regulations. Additionally, the City Attorney recommended 10 -foot
side and rear lot line setbacks in the Estate zoning district to maintain consistency with
the accessory structure setback in that district.
➢ At the Special City Council meeting, the Council directed that chickens be allowed to
roam a fenced yard and that an additional run not be required. After further research, staff
determined it is standard for the coop to have an attached, fully enclosed run. The
attached runs ensure chickens have an area protected from predators and a place to
exercise in the winter, when snowfall makes it difficult to roam a yard. The proposed
ordinance amendment requires a coop and run, which are attached and considered one
structure. The amendment still allows chickens to roam a fenced yard.
➢ At the suggestion of the City Attorney, the proposed ordinance amendment requires that
eggs collected on residential properties be used for personal consumption. The eggs shall
not be offered for sale.
ATTACHMENTS (3):
The proposed ordinance amendment and summary ordinance is attached on pages a(o to
koa
The Resolution adopting a chicken permit fee is attached on page 10 3
Comments received from residents after the September 11, 2012 Special City Council meeting
are attached on pages <0 to LOCO .
q
ORDINANCE NO. 2ND SERIES
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EAGAN, MINNESOTA, AMENDING EAGAN CITY
CODE CHAPTER TEN ENTITLED "PUBLIC PROTECTION, CRIMES AND OFFENSES" BY
ADDING SECTION 10.12, SUBDIVISION 8, REGARDING THE HARBORING OF
CHICKENS; AND BY ADOPTING BY REFERENCE EAGAN CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND
SECTION 10.99.
The City Council of the City of Eagan does ordain:
Section 1. Eagan City Code Chapter Ten is hereby amended by adding Section 10.12,
Subdivision 8, to read as follows:
Subd. 8. Harboring & keepingofchickens
A. Definitions. As used in thissubdivision, the following definitions shall apply:
1. Chicken means a fowl of the genus Gallus and species Gallus domesticus
that is commonly referred to as domesticated fowl
2. Chicken coop means any structure used for the housing of chickens
3. Chicken run means a fenced outdoor area for the keeping and exercising of
chickens.
4. Rooster means a male chicken.
B. Chicken permit required. It is unlawful for any person to keep harbor, maintain
possess, or otherwise control any chicken within the City, except: (1) in an area
zoned as agricultural; or (2) pursuant to a permit issued by the City under this
subdivision on a parcel of record zoned for single family detached dwelling
C. Permit application and permit fees. An application for a permit hereunder shall be
filed with the city clerk u op n an application form furnished by the city. The en rmit
fee, which shall be paid and filed with the erp mit application shall be in an amount
established by city council resolution A permit issued hereunder shall be for
duration of one year from its date of issuance An application for permit renewal
shall be filed 60 days prior to the expiration of the current permit The permit
application shall include, but not be limited to the following:
1. The full name and address of the following persons:
(a) The applicant signed thereto; and
(b) The owner(s) of the premises on which chickens are sought to be
kept and for which the permit would apply
2. The street address of the premises on which chickens are sought to be kept
E
3. The number of chickens to be kept on the premises;
4. A detailed sketch plan of the premises on which chickens are sought to be
kept, including the location, the dimensions and design of the coop and run
establishing compliance with the chicken coop and run specifications
provided in this subdivision,
5. A statement certifying whether the property's homeowners' association
rules if any, prohibit the keeping of chickens on the property for which the
application is sought:
6. If the applicant is not the fee owner of the premises on which the chickens
are sought to be kept and for which the permit would apply, application
shall be signed by all fee owners of the premises
7. Any other and further information as the city deems necessM
D. Granting or denying issuance of permit. The city 'clerk mqy grant an initial or
renewal permit under this subdivision; however, a permit may not be issued or
renewed unless the application filed demonstrates compliance with the requirements
of this subdivision. A permit shall not be issued or renewed until the animal control
officer inspects and approves the premises including the chicken coop and run,at
which chickens are sought to be kept. The city clerk shall deny a permit hereunder
for any of the following reasons:
1. The application is incomplete or contains false fraudulent or deceptive
statements.
2. The applicant does not or has not complied with one or more of the
provisions of this subdivision.
3. The premises for which the permit is sought including but not limited to
the proposed or existing chicken coop or run is not in compliance with any
provisions of this subdivision, other city code provisions or state laws
relating to zoning, health, fire building or safety
4. The proposed chicken coop would result in a violation of or be inconsistent
with the accessory structure zoning regulations elsewhere in this Code
The applicant or owner of the premises where the chickens are to be kept has
been convicted of a violation under this subdivision.
6. The applicant is not the owner of the chickens proposed to be Ice pt on the
Premises,
q'I
E.
The applicant is not the occupant of the premises for which the pennit is
sought to be issued.
Ownership. The owner of the chickens must occupy the premises for which
the permit is issued.
2. Inspection. The premises including the coop and run thereon for which a
permit is issued shall at all reasonable times be open to inspection by the
ammal control officer or any other city official to determine compliance with
this subdivision, other city code provisions and state laws relating to zoning
health, fire, building or safety.
Transferability of permit A permit issued hereunder shall be
nontransferable. It is unlawful to keep harbor, maintain possess or
otherwise control any chicken on property that is not identified on the
ennit.
4. Specifications for feeding chickens All feed for the chickens shall be stored
in water -tight and vermin -proof containers
Specifications of chicken coop and run A chicken coop and run are
required. The construction and location of the chicken coop and run shall be
in compliance with the applicable building and zoning regulations of the city
and the following requirements:
(a) The interior floor space of the chicken coop shall be. a minimum size
of two (2) square feet for each chicken authorized under the permit.
(b) The exterior finish materials of the elcken coop shall be: (i)
weather - resistant protective covering material decay resistant wood
or of exterior finish wood is not decay resistant then the wood finish
shall be protected from the elements and decay y paint or protective
covering (e.g siding fascia wrap )• and (ii) in accordance with the
accessory structure regulations set forth in the zoning regulations in
this Code.
(c) The construction of and materials used for the chicken coop and nm
must be adequate to prevent access by rodents
MAI
(d) The chicken run shall be attached to the chicken coon The chicken
coop and run shall be deemed as a single structure and subject to the
accessory structure regulations set forth in the zoning regulations of
this Code.
(e) The floor area of the chicken run shall be a minimum size of five (5)
square feet for each chicken authorized under the permit
(f) The chicken run shall be fully enclosed by fencing or other similar
material.
(g) No chicken coop or run, or M portion thereof, shall be within 25
feet of the outer perimeter of .any inhabitable building
(h) The chicken coon and run shall be setback at least 10 feet from the
rear lot line and at least 5 feet from the side lot lines On properties
zoned Estate, the coop and run shall be setback at least 10 feet from
the rear and side lot lines. The chicken coop and nm or an portion
thereof, shall not be located in the front yard which is defined as any
area located between the front lot line and the front setback line or
front building line, whichever is further from the front lot line
running from side lot line to side lot line
(i) The chicken coop and run shall be kept in good repair as to be. in
compliance with the property maintenance regulations elsewhere in
this Code.
(j) The chicken coop and run shall be kept in a sanitary and odor -free
condition, including the regular and frequent removal and proper
disposal of any accumulated chicken feces or waste dirt or filth that
could create a safety or health hazard
(k) The chicken coop and run shall be immediately removed if a perinit
granted under this subdivision expires or is revoked
6. Regulations The keeping harboring maintaining or possessing of any
chicken under a permit issued pursuant to this subdivision shall be in
accordance with the following:
(a) No more than five (5) chickens shall be kept or harbored on the
premises to which the permit ap 1p ies
(b) Roosters are prohibited.
•f
(c) Slaughtering of chickens on the premises to which the permit applies
is prohibited.
(d) No chickens shall be kept maintained housed or permitted inside
M residential dwelling or r any garage.
(e) No chicken shall be permitted to run at large. The term "run at large"
is defined as any chicken freely roaming in any area not on the
premises to which the permit applies. The chicken shall be deemed to
be permitted to run at large when the premises to which the permit
applies is not securely enclosed by a proper boundary fence as to
prevent a chicken from leaving the premises.
(f) If the chickens are not contained at all times to the coop and run and
allowed to freely roam within the ay rd the roperty shall be enclosed
by a fence in accordance with the fence regulations set forth in the
zoning regulations of this Code and which by material and design
prevents a chicken from leaving the premises
(g) Chickens shall not be kept in such a manner as to constitute a public
nuisance. Any violation of the provisions of this subdivision shall be
deemed a public nuisance.
(h) No chicken eggs shall be sold or offered for sale• all chicken eggs
shall be for personal use or consrunption.
7. Revocation of permit. A violation of any provision of this subdivision or any
provisions of the permit issued hereunder shall constitute grounds for revocation of a
mm-a.
Section 2. Eagan City Code Chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions and Definitions
Applicable to the Entire City Code Including 'Penalty for Violation "' and Section 10.99, entitled
"Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety by reference as though repeated
verbatim.
Section 3. Sumrnary approved. The City Council hereby determines that the text of the
summary marked "Official Summary of Ordinance No. ", a copy of which is attached hereto,
clearly informs the public of the intent and effect of the ordinance. The City Council further
determines that publication of the title and such summary will clearly inform the public of the
intent and effect of the ordinance.
Section 4. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect upon its adoption and publication
according to law.
X00
ATTEST: CITY OF EAGAN
City Council
By: Christina M. Scipioni
Its: City Clerk
Date Ordinance Adopted:
By: Mike Maguire
Its: Mayor
Date Ordinance Published in the Legal Newspaper:
X01
The following is the official summary of Ordinance No. as approved by the City Council
of the City of Eagan on 2012.
ORDINANCE NO. SECOND SERIES
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EAGAN, MINNESOTA, AMENDING EAGAN CITY
CODE CHAPTER TEN ENTITLED "PUBLIC PROTECTION, CRIMES AND OFFENSES" BY
AMENDING SECTION 10.12, SUBD. 8, REGARDING THE KEEPING OF CHICKENS;
AND BY ADOPTING BY REFERENCE EAGAN CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION
10.99.
Eagan City Code Section 10.12 has been modified to add Subdivision 8 regulating the
keeping of chickens in areas zoned as `E ", "R -17', "R -1S ", and "R -2" districts. The
section sets forth the regulations concerning permit application requirements and fees;
granting, denial and revocation of permits; conditions of permit; specifications of
construction and location of chicken coops; as well as limitations on the number of
chickens and condition of the premises on which chickens are to be kept.
A printed copy of the ordinance is available for inspection by any person during regular
office hours at the office of the City Clerk at the Eagan Municipal Center, 3 83 0 Pilot Knob Road,
Eagan, Minnesota 55122.
Effective date. This ordinance shall take effect upon its passage and publication.
Boa
RESOLUTION NO.
CITY OF EAGAN
APPROVING AMENDMENT TO THE 2012 FEE SCHEDULE
WHEREAS, various sections of the City Code provide for fees to be established by City
Council resolution; and
WHEREAS, the City desires to recover certain user related costs through fees and
reimbursement; and
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the fees listed below shall be effective
immediately:
• Chicken Permit Fee: $50.00
Motion by:
Seconded by:
Those in favor:
Those against:
Date: October 16, 2012
Certification
Attest:
CITY OF EAGAN
CITY COUNCIL
Its Mayor
Its Clerk
I, Christina M. Scipioni, City Clerk of the City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, do
hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly passed and adopted by the City Council of
the City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, in a regular meeting thereof assembled this 16th
day of October, 2012.
Christina M. Scipioni, City Clerk
02)
Chicken Ordinance Feedback
Date
Resident name
Feedback
Sept. 12, 2012
Kim Bernard
See email
Sept. 16, 2012
Richard Goetz
Read about the ordinance amendment in Sun
Thisweek and is not in support of it. He doesn't want
to hear roosters crowing in the morning, which will
cause his dogs to bark.
Sept. 18, 2012
Barb Stripsky
In support of the ordinance amendment. Thinks the
coops should be aesthetically pleasing, but not
required to match house siding.
Sept. 24, 2012
Natalie Kemp
In support allowing backyard chickens. She would
like to have a few chickens in her backyard.
`O�
Christina Scipioni
From: Kimberly [kimberlykayb @gmail.coml
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 9:26 AM
To: Christina Scipioni
Subject: Chicken Ordinance
Hi Christina,
Thank you again for your efforts and information regarding the petitioning process. You were consistently kind
and helpful and that was very much appreciated.
I had a couple of questions regarding the session yesterday and wondered if you could tell me how I can get this
information to the Mayor and Council Members.
1. Permit fee
While we understand where the $50 amount came from (pigeon ordinance), but as chickens are far less
destructive on the environment and neighborhood (as we all know by now there is a strong environmental
benefit), we respectfully request the Mayor and Council Members reconsider the annual fee, and perhaps make
it a $50 initial permit application fee, with a yearly renewal fee of $15 for anyone with no complaints or
violations. Many cities, this particular renewal fee amount coming from St. Paul's permit process for chickens,
have either a much lower initial cost, or a higher initial cost with lower renewal fees. If you poll other cities
with chicken permit fees, pretty much across the board they are lower than the amount suggested last night.
2. Aesthetics
Again, frilly understanding the concern about chicken 'flophouses' we also respectfully request the council
reconsider the requirement of 'matching the house exterior and design'. Many people purchase pre -built (and
attractive) coops but some of the best of them look nothing like a residential house, For a good example, click
here: http: / /www.omlet.us/ Perhaps the ordinance wording could be done so it ensures the coop is a stable, safe
and clean environment. Something along those lines should ensure a lack of offensiveness to neighbors, but the
one thing I found in our exhaustive research is that people who do this (and do it legally) WANT attractive, safe
and clean coops. A lot of effort goes into the design and choosing of the coop. I discussed at length with the St
Paul animal control officer what his experiences were with coops. He stated he rarely came across the 'eyesore'
type of coop. But to have the coop look like the homeowner's home would incur a HUGE expense and
honestly, is simply not feasible for housing backyard chickens.
3. Information Packet Available with Permit Application
We would be happy to help put together an informational packet to hand out with the permit application.
Through our research we have learned a lot and can make something simple and easy to understand for those
who may be first time chicken owners. We can include information on free classes, where to purchased gender -
determined chickens (there is only one place who actually guarantees this), what chickens are winter - hearty,
and coop pros and cons. If the city wants to put this together, I would strongly suggest that
www.mypetchicken.com is recommended as they have comprehensive information on how to choose breeds,
and coops and are also the only place you can get the sexed - chicks. EggPlant Urban Farm Supply Store in St.
Paul holds regular and typically free classes on raising backyard chickens as well as gardening, etc. Harvest
Moon Backyard Farmers, a local company, actually recommended by the GreenStep
program http: / /harvestmoonfarmers.blogs otp com/ is another excellent reference.
�p 5
4. In the LaPrairie ordinance I noted in our presentation packet, they had a very good coop reference
guide: You might want to check that out and include it with the permit application as well.
That's all I can think of for now. It was very encouraging to see the process yesterday and the forward thinking
and common sense shown by the Mayor and Council. Thank you again for all you have done. I was quite
proud of our Eagan City Government yesterday! And no one took offense at the "fowl language puns" ...yes,
it's a serious issue, but it's impossible to discuss it without a pun or two -- after all, chickens are some of the
funniest animals on the planet- -we'd be doing them a disservice if we didn't have a sense of humor about it!
Feel free to forward this on to the Mayor and Council Members if you think it would be appropriate.
Best Regards,
Kim Bernard
i O
1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVAKU N.w. • ANUUVLK, MINNtSUTA bb304 • (763) 755 -5100
FAX (763) 755 -8923 • WWW.ANDOVERMN.GOV
TO: Mayor and Council Members
CC: Jim Dickinson, City Administrato
David D. Berkowitz, Public Work ector /City Engineer
FROM: Todd J. Haas, Assistant Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Discuss Crooked Lake Elementary School Hockey Rink as a CIP Improvement —
Engineering
DATE: April 22, 2014
INTRODUCTION
The City Council is requested to discuss Crooked Lake Elementary School Hockey Rink as a Capital
Improvement Plan Project.
DISCUSSION
Over the past year the Park and Recreation Commission had been exploring ideas if the hockey rink at
its current location should be replaced or if an alternate location should be considered. The discussion
to replace the hockey rink was brought up by Public Works staff about two years ago due to the
condition the hockey rink and free skating rink at Crooked Lake School.
Some of the possible ideas that were suggested by the Park Commission for relocations included Rose
Park, Fox Meadows Park, Pine Hills Park, City Hall Outdoor Hockey Rink facility or just leaving the
rink at its current location at Crooked Lake School. After months of discussion and review of the
options by the Park Commission, it has been recommended by the Commission to leave the hockey
rink in its current location and request that funds be approved by the City Council to rebuild the rink
and make some other safety and storm sewer improvements so that is suitable for use by the public and
the hockey associations. If it is determined by the City Council to leave the hockey rink at its current
location, Public Works staff is recommending funding be made available for 2015 so that the
improvements can be made, otherwise Public Works staff is recommending the rink be removed due to
the poor condition of the rink.
The parks or facilities for relocating the rink that were discussed by the Park Commission are as
follows:
• City Hall Outdoor Hockey Rink Facili ty — The City has purchased the property on the west
of the existing hockey rink. Relocating the rink from Crooked Lake School to City Hall
Outdoor Hockey Facility would have some benefits including a campus of hockey rinks since
the existing hockey rinks are heavily used and having a third hockey rink will provide more
opportunity for individuals that want to play. From a maintenance standpoint, it is more
efficient since the rinks are right adjacent to the Public Works Facility to be cleaned and where
City's water source is to flood the rinks. In addition to having an additional hockey rink at this
location would give the City the opportunity to construct a larger free skating rink since the
existing free skating is relatively small. The Park Commission did not recommend this location
as it was too far from its current location.
Mayor and Council Members
April 22, 2014
Page 2 of 3
• Rose Park — After meeting with the neighborhood on the improvements last June 2013, due to
lack support by the neighborhood for the rink, the park was not recommended by the Park
Commission.
• Fox Meadows Park — This park has been discussed in the past and has the room to construct a
hockey and free skating rink. A well could be drilled at this park since one is needed for
potential redevelopment of the park for some sort of fields such as soccer, football and /or
lacrosse. The Park Commission did not recommend this location as it was too far from its
current location.
• Pine Hills Park (south side of 161" Avenue NW) — This park has some space on the west half
of the park west of the existing ball field to construct a hockey and free skating. Some of the
issues with moving the rink to this park is the site will need to be regraded and storm sewer
system will need to be relocated to allow the storm sewer system and drainage areas to function
properly. One of the benefit of this location is that it is centrally located in the City and would
provide another winter activity since the Sports Complex across the street will be providing
other outdoor winter activities such as a sledding, snow showing or cross country skiing. The
Park Commission did not recommend this location as it was too far from its current location.
Listed below the challenges that have been raised by Public Works for Crooked Lake Elementary
School are as follows:
• The location of the rink is secluded and located very far back from the county road (Bunker
Lake Boulevard). So it has been hard to know when it is open or not.
• Although the rink is located on school district property, the rink is pushed right up against
residential property which is private.
• When the Parks Department Maintenance Crew plows the snow from the rink, much of the
snow removal ends up onto private property since there is really nowhere to put the snow.
• When the school district plows the adjacent parking lots, some the snow ends up on the ice.
• Having issues with the trees growing into the rink areas.
• Having issues with salt and debris from the parking lot ending up on the free skate rink due to
the slope of the parking which drains towards the free skate rink.
• The free skate rink is very small and narrow.
• Towards the end of the skating season, the melting of the snow from the parking lot flows onto
the free skating rink.
• Melting snow from the hockey rink does flow onto Eidelweiss Street NW which can cause
issues for that street.
• It is difficult for hockey players to get to the hockey rink because of the down slope from the
warming to the hockey rink. Once you get past the down slope, it is also very hazardous getting
to the entry gate of the hockey rink.
• Access to the hockey rink for maintenance is quite difficult from either around and through the
playground or through the dead end street.
• Parking our equipment at the site is very often difficult. The Parks Maintenance Crew always
seems to be someone's way.
• Getting out of the school parking lot is a challenge at certain times of the day.
• Small kids are present when we do maintenance very often. They love the snow being blown
over them.
Mayor and Council Members
April 22, 2014
Page 3 of 3
• Unfortunately once the rink has been cleaned, the school kids enjoy throwing snowballs onto
the ice. Staff has discussed this with school representatives in the past but continues to be an
ongoing problem for the Park Maintenance Crew.
• Currently all wiring for the hockey rink lighting is above ground and does overhang pretty low
to the rink and also is not very attractive.
• The rink lighting is very out dated and should be replaced.
• There is no security fencing to keep vehicles from driving around behind the school and the
playground area.
• The base of the rink could use some upgrades, clay or more hard pack gravel if it were to stay.
• The basic layout and location of these rinks are just not very good for the City of Andover. If
the rinks were located closer to an existing neighborhood, the rinks would probably get used
more. Based on what staff has seen and heard, the rinks are not getting as much use as the other
rinks such City Hall Outdoor Rinks.
City staff met with Tom Redman of the Anoka Hennepin School District to evaluate the drainage
issues in the parking lot and free skating rink. Based on what was viewed in the field, it is evident that
the only way to help the drainage out so that it does not end up in the free skating rink or sit in the
school parking lot is to construct a storm sewer directly north just past the existing hockey rink and
then eventually to the flood plain area of Coon Creek. With construction, engineering, surveying,
inspection and permits the estimated cost to install the storm sewer is $30,000 to $40,000. The other
issue which has been a concern is snow plowing. Attached is an e -mail from the Anoka Hennepin
School District as to their thoughts about the rink.
BUDGET IMPACT
The estimated improvement cost which would new posts and boards, lights and storm sewer will be
between $90,000 and $100,000.
ACTION REQUIRED
The City Council is requested to discuss Crooked Lake Elementary School Hockey Rink as a Capital
Improvement Plan Improvement for 2015.
Respectfully submitted,
Todd J. Maas
Cc: Ted Butler, Park and Recreation Commission Chair
Attachments: E -mail from Anoka Hennepin School District, Pictures of Crooked Lake Rink
Todd Naas
From: Redmann, Tom <Tom.Redmann @anoka.kl2.mn.us>
Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2013 2:09 PM
To: Todd Haas
Cc: Anderson, Samuel
Subject: Hockey and free skating rinks at Crooked Lake Elementary.
Todd,
This is a follow up to the email you sent last week regarding the City's hockey and skating rinks located at Crooked Lake
Elementary. When we met last year at the school to discuss this with the Principal, we determined that the school really.
does not use the rinks and would have no problem if the City chose to remove and relocate them to another City
park. Since that meeting Crooked Lake Elementary has a new Principal, Sam Anderson: I talked with Sam after receiving
your email and filled him in on the history of the rinks, the warming house, and our meeting last year. Since he has yet
to experience a winter at Crooked Lake Elementary, he hasn't given it much thought nor has he had any parents or staff
express a desire to keep the rinks,
You and I have also discussed the option of altering the drainage to minimize the run off into the rink area, thus making
the establishment and upkeep of good ice more successful. Currently the drainage from our asphalt along the east side
of the school tends to go towards the free skating area. To change this would result in establishing a low area to
intercept the run off. This would mean removal of a fair amount of asphalt, installation of a storm water catch basin,
excavation to install a storm sewer line to the north east into the nature area ... the only area lower than the asphalt...,
the removal of trees and vegetation, and perhaps a sediment pond. This would be at a tremendous cost, which the
school district is in no position to take on, nor do I personally feel would be a good expenditure for the City.
Bottom line is the school district has allowed these City ice rinks to exist for perhaps 30+ years at this location, offering
skating to the community. The school does not depend on or require these to exist as part of any school
curriculum. The school as begun using this east side of the school as a student drop off and pick up area. This seems to
be working well and has made pickup safer and more efficient. Because of the increase vehicles using this area will
likely increase the amount of salt and deicer that drip off of cars, it may be even more difficult to keep a good sheet of
ice on the rink.
The decision is yours, but the removal and relocation of these rinks if totally fine with us and understandable. If you
have any additional questions or wish to talk more about this please reply or call.
Tom
Thomas Redmann
Anoka - Hennepin ISD #11
Supervisor of Sites & Grounds
Phone 763 - 506 -1206
Fax 763 - 506 -1203
tom.redmann@onoka.k12.mn.us
�2;L-
O
1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. • ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 • (763) 755 -5100
FAX (763) 755 -8923 • WWW.ANDOVERMN.GOV
TO: Mayor and Council Members
CC: Jim Dickinson, City Administrator
FROM: David D. Berkowitz, Public Works Director /City Engineer
SUBJECT: Consider Location & Layout of Way Finding Signs /14 -16, Cont. — Engineering
DATE: April 22, 2014
INTRODUCTION
The City Council is requested to continue discussion on the way finding signs.
DISCUSSION
Attached is an updated map after the last workshop. Sign locations have been added and the actual
proposed sign size will be presented at the meeting along with real size examples from other cities.
Each sign will have an arrow that will state "You Are Here ".
Also attached are kiosk examples. Staff recommends the Bent Diamond.
BUDGET IMPACT
The CIP identifies $30,000 for the installation of way finding signs and exercise equipment along trial
segments. It is identified that $10,000 would be funded from Park dedication Funds and the remaining
$20,000 from Trails Funds.
ACTION REQUIRED
The City Council is requested to review the updated way finding sign, approve the sign to move
forward to sign production and installation and direct staff on the kiosk style.
Respectfully submitted,
l c�,
David D. Berkowitz
Attachments: Andover Way Finding Sign & Kiosk Examples
r
i
�4TW Y�r
rW
.50 mi.
pwww
E IB '•.•.
J �
A �
3
city Hall
Clry Hall Cam W s '
Ho,key Rinks
621-M. »4
x.40 mi.�
hi Parx
0a 6 w
w�nz 4v' 4ak Bluff Party
r xi.rps �wrx,.
. Hartfiere 3 w b xart
v..... Park .e.
sCOONCREEK
Moores
"
Estrtez
/ks
Landlocked
Ip Park
IN
pwww
E IB '•.•.
J �
A �
3
city Hall
Clry Hall Cam W s '
Ho,key Rinks
621-M. »4
x.40 mi.�
hi Parx
0a 6 w
w�nz 4v' 4ak Bluff Party
r xi.rps �wrx,.
. Hartfiere 3 w b xart
v..... Park .e.
wMW
........... I.........r arw•• .,f,'.p
iwrmur„,
,a^•ae 4� rwmW .xaovs
3i F
ECrxkViaw �^„ tC`:
6 j Crossirq �.K ••„°M
d � Park
ff •aW rae.,, 95nfF 6 aa�o
Coo X801 °r. dy 3
N f= £
" � ker s �WFF�f •..,9r 1 - � , mx.x
i a�. R�Jwoad v - ��ns Park
if
wTwe �s `N a3 �
+mW a ,rr.w
mi•
a` rmW
BUNKER
LAKE
Trail Distances and Map Locations
N /V Paved Trail O Guide Sign - Distance Marker ANDOVE C II T Y 0 F
W +E '••,••" Unpaved Trail park
S Sidewalk water
ue�mm nMmuaeend bWUwElorrMe owanWpaln.r.0
mmp.rme,a
This map is provided by the City of Andover to guide people in the enjoyment of our trails nb b+ ruommaM ����
. eo.
owa mr ave.er•oa. r.o: w
when walking, running, rolling or biking.Trails displayed consist of paved and unpaved surfaces.
Paved surface trails are blacktop and sidewalks. Unpaved surface trails are wood chips, soil or sand. 000 :ate ,oa
Not all surrounding trails are shown. Trail distances are approximate
sCOONCREEK
/ks
IN
. i,h woods
Red Oaks
pntlover5uuan rvonn
si'
amW
Ball Field Complex
®C
het
+
ta'b tcs.
y
'o
..
mW
70 mi
2J " °'••°
l�rry4^
rrr� rrrr.uwrr.,. wr rmn...q.
•,a
a.•.'12
mi
r
i3
wMW
........... I.........r arw•• .,f,'.p
iwrmur„,
,a^•ae 4� rwmW .xaovs
3i F
ECrxkViaw �^„ tC`:
6 j Crossirq �.K ••„°M
d � Park
ff •aW rae.,, 95nfF 6 aa�o
Coo X801 °r. dy 3
N f= £
" � ker s �WFF�f •..,9r 1 - � , mx.x
i a�. R�Jwoad v - ��ns Park
if
wTwe �s `N a3 �
+mW a ,rr.w
mi•
a` rmW
BUNKER
LAKE
Trail Distances and Map Locations
N /V Paved Trail O Guide Sign - Distance Marker ANDOVE C II T Y 0 F
W +E '••,••" Unpaved Trail park
S Sidewalk water
ue�mm nMmuaeend bWUwElorrMe owanWpaln.r.0
mmp.rme,a
This map is provided by the City of Andover to guide people in the enjoyment of our trails nb b+ ruommaM ����
. eo.
owa mr ave.er•oa. r.o: w
when walking, running, rolling or biking.Trails displayed consist of paved and unpaved surfaces.
Paved surface trails are blacktop and sidewalks. Unpaved surface trails are wood chips, soil or sand. 000 :ate ,oa
Not all surrounding trails are shown. Trail distances are approximate
.................................................................. ...............................
F
•r
•:.�
P- 1015 -SW .`
Ili a.
•
F
S
•
•RP
15505W
P- 1024 -SW w/ Hot Dipped Galvanized Frame
•.•..•.•.•.•..•.•.•.•..•.•....•.•.•.•.•.••••••.•.••••.•.••.•.• •••••••••••••••••••••••••••.•••
overworx.net
C C I T Y 0 F
A
1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. • ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 • (763) 755 -5100
FAX (763) 755 -8923 • WWW.CI.ANDOVER.MN.US
TO: Mayor and Councilmembers
FROM: Jim Dickinson, City Administrator
SUBJECT: 2015 -2019 CIP Development Discussion & 2014 CIP Progress Report
DATE: April 22, 2014
INTRODUCTION
In late March, Administration/Finance distributed baseline worksheets to Department Heads as
part of the 2015 -2019 CIP kick -off. Subsequent discussion has centered on the 2015 -2019 CIP
development and committees (Vehicle Purchasing & Facility Management Committees) and
commissions (Parks and Recreation & Community Center Advisory) doing the necessary work
to prepare a "draft" 2015 -2019 CIP.
DISCUSSION
To assist with the Councils discussion of the 2015 -2019 CIP, I have attached for the Council's
reference a progress report on the 2014 Capital Improvement Plan projects and the to -date draft
2015 -2019 CIP project listings.
Throughout the summer a significant amount of time will also be spent on evaluating utility
infrastructure, transportation improvements, building maintenance, equipment and park and
recreation needs; individual project sheets will be prepared for recommended projects and
equipment. Finance will evaluate each of these items to assure the projects /equipment can be
supported by an appropriate funding source. Detailed fund balance analysis of the Capital
Projects Funds and Utility Funds will be presented to the Council for review at future workshops.
At this time the Staff would like to again secure the Council's priorities to assure that those
priorities are taken into consideration while staff develops the draft 201 5 -2019 CIP. Staff will
also discuss with the Council the Community Center Security Proiect and the upcoming
Capital Equipment Bonds.
ACTION REQUESTED
The Council is requested to review the attachments, receive a brief presentation from
Administration, and provide direction to staff on Council priorities for the 2015 -2019 CIP.
submitted,
L
CITY OF ANDOVER
2015 - 2019 CIP Development Calendar
Date
Activity
February 25, 2014
2015 - 2019 CIP Council Workshop to determine CIP guidelines.
March 4, 2014
Council adopts 2015 Budget Development Guidelines.
March 25, 2014
Council discussion of CIP priorities for 2015 — 2019.
April 3, 2014
Draft 2015 - 2019 CIP Calendar.
April 3 - May 2, 2014
Prepare base CIP Sheets.
April 10, 2014
Vehicle Purchasing Committee review of CIP equipment.
April 22, 2014
2015 - 2019 Capital Improvement Plan Discussion
May 8, 2014
CIP kick -off meeting with Department Heads to discuss CIP sheet content.
May 9, 2014
Projected cash flow statements prepared.
May 27, 2014
City Council progress update and Council CIP priority discussion.
June 2, 2014
All projects updated in CIP program.
June 12, 2014
Review projects — new and shifts.
June 24, 2014
City Council progress update and Council CIP priority discussion.
July - August, 2014
Commission and Committee review.
July 1, 2014
CIP project sheets completed.
July 7, 2014
CIP project sheets staff initial review.
July 8, 2014
Vehicle Purchasing Committee review of CIP equipment.
July 22, 2014
City Council review of City Utilities projects.
August 5, 2014
CIP project sheet staff final review.
August 11 - 22, 2014
Preparation of final draft of 2015 - 2019 CIP for Council Workshop.
August 26, 2014
City Council review of draft 2015 - 2019 CIP.
September 23, 2014
Council Workshop — progress report; public comment update.
October 21, 2014
City Council holds 2015 - 2019 CIP public hearing.
October 21, 2014
City Council adopts 2015 - 2019 CIP.
Responsibility
City Council / Staff
City Council / Staff
City Council / Staff
Finance
Finance
Vehicle Purchasing Committee
City Council / Staff
Department Heads
Finance
City Council / Staff
Department Heads
Department Heads
City Council / Staff
Admin / Department Heads
Department Heads
Admin / Department Heads
Vehicle Purchasing Committee
City Council / Staff
Admin / Department Heads
Finance
City Council / Staff
City Council / Staff
City Council
City Council
CITY OF ANDOVER
2014 Capital Improvement Plan
Projects By Department - Use of Funds
Central Equipment
New - Mobile Vehicle Lifts
$ 24,000
purchased
Engineering
218,000
awarded
New Development Projects
115,000
awarded
Pedestrian Trail Maintenance
72,000
bid early summer
Survey Equipment
32,000
purchased
New Pedestrian Trail and Sidewalk Segments
15,000
out for bids
Intersection Upgrades
234,000
out for bids
Facility Management .
150,000
ordered
Annual Parking Lot Maintenance
97,000
bid early summer
Recycling Building & Fence
50,000
security cameras to be installed in late spring
Water
147,000
Fire
15,000
currently underway
Replacement- Ladder Truck #11
600,000
ordered: $1,050,000 truck; $50,000 accessories
Park & Recreation - Operations
Replace /Repair Play Structures - Various Parks
48,000
Langseth / Lions - quotes early spring
Replace /Repair Major Park Projects - Various Parks
25,000
requesting info
Replacement - Bobcat #610
36,000
purchased
Replacement- One Ton Truck w/ Plow #503
109,000
requesting info
Park & Recreation - Projects
23,000
requesting info
Annual Miscellaneous Projects
15,000
requesting info
Rose Park - Renovation
200,000
design early spring, construct in summer
WayFinding Signs / Exercise Station
30,000
spring
Irrigation Projects - Small Parks
20,000
spring
Prairie Knoll Park - Pave Parking Lots
100,000
out for bids
365,000
Storm Sewer
Storm Sewer Improvements
40,000
Streets / Highways
Annual Street Seal Coat Project
513,000
awarded
Annual Street Crack Seal Project
218,000
awarded
Annual Street Reconstruction
660,000
awarded
Annual Pavement Markings
27,000
awarded
Annual Curb Replacement
44,000
grouped w/ Station Parkway project
Municipal State Aid Routes / New & Reconstruct
1,126,000
out for bids
Intersection Upgrades
455,000
out for bids
Replacement - Dump Truck w/ Snow Removal Equipm
150,000
ordered
New - Tractor Blade
5,000
ordered
3,198,000
Water
Rehabilitation of Wells
15,000
currently underway
Grand Total
$ 4,732,000
Additional Items:
Replacement - Fire Utility #4
$ 32,000
requesting info
Replacement - Fire Utility #5
32,000
requesting info
Replacement - Toro Groundmaster #559
35,000
ordered
Replacement- One Ton Truck w/ Plow #503
65,000
requesting info
New - Snowblower Attachment - Belos
23,000
requesting info
Replacement - Snowblower Attachment - Bobcat
7,000
requesting info
New - Add Rear Wing to Plow Truck
30,000
requesting info
$ 224,000
City of Andover, MN
Capital Plan
2015 thou 2019
DEPARTMENT SUMMARY
Department 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total
Central Equipment
40,000
40,000
Community Center
12,000
2,762,000
2,774,000
Engineering
215,000
596,000
341,000
640,000
1,792,000
Facility Management
58,000
140,000
877,000
4,150,000 10,000
5,235,000
Fire
150,000
290,000
430,000
870,000
Information Technology
70,000
20,000
90,000
Park 6 Rec - Operations
75,000
75,000
125,000
225,000
500,000
Park&Rec - Projects
535,000
535,000
715,000
565,000 515,000
2,865,000
Sanitary Sewer
86,000
500,000
3,465,000
1,250,000
5,301,000
Storm Sewer
58,500
50,000
55,000
410,000
573,500
Streets lHighways
2,046,000
2,316,000
2,096,000
2,622,000 180,000
9,260,000
Water
17.000
950.000
50.000
760.000
1.777.000
TOTAL 3,322,500 5,512,000 10,916,000 10,622,000 705,000 31,077,500
City of Andover, MN
Capital Plan
2015 thm 2019
FUNDING SOURCE SUMMARY
Source 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total
Assessments
150,000
185,000
577,000
1,970,000
2,882,000
Capital Equipment Reserve
570,000
530,000
500,000
500,000
500,000
2,600,000
Capital Projects Levy
283,000
355,000
117,000
75,000
10,000
840,000
Comm Ctr Operations
12,000
100,000
12,000
124,000
Construction Seal Coat Fund
16,000
7,000
26,000
59,000
108,000
Equipment Bond
80,000
660,000
680,000
180,000
1,600,000
G.O. Bond
3,585,000
4,150,000
7,735,000
Municipal State Aid Funds
579,000
600,000
285,000
1,464,000
Park Dedication Funds
35,000
35,000
215,000
65,000
15,000
365,000
Road 8 Bridge Funds
1,376,000
1,602,000
1,749,000
2,022,000
6,749,000
Sanitary Sewer Fund
90,500
230,000
320,500
Sewer Revenue Bonds
2,000,000
250,000
2,250,000
Sewer Trunk Fund
110,000
610,000
997,000
1,717,000
Storm Sewer Fund
49,500
50,000
55,000
60,000
214,500
Trail Funds
368,000
100,000
456,000
924,000
Water Fund
21,500
950,000
50,000
50,000
1,071,500
Water Trunk Fund
30,000
40,000
43,000
113,000
GRAND TOTAL
3,322,500
5,512,000
10,916,000
10,622,000
705,000
31,077,500
City of Andover, MN
Capital Plan
2015 thru 2019
PROJECTS & FUNDING SOURCES BY DEPARTMENT
Department
Project#
Priority
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019 Total
Comm Ctr Operations,
Carpet/ Tile Replacement
15- 41900 -02
Capital Projects Levy
Building A - Seal Floor
Central Equipment
Replacement - Service Truck
16 -08800 -01
2
16- 41900 -01
40,000
Fire St. #2 Addition with additional land purchase
40,000
Equipment Bond -
Addition to Storage Building 8 Vehicle Maint. Shop
18 411900 -01
40,000
Attached Storage Building
40,000
Central Equipment Total
40,000
40,000
Community Center
Replacement - Rink Boards
15- 44300 -01
1
12,000
12,000
Comm Ctr Operations
11,000
12,000
ACCNMCA Expansion
17- 44000 -01
2
2,750,000
2,750,000
G.O. Bond
;150,000
2,750,000
Replacement - Zamboni Battery Pack
17- 44300 -01
1
12,000
12,000
Comm Ctr Operations
12,000
1$000
Community Center Total
12,000
2,762,000
2,774,000
Engineering
New Development Projects
15 -01600 -01
1
140,000
150,000
160,000
450,000
Sewer Trunk Fund
110,000
110,000
117,000
337,000
Water Trunk Fund
30,000
40,000
43,000
113,000
Pedestrian Trail Maintenance
15 -01600 -02
1
75,000
78,000
81,000
184,000
418,000
Road B Bridge Funds
75,000
78,000
81,000
184,000
418,000
New Pedestrian Trail and Sidewalk Segments
16- 41600 -01
1
368,000
100,000
456,000
924,000
Trail Funds
368,000
100,000
456,000
924,000
Engineering Total
Facility Management
Annual Parking Lot Maintenance
15411900 -01
Capital Projects Levy
Comm Ctr Operations,
Carpet/ Tile Replacement
15- 41900 -02
Capital Projects Levy
Building A - Seal Floor
15- 41900 -03
Capital Projects Levy
Memorial - Veterans Memorial
16- 41900 -01
Capital Equipment Reserve
Fire St. #2 Addition with additional land purchase
17 41900 -01
G.O. Bond
Addition to Storage Building 8 Vehicle Maint. Shop
18 411900 -01
G.O. Bond
Attached Storage Building
18 -01900 -02
215,000 596,000 341,000 640,000 1,792,000
1 28,000 130,000 32,000
28,000 30,000 32,000
100,000
2 10,000
10,000
1 20,000
20,000
1 10,000
10,000
2
1
10,000
10,000
835,000
835,000
3,100,000
3,100,000
300,000
10,000
10,000
190,000
90,000
100,000
30,000
30,000
20,000
20,000
10,000
10,000
835,000
835,000
3,100,000
3,100,000
300,000
Department
Project#
Priority
2015
2016
2017
2018 2019
Total
G.O. Bond
Microsoft DataCenter & CAL's License
15 -01420 -02
Capital Equipment Reserve
1 20,000
Microsoft Office Upgrade
300,000
300,000
Relocate Fuel Station w/ Canopy
18 -01900 -03
2
Capital Equipment Reserve
1
Information Technology Total
300,000
300,000
G.O. Bond
Park & Rec - Operations
Replace/Repair Play Structures - Various Parks
15 45000 -01
Capital Projects Levy
50,000
300,000
300,000
Pedestrian Tunnel Under Crosstown Blvd.
18- 41900 -04
1
17 45000 -01
Equipment Bond
450,000
450,000
G.O. Bond
75,000
Park & Rec - Operations Total
225,000
500,000
450,000
450,000
Facility Management Total
Park Dedication Funds
58,000
140,000
877,000
4,150,000 10,000
5,235,000
Fire
Replacement - Turnout Gear
1542200 -01
1
150,000
150,000
Capital Projects Levy
150,000
150,000
Replacement - SCBA's
16- 42200 -01
1
250,000
250,000
Capital Projects Levy
250,000
250,000
Replacement- Fire Marshall Vehicle
16- 42200 -02
2
40,000
40,000
Equipment Bond
40,000
40,000
Replacement - Tanker #11
17 -02200 -01
2
340,000
340,000
Equipment Bond
340,000
340,000
Replacement - Grass #31
17- 42200 -02
2
45,000
45,000
Equipment Bond
45,000
45,000
Replacement - Grass #21
17 42200 -03
2
45,000
45,000
Equipment Bond
45,000
45,000
Fire Total
40,000
40,000
40,000
Information Technology
Add /Replace SAN storage array
15 -01420 -01
Capital Equipment Reserve
2 15,000
Microsoft DataCenter & CAL's License
15 -01420 -02
Capital Equipment Reserve
1 20,000
Microsoft Office Upgrade
15 41420 -03
Capital Equipment Reserve
70,000 20,000
New Server addition /replacement
16- 41420 -01
Capital Equipment Reserve
1
Information Technology Total
50,000
50,000
Park & Rec - Operations
Replace/Repair Play Structures - Various Parks
15 45000 -01
Capital Projects Levy
50,000
Replace/Repair Major Park Projects - Various Parks
15 -05000 -02
Capital Projects Levy
150;000
Replacement- One Ton Crew Cab Pickup #502
17 45000 -01
Equipment Bond
Replacement - Water Tanker #161
18 415000 -01
Equipment Bond
75,000
Park & Rec - Operations Total
225,000
500,000
Park & Rec - Projects
Annual Miscellaneous Park Projects
15 -05001 -01
Park Dedication Funds
150,000 290,000 430,000 870,000
1 40,000
40,000
40,000
40,000
1 15,000
15,000
15,000
15,000
2 15,000
15,000
15,000
15,000
1 20,000
20,000
20,000
20,000
70,000 20,000
90,000
1 50,000
50,000
50,000
50,000
200,000
50,000
50,000
50,000
50,000
200,000
1 25,000
25,000
25,000
25,000
100,000
25,000
25,000
25,000
25,000
100,000
1
50,000
50,000
50,000
50,000
1
150;000
150,000
150,000
150,000
75,000
75,000
125,000
225,000
500,000
1 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 75,000
15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 75,000
Department Project# Priority 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total
Irrigation Projects -Small Parks
15 -05001 -02
Park Dedication Funds
20,000
40 Acre Park Project - 3535161st Ave
15 -05001 -03
Capital Equipment Reserve
Construction Seal Coat Fund
Fox Meadows Park - Renovation
17- 45001 -01
Park Dedication Funds
Annual Street Crack Seal Project
City Campus Rinks - Pave Hockey Rink
18- 45001 -01
Park Dedication Funds
Road & Bridge Funds
Park & Rec - Projects Total
Annual Pavement Markings
15 43100 -04
Road & Bridge Funds
Sanitary Sewer
Televising Camera Upgrade
1548200 -01
Sanitary Sewer Fund
200,000
Sanitary Sewer Extensions
16 48200 -01
Assessments
11,000
Sewer Trunk Fund
1
Yellow Pine Lift Station
17- 48200 -01
Sewer Trunk Fund
30,000
Rural Reserve Trunk Sanitary Sewer
17 -08200 -02
Assessments -
30,000
Sewer Revenue Bonds
535,000
Replacement - Jet/Vac Truck #99
17 48200 -03
Sanitary Sewer Fund
2,865,000
Sewer Trunk Fund
Sanitary Sewer Total
86,000
86,000
Storm Sewer
Storm Sewer Improvements
15 48300 -01
Storm Sewer Fund
1
New - Plate Compactor
15- 48300 -02
Sanitary Sewer Fund
605,000
Storm Sewer Fund
Water Fund
Replacement - Tymce Street Sweeper #172
18- 48300 -01
Equipment Bond
Replacement - Elgin Street Sweeper #169
18 4 8300 -02
Equipment Bond
Storm Sewer Total
20,000
55,000
20,000
Streets / Highways
Annual Street Seal Coat Project
15 -03100 -01
Construction Seal Coat Fund
20,000
Road & Bridge Funds
1 500,000
Annual Street Crack Seal Project
15- 43100 -02
Construction Seat Coat Fund
2,500,000
Road & Bridge Funds
500,000
Annual Pavement Markings
15 43100 -04
Road & Bridge Funds
1
Annual Curb Replacement
15 43100 -05
1 20,000
20,000
55,000
20,000
60,000
20,000
20,000
659,000
20,000
60,000
1 500,000
500,000
500,000
500,000 500,000
2,500,000
500,000
500,000
500,000
500,000 500,000
2,500,000
1
241,000
200,000
252,000
200,000
7,000
200,000
11,000
200,000
1
234,000
273,000
30,000
30,000
1 29,000
31,000
33,000
30,000
30,000
535,000
535,000
715,000
565,000 515,000
2,865,000
1 86,000
86,000
86,000
86,000
1
500,000
105,000
605,000
105,000
105000
500,000
500,000
1
650,000
650,000
- 650,000
650,000
1
2,250,000
1,250,000
3,500,000
250,000
11000,000
1,250,000
2,000,000
250,000
2,250,000
1
460,000
460,000
230,000
230,000
230,000
230,000
86,000
500,000
3,465,000
1,250,000
5,301,000
1 45,000 50,000 55,000 60,000
45,000 50,000 55,000 60,000
1 13,500
4500
4,500
4,500
I
175,000
175,000
175,000
175,000
210,000
210,000
13,500
4,500
4,500
4,500
175,000
175,000
175,000
175,000
58,500
50,000
55,000
410,000
573,500
1 490,000
658,000
659,000
785,000
2,592,000
16,000
13,000
48,000
77,000
474000
658,000
646,000
737,000
2,515000
1 303,000
241,000
286,000
252,000
1,082,000
7,000
13,000
11,000
31,000
303,000
234,000
273,000
241,000
1,051,000
1 29,000
31,000
33,000
35,000
128,000
29,000
31,000
33,000
35,000
128,000
1 45,000 46,000 48,000 50,000 189,000
Department Project# Priority 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total
Road &Bridge Funds
2,046,000
2,316,000
45,000
46,000
48,000
50,000
189,000
Municipal State Aid Routes / New & Reconstruct
15 -03100 -06
1
579,000
Rehabilitation of Wells 15 48100 -01 1
17,000
50,000
579,000
Municipal State Aid Funds
167,000
Water Fund
579,000
50,000
50,000
50,000
579,000
Street Overlays
15- 43100 -08
1
600,000
900,000
Water Fund
600,000
Assessments
150,000
Water Main Improvements 18 48100 -01 1
150,000
Road & Bridge Funds
710,000
Assessments -
450,000
710,000
450,000
Annual Street Reconstruction
16 -03100 -01
1
50,000
740,000
890,000
1,035,000
2,665,000
Assessments
185,000
222,000
260,000
667,000
Road &Bridge Funds
555,000
668,000
775,000
1,998,000
Intersection Upgrades
16- 43100 -02
1
600,000
285,000
885,000
Municipal State Aid Funds
600,000
285,000
885,000
Replacement - Dump truck w/ Snow removal #196
17 -03100 -01
1
180,000
180,000
Equipment Bond
180,000
180,000
Replacement- Dump Truck wl snow removal #200
18- 43100 -01
1
180,000
180,000
Equipment Bond
180,000
180,000
Replacement- Dump Truck w/ Snow removal #201
19 -03100 -01
1
180,000
180,000
Equipment Bond
180,000
180,000
Streets / Highways Total
2,046,000
2,316,000
2,096,000
2,622,000 180,000
9,260,000
Water
Rehabilitation of Wells 15 48100 -01 1
17,000
50,000
50,000
50,000
167,000
Water Fund
17,000
50,000
50,000
50,000
167,000
Water Meter Reading System AMI /AMR 16- 48100 -01 2
900,000
900,000
Water Fund
900,000
900,000
Water Main Improvements 18 48100 -01 1
710,000
710,000
Assessments -
710,000
710,000
Water Total
17,000
950,000
50,000
760,000
1,777,000
GRAND TOTAL 3,322,500 5,512,000 10,916,000 10,622,000 705,000 31,077,500
C I T Y O F
N
1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. • ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 • (763) 755 -5100
FAX (763) 755 -8923 • WWW.CLAN DOVER. MN.US
TO: Mayor and Councilmembers
FROM: Jim Dickinson, City Administrator
SUBJECT: 2015 Budget Development Discussion
DATE: April 22, 2014
INTRODUCTION
City Administration is starting to focus on the 2015 Annual Operating Budget Development
process and is looking for City Council direction as the preparation of the 2015 Annual
Operating Budget proceeds.
City Administration will review with the Council the bold italics items at the meeting.
DISCUSSION
The following are the 2015 Budget Development guidelines were adopted at the March 4`" City
Council meeting:
1) A commitment to a City Tax Capacity Rate to meet the needs of the organization and
positioning the City for long -term competitiveness through the use of sustainable revenue
sources and operational efficiencies.
Note: Preliminary Anoka County Assessor taxable market value figures for the City of
Andover are reflecting an 18.10% increase in total taxable market value. (See attached
City ofAndover Pay 2015 Valuation Estimates).
2) Continue with the current procurement and financial plan to appropriately expend the bond
proceeds generated from the successful 2006 Open Space Referendum.
Note: The Open Space Commission and Staff have been active pursuing open space
purchases. It is anticipated closed sessions with the City Council will be held in the near
future to discuss progress.
3) A fiscal goal that works toward establishing the General Fund balance for working capital at
no less than 45% of planned 2015 General Fund expenditures and the preservation of
emergency fund balances (snow emergency, public safety, facility management &
information technology) through targeting revenue enhancements or expenditure limitations
in the 2014 adopted General Fund budget.
Note: With property tax revenues making up close to 80% of the total General Fund revenues
cash flow designations approaching 50% would be appropriate and are recommended by the
City's auditor. Emergency Fund Balances should be estimated to stabilize the situation, not
be the complete solution. Staff will review with the Council a 2013 -2014 General Fund
Balance Analysis at the meeting
4) A commitment to limit the 2015 debt levy to no more than 25% of the gross tax levy and a
commitment to a detailed city debt analysis to take advantage of alternative financing
consistent with the City's adopted Debt Policy.
Note: The adopted 2014 debt levy was 19.10% of the gross tax levy, 25% will provide
margin to accommodate the 2014 Equipment Bond debt service. If an additional debt
issuance was considered in 2014 -2015, the impact to the levy could be accommodated.
(See attached City ofAndover Property Tax Levy spreadsheet).
5) A comprehensive review of the condition of capital equipment to ensure that the most cost -
effective replacement schedule is followed. Equipment will be replaced on the basis of a cost
benefit analysis rather than a year based replacement schedule.
Note: The City Vehicle Purchasing Committee is currently performing this analysis, and will
make recommendations to the City Council as part of the 2015 -2019 Capital Improvement
Plan development process.
6) The use of long -term financial models that identify anticipated trends in community growth
and financial resources that will help designate appropriate capital resources for future City
needs. The financial models will be used in the budget planning process to ensure that key
short-term fiscal targets are in line with long -term fiscal projections.
Note: The City continually maintains various financial models to determine the long -term
impacts of present day expenditures and financing decisions. Fiscal assumptions are based
upon a complex set of financial data including growth factors, tax capacity valuations, per
capita spending and debt ratios.
7) A team approach that encourages strategic planning to meet immediate and long -term
operational, staffing, infrastructure and facility needs.
Note: The City Council last year adopted 2013 -2014 City Council Goals and Values. It is
anticipate that same process will occur for 2014 -2015.
8) A management philosophy that actively supports the funding and implementation of Council
policies and goals, and a commitment to being responsive to changing community conditions,
concerns, and demands, and to do so in a cost effective manner.
Note: The City Council has formally adopted Council Goals and Values. Management,
through these goals, pay special attention to fiscal values, commercial & residential
development or redevelopment, collaboration opportunities, service delivery and the
livability /image of the community.
Staffing:
A few new staffing requests are expected from City Departments for the 2015 budget.
Administration is anticipating requests from the Fire, Public Works and Building Departments.
Development and building activity is fairly robust at this time, it is anticipated that this activity
will continue into the near future. With the potential of various position vacancies,
Administration & Human Resource will continually monitor staffing availability and budget to
maintain adequate service levels to the public.
There are some anticipated retirements in the next few years; there will need to be a focus on
appropriate succession planning.
Personnel Related Implications:
To date the following are projected issues facing personnel related expenses:
1. Administration and Human Resources will be reviewing position -based salaries in detail
over the next few months to determine if the current compensation package is
competitive with other government entities to ensure competitiveness.
As part of the budget process, pay steps for eligible employees will be included in the
2015 budget proposal. A cost of living adiustment (COLA) for non - bargaining
employees will also be explored. The Public Works Union is under contract for a 2%
COLA for 2015.
2. A midyear review of the health plan will be conducted with our broker in June.
The City currently offers the employees the option of two high deductible plans ($5,000
family, $2,500 single for in network expenses) with a health spending account (HSA),
this was implemented in 2006. As part of the program, the City pays for 100% of the
single health insurance premium for an accountable care plan and 76% for a family health
insurance premium accountable care plan. Employees that select the open network health
plan pay the increased cost over the accountable care plan. The City does contribute
annually to the employees HSA.
3. Administration and Human Resources will continue to encourage the PTO conversion
program for current City employees.
Contractual Departments:
1. The City Attorney 2014 contract included a 2.0% increase over the 2013 rate.
Discussion for the 2015 contract will likely indicate, if City employees are granted a
COLA, the legal service contract would be treated the same.
2. At the September 3, 2013 Council meeting, the City Council approved the 2014 City of
Andover Law Enforcement Contract with the Anoka County Sheriff's Office. The 2014
budget for the contract is $2,818,132 and is offset by a Police State Aid of $122,720 and
School Liaison revenue of $88,254 reflecting a net tax levy impact of $2,607,158.
The 2014 Sheriff's contract provides for:
a. 80 hours per day of patrol service
b. 6 hours per day of service provided by a Community Service Officer
c. School Liaison Officers in the middle school and high school
d. 2 Patrol Investigators
e. 50% of the Crime Watch Program's coordinator position.
It should be noted that the Sheriff's Department always provides the required number of
deputies for all hours contracted by the City. If the Sheriff's Department has a vacancy
or a deputy is injured etc.., they still provide the City with a deputy at straight time even
though they may have to fill those hours with overtime which at times may cost the
Sheriff's Department additional, but is not billable per the contract
Staff has had initial discussions with the Anoka County Sheriff for a 2015 contract
Discussions are indicating the City will again be maintaining the status quo for 2015.
Council Memberships and Donations /Contributions:
The following memberships /contributions are included in the 2014 General Fund Budget:
• North Metro Mayors Association $13,709
• Metro Cities $ 9,232
• Mediation Services $ 3,323
• YMCA — Water Safety Program $ 8,000
• Alexandra House $17,328
• Youth First (Program Funding) $12,000
• NW Anoka Co. Community Consortium - JPA $101000
• Teen Center Funding (YMCA) $23,000
• Lee Carlson Central Center for Family Resources $ 1,500
• Senior High Parties $ 1,000
Council direction is sought on how to budget for these items in 2015.
Capital Proiects and Debt Service Funds
Capital Projects Levy:
Capital Projects Levy — The 2014 Capital Projects Levy Budget specifically designates
$1,336,968 of the general tax levy to capital projects and equipment needs relating to Capital
Outlay ($210,000), Road and Bridge ($967,197), Pedestrian Trail Maintenance ($58,271) and
Park Projects ($61,500). Specific designation of the tax levy to anticipated City needs and
priorities for transportation and trail maintenance, park projects and equipment outlays allows the
City to strategically allocate its resources and raise the public's awareness of City spending
priorities. The Road and Bridge levy is calculated according to Council Policy based on annual
growth increases /decreases, with Capital Outlay, Pedestrian Trail Maintenance and Park Levies
increased according to the City Council budget guidelines.
• Road and Bridge
An adjustment was made to the Road & Bridge funding formula in 2014 primarily to
stop the continual decrease in the levy that has been happening over the past few years
due to decreases in the Anoka County Assessor taxable market value figures for the City
fund Roads.
For 2014, the levy to Roads is $967,197. The 2014 levy to pedestrian trail maintenance is
$58,271.
Council direction will be sought on Road and Bridge funding for 2015.
• Park Improvements
This levy is an annual appropriation to be used to underwrite park improvement projects
as recommended by the Park and Recreation Commission and approved by the City
Council. This funding is intended to be a long -term supplemental source of capital
funding for park projects that is separately identified in the City's Five -Year Capital
Improvement Plan. The 2014 levy is $61,500, the same is currently proposed for 2015.
• Equipment/Projects
Under the Capital Projects Levy, a levy is proposed to be designated to capital
improvement /equipment project expenditures identified through the CIP process.
Through this designation, the City, over time, will build a fund reserve to avoid cash flow
"spikes" and address a wide range of capital improvement needs such as facility
maintenance projects under a more controlled spending environment. The 2014 levy is
$210,000 the same is proposed for 2015.
Debt Service Levy:
Annually the Finance Department conducts a detailed debt service analysis to monitor
outstanding debt and to look for early debt retirement or refinancing opportunities that will yield
interest expense savings to the City. (Staff.' along with Ehlers & Associates has completed a
review and sees no new re inancinZ opportunities at this time.)
The proposed 2015 Debt Service levy is as follows:
• 2010A G.O. Open Space Referendum
$
184,238
• 2012A G.O. Equipment Certificate
$
140,000
• 2012B G.O. Capital. Imp. Refunding
$
540,120
• 2012C Taxable G.O. Abatement Bonds
$
975,652
• 2014 G.O. Equipment Certificates
$
287,345
Total
$2,127,355
• It should be noted that the levy is offset significantly by a $635,000 YMCA annual rental
payment for the Community Center bonds (2012C Taxable G.O. Abatement Bonds).
The proposed 2015 Debt Service levy reflects a 2.72% increase ($56,289
Staff will review with the Council at the meetinz the attached City of Andover Debt Service
Levy Summary,
ACTION REQUESTED.
The Council is requested to receive a presentation and provide direction to staff.
CITY OF ANDOVER
Pay 2015 Valuation Estimates
Taxable Market Value
% Change
Tax Capacity Value
% Change
Pay 2012
$
2,202,135,356
Pay 2012
Estimate
23,477,711
Pay 2012
Pay 2013
Pay 2014
Pay 2015
$
Taxable Tax
Taxable Tax
Taxable Tax
Taxable Tax
Pay 2014
Market Capacity
Market Capacity
Market Capacity
Market Capacity
2,446,797,575 18.10%
Value Value
Value Value
Value Value
Value Value
Andover Valuation Totals
$ 2,202,135,356 $ 23,477,711
$ 2,123,596,358 $ 22,569,018
$ 2,071,812,281 $ 21,978,322
$ 2,446,797,575 $ 25,275,070 15.0%
Captured Tax Increment
(1,871,779)
(336,580)
(327,433)
(142,430)
Fiscal Disparity Contribution
(1,091,258)
(1,077,175)
(1,035,107
a
(998,878) -3.5 /o
24,133,762
Local Tax Rate Value
20,514,674
21,155,263
20,615,782
Fiscal Disparity Distribution
4,649,558
4,256,749
4,202,605
4,202,605
$ 28,336,367
Total Adjusted Values
$ 25,164,232
$ 25 412,012
$ 24 818,387
0.98%
-2.34%
14.17%
Taxable Market Value
% Change
Tax Capacity Value
% Change
Pay 2012
$
2,202,135,356
Pay 2012
$
23,477,711
Pay 2013
$
2,123,596,358 -3.57%
Pay 2013
$
22,569,018
Pay 2014
$
2,071,812,281 -2.44%
Pay 2014
$
21,978,322
Pay 2015
$
2,446,797,575 18.10%
Pay 2015
$
25,275,070
Taxable Market Values
$2,500,000,000 -
$2,400,000,000
$2,300,000,000
$2,200,000,000
$2,100,000,000
$2,000,000,000
$1,900,000,000
$1,800,000,000
Pay 2012 Pay 2013 Pay 2014 Pay 2015
-3.87%
-2.62%
15.00%
Tax Capacity Values
$26,000,000
$25,000,000
$24,000,000
$23,000,000
$22,000,000
$21,000,000
$20,000,000
Pay 2012 Pay 2013 Pay 2014 Pay 2015
City of Andover, Minnesota
Property Tax Levy
Other Levies
Capital Projects Levy
Capital Equipment/Project
Certified
Certified
Certified
Certified
Certified
Requested
Change
-
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
% of Total $ %
General Fund Levy $
7,596,494
$ 7,500.802
$ 7,332.857
$ 7,332,857
$ 7,435,891
$ 7,547,429
68.54% $ 111,538 1.50%
Debt Service Funds Levy
1,022,817
967.197
967.197
967.197
8.78% $
0.00%
2004A G.O. Capital Improvement Bonds
368,418
412,320
405,292
381,290
-
-
58,271
2004 EDA Public Facility Revenue Bonds
934.203
960,858
1,092,684
452,082
181,803
-
40,000
2007A G.O. Equipment Certificate
208,000
-
-
-
-
-
Total Other
2008AG.O. Equipment Certificate
171,410
188,972
-
-
-
-
2009AG.O. Equipment Certificate
130,738
142,783
-
-
-
-
10.631,299
2010A G.O. Open Space Referendum Bonds
87,797
139,179
182.558
184,973
187,283
184,238
2011AG.O. Equipment Certificate
-
85,000
102,017
101.745
-
-
1,718,153
2012A G.O. Equipment Certificate
-
-
125,000
125.000
140,000
140,000
8,839,803
2012B G.O. Cap Improv Refunding Bonds
-
-
-
138,339
561,015
540.120
Less Levy Based on Market Value
2012C Taxable G.O. Abatement Bonds
-
-
-
578.045
740,965
975,652
2014 G.O. Equipment Certificate
260,000
287,345
Total Debt Service
1,900.566
1,929,112
1,907,551
1, 961,474
2,071,066
2.127,355
19.32% $ 56,289 2.72%
Other Levies
Capital Projects Levy
Capital Equipment/Project
210.000
210,000
210,000
210,000
210,000
210,000
1.91% $
-
0.00%
Parks Projects
59.410
61.500
61.500
61.500
61,500
61,500
0.56% E
-
0.00%
Road & Bridge
1,003,056
1,064,959
1,022,817
967.197
967.197
967.197
8.78% $
0.00%
Pedestrian Trail Maintenance
51, 773
54 ,926
56,574
58,271
58,271
58,271
0.53% $
-
0.00%
Lower Rum River Watershed
35,000
35,000
40,000
40,000
40,000
40,000
0.36% $
0.00%
Total Other
1,359.239
1.426,385
1,390,891
1,336,968
1,336,968
1,336,968
12.14% $
0.01D%
Gross City Levy
10,856,299
10.856.299
10.631,299
10,631,299
10,843,925
11,011,752
100% $
167,827
1.55%
Less Fiscal Disparities Distribution
1,521,663
1,886.192
1,791,496
1,798,577
1,718,153
1,718,153
Local Tax Rate Levy
S 9,334.636
$ 8,970,107 $
8,839,803
$ 8,832,722
$ 9,125,772
S 9,293,599
Less Levy Based on Market Value
It 87,797
E 139,179 E
182,558
$ 184,973
$ 187,283
E 184,238
Net Local Tax Rate Levy
E 9.246.839
E 8.830,928 $
8,657,245
$ 8,647,749
S 8,938,489
$ 9,109,361
Adjusted Tax Capacity Value"
S 25,263,121
22,917,072
20,514,674
21,155,263
20,615,782
24,133,762
17.06%
h n
% Change
Tax Capacity Rate...
36.602%
38.534%
42.200%
40.878%
43.358%
37.745%
. 5.612%
- 12.944%
Tax Capacity Rate W/O LRRWSD
32.180%
36.484%
38,407%
42.090%
43.197%
Tax Capacity Rate With LRRWSD
32.483%
36.814%
38.746%
42.539%
43.657%
Rate
Ch in Rate
Levy Ch in Levy
Voter Approved Ref - MV
0.00551%
0.00327%
0.00568%
0.00778%
0.84100%
37.464%
- 13.593%
$ 100,000
1.00%
37.671%
- 13.115%
$ 150.000
1.5D%
-Adjusted Value determined by adjusting for F'sca/ Disparities and
Tax Increment estimates.
37.879%
- 12.636%
$ 200,000
2.00%
- Blended rate due to the Cify of Andover
levying for Lower Rum River Watershed District
38 .086%
-12.158%
$ 250,000
3.00%
38.293%
- 11.681%
$ 300.000
3.00%
(1) Adjusted Tax Capacity Value is subject
to change.
4/17/2014
A
CITY OF ANDOVER
Debt Service Levy Summary
2015
2016
2097
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
General Obligation Abatement Bonds
2012C G.O. Abatement Bonds
1,275,652.00
1,277,332.00
1,274,418.00
1,272,055.00
1,269,378.00
1,276,780.00
1,273,263.00
1,274,628.00
1,269,745.00
Transfer from Operations
(300,000.00)
(300,000.00)
(300,000.00)
(300,000.00)
(300,000.00)
(300,000.00)
(300,000.00)
(300,000.00)
(300,000.00)
975,652.00
977,332.00
974,418.00
972,05.5.00
969,378.00
976,780.00
973,263.00
974,628.00
969,745.00
Certificates of Indebtedness
2012A G.O. Equipment Certificates
140,000.00
142,885.00
2014 G.O. Equipment Certificates
287,345.00
285,844.00
289,046.00
286,264.00
288,036.00
427,345.00
428,729.00
289,046.00
286,264.00
288,036.00
Capital Improvement Bonds
-
2012B G.O. Cap Improvement Ref Bonds -
540,120.00
498,435.00
540,120.00
498,435.00
2010A G.O. Open Space Referendum Bonds
184,238.00
186,291.00
187,840.00
188,777.00
183,989.00
184,199.00
184,078.00
-
-
2,127,355.00
2,090,787.00
1,451,304.00
1,447,096.00
1,441,403.00
1,160,979.00
1,157,341.00
974,628.00
969,745.00
1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W.. ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 • (763) 755 -5100
FAX (763) 755 -8923 a WWW.CI.ANDOVER.MN.US
TO: Mayor and Councilmembers
FROM: Jim Dickinson, City Administrator
SUBJECT: 2014 Budget - General Fund Progress Report — Through March 2014
DATE: April 22, 2014
INTRODUCTION
The City of Andover 2014 General Fund Budget contains total revenues of $9,569,142 and total
expenditures of $10,026,875 (includes $30,500 of 2013 budget carry forwards), a decrease in
fund balance is planned.
Monthly reporting of the City Budget progress to the Governing body is a recommended
financial practice and often viewed positively by rating agencies.
DISCUSSION
Attached is the General Fund Revenue & Expenditure Budget Summary - Budget Year
2014, reflecting year to date through March 2014. The attachments are provided to assist
discussion in reviewing 2014 progress; other documents may be distributed at the meeting
The following represents Administration's directives and departmental expectations that are in place
again for 2014:
1. Expenditure budgets while approved, expenses are to meet with the spirit that needs are
fulfilled first, expansions of service and special requests are to be reviewed with City
Administration before proceeding.
2. Departments are to be committed to search for the best possible prices when purchasing
goods and services.
3. Departments are to be committed to continually searching out new efficiencies and to
challenge the status quo of how the City provides services.
4. Departments are to be committed to searching out collaborative opportunities to facilitate
efficient and cost - effective utilization of governmental assets and personnel.
5. Departments are to be committed to developing effective, consistent and ongoing
communications with City residents, businesses and other stakeholders.
ACTION REQUESTED
The Council is requested to receive a presentation and provide direction to staff.
ectfully submitted,
J m Dickinson
Attachments
CITY OF ANDOVER
General Fund Budget Summary Totals
Budget Year 2014
2013 2014
REVENUES Budget Mar YTD %Bud Final Budget Mar YTD %Bud
General Property Tax
$ 7,398,782
$
-
0%
$ 7,376,284
$ 7,501,816
$ -
0%
Licenses and Permits
288,355
79,052
27%
536,706
307,355
34,272
11%
Intergovernmental
596,564
177,728
30%
710,071
609,541
185,060
30%
Charges for Services
619,850
149,237
24%
1,122,461
685,900
110,350
16%
Fines
100,750
18,498
18%
96,130
100,750
16,109
16%
Investment Income
65,000
(22,469)
-35%
(13,242)
75,000
(25,516)
-34 °%
Miscellaneous
90,350
56,431
62%
137,129
91,850
62,452
68%
Transfers In
196,930
196,930
100%
196,930
196,930
196,930
100%
Total Revenues
$ 9.356,581
$
655,407
7%
$ 10,162,469
$ 9,569,142
$ - .579,657
6 %'
2013
2014
EXPENDITURES
Budget
Mar YTD
% Bud
Final
Budget
Mar YTD
% Bud
GENERAL GOVERNMENT
Mayor and Council
$ 87,953
$
41,093
47%
$ 83,595
$ 86,840
$ 40,644
47%
Administration
143,995
36,690
25%
147,503
176,265
40,991
23%
Newsletter
25,500
3,842
15%
17,678
26,000
10,438
40%
Human Resources
42,770
6,580
15%
17,906
39,229
6,811
17%
Attorney
178,300
28,883
16%
173,244
178,300
44,107
25%
City Clerk
108,925
24,932
23%
108,311
129,400
32,463
25%
Elections
54,155
1,509
3%
11,353
55,336
1,904
3%
Finance
221,256
58,567
26%
215,215
235,459
66,421
28%
Assessing
150,000
-
0%
144,561
150,000
-
0%
Information Services
161,252
28,349
18%
135,981
176,629
30,976
18%
Planning & Zoning
360,970
79,186
22 °%
349,488
401,360
90,490
23%
Engineering
440,168
98,644
22%
452,788
465,656
109,031
23%
Facility Management
566,187
81,063
14%
451,255
562,905
108,794
19%
Total General Gov
2,541,431
489,338
_19 %_
2,308,878
' 2,683,379 ';
.: `.583,070,
2200;
PUBLICSAFETY
Police Protection
2,740,899
685,225
25%
2,740,899
2,818,132
704,533
25%
Fire Protection
1,127,444
196,159
17%
1,126,979
1,127,389
208,488
18%
Protective Inspection
393,530
86,936
22%
423,495
411,295
94,947
23%
Civil Defense
17,188
4,623
27%
13,930
17,128
5,492
32%
Animal Control
9,950
_
874
9 %_
6,037
9,950
881
9%
Total Public Safety
- 973,817
_23%
4,311,340
_
4,383,894':
.,1,014,341
23 %�
PUBLIC WORKS
Streets and Highways
585,111
93,810
16%
572,754
604,078
105,588
17%
Snow and Ice Removal
511,834
222,840
44 °%
630,798
517,949
296,672
57%
Street Signs
198,693
27,269
14%
162,859
197,274
41,630
21%
Traffic Signals
36,000
3,023
8%
26,241
35,000
4,385
13 °%
Street Lighting
36,400
5,578
15%
31,702
36,400
4,621
13%
Street Lights - Billed
210,000
30,226
14%
210,331
210,000
34,540
16%
Park & Recreation
1,014,366
151,228
15%
946,545
1,138,426
177,990
16%
Recycling
128,633
15,617
12%
178,109
131,147
18,015
14 °%
Total Public Works
2;721,037
X549,591
20%
2,759,339 -
% - 2,870,274
- 683,441
_
24 %;
OTHER
88,950
38,638
43%
210,519
89,328
43,080
48%
Total Other
88,950
- 38,638
43%
210,519.
89,328
48%
Total Expenditures
$ 9,640,429
$.
2,051,384
- 21%
S 9,590,076.
$- 10,026,875:.
$ .`.2,323,932
23 %1 .
NET INCREASE (DECREASE)
$ (283,848)
. $
(1,395,977)
$ 572,393
$ (457,733)
$ (1,744,275) ..
AT Y 0 F (i)
NDOVEA
1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. • ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 • (763) 755 -5100
FAX (763) 755 -8923 • WWW.CI.ANDOVER.MN.US
TO: Mayor and Councilmembers
FROM: Jim Dickinson, City Administrator
SUBJECT: March 2014 Investment Report
DATE: April 22, 2014
INTRODUCTION
Summary reporting of the City Investment portfolio to the Governing body is a recommended
financial practice and often viewed positively by rating agencies.
Furthermore, the City of Andover Investment Policy recommends the Finance Director presents
to the City Council at least quarterly the type of investments held by the City.
DISCUSSION
Attached is the Investment Maturities Summary for March 2014 the March 2014
Investment Detail Report, and the March 2014 Money Market Funds Report These
attachments are intended to assist with discussion when reviewing the March 2014
investments.
ACTION REQUESTED
The Council is requested to receive a presentation and provide feedback to staff.
ectfully submitted,
Ji Dickinson
Attachments
Investment Maturities - March 2014
Investment Maturities
(in Years)
Credit
ZFair
Less Than
More Than
Investment Type
Rating
1
1 - 5
6-10
10
Money market funds
N/A
$ 2,420,850
2,420,850
$
$
$
MN Municipal Money
Market Fund (4M)
N/A
4,993
4,993
Certificates of deposit
FDIC
2,991,752
1,336,630
1,409,323
245,800
Local governments
13/131/132
A/Al /A2
777,432
518,941
112,036
146,455
-
AAl /AA2 /AA3
8,337,999
1,830,190
3,576,780
2,033,773
897,255
AAA
4,385,846
55,224
1,968,867
1,982,308
379,447
State governments
A/Al /A2
640,330
-
420,234
220,096
AAl /AA2 /AA3
494,719
159,957
251,550
83,212
AAA
438,005
-
416,917
21,088
U.S. agencies
AAA
3,994,406
243,876
2,509,770
394,802
845,958
FNMA REMIC
N/A
19,934
-
19,934
-
U.S. agencies
N/A
11,435
-
11,435
-
-
Total investments
$ 24,517,700
$ 6,570,661
$ 10,696,846
1
$ 5,127,533
$ 2,122,661
Deposits
2,381,863
Total cash and investments
$ 26,899,563
March 2014 Investment Detail
Description
Cusip Number
Credit
Rating
Type
Purchase Price
Carrying Cost
Maturity Amount
Interest
Rate
Current Market
Value
Ihteres Bartl
Date
Acquired
Coupon
.Date
Maturity I
Due Date.
Capital One Bank Glen Allen VA
14041AXU8
A2
CD
43,910.10
43,910.10
40,000.00
4.750%
41,338.00
semi - annual
05/10/11
none
01/23/15
Suntrust Bank Atlanta GA
86789VHM2
AA3
CD
99,000.00
99,000.00
99,000.00
4.000%
97,641.72
quarterly
05/28/09
08/28/09
05/28/14
Beal Bank USA
07370WCJ3
CD
249,000.00
249,000.00
249,000.00
0.300%
248,930.28
maturity
12/11/13
none
06/11/14
Discover Bank
254671D31
CD
249,000.00
249,000.00
249,000.00
0.400%
248;975.10
maturity
12/11/13
none
06/11/14
Citizens State Bank
176688AM1
CD
100,000.00
100,000.00
100,000.00
3.250%
100,764.00
monthly
07/09/09
08/09/09
07/09/14
Currie State Bk
23130SCA9
CD
249,000.00
249,000.00
249,000.00
0.300%
248,900.40
maturity
10/03/13
none
10/03/14
MB Financial Bank
55266CHVI
CD
102,249.00
102,249.00
100,000.00
2.350%
101,362.00
monthly
04/18/11
none
11/12/14
S & T Bank
783861BH9
CD
249,000.00
249,000.00
249,000.00
0.350%
248,718.63
maturity
12/13/13
none
12112/14
Etowah TN
297785EY9
A
local
100,000.00
100,000.00
100,000.00
0.600%
100,058.00
semi - annual
04/12/13
12/01/13
06/01114
Stratford Conn
8628111.120
Al
local
200,000.00
200,000.00
200,000.00
1.905%
201,148.00
semi - annual
06/29/11
08/01/11
08/01/14
Bridgeport Conn
108151V57
A2
local
222,688.40
222,688.40
215,000.00
3.074%
217,734.80
semi - annual
03/29/11
none
09/15/14
McLennan Cnty TX Jnr Clg Dist
582188JVI
AA
local
30,576.00
30,576.00
30,000.00
2.000%
30,197.40
semi - annual
05/02/13
08/15/13
08/15/14
Canton Charter Twp Mich
138128EC3
AA
local
115,965.30
115,965.30
110,000.00
3.625%
111,780.90
semi - annual
11/24/10
none
10/01/14
Chaska MN
161664DS3
AA
local
66,128.40
66,128.40
65,000.00
2.000%
65,781.95
semi - annual
08/15/13
06/01/14
12/01/14
Sherwood Wis
824422CB3
AA-
local
110,000.00
110,000.00
110,000.00
2.600%
110,356.40
semi - annual
03/11/10
06/01/10
06/01/14
Pell City AL
705880MK5
AA-
local
100,000.00
100,000.00
100,000.00
0.950%
100,202.00
semi - annual
04/25/12
08/01/12
08/01/14
Brooklyn Park Minn
114223V64
AA+
local
206,700.00
206,700.00
200,000.00
3.400%
204,026.00
semi - annual
02/10/11
none
02/01/15
Pipestone - Jasper MIN ISD #2689
724114BH5
AA+
local
181,521.00
181,521.00
180,000.00
1.000%
181,186.20
semi - annual
semi - annual
semi - annual
05/23/13
01/11/11
11/07/11
03/01/14
none
none
03/01/15
03/01/15
12/01/14
Red Wing Minn ISD #25
757130JR1
AA+
local
36,367.10
36,367.10
35,000.00
3.500%
35,997.15
Palatine III
696089RY9
AA1
local
112,000.00
112,000.00
100,000.00
5.200%
103,117.00
Virginia Beach VA
Council Bluffs Iowa
Kirkwood Cmnty College Iowa
Western Lake Superior MN _
92774GCV5
222129X62
497595WL8
958522WP5
AA2
AA2
AA2
local
71,100.25
71,100.25
65,000.00
5.000%
65,261.95
semi - annual
05/27/11
none
05/01/14
local
local
137,991.60
137,991.60
135,000.00
3.500%
135,750.60
semi - annual
08/19/09
12/01/09
06/01/14
103,718.00
103,718.00
100,000.00
2.500%
100,351.00
semi - annual
12/10/10
06/01/11
06/01/14
AA2
local
102,756.00
102,756.00
100,000.00
2.000%
100,909.00
semi - annual
08/16/11
04/01/12
10/01/14
Austin Minn
052249542
AA2
local
79,600.00
79,600.00
80,000.00
5.100%
80,235.20
semi - annual
07/15/08
none
02/01/15
Duluth MN
264438ZA3
AA2
.local
201,733.11
201,722.00
200,000.00
1.000%
201,286.00
semi- annual
11/27/12
08/01/13
02/01/15
Onamia MNISD #480
682271DT5
AA2
local
104,979.00
104,979.00
100,000.00
3.000%
102,265.00
semi - annual
09/27/12
08/01/13
02/01/15
Brownsville TX
116405FY2
AA3
local
102,683.00
102,683.00
100,000.00
2.000%
101,486.00
semi - annual
12/27/12
02/15/13
02/15/15
Saint Louis Park MN
791740ZJ5
AAA
local
55,000.00
55,000.00
55,000.00
0.750%
55,223.85
semi - annual
10/17/12
08/01/13
02/01/15
Oregon School Boards Assn Zero Cpn
686053CD9
AA2
state
138,663.60
138,663.60
160,000.00
159,956.80
maturity
02/12/09
none
06/30/14
US Treasury Sec Stripped Zero Cpn
912833KD1
AAA
US
49,889.30
49,889.30
244,000.00
5.000%
243,875.56
maturity
09/14/94
11/15/14
4,144,816.89
Garrett State Bank
366526AJO
CD
200,000.00
200,000.00
200,000.00
1.750%
202,682.00
monthly
05/20/11
06/20/11
07/20/15
Flushing Savings Bank
344030DK4
CD
250,023.39
250,023.39
249,000.00
1.750%
254,201.61
monthly
07/25/11
none
10/29/15
Portage County Bank
73565NAZ6
CD
249,000.00
249,000.00
249,000.00
1.650%
254,231.49
monthly
07125/11
none
11/03/15
Sterling Savings Bank
859532AH6
CD
248,000.00
248,000.00
248,000.00
0.750%
248,825.84
semi - annual
07/31/13
01/31114
01/29/16
Lake Forest Bank & Trust
509685ES8
CD
200,000.00
200,000.00
200,000.00
0.850%
200,464.00
semi - annual
08114113
02/14/14
08/15/16
Luana Savings Bank
549103MY2
CD
248,000.00
248,000.00
248,000.00
0.750%
248,917.60
semi- annual
08/16/13
02/16/14
08/16/16
Junction City Kansas
481502F72
A2
local
101,558.00
101,558.00
100,000.00
5.500%
112,036.00
semi - annual
05/28/08
03/01/09
09/01/18
Chaska MN
161664DTI
AA
local
71,663.20
71,663.20
70,000.00
2.000%
71,830.50
semi - annual
08/15/13
06/01/14
12/01/15
Chaska MN
161664DU8
AA
local
76,434.00
76,434.00
75,000.00
2.000%
77,161.50
semi - annual
08/15/13
06/01/14
12/01/16
North Mankato MN Port Auth Com
660760AG4
AA
local
107,657.00
107,657.00
100,000.00
4.000%
106,823.00
semi - annual
09/20/13
none
02/01/17
1,336,630.13 CD
2,404,354.40 local
159,956.80 state
243,875.56 US
-ess Than 1 Year
1,409,322.54 CD
March 2014 Investment Detail
Description
Cusip Number
Credit
Rating
Type
Purchase Price
Carrying Cost
Maturity Amount
Interest
Rate
'Current Market
Value
me es Pa tl
Date
Acquired
Coupon
'Date
Maturity/
Due Data
Philadelphia PAAuth Zero Coupon
71781LBJ7
AA
local
161,700.00
161,700.00
245,000.00
227,066.00
maturity
01/12/10
none
04/15/17
Augusta ME
051411ND4
AA
local
28,125.00
28,125.00
25,000.00
5.250%
26,586.00
semi - annual
03/07/12
none
10/01/17
Rice Cnty, MN
762698GK8
AA
local
45,466.80
45,466.80
40,000.00
4.400%
42,577.20
semi - annual
03107/12
none
02/01/19
Pell City AL
705880ML3
AA-
local
100,000.00
100,000.00
100,000.00
1.200%
100,831.00
semi - annual
04/25/12
08/01/12
08/01/15
Racine WI
7500216D4
AA-
local
101,792.00
101,792.00
100,000.00
2.100%
100,210.00
semi - annual
01/24/12
06/01/12
06/01/18
Ramsey MN
751813QE9
AA+
local
176,289.75
176,289.75
175,000.00
1.000%
176,316.00
semi - annual
06/05/12
12/01/12
06/01/15
Minnetrista MN
604229KE3
AA+
local
15,000.00
15,000.00
15,000.00
2.450%
15,004.95
semi - annual
10110/13
08/01/14
02/01/19
Minneapolis Minn
60374YP35
AA1
local
21,269.40
21,269.40
20,000.00
3.250%
21,028.20
semi - annual
08/02/11
none
03/01/16
Des Moines IA Area Cmnty Cal
250097A85
AA1
local
137,668.95
137,668.95
135,000.00
1.375%
136,818.45
semi - annual
07/30/12
12/01/12
06/01/16
Osseo MN ISO #279
688443J27
AA1
local
30,103.25
30,103.25
25,000.00
6.000%
27,983.00
semi - annual
12/22/11
none
02/01/17
Dane County WI
236091M92
AA1
local
106,487.00
106,487.00
100,000.00
2.450%
104,657.00
semi - annual
07116/12
none
12/01/17
Minneapolis MN
60374YF93
AA1
local
220,938.00
220,938.00
200,000.00
4.000%
' 219,146.00
semi - annual
03/04/14
none
03/01/18
King Cnty, WA
49474E31-5
AA1
local
224,634.00
224,634.00
200,000.00
3.980%
216,794.00
semi - annual
03/27/12
none
12/01/18
Minneapolis MN
60374YS73
AA1
local
111,898.00
111,898.00
100,000.00
3.250%
106,760.00
semi - annual
06/05/12
12/01/11
12/01/18
Waunakee WI
943181NZ6
AA2
local
110,000.00
110,000.00
110,000.00
1.500%
111,238.60
semi - annual
11/08/11
05/01/12
05/01/15
Waterloo IA
941647NW5
AA2
local
261,334.20
261,334.20
255,000.00
2.000%
260,023.50
semi - annual
06/27/13
12/01/13
06/01/15
Western Lake Superior MN
958522WQ3
AA2
local
101,790.00
101,790.00
100,000.00
2.000%
102,436.00
semi - annual
semi - annual
semi - annual
semi - annual
semi- annual
08/16/11
12/27/12
01/18/11
12/05/12
07/10/12
04/01/12
none
none
08/01/13
08/15/12
10/01/15
12/15/15
02/01/16
02/01/16
02/15/16
Plainfield III
726243LT3
AA2
local
79,373.25
79,373.25
75,000.00
3.000%
77,928.00
Duluth Minn ISD #709
264474CKI
AA2
local
74,939.20
74,939.20
70,000.00
4.000%
72,109.10
Duluth MN
264438ZB1
AA2
local
105,652.05
105,652.05
105,000.00
1.000%
105,636.30
Rowlett TX
Hopkins Minn ISD #270
Scott County
Orange Beach ALA _ - _
7796986H7
439881HCO
809486EZ2
68406PHF1
AA2
AA2
AA2
local
local
local
101,905.55
101,905.55
95,000.00
3.000%
99,237.95
95,278.40
114,450.33
95,278.40
80,000.00
5.250%
91,066.40
semi - annual
04/30/12
08/01/09
02/01/18
112,617.00
100,000.00
4.400%
108,150.00
semi - annual
10/31/12
12/01/12
06/01/18
AA2
local
241,689.60
241,689.60
240,000.00
4.400%
247,982.40
semi - annual
08/05110
02/01/11
02/01/19
SouthEastern IA Cmnty College
841625MC7
AA3
local
149,060.00
149,060.00
145,000.00
2.000%
147,759.35
semi - annual
07/26/12
none
06/01/15
East Bethel Minn
271074HRO
AA3
local
100,941.00
100,941.00
100,000.00
3.200%
103,318.00
semi - annual
12/15/10
08/01/11
02/01/16
Oshkosh Wis Storm Wtr Util
68825RBDI
AA3
local
101,003.00
101,003.00
100,000.00
3.250%
104,120.00
semi - annual
10/05/10
05/01/11
05/01/18
Kane McHenry Cook & De Kalb Zero Cpn
484080MB9
AA3
local
157,328.00
157,328.00
200,000.00
168,182.00
maturity
07/16/12
none
12/01/18
Cook Cnty IL Cmnty CIg Dist #5
216129FD3
AAA
local
196,228.20
196,228.20
190,000.00
2.000%
193,877.90
semi - annual
01/08/13
06/01/13.
06/01/15
Palm Beach Cnty FLA
696497TP1
AAA
local
226,296.00
226,296.00
200,000.00
5.808%
212,664.00
semi - annual
03114/11
none
06/01/15
Johnson Cnty, KS
478700,199
AAA
local
257,290.00
257,290.00
250,000.00
2.000%
256,487.50
semi - annual
12/12/13
none
10/01/15
Madison WI
55844RFY5
AAA
local
103,870.00
103,820.00
100,000.00
2.000%
102,466.00
semi - annual
10101/12
04/01/13
10/01/15
Three Rivers MN Park Dist
885718GG5
AAA
local
210,828.00
210,828.00
200,000.00
3.000%
209,526.00
semi - annual
12/12/13
08/01/14
02/01116
Maple Grove MN
56516PNY5
AAA
local
230,520.40
230,520.40
220,000.00
2.000%
226,560.40
semi - annual
01/10/13
08/01/13
02/01/17
Tennessee Valley Auth
880591EA6
AAA
local
93,153.11
93,153.11
85,000.00
5.500%
96,911.90
semi - annual
06/01/09
01/18/08
07/18/17
Washington County MN
937791KL4
AAA
local
115,000.00
115,000.00
115,000.00
3.750%
120,575.20
semi - annual
07/01/10
01/01/11
01/01/18
Saint Louis Park MN
791740WC3
AAA
local
112,114.00
112,114.00
100,000.00
3.850%
107,601.00
semi - annual
12/22/11
none
02/01/18
Polk Cnty IA
731197TQ2
AAA
local
184,089.60
184,089.60
180,000.00
4.200%
181,170.00
semi - annual
10/29/13
none
06101/18
Brownsville TX ISD Zero Coupon
11642IE46
AAA
local
229,640.00
229,640.00
250,000.00
225,475.00
maturity
06/26/13
none
08/15/18
Minnetonka MN ISD #276
604195RA7
AAA
local
37,433.20
37,433.20
35,000.00
3.100%
35,551.95
semi - annual
12/22/11
none
02/01/19
Alabama St Univ Rev
010632MK0
A3
state
200,858.00
200,858.00
200,000.00
3.400%
206,340.00
semi - annual
12/17/10
03/01/11
09/01/15
Illinois State
452152HR5
A3
state
217,312.00
217,312.00
200,000.00
4.961%
213,894.00
semi - annual
07/16/12
09/01/11
03/01/16
Washington State
939758DL9
AA
state
205,804.00
205,804.00
200,000.00
4.500%1
211,460.00
semi - annual
01/24/12
04/01/12
10/01/18
5,657,683.25 local
March 2014 Investment Detail
Description
Cusip Number
Credit
Rating
Type
Purchase Price
.Carrying Cost
Maturity Amount
Interest
Rate
Current Market
Value
In eras Pa d
Date
Acquired
Coupon
Date
Maturity 1
Due Date'
Oregon School Boards Assn Zero Cpn
686053CE7
14,233.50
14,233.50
15,000.00
14,897.55
maturity
02/08/12
none
06/30/15
Mississippi State
605581BV8
25,000.00
25,000.00
25,000.00
1.116%
25,192.50
semi - annual
09/12/13
none
12/01/16
Texas State
882722,128
80,158.50
80,158.50
75,000.00
3.000%
78,005.25
semi - annual
03/28/12
04/01/12
10/01/15
Tennessee State
880541QM2
201,894.00
201,894.00
200,000.00
2.326%
207,576.00
semi - annual
10/26/11
02/01/12
08101/17
Georgia State
373384RQ1
iT,,te
26,742.50
26,742.50
25,000.00
2.970%
26,386.00
semi - annual
02/08/12
none
10/01/18
Texas State
882722151
103,089.00
103,089.00
100,000.00
2.894%
104,950.00
semi - annual
08/10/11
04/01/12
10/01/18
Fed Farm Credit Bank
3133EA6K9
AAA
US
200,000.00
200,000.00
200,000.00
0.410%
200,228.00
semi - annual
10129/12
04/29/13
10/29/15
Fed Home Ln Bank -
313381MH5
AAA
US
24,812.50
24,812.50
25,000.00
0.500%
25,000.00
semi - annual
07/10/13
07/07/13
01/07/16
Fed Home Ln Mtg Corp Mad Term Note
3134G4EF1
AAA
US
200,000.00
200,000.00
200,000.00
1.000%
200,438.00
semi - annual
08/13113
02/13/14
02/13/17
Fed Farm Credit Bank _ _
3133EATE8
AAA
US
99,647.00
99,647.00
100,000.00
0.900%
99,386.00
semi - annual
11/04/13
12/08/12
06/08/17
Fed Home Ln Bank
. 3130A1AX6
AAA
US
200,000.00
200,000.00
200,000.00
1.300%
200,442.00
semi - annual
03/27/14
09/27/14
12/27/17
Fed Natl Mtg Assn
3136G1AJ8
AAA
US
200,000.00
200,000.00
200000.00
0.700%
197,554.00
semi - annual
01/30/13
07/30/13
01/30/18
Fed Farm Credit Bank
Fed Home Ln Mtg Corp Med Term Note
3133ECFA7
3134G4XK9
AAA
AAA
US
US
100,000.00
200,000.00
100,000.00
200,000.00
100,000.00
200,000.00
1.080%
1.300%
97,733.00
198,904.00
semi - annual
semi - annual
023/3/13
03/27/14
08/13113
09/27/14
02/13/18
03/27/18
Fed Home Ln Mtg Corp
3134G46D5
AAA
US
198,000.00
198,000.00
200,000.00
1.200%
195,528.00
semi - annual
06/12/13
12/12/13
06112/18
Fed Home Ln Mtg Corp Med Term Note
3134G3ZK9
AAA
US
200,000.00
200,000.00
200,000.00
1.200%
196,146.00
semi - annual
07/30/12
01/30/13
07/30/18
Fed Farm Credit Bank
31331Y4S6
AAA
US
114,000.00
114,000.00
100,000.00
5.050%
114,375.00
semi - annual
09/11/13
none
08/01/18
Fed Home Ln Bank
3130AOFN5
AAA
US
200,000.00
200,000.00
200,000.00
0.500%
199,892.00
semi - annual
12/26/13
05/26/14
11126/18
Fed Nail Mtg Assn
3136GORB9
AAA
US
294,999.00
294,999.00
300,000.00
1.375%
294,048.00
semi- annual
12/05/13
12/28/12
12/28/18
Fed Nall Mtg Assn
3136GOY70
AAA
US
199,300.00
199,300.00
200,000.00
1.080%
193,606.00
semi - annual
10/30/12
01/30/13
01/30/19
Fed Farm Credit Bank
Fed Natl Mtg Assn Remic
Fed Home Ln Mtg Corp
3133EC5N0
- - - --
31393EAL3
AAA
-
US
99,587.00
99,587.00
100,000.00
1.250%
96,490.00
semi- annual
01/07/13
03/04/13
03/04/19
US
204,187.50
19,251.47
18,856.67
4.500%
19,933.57
monthly
07/30/03
none
08/25/18
31393VMQ1
_
- _
US
153,656.25
11,104.95
10,840.69
4.500%
11,435.19
monthly
06/30/03
06/15/18
10,696,845.85
Celtic Bank
15118RJMO
CD
247,000.00
247,000.00
247,000.00
2.050%
245,799.58
semi - annual
12/20/13
06/20/14
12/20/19
Barren Cnty KY
068437DM1
Al
local
43,996.00
43,996.00
40,000.00
4.300%
41,354.80
semi - annual
02/08/12
none
04/01/19
Oneida County NY
682454382
Al
local
114,388.00
114,388.00
100,000.00
6.250%
105,100.00
semi - annual
08/16/10
none
04/15/19
Ramsey MN _
751813PB6
AA+
local
158,677.85
158,677.85
145,000.00
4.500%
148,526.40
semi - annual
02/16/12
04/01/16
04/01119
Stearns Co MN
857896MH4
AA,
local
276,875.00
276,875.00
250,000.00
4.500%
259,257.50
semi - annual
04/17/13
none
06/01/20
Minnetrista MN
604229KG8
AA+
local
196,265.55
196,265.55
195,000.00
3.100%
195,039.00
semi - annual
10/10/13
08/01/14
02/01/21
Greenway MN ISD #31
39678LDF6
AA+
local
27,593.50
27,593.50
25,000.00
5.000%
26,788.50
semi - annual
07/09/13
none
03/15/21
Minnetrista MN
604229KJ2
AA+
local
50,000.00
50,000.00
50,000.00
3.850%
50,015.50
semi - annual
10/10/13
08/01/14
02/01/23
Savage Minn
80465PAN4
AA+
local
198,018.00
198,018.00
200,000.00
4.800%
209,620.00
semi - annual
06/17/10
02/01/11
02/01/24
Minneapolis MN
60374YS81
AA1
local
278,632.50
278,632.50
250,000.00
3.500%
267,747.50
semi - annual
02/26/13
none
12/01/19
Minneapolis MN
60374YG68
AA1
local
110,419.00
110,419.00
100,000.00
4.700%
107,715.00
semi - annual
10/31/11
none
03101123
Waterloo IA
941647PAl
AA2
local
50,559.50
50,559.50
50,000.00
2.000%
49,497.00
semi - annual
06/27/13
12/01/13
06/01/19
Western Lake Superior MN
958522WU4
AA2
local
100,000.00
100,000.00
100,000.00
3.150%
102,723.00
semi - annual
08/16/11
04/01/12
10/01/19
Portsmouth VA
73723RSL8
AA2
local
286,268.00
286,268.00
295,000.00
2.400%
297,840.85
semi - annual
07/17/13
02/01/14
02/01/20
Moorhead MN
6161412R7
AA3
local
108,820.00
108,820.00
100,000.00
3.800%
100,769.00
semi - annual
11/14/11
none
02/01/20
Davenport Iowa
238388GS5
AA3
local
111,948.00
111,948.00
100,000.00
4.650%
106,226.00
semi - annual
09/13/11
none
06/01/20
WhitewaterWis
966204KA6
AA3
local
109,541.00
109,541.00
100,000.00
4.850%
112,008.00
semi - annual
06/09/11
none
12/01/20
Cedar Rapids IA
150528RM1
AAA
local
217,672.00
217,672.00
200,000.00
3.000%
207,702.00
semi - annual
06/11/13
12/01/13
06/01/19
1,088,701.30 state
2,541,138.76 US
- 5 Years
245,799.58 CD
March 2014 Investment Detail
Description
Cusip Number
Credit
Rating
Type
Purchase Price
in Cost
'Carryg
Mtit A
aury mount
Interest
Rate
Current Market
Value !
In er st Pa
Date
Acquired
Coupon
Date
Maturity
Due Date
Palm Beach CntyFLA
696497TR7
AAA
local
256,504.60
256,504.60
220,000.00
5.898%
255,087.80
semi - annual
07/06/11
none
06/01/19
Tenn Val Auth Cpn Strip Zero Cpn
88059EWZ3
AAA
local
262,890.00
262,890.00
300,000.00
262,383.00
maturity
12/27/13
none
06/15/19
Norwalk Conn
668844DS9
AAA
local
122,464.80
122,464.80
120,000.00
4.050%
124,215.60
semi - annual
08/04110
08/01/11
08/01/19
Greensboro NC
395460V21
AAA
local
366,832.80
366,832.80
360,000.00
3.263%
362,854.80
semi - annual
07/15/11
none
10101/19
Woodbury MN
97913PCQ7
AAA
local
123,037.35
123,037.35
115,000.00
3.250%
116,329.40
semi - annual
12/22/11
none
02/01/20
Dallas TX Indpt Sch Dist
235308QK2
AAA
local
116,900.00
116,900.00
100,000.00
4.450%
110,896.00
semi - annual
04/16/12
08/15/11
02/15/20
Tenn Valley Auth Zero Cpn
88059EHD9
AAA
local
263,970.00
263,970.00
300,000.00
252,516.00
maturity
03/11/13
none
05/01120
Tenn Val Auth Cpn Strip Zero Cpn
88059EMX9
AAA
local
88,133.00
88,133.00
100,000.00
83,346.00
maturity
03/18/13
none
07/15/20
Minnetonka MN ISD #276
604195PQ4
AAA
local
23,491.73
23,016.40
20,000.00
6.200%
21,906.00
semi - annual
11/19/12
none
01/01/21
Shoreview MN
825214EH8
AAA
local
197,205.75
197,205.75
175,000.00
4.900%
185,071.25
semi - annual
01/25/12
none
02/01/24
Florida St Dept Environmental
3416OWUAO
Al
state
217,800.00
217,800.00
200,000.00
6.206%
220,096.00
semi - annual
08/30/10
07/01/10
07/01/22
Minnesota St Hsg Fin Agy Taxable
60415NE24
AA1
state
80,600.00
80,600.00
80,000.00
6.300%
83,212.00
semi - annual
07/27106
01/01/07
07/01/23
Virginia State
928109XD4
AAA
state
22,126.00
22,126.00
20,000.00
4.100%
21,087.60
semi - annual
02/07/12
none
06/01/21
Fed Natl Mtg Assn
3135GOKB8
AAA
US
203,114.00
203,114.00
200,000.00
2.750%
200,214.00
semi - annual
08/06/13
10/16/12
04/16/19
Fed Farm Credit Bank
3133ECQ64
AAA
US
191,812.00
191,812.00
200,000.00
1.740%
194,588.00
semi - annual
07/23/13
11/21/13
05/21/20
5,127,533.08
semi - annual
semi - annual
semi - annual
12/20/11
07/12/11
05/11/11
06/15/19
none
none
06/15/24
02/01/28
02/01/25
Mitchell SD Sch Dist #17 -2
606687EH0
AA
local
116,702.00
116,702.00
100,000.00
6.000%
111,244.00
Itasca County Minn
465452GP9
AA-
local
105,024.00
105,024.00
100,000.00
5.550%
103,490.00
Lake City Minn lSD #813
508084DW7
AA+
local
1 03,933.00
103,933.00
100,000.00
5.000%
105,311.00
Milaca Minn SID #912
Duluth MN
Will County IL Cmnly Zero Coupon
Van Buren Mich Public Schools
-- -
HawkinsCntyTN
598699NT9
264438ZL9
969078QM9
920729HD5
--- —
420218PL7
AA+
AA2
AA2
AA2
local
106,941.00
106,941.00
100,000.00
5.650%
108,322.00
semi - annual
07/22/11
none
02/01/27
local
local
local
29,767.20
29,767.20
30,000.00
2.625%
27,293.10
semi - annual
12/05/12
08101/13
02/01/25
159,000.00
159,000.00
500,000.00
229,980.00
maturity
08/25109
none
11/01/27
102,750.00
102,750.00
100,000.00
6.430%
108,852.00
semi - annual
07/17/09
11/01/09
05101/29
AA3
local
111,480.00
111,480.00
100,000.00
4.800%
102,763.00
semi - annual
03/13/12
none
05/01/24
Tennessee Valley Auth Ser E
880591CJ9
AAA
local
121,500.00
121,500.00
100,000.00
6.750%
129,447.00
semi - annual
03/19/09
none
11/01/25
Ice Deposit - National Sports Center
none
local
250,000.00
250,000.00
250,000.00
250,000.00
maturity
02/06/08
none
01/01/26
Fed Home Ln Bank
3133803H8
AAA
US
200,000.00
200,000.00
200,000.00
1.500%
186,644.00
semi - annual
07/30/12
01/30/13
07/30/24
Fed Farm Credit Bank
31331VLC8
AAA
US
106,030.45
106,030.45
100,000.00
5.250%
115,048.00
semi - annual
02/26/10
none
04/21/28
Fed Nall Mtg Assn
31398AQY1
AAA
US
218,100.00
218,100.00
200,000.00
5.380%
205,726.00
semi - annual
12/24/12
none
11/13128
Fed NatlMtg Assn
3136FTP94
AAA
US
361,069.20
361,069.20
360,000.00
2.000%
338,540.40
semi - annual
12/13/12
none
02/27/32
2,122,660.50
22,091,856.32
4,162,535.90 local
324,395.60 state
394,802.00 US
- 30 Years
1,276,702.10 local
845,958.40 US
0+ Years
INVESTMENT SCHEDULE - Money Market Funds
March 31, 2014
Description <
Cur rent Market Value
YTD Interest
Wells Fargo
1 lWells Fargo Government Money Market Fund
1 $2,420,850.401 $103.92
4M
I 14M
1,892.52 -
4M PLUS
1 14M Plus
3,100.71 -
Grand Total Money Market Funds 1 $2,425,843.63 1 $103.92
Updated: 41912014