Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-27-02 City of Lakeville Economic Development Commission Regular Meeting A_ genda Tuesday, August 27, 2002, 6:00 p.m. City Hall, 20195 Holyoke Avenue Lakeville, MN 1 Call meeting to order. 2. Approve June 25, 2002 meeting minutes. 3. Strategic Plan Work Item: Educate residents on benefits of C /I. A.) Discussion with PR Firm Himle Horner -Todd Rapp B.) Spotlight on Business update 4. Strategic Work Plan Item: Investigation of critical business infrastructure. A.) Review and make recommendations on Springsted's Interchange Finance Study. B.) Update on collaboration on Lakeville Technology Center Concept meeting with Dakota County Technical College and Dakota County Community Development Agency. 5. Update on Downtown Code Improvement Program Ben Franklin CDBG project. 6. Update On Advanced Wireless Project. 7. Director's Report. 8. Adjourn. .T N ,FT City of Lakeville Economic Development Commission Meeting Minutes June 25, 2002 Lower Level, Lakeville Area Arts Center 20965 Holyoke Avenue Members Present: Vogel, Emond, Pogatchnik, Schubert, Tushie, Smith, Miller Ex- Officio member Todd Bornhauser. Members Absent: Commissioners Brantly, Matasosky, Erickson. Others Present: Staff present: David Olson, Community & Economic Development Director; Ann Flad, Economic Development Coordinator, Jodi Braun, representative for John and Jerry Enggren. 1.Call Meeting to Order. Chair Vogel called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Lower Level of the Lakeville Area Arts Center, .20965 Holyoke Avenue, Lakeville, Minnesota. 2.Approve April 23, 2002 Meeting Minutes. Motion 02.08 Comms. Tushie/Emond moved to approve the minutes of the April 23, 2002 meeting. Motion carried unanimously. 3.B.) E-Commerce Certification Event Ms. Flad reported on the E-Commerce Certification Event that was held immediately prior to the EDC meeting. Commissioner Rebecca Yanisch of the Department of Trade & Economic Development formally presented .Mayor Johnson with the .certification. EDC Chair Bob Vogel and Telecommunications Chair Greg Statmann introduced members of their respective advisory committees and the High Tech Subcommittee. Dr. Ron Thomas, President of Dakota County. Technical College, provided closing remarks and noted that e-commerce and development of a presence of higher education will make Lakeville competitive with the most desirable communities in the nation. Charter Communications, Frontier Communications, Focal Communications., OneNet USA, and Dakota County Technical College had display tables and provided information to guests regarding the telecommunications services they could provide. It is estimated that more than 60 guests attended the event.. Flad also noted that Lakeville's E-Commerce certification was highlighted in an article in the Minneapolis Star-Tribune on Monday, June 17, 2002. This certification "sends a f Economic Development Commission r Meeting Minutes June 25, 2002 strong signal to entrepreneurs" said City Administrator Bob Erickson in the article. Lakeville is only the second metro-area community to receive this certification. E-Commerce Certification was pursued at the recommendation of the EDC at their January 29, 2002 meeting which directed staff "to pursue E-commerce Certification with the assistance of Frontier Communications on the basis that it is consistent with Goal #3 of the City's 2002-2004 Strategic Plan for Economic Development." 4. 2002-2004 Strategic Plan -Work Plan Goal #1: Educate residents on benefits of C/l PR Firm: Mr. Olson reported that Ghair Vogel, Ms. Flad and Mr. Olson interviewed two PR firms, Himle Horner, Inc. and New School, Inc. Based on the EDC's directive from the April 22, 2002 meeting, the firms were asked to prepare proposals to assist the EDC in developing a plan to educate residents on the following: 1. Educate the residents that the City has been very responsible in fiscally managing the City.. 2. Educate the residents about the proportion of C/I to residential. development that is called for in the Comprehensive Plan as compared to other communities. 3. Educate the residents about the future needs of the community and .the benefits that C/I development will accrue. Mr. Olson reported that Mayor Johnson, Chair Vogel, Mr. Erickson and Mr. Olson met to discuss the City's ability to support. this initiative with staff and financial resources. The City is currently processing nearly 3,800 residential units and .over one million square feet of commercial and industrial development. Mayor Johnson and staff are recommending the EDC adjust the timeframe for this project, with work on developing a plan beginning in October. concluding in the first quarter of 2003. Comm. Emond acknowledged that adjusting the time frame for this project would also enable staff to identify funding to pay for the project. Additionally, based on the qualifications of both firms, the interviews that were conducted, and the subsequent preliminary proposals submitted by both firms, it is the recommendation of Chair Vogel and staff that the firm of Himle Horner be invited to the July 30th EDC meeting. The purpose of inviting Himle Horner to the July meeting would be to allow other EDC members to discuss the firm's approach to the project and to develop an agenda for tasks that would be completed by Himle Horner. Mayor Johnson and staff discussed paying a representative of Himle Horner at the firm's hourly rate for attending this meeting. Comm. Tushie indicated that consultants typically are not paid for meetings to define the scope of the work they will be doing for a client. Comm. Miller suggested perhaps the same option should be offered to New School, Inc. Comm. Smith commented that having a consultant attend a meeting without pay would not obligate the City or the PR Firm to continue with the project. 2 Economic Development Commission Meeting Minutes June 25, 2002 It was the consensus of the Commissioners to direct Chair Vogel and Mr. Olson. to discuss this approach further with Mr. Erickson. It was also the consensus that if the consultant was to be paid for his time at a meeting that he spend time pior to the meeting refining his firm's scope and approach to the project.- Commissioners will be informed of the outcome of this conversation. Comm. Tushie added that it is crucial that the consultant further define the scope of work prior to the EDC meeting. Commissioners can then provide additional input, thus maximizing the use of the consultant's time at the meeting. Spotlight On Business: Ms. Flad reported that the "Spotlight On Business" program continues to be well received by the businesses featured and by the business community as a whole. Consistent with Goal #1 of the Strategic Work Pian, this program provides a forum to share information on the benefits of having a business base in the community. Information about the featured business is presented by an EDC member and includes the dollar amount of taxes paid by that business. Per Commissioner Jerry Erickson's suggestion, staff contacted the This Week Life & Times. They have agreed to publish press releases regarding the businesses featured in the "Spotlight on Business" program. Comm. Miller introduced Mike Muller of Lakeville Muller Theater, Comm. Pogatchnick introduced Tom Everett of Strout Plastics, Comm. Smith introduced Tim Peterson of Southfork and Dan Shimek of Hearth Technologies, and David Olson introduced Glenn Haase of Ryt-Way Industries at recent City Council meetings. 4. Consider Concept for Ben Franklin Exterior Code Improvement Project Mr. Olson reported on the Downtown Code Improvement Program that was approved by the City Council at their January 7, 2002 meeting. At that time, the City Council was informed of Jerry and John Enggren's interest in utilizing CDBG funds to address the building code issues on the facade of their building that currently houses the Ben Franklin store. City Building Official Gene Abbott has inspected the condition of the existing building and determined that the majority of the work associated with the removal of the existing facade would constitute a building code improvement. Since January, several meetings have been held with the Enggrens to discuss the program requirements. The Enggrens have also retained the architectural firm of Charles Radloff Architects to prepare a design concept. Mr. Radloff was provided .with a copy of the Historic Fairfield District guidelines along with several photographs of new and renovated buildings in the Historic Downtown area and Heritage Commons. The design has been revised to be consistent with the design guidelines, to make it compatible with surrounding buildings, .and to make the project financially feasible for the building owners to complete. 3 Economic Development Commission Meeting Minutes June 25, 2002 Mr. Olson presented a building facade design concept to the Commissioners. Mr. Olson noted that the building colors in the drawing are not identical to .the colors of the building materials that will be used. Mr. Olson explained that the second story is a facade only and. usable second floor space is not incorporated in the design. The second story is proposed to be faced with stucco because the building would not support the weight associated with a brick second story. Ms. Braun indicated that the entrance to the building is currently set back from the facade. The proposed new facade would bring the entrance flush with the rest of the building facade. Ms. Braun also indicated that no interior renovation was proposed with this project except addressing the interior floor, ceiling and wall repair associated with making the entrance flush with the rest of the facade. Comm. Pogatchnik questioned whether the. Downtown Lakeville Business Association (DLBA) supported the new design. Ms. Braun indicated that she had presented the design to the. DLBA and that the DLBA supported the design. Commissioners discussed the impact to the building's tenant, the Ben Franklin store. Floor space will not be lost due to this project. Space will be gained by making. the entrance flush with the facade. Mr. Olson and Ms, Flad will be meeting with Ben Franklin owner Scott Erickson on June 28, 2002 to discuss the project with him further. Mr. Olson encouraged Ms. Braun to share. the plans with Scott Erickson and to work with him to ensure his business remains operable during project construction. Comm. Pogatchnik also inquired whether anyone else was interested in the CDBG funds. Mr. Olson .reported that, consistent with the Smith Downtown Code Improvement project completed with 2000 CDBG funds, the Ben Franklin project is proposed to be funded up to a maximum of $70,000. The remaining 2002 CDBG funds are anticipated to be approximately $35,000. It was concluded that a project of a similar .size as the Smith's and that is proposed for the Enggrens could not be accomplished with the remaining. funds. The remaining funds may be reprogrammed for other uses or may be carried over to 2003 and incorporated into another Downtown Code Improvement program. It was noted that many unknown issues and extra project costs often arise when renovating buildings of this age. Mr. Olson reminded the Commissioners that the assistance is capped at $70,000, and the Enggrens, who must match the funds on a 1:1 basis, would be responsible for any additional costs incurred. The CDBG assistance would be provided as a reimbursement after the entire project is complete, thus eliminating the possibility that funds could be expended on a project that owners deem too costly to complete. This is identical to terms of the grant agreement that was. approved for the Smith Dental building. 4 Economic Development Commission Meeting Minutes June 25, 2002 Motion 02:09 Comm. Pogatchnik/Miller moved to recommend the City Council approve $70,000 in CDBG Downtown. Code Improvement program funds to be used to address building code issues as depicted in the design presented for the Enggren's Ben Franklin building. Tushie abstained; motion carried. Mr. Olson indicated that the City Council would consider the recommendation to fund this project once the architect has more detailed drawings and has received bids. It is anticipated that the Council will consider this project at the July 15, 2002 City Council meeting. 4. B.) Work Plan Goal # 3: Encourage investigation of critical business. infrastructure: Dakota County Technical College collaboration on Lakeville Technology Center .Concept Ms. Flad reported that staff has resumed discussions with Dakota County Technical College regarding potential collaboration on the development of a High Tech presence in Lakeville as requested by the High Tech Subcommittee at their Aprit 03, 2002 High Tech Subcommittee meeting. Discussions had been on hold until the outcome of the ISD 194 referendum was known. On May 16, 2002, staff met with President Ron Thomas and staff from Dakota County Technical College, representatives from Metropolitan State University, and Gary Amoroso,. Julia Espe, and Barb Knudsen. of ISD 194. The parties discussed developing a Center that would provide courses in technical trades, college courses for high schoolers, undergraduate and graduate courses, and would also have a component that could serve entrepreneurs, telecommuters and customized training for companies' employees. Additionally, DCTC President Ron Thomas again suggested that DCTC could possibly fund a coordinator position who could focus their energy on developing this partnership and the subsequent project. Dr. Thomas also indicated that he has been cultivating a relationship with Metro State University President Wilson Bradshaw, who is very close to the Chancellor of the university system and who will also serve on the Chancellor's board next year. Ron believes that this project will capture the attention of the Chancellor and the university system because of Mr. Bradshaw's interest and involvement. Ms. Flad shared a draft concept of this project that was developed with input from each of the organizations. Staff also visited the Owatanana Technology Center on June 20, 2002 with Dr. Thomas and staff in order to evaluate the feasibility of replicating this model. Dr. Thomas is s Economic Development Commission - Meeting Minutes June 25, 2002 considering visiting a similar facility in Salt Lake City, Utah to evaluate the feasibility of incorporating that model into the Lakeville project. Staff will be meeting with DCTC, ISD 194 and Metro State Uriiversity in the near future to determine the next step for the project. 5. Review of proposed Dakota County Tax Increment Financing Policy Mr. Olson reported that Dakota County recently provided the City with a copy of a DRAFT Tax Increment Financing (TIFJ Policy dated 5/23/02. The City was previously provided a DRAFT TIF Policy dated 1/23/02. Mr. Olson indicated that the County is attempting to simplify their policy with the most recent DRAFT. The policy is intended to limit and constrain the use of TIF for the types of projects listed below. The current DRAFT policy indicates the following: Dakota County will support housing, redevelopment, and renewal and renovation of TIF districts that increase or have a neutral effect on the number of affordable housing units in the community, clearly demonstrate that they meet the "but for" test, and meet at least one of the following: 1. Provide affordable housing 2. IncludeJivable community housing and provide mixed use such as a central city concept 3. Remove blight conditions and contamination 4. Provide a net increase in livable wage jobs The previous DRAFT TIF Policy included a statement that the County would only support Economic Development TIF Districts that provide substantial county-wide economic benefit as determined by the County. This provision is not contained in the latest DRAFT Policy.. Economic Development Districts are typically utilized for new manufacturing and warehouse projects that are developed on previously undeveloped sites. The County has previously not supported this type of TIF District. In addition, the current Draft Tlf Policy does not address Soil Correction TIF Districts. The other main provision of the DRAFT Policy addresses transportation improvements that may be required as a result of a TIF Project. .This current DRAFT Policy indicates the County: shall require the authority (City) to pay all or a portion of the cost of related or required improvements to the county transportation system from increment revenues, if the following conditions occur: 1. The proposed plan would, in the judgement of the county, substantially increase the use of the county transportation system and require construction of road. improvements or incur other transportation system costs; and 2. The transportation system improvements are not scheduled for construction within five years under the county capital improvements plan, and, in the opinion of the county, 6 - Economic Development Commission Meeting Minutes June 25, 2002 would not be expected to be needed within the reasonable foreseeable future were it not for the tax increment district. It should be noted that under Minnesota Statutes, the County is provided the opportunity to comment on proposed new or amended TIF districts, however the County cannot prevent cities from approving new or amended TIF Districts that meet all the requirements of Minnesota Statutes. Staff is in the process of preparing comments to this latest DRAFT TIF Policy. 6. Update On Dakota County Economic Development Partnership Mr. Olson reported that The Dakota County Economic Development Partnership (DCEDP) recently mailed a survey to approximately 100 community leaders in Dakota County including DCEDP members, past members, all cities, county representatives, chambers of commerce, school district superintendents and local newspapers. The response rate of the survey was 40%. The majority of the respondents indicated that DCEDP should continue to operate as a county-wide agency that coordinates and promotes economic development in Dakota County. The greatest. strength of the DCEDP is the involvement, support and leadership from both the public and private sectors,. and the collaboration and communication that results. According to the surrey results, the most important program areas for the DCEDP to continue focusing on include: • Business retention and development • Workforce development and training • Technology • Marketing Dakota County as a unified entity The DCEDP was also identified as having a number of weaknesses or shortcomings in its mission and operations, including: • The DCEDP's mission being somewhat off target by trying to be all things to all people. • The DCEDP has not effectively communicated its activities. • DCEDP leadership and management have not been as effective as they. should be. A Strategic Planning Task Force, with the help of a The Osgood Group, was formed to initiate the survey. The taskforce has been meeting regularly to review the survey results to determine what changes need to be implemented in the organization. Mr. Olson indicated he has been serving on this Task Force as one of two city representatives. The other members of the Task Force represent the County and private sector members. Economic Development Commission , Meeting Minutes June 25, 2002 The Survey results were recently reviewed with Chambers of Commerce in Dakota County and with Community Development Directors. Based on the discussions of the DCEDP Task Force and meetings with the above organizations that have taken place to date, several areas for improvement of the DCEDP have been identified, including: • Eliminate duplication with other entities • Increase visibility, credibility and leadership • The need for strong Executive Director leadership Additional input from a number of other organizations, including the Dakota County City Managers group, will result in a number of recommended changes to the organizational structure and focus of DCEDP. These recommendations will be considered by the full membership in the next several months. Comm, Pogatchnik indicated that he did not believe Lakeville would be overlooked by businesses looking for a new location if the City was not a member of DCEDP. Mr. Bornhauser indicated that DCEDP needs to be a marketing entity. Chair Vogel suggested that this topic be included when discussions about the 2003 budget'take place. 7. Director's Report. Mr. Olson reported that City staff has recently approved a site plan and concept plan for the renovation of the Old Tom Thumb building located at the corner of CSAH 50 and 175tH Street owned by Bob James. Approval of the plan will result in the removal of a free- standing shed behind the building, a{imination of a pylon sign base located within art easement and the removal of a trash enclosure located within an easement. This property is located within the Moratorium Area. The plan, with several minor revisions, is permitted as it utilizes the existing building footprint and does not intensify the use so as to require a conditional use permit or variance. Mr. Olson reported that Mr. James was very positive about the outcome of this review process and will be able to pursue other improvements to property once the moratorium is lifted, including a possible drive-thru window, improvements to the outdoor seating area, and improvements to his parking lot design including landscaped medians. The proposed uses that would occupy the remodeled commercial center may include a coffee shop, sandwich shop, and a dry cleaner. SRF Consulting Group continues to meet with property and/or business owners in the Moratorium area. The input gathered will be used by SRF to develop a preliminary design layout, traffic forecast and traffic operations evaluation for the I-35 -CSAH 50 area. s ' Economic Development Commission Meeting Minutes June 25, 2002 Mr. Olson also reported that the Dakota County Board awarded a bid to Valley Paving on June 4, 2002 for the first phase of the CSAH 60 project. The Bid award amount .was approximately $2 million below the engineers estimate. The first phase project will include construction of the south ramps, realignment of the frontage road and the upgrading of 185t" Street east of I-35. The Project Management Team for the I-35-CSAH 70 Interchange Project has met twice, and their next meeting is scheduled for July 11, 2002. The Team is comprised of representatives of MnDOT, Dakota County, and the City of Lakeville, along with the consulting firms of TKDA and SRF. Mr. Olson reported that the City Council approved the proposed sketch plan for the CrossRoads Development at their June 17, 2002. meeting.. This is a mixed-use development proposed at the southeast corner of Dodd Boulevard and Cedar Avenue on approximately 230 acres. OPUS Corporation is the developer of the commercial portion of this project that contains approximately 186,000 square feet of space and will have a Cub Foods store as its anchor tenant.. Approval of this sketch plan was contingent upon reaching an agreement with the County on an innovative approach to the upgrade of Dodd Boulevard. The County has authorized the .execution of an agreement whereby the City would be authorized to oversee the upgrade of Dodd to a four-lane divided roadway from Cedar to Gerdine Path. The City .would also to be-.the agency to coordinate the installation of traffic signals at Cedar and 179t" Street and at Glacier and. Dodd Boulevard when traffic warrants are met. All of the required transportation improvements will be funded by OPUS and by DR Horton, the residential developer of the project. Mr. Olson reported that the next annual meeting of the Fairfield Property Owners Association was held on Tuesday, June 25t" at noon at New Morning Windows. Mr. Olson also reported that a meeting of the Airlake Airport Advisory Commission has been scheduled for Thursday, June 27, 2002 at 4:00 in the Flyteline Services building at the airport. This will be the committee's first meeting in approximately two years. Mr. Olson indicated that Dakota County Capital recently approved a loan in the amount of $50,000- to Tangen Industrial Services located in Airlake Industrial Park. Dakota County Capital LLC is a Gap and Equity .Financing fund that is overseen by the Dakota. County Economic Development Partnership staff. A number of banks in the County participate in the program. The loan made to Tangen was for machinery and equipment and was processed by Anchor Bank in Lakeville. Mr. Olson reported on the most recent legislative session and provided a Final Legislative Report prepared by Kathy Hahne lobbyist for the. Economic Development Association of Minnesota. In terms of economic development programs, the Governor's veto of all funding for State redevelopment programs is significant. In addition, the legislature eliminated funding for the TIF Grant program that was established to assist cities with TIF Districts that have shortfalls caused by property tax reforms. As the report indicates, unless there is a 9 Economic Development Commission Meeting Minutes June 25, 2002 significant improvement in the state economy, there will be dramatic spending cuts or tax increases required during the 2003 Legislative Session. Mr. Olson also reviewed a memo from Fire Chief Danny Barth regarding the sale of fireworks in the City as a result of the recent change in State Statutes. Chief Barth indicated that several licenses to sell fireworks have been issued with some parties withdrawing their applications. 7. Adjourn. Chair Vogel adjourned the meeting at 8.:20 p.m. Respectfully submitted by: Attested to: Ann Flad, Recording Secretary -Bob Vogel, Chair io Agenda Item MEMORANDUM TO: .Economic Development Commission CC: Robert Erickson, City Administrator David L. Olson, Community & Economic Development Director Todd. Rapp, Himle Horner ~r,; FROM: Ann Flad, Economic Development Coordinator, DATE: August 20, 2002 RE: Strategic Work Plan Item to Educate Residents on the Benefits of C/I Discussion with Public Relations Firm Himle Horner Goal # 1 of the Economic Development 2002 Strategic Work Plan is `~o inform and educate the residents of the benefits of CII base to gain community support and appreciation for business growth. " The EDC, at its April 22, 2002 meeting, recommended that a Public Relations/Marketing firm be retained to assist the EDC in outlining, implementing, and evaluating an educational campaign to achieve the following: 1. Educate the residents that- the City has been very responsible in fiscally managing the City.. 2. Educate the. residents about the proportion of C/I to residential. development that is called for in the Comprehensive Plan as compared to other. communities. 3. Educate the residents about the future: needs of the community and the benefits that C/I development will accrue. Staff and EDC Chair Bob Vogel subsequently met with two public relations firms. At the June 25, 2002 EDC meeting, the Commission recommended that the firm of Himle Horner be invited to the next EDC meeting to allow other EDC members to discuss the firm's approach to the project and to attempt to develop an agenda for tasks that would be completed by Himle Horner. Please see attached proposal from Himle Horner for more information. Subsequent to the August meeting, staff would work with Himle Horner to develop a more defined scope of services and contract. Included in this refined scope of services and contract would include a project schedule and proposed compensation amount with anot-to-exceed amount .This scope of services /contract and funding recommendation would be brought to the EDC for consideration at the October meeting. The project would hopefully be completed by March/April of 2003. ~Iim1e ~Io~ner INCQRPORATED PUBLIC RELATIONS MARKETING PUBLIC AFFAIRS - May 31, 2002 David L. Olson, Director Community ~St Economic Development City of Lakeville 20195 Holyoke Avenue Lakeville, MN 55044 Dear David: Thank you for inviting Himle Horner to prepare a proposal for a public awareness and engagement campaign for the City of Lakeville and its Economic Development Commission. Enclosed is our proposal for atwo-year program to assist the Commission. In keeping with the budget guidelines outlined by you, I have recommended two options for strategic counsel. Each of these includes the following roles for Himle Horner: • Creation of a detailed plan for the Commission to increase resident awareness and engagement in economic development discussions within the City of Lakeville • Identification of keymessages • Development of a modular presentation for use by City Staff • Evaluation of current communication materials and tactics, along with recommendations for future activities • Assist in design of research • Prepare yearly progress reports on activities In Option B, Himle Horner tivould assist City staff in the implementation of specific tactical steps for which our expertise may best complement those of .your staff. The specific items included on this list may change based on the choices the Commission makes with regard to implementation of the public awareness and engagement campaign. If }you have any questions related to this proposal, please call me at 952-897-8212. I hope we can meet in the near future to discuss Himle Hornet's ideas in more detail. Sincerely, Todd Rapp Senior Director 8500 Normandale lake Boulevard, Suite 720, (vlinneapoiis, ulN 55437 Phone: 452-831-3200 fax: 952831-5116 E-rc!ail: himlehomer@himlehorner.com Increasing Public Awareness and Participation in Economic Development Planning and Implementation Proposal prepared for Economic Development Commission City of Lakeville May 31, 2002 Prepared by Todd Rapp, Senior Director Himle Horner, .Inc. 952-897-8212 ToddRappCa>HimleHorner.com 4 Situation Analysis The City of Lakeville has successfully managed 30 years of exceptional residential and business growth. In just three decades, Lakeville -has grown from an outpost of just 7,500 residents in 1970 to a thriving, dynamic city of 43,000 in 2000 with growth expected to continue. That success was due in no small part to the thoughtful, well researched planning by city officials, residents and others. While other communities have experienced similar growth, not all have been able to maintain a high quality of life and full community support while they grew. Often communities have built first and thought later of planning. Lakeville, by contrast, has developed a deliberate, intelligent plan to ensure that they have the right mix of business and residential development while maintaining the support of area residents. The challenge for Lakeville as it grows into the next .stage is to maintain and broaden that support by communicating to residents details of the tong range plan. Why economic development is good for the city, how plans are derived and listing past successes are critical messages if Lakeville citizens are going to continue to support growth.. In short, residents need to understand that Lakeville will continue to change and understand how and why those changes will be implemented. HHI Proposal for Lakeville EDC 2 May 31, 2002 Introduction Why Himle Horner? Three reasons stand out: 1. We have a demonstrated track record of tackling tough challenges in local communities and producing successful results. Himle Horner. has earned a reputation as the leading public affairs agency in Minnesota. What have we done to deserve .this reputation? We know how to build. coalitions and how to communicate with. them. We reach out to diverse audiences to engage them around common interests. We work to understand the key messages most important to targeted audiences and we find out the most effective means to deliver those key messages. Working with the City of Lakeville, we will break through .the clutter of competing communications to ensure that people understand. what is transpiring in their community, how they can get involved and where they can go for more information. 2. We know how to build coalitions to obtain positive results. No other agency is better at partnering with potential supporters and identifying key opponents to develop integrated communications to reach a desired goal. The first step in understanding how to best communicate with your audiences is to understand who they are and what motivates them. Through research and testing Himle Horner will understand what information people are looking for and in what manner they prefer to receive it. We will also assist in developing communication vehicles designed to communicate .key messages as determined by the Economic Development Commission. 3. We know how to create the right strategy to deliver the right tactics. Himle Horner has a long and successful history of working with public entities to communicate complex issues to large audiences. From city councils to state departments to local coalitions, we know how to educate, energize and engage people on important issues. Most importantly, Himle Horner develops strategies first rather than preparing an unrelated list of tactical steps for a client to consider. HHI Proposal for Lakeville EDC 3 May 31, 2002 Strategy and Deliverables The City of Lakeville is looking for assistance with strategic public affairs counsel and targeted public relations tactics. Based upon current research and conversations with City staff, residents, interested audiences and others, Himle Horner will develop a specific plan that will include: • Developing key messages, materials and the communication vehicles to deliver them; • Identifying key community groups with whom to communicate and managing the communications with them; and • Providing custom strategic counsel and project management for -plan implementation. Some questions we would want to discuss with City staff and others include: • How does Lakeville integrate its planning efforts with those undertaken by Dakota County and the Metropolitan Council? • What is the level- of political support for the planning efforts undertaken by the Economic Development Council? • What issues concern residents and business leaders as Lakeville emerges into one of Minnesota's largest cities? While the specifics of the plan will be based on more thorough research and conversations with City staff .and targeted groups, some of the ideas we may want to explore to effectively communicate key messages about Lakeville's economic. development include: • Creating a modular presentation for City staff to use with key groups, • Developing materials to communicate how economic development benefits the entire city, including fact sheets, electronic presentations, charts, graphs, profiles, brochures and other materials; • Identifying and capitalizing on opportunities to promote the City of Lakeville; • Determining the best option for sharing information with residents by updating and re-energizing existing materials. For example -survey web users on what information they want most, consider providing Lakeville. information via a-mail, reformat "Messenger" with more crisp look and review editorial content standards; and • Creating an electronic .model of how Lakeville will look in 10, 20 or 50 years to be displayed on web site, in kiosks, in newsletters, etc. HHl Proposal for Lakeville EDC 4 May 31, 2002 Budget Himle Horner is recommending two different levels of activity for Lakeville to consider for public affairs and public relations consulting from July 2002 through June 2004. Option A Budget: $2,000 per month retainer (plus out-of-pocket expenses) Activities: - Assist Economic Development Commission staff in creating a strategic plan to communicate economic development activities and benefits to residents - Strategic. counsel on tactical implementation. including: 1. Identifying key messages -and adjusting as necessary 2. Identifying key constituencies 3. Evaluating current communication materials 4. Creating and updating. a modular presentation for City staff 5. Assisting in design of research of residents and businesses 6. Developing yearly progress report on activities Option B Budget: $3,500 per month retainer (plus out-of-pocket expenses) Activities: - Assist Economic Development Commission staff in creating a strategic plan to communicate economic development activities and benefits to residents - Strategic counsel on implementation of all Option A tactics plus; 1. Redesigning and updating web site and evaluating its effectiveness 2. Developing media pitch to targeted publications (commercial and residential developers, potential homeowners, major media outlets, etc.) 3. Organizing community meetings to promote the City of Lakeville 4. Reviewing and editing all economic development publications HHI Proposal for Lakeville EDC - ~ May 31, 2002 The Account Team Himle Horner is a 18-person agency. More important than the size of an agency is the team our agency or any agency is willing to dedicate to the account. We are proposing an account team that by virtue of experience and training is ideally suited to this task. Key members include the following Himle Horner professionals: ? Todd Rapp -Todd Rapp is a senior director at Himle Horner. He provides counsel and strategy in areas of media relations, public affairs, coalition development, grassroots advocacy, and corporate and crisis. communications. He chairs the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce`s Fiscal Policy Committee, which develops policy statements and public .affairs. strategies for the Chamber's member companies and associations in the areas of taxes and government finances. Previously Rapp served as Minnesota Director of Government Affairs for Xcel Energy and as Chief of Staff to Minnesota Speaker of the House Phil Carruthers. ? Patrick Sexton -Pat Sexton is a senior account executive at Himle Horner. He works with clients in areas of media relations, public affairs, corporate communications, strategic planning and crisis management. Previously Sexton served in the office of Governor Arne H. Carlson as a communications staff member and director of legislative affairs. He has also worked in senior communication positions at Honeywell and West Group. Other Himle Horner stafF would be available as needed. HHI Proposal for Lakeville EDC 6 May 31, 2002 A Bit about Himle Horner, Inc. Himle Horner was created in 1989. We remain an independent agency (still owned by the two founders). Services Himle Horner is able to develop, manage and implement all the services recommended in this proposal, including the following: o Conduct qualitative research with target audiences. ? Develop a marketing plan with specific measures. ? Build and engage key partnerships. Develop, design and produce collateral material ? Execute a media relations program. ? Manage the entire campaign. C/ients Our clients are in diverse fields and call on us for a variety of challenges. Our work is in public affairs, corporate communications, marketing and other information arenas. Current and recent public sector and .local development clients include the following: ? Northstar Corridor Development Authority ? .Anoka County ? Minnesota Department of Health ? Minnesota Department of Transportation o Ramsey County Regional Rail Authority ? Burnsville-Savage-Eagan Independent School District #191 Current and recent clients also include: ? Blue Cross and Blue Shield of ? Minnesota Orchestra (Brooklyn Park Minnesota amphitheater) ? .Metropolitan Council of Chambers of ? Eller Media (St. Paul billboard Commerce ordinance ? Minnesota Business Partnership ? Minnesota Chamber of Commerce ? Care Providers of Minnesota ? Minnesota Grocers Association ? The McKnight Foundation ? Target Corporation o Xcel Energy ? West Group References (Other references are available should they be needed.) Nate Garvis Tim Yantos Vice President, Government Affairs Northstar Project Director Target Corporation Anoka County 612-696-6866 763-323-5692 HHl Proposal for Lakeville EDC ~ May 31, 2002 Our Promise to You Achieving a level of excellence in creating and implementing a marketing program is the result of a partnership between the client and an agency that thinks creatively and strategically. Creating a partnership requires a commitment from both parties. Himle Horner's responsibilities include the following: ? To design a program that is distinctive to each client and its needs. We won't give you an "off-the-shelf" program just because it has worked for someone else. ? To take the time to know you and your organization. It is your face we are presenting to your key audiences. We want to make sure it is represented accurately and fairly. ? To give you our best advice at all times.. Our first criterion in advising you is to consider your best interests. ? To provide you with senior-level account management. We won't "sell from the top and service from the bottom." ? To be fair, honest and forthright. in our billings, in our effort and in our relationship with you. Once. we agree on a program, we will deliver the product to your expected level of excellence within the approved budget. HHI Proposal for Lakeville EDC g May 31, 2002 Financial Agreement Himle Horner is proposing to be retained by the Economic Development Commission of the City of Lakeville at a fixed monthly rate. Any costs in excess of the monthly retainer, other than direct out-of-pocket expenses, incurred for the professional services outlined above will be approved in advance by you, and billed at the hourly rates listed below. Any additional professional services, production fees or vendor costs requested wilt be negotiated separately: Principals, Senior Counselor $225/hour Senior Director $200 Directors $150-175 Account Supervisors $120-145 Senior Account Executives $110-120 Account Executives $90-110: Asst. Account. Exec. $65-90 Support Staff $45 Far your reference, Himle Horner bills on a monthly basis, and payment is due within 30 days of the invoice. Overdue invoices incur an interest expense of 1.5% per month (18% annual). Any vendor costs incurred on behalf of the client and billed through Himle Horner carry amark-up of 17.65%. Himle Horner allows clients to be billed directly for vendor expenses, thereby avoiding the agency mark-up. Himle Horner reserves the right to change its hourly rates; you will be notified in writing 30 days prior to any changes. HH! Proposal for Lakeville EDC g May 31, 2002 ~ ~ 1 ~~:~l~r '~ORAiED HIMLE HORNER CAPABILITIES Public Affairs Having served and worked in government at all levels, the principals of Himle Horner understand the need to define public affairs broadly. Public affairs goes beyond how a corporation relates to a particular government agency or official. Successful public affairs is a complex blend of grassroots campaigning, media relations, one-on-one base. building and, of course, government relations. (Himle Horner does not lobby public officia{s nor does the agency work on individual campaigns for partisan political offices.) Issues. Management .Issues management is the systematic process of identifying changes in internal and external environments which might affect a client's plans, operations or competitive standing; analyzing the potential impact; and planning and executing an appropriate program of action to shape the environment in ways favorable to the clients position. Himle Horner has created a distinctive program that makes it possible Yar clients to anticipate issues and effectively use communications before attitudes. of the public and. key audiences have been defined. Grassroots Campaigns Himle Horner has earned a national reputation for its innovative work in designing and implementing grassroots campaigns. Himle Homer's original work iri combining technology with traditional grassroots organizing tactics has assisted clients who have a need to build broad- based coalitions, and then motivating members of the coalitions to .action. Himle Horner's grassroots expertise is effective in communications to government, as part of a community relations program, to assist in crisis management, in issues involving investor relations and in other arenas of public affairs and public relations. Research, Surveys, Communications Audits Communications audits subjective research designed to identify perceptions of a client and the messages that can influence the attitudes of key audiences are particularly useful devices in times of transition. Appropriate times for audits include the beginning of a major communications campaign, during a corporate restructuring and following a crisis. Himle Horner also has extensive experience in developing the strategy for other research services, and coordinating polling development, execution and analysis. Surveys for fact-finding and planning purposes, problem solving, media attention and story line suggestions have produced meaningful results t Communications Master Planning We believe that fundamental to any successful ongoing public relations effort is the preparation of a communications master plan and calendar. With client participation, we identify the primary and secondary target audiences, define the .program objectives and develop the component parts of the overall communications ,master plan. Timelines for each activity are backdated onto a calendar according to the time required to perform the task. We then prepare a written master plan and calendar that can be updated or changed as we move through the program. Marketing Himle Horner has worked with clients in diverse fields to design creative programs that help position their products and services with potential customers. Audiences for Himle Homer marketing services have ranged from the general public to very narrowly-defined and .targeted decision makers. Himle Horner's marketing services include business-to-business communications, marketing events, .the creation of marketing materials and other campaigns that help achieve a company's marketing goals. Media Relations Himle Horner has extensive experience working with the news media on promotional events, in breaking news coverage and in crisis situations. Opinion articles, magazine features and news releases we have developed and written have appeared in local and national media. At Himle Horner, a media program always starts with careful planning and a clear understanding of objectives. Having worked in the media, in government and politics and in business, we understand what makes news and how your message can .best be presented. Qur services include media training, the development and writing of press kits, managing news conferences, coordinating background sessions with individual reporters and editorial boards and working with our clients to anticipate the news to avoid surprises, while taking advantage of all opportunities. Crisis Planning/Management The principals of Himle Horner have successfully managed large and small crises for professional service firms, multinational corporations, consumer products companies and individual corporate executives and government .officials. Successful crisis management depends on urgency as much as it does accuracy anal thoroughness. The right message must be sent to the right audience while you still control the content and events. Along with our skills of working with the media and communicating to key audiences, our value is the objectivity, seasoned experience that we bring to crisis management. Himle Horner also applies this experience to crisis planning. We have worked with several Minnesota corporations to identify and develop specific contingency plans, many of which have successfully been tested under fire. WHY HIMLE HORNER A client of Himle Horner once said, "Our company has used various agencies around the country, but Himle Horner is distinctly different then the others due to your clear focus on strategy and delivering results. Don Y mess it up!" Based on feedback we receive from clients, here are five points of distinction that tend to define Himle Horner from other agencies. ~ Too often, written plans appear to be tactics in search of a strategy. Himle Horner knows the difference between creating a strategy and drafting an unrelated list of activities. Awell-conceived strategy sets up the decision framework by which tactics can be identified, prioriti2ed and measured. ~ Have you ever had fo be the client in search of your agency? We have been surprised the number of times a new client has approached Himle Horner relating horror stories about having to track down their agency and not getting phone calls returned in a timely manner. We are committed to returning client phone calls the same day and almost always within an hour or two. If a client has an emergency, we can be reached by pager or cell phones and we provide clients our home phone numbers. As-importantly, we initiate contact with our clients to identify ideas and opportunities and offer information that may be of interest. ~ Would you rather have an agency that prefers to be measured against business goals or tactical goals? We prefer to be measured by how our efforts contribute to the overall business goal of the client rather than counting the number of community mailings we organized or the number of times a news release was printed. The more critical measurements include: - were our key messages conveyed? -did the effort change attitudes or affect behavior on behalf of the client? ~ We understand that managing the account also includes managing the client's budget in a responsible manner. We don't like surprises and neither do you. Our approach is to make sure that both the agency and the client have a clear understanding about the budget and we assume it is part of our job to manage the work within the defined budget. We believe in billing fairly and do not impose minimum billing requirements on Himle Horner staff. Further, we do not push retainer arrangements and are flexible in providing invoicing which meets your needs. ~ Who you see (during the client pitch) is who you get (to actually perform your work). Himle Horner made the strategic decision to maintain our employee count. at a size where we can manage challenging assignments and yet offer senior level service to our clients. While we could be a significantly larger agency, this would require the senior people to function primarily as administrators and "rainmakers" rather than client managers and strategists. TODD RAPP Todd Rapp joined Himle Horner in January 2002 as a senior director. He provides counsel and strategy in areas of media relations, public affairs, coalition development, grassroots advocacy, and corporate and crisis communications. Prior to joining Himle Horner, Rapp served as Director of Minnesota Government Affairs for Xcel Energy (formerly Northern States Power Company). In this role, he developed and managed company strategies for legislative affairs in the areas of energy,. environmental and tax policy. In the fall of 2000, Minnesota Law and Politics magazine included -Rapp in their list of top lobbyists in Minnesota. While Himle Horner is not a lobbying firm, Rapp's experience in issues management, organizational strategy and crisis communications merge comfortably into Himle Homer's core functions. Previously, Rapp served in a number of key positions in Minnesota government and politics. As the Executive Director for. former House Speaker and Majority Leader Phil Carruthers, Rapp served as Carruthers' chief political advisor forfour legislative sessions from 1994 through 1997.. Rapp also worked as Campaign Director for Majority Leader Roger Moe and the Senate Majority Gaucus in 1996, and as Political Director for the Minnesota Democratic-.Farmer-Labor (DFL) Party from 1990-93. Managing the research, media, voter identification and get-out- the-vote programs, Rapp played a critical role in the upset victories of Senator Paul Wellstone, Representatives Colin Peterson and David Minge and nearly two dozen state legislative challengers. Rapp chairs the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce's Fiscal Policy Committee, which develops policy statements and public affairs strategies for the Chamber's member companies and associations in the areas of taxes and government finances. Rapp also has presented at state and national conferences on the topics of grassroots campaign strategies and ethics in government. A former high school debate and speech coach, Rapp currently directs the State Debate Tournament for the Minnesota State High School League, and has published research materials used by high school debaters throughout the country. He also served one term as the President of the Minnesota Debate Coaches Association. A life-long resident of Minnesota, Todd lives with his wife Maggie and their five children in Woodbury. Agenda Item # ' MEI~CyRANQUM TO: - Economic Development Commission CC: Robert Erickson, City Administrator David L. Olson, Community & Economic Development Dir r FROM: Ann Flad, Economic Development Coordinate DATE: August 20, 2002 RE: Work Plan Goal`#1: Educate residents on benefits of C/I - Sp©tlight, on Business The "Spotlight ©n Business" program continues to be well received by the businesses featured and by the business community as a whole. The City Council approved the "Spotlight an Business" program at their February 25, 2002 work session. Consistent with Goal#1 of the Strategic Work Plan, the .Spotlight on Business program provides a forum to share information on the benefits of having a business base in the community. Information about the." featured business is presented by an EDC member and includes the dollar amount of taxes paid by that business. Chair Vogel introduced Jeff Belzer and Jeff Krapu of Belzer Chevrolet, Dodge, Ka, Jeanne Schubert introduced Ken Ewen and David Owen of DHY, and. Bob Brantly introduced John Greening of New Morning Windows at recent City Council meetings, Please see attached memos that were presented to the City Council regarding each Spotlighted business. Combined, these businesses provide over $260,000 in`property taxes to the City, School District 194 and the County. They :also provide`over315fuIl andpart time jobs for area residents. ` Please. review the .attached schedule to .confirm the date of your: Spotlight on; Business presentation. The time commitment includes approximately 15 minutes during: the day to review the presentation with the cable department staff and approximately 20'minutes to attend the Council meeting. EDC presentersare asked o beat the Council Chambers at 6:45 in order to meet the business representative before the meeting begins at 7:00 p.m. Revised July 9, 2002 2002 "Spotlight on .Business" EDC Member Sign-Up EDC MEMBER DATE CONFIRMED COMPANIES Bob Vogel March 4 Progressive Rail Jim Emond March 18 Americlnn Jack Matasoskv April 1 Verified Credentials- Steve Spang Todd Bornhauser April 15 Toro-Gary Stone Con Agra-Paul Lapadat Dick Miller May 6 Muller Theater -Mike Muller Barry Pogatchnik May 20 Belzers -Jeff Strout Plastics -Tom Everett Tom Smith June 3 Southfork/Snyders-Tim Peterson Heat-N-Glo -Dan Shimek Dave Olson June 17 Ryt-Way -Glenn Hasse Bob Vogel July 1 Belzer's -Jeff Krapu NO SPOTLIGHT July 15 Jeanne Schubert August 5 DHY -Ken Owen Bob Brantly August 19 New Morning Windows -Alexis Bloomstrand September 3 Imperial. Plastics -Norm Oberto Bob Vo el September 16 Super 8 -Ron Theis Jack Matasosky October 7 Arden International Kitchens -Brad Moore October 21 November 4 November 18 Menasha Products -John Sondergard December 2 December 16 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council City Administrator CC: David L. Olson, Community & Economic Development Director FR: Ann Flad, Economic Development Coordinator DATE: August 15, 2002 RE: Spotlight on Business: New Morning Windows The purpose of the Spotlight On Business is "to inform and educate residents on benefits of C/I base to gain community support and appreciation #or business growth. (Goal #1 of the Economic Development 2002 Strategic Work Plan.) New Morning Windows has. been selected as the next business to spotlight. Economic Development Commissioner, Bob Brandy, will be in attendance at the Council meeting to present information on New Morning Windows and introduce John Greening, Vice President of Sales and Marketing. New Morning Windows is located at 20845 I<enbridge Court in the Fairfield Business Campus. They were the first company to locate in the Fairfield Business Campus. The business. began in 1977 as New Morning Builders, a residential remodeling company in the Twin Cities. Demand began to grow for arch-top windows., which had not been manufactured since the advent of track homes after World War II, so New Morning Builders began producing their own all-wood, fixed arch windows. In 1980, the company was incorporated under its current name of New Morning Windows. They were the first U.S. wood window manufacturer to supply custom round-top windows with a low-maintenance,. aluminum-clad exterior and the first to offer custom vinyl-clad windows, complex clad exterior divided-lite designs and clad framed curved and corner glass units. In 1995, after outgrowing five facilities, the company built its own 66,500 square foot office and manufacturing facility on a 14.4 acre lot in Lakeville's Fairfield Business Campus. An expansion capability of up to 200,000 square feet ensures that they have secured a location for the business for decades to come. Today, New Morning Windows' custom designed windows are found in many award-winning homes and commercial buildings and are used in remodeling projects and historic restorations as well. New Morning Windows sells their products through multiple channels of distribution, including retail lumber yards, specialty window stores and to other manufacturers. Their products are complementary to some. of the most prestigious window companies in the world, including Andersen, Pella, Marvin, Hurd and many other wood window companies. They also manufacture vinyl windows on a private label basis. New Morning Windows also provides jobs for area residents. They currently employ 45 area residents. In addition to employment, New Morning Windows provides a substantial tax benefit to the community. The Dakota County Assessor has assigned an estimated market value of over $2.3 million to New Morning Windows' buildings and property, resulting in the company's contribution of $84,032 in local property taxes going to support the City, Dakota County and Independent School District 194 in 2002. MEMOR~4NDUM TO: Mayor and City Council City Administrator CC: David L. Olson, Community & Economic Development Director FR: Ann Flad, Economic Development Coordinator DATE: August 5, 2002 RE: Spotlight on Business: DHY Corporation Di-Hed Yokes Corporation (DHY) has .been selected as the next business to spotlight. Economic Development Commissioner Jeannie Schubert will be in attendance at the Council meeting to present information on Di-Hed Yokes and introduce Ken Owen, CEO, and Dave Owen, President. DHY is located at 21467 Holyoke Avenue, at the intersection of Holyoke Avenue and County Road 70 in Airlake Industrial Park. The company was establishedin 1978 by Colin Owen and Ken Owen in the basement of Ken's Minneapolis home to provide di-hed yokes, which are replacement parts far screw machines. The business outgrew several spaces in Minneapolis before the company constructed a 53,000 sq. ft. facility in Lakeville in 1997. DHY no longer produces di-hed yokes. The company has evolved to provide customers with precision machining, vacuum brazing, and exotic materials processing. DHY currently. uses CNC and manual machines to manufacture close-tolerance components for automotive, aerospace, medical, and commercial customers: The company specializes in difficult-to-machine components and subassemblies in high volume applications exceeding 30,000 parts per week. DHY also vacuum brazes complex assemblies in aluminum and exotic metals. The company's vacuum brazements are currently in use in critical applications such as Liquid Flow Through (LFT) cooling panels and Avionics Rack Assemblies used on the F22 "Raptor" Advanced Tactical Fighter, the Joint Strike Fighter, the F18 Hornet, and other high performance aircraft.. Quality assurance programs are a critical component of DHY's operation. The company recently received QS-9000 and ISO 9002 Certification. Binocular stereo microscopes are used to view conditions undetectable to the naked eye, while microscopic photographs and videos are used in other applications. These capabilities allow DHY to provide components for demanding applications such as Spinal Implants, Hard Disk Actuators, and Satellite components, as well as enhancing performance for automotive and commercial applications. DHY also provides jobs for area residents. The company has approximately 70 employees. In addition to employment, DHY provides a substantial tax benefit to the community. The Dakota County Assessor has assigned an estimated market value of over $2.2 million to DHY's buildings and property, resulting in the company's contribution of $81,687 in local property taxes going to support the City, Dakota County, and Independent School District 194 in 2002. r MEM~JRANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council City Administrator CC: David L. Olson, Community & Economic Development Director FR: Ann Flad, Economic Development Coordinator DATE: June 26, 2002 RE: Spotlight on Business: Jeff Belzer's Chevrolet, Dodge, Kia The purpose of the Spotlight On Business program is "to inform and educate residents on benefits of C/I base to gain community support and appreciation for business growth" (Goal #1 of the Economic Development 2002 Strategic Work Plan.) Jeff Belzer's Chevrolet, Dodge, Kia has been selected as the next businesses to spotlight. Economic Development Commission Chair Bob Vogel will be in attendance at the Council meeting to present information on Jeff Belzer's Chevrolet, Dodge, Kia and introduce Jeff Belzer, President, and Jeff Krapu, Vice. President of Jeff Belzer's Chevrolet, Dodge, Kia. Jeff Belzer's Chevrolet, Dodge, Kia is Located adjacent to Airlake Industrial Park at the intersection of Cedar Avenue and County Road 50. Jeff Belzer's has been at this location since 1980. Jeff Belzer's Chevrolet, Dodge, Kia is the largest automotive agency in the Midwest. Belzer's sells new and pre-owned vehicles, and has a service department, body shop and parts sales. Belzer's can provide customers with financing and leasing options as well. Located on 27 acres of land, Jeff Belzer's plans to expand their auto showroom building by 50,000. sq. ft., bringing the building's total square footage to 95,000 sq. ft. Jeff Belzer's also provides jobs for area residents. The company has approximately 200 full and part time employees. In addition to employment, Jeff Belzer's Chevrolet, Dodge, Kia provides a substantial tax benefit to the community. The Dakota County Assessor has assigned an estimated market value of over $2.4 million to Jeff Belzer's buildings and property, resulting in the company's contribution of $ 94,874 in local property taxes going to support the City, Dakota County, and Independent School District 194 in 2002. ~~`L . - Di-Hed Yokes ~~s oy honored by ci The Lakeville. City Council honored Di-Hed Yokes Corporation (DHY) with the Spotlight on Business recogni- tion program at its Aug. S meet- . ing. DHY constructed a 53,000 I square-foot facility in Lakeville in 1997. In 2000, DHY was one of nine companies in the United States to be awarded the Federal Small Business Administration Subcontractor of the Year Award. j The company was established in 1978 by Colin Owen and Ken Owen in the basement of Ken Owen's Minneapolis.. home to provide di-hed yokes, replace- - ment parts for screw machines. The company, which outgrew several spaces in Minneapolis before moving to Lakeville, has evolved to provide customers with precision .machining, vacu- um brazing and exotic .materials processing. The Spotlight on .Business program is an outgrowth of the Economic Development 2002 Strategic .Work Plan, which includes the goal of educating the community about the benefits of Lakeville's commerciaUindus- trial tax base. The Dakota County assessor has assigned an estimated market value of more than $2.2 million to the DHY's buildings and prop- erty, resulting in .the company's contribution of $81,687 in 2002 in local property taxes that sup- pc,rt the city, Dakota County and Independent School District 194. `l'ie company also provides 70 .Agenda Item # ~ MEM~RAPIDIlM TO: Economic Development Commission CC: Robert Erickson, City. Administrator , Ann Flad, Economic Development Coordinator Dennis Feller, Finance Director Keith Nelson, City Engineer FROM: David Olson, .Community & Economic Development Director DATE: August 2t, 2002 RE: Review of Interchange Financing Study Prepared by Springsted Reminder: Please. bring yourcopy of the {nterchsnge Financing S#udy to the Mee#ing The Strategic Work Plan for Economic.Development in 2002 includes the "Investigation of Critical :Business Infrastructure." The completion. of the Interchange Financing Study is consistent with this Strategic Work Plan and was specifically recommended by the EDC upon the completion of the Financial Tools Program (also completed by Springsted) in October of 2001. EDC. members have previously. received a copy of the Draft Interchange Financing Report that-was prepared by Springsted m conjunction City_staff. The majority of the EDC members participated in a Joint Work Session with fhe City Council on Monday, August 12"' at which the Report was presented by City staff and .David MacGllivray of Springsted. Numerous questions from EDC and Council members regarding the report were answered. It was emphasized during the work session from. EDC that this report represented a strategy to the financing of these interchanges and both project. costs and`actual funding levels from the sources being recommended. are still. subject change as these projects move forward. Several questions were asked during the.Work Session regarding the impact ofi future. commercial development in these interchange areas along 1-35. SRF Consulting Group is currently working on .preparing traffic studies for the Ca.' Rd. 70 and Co. Rd. 50 Interchanges to be used in the design of both of these interchanges. These traffic studies will include assumptions on the type and extent of future commercial development in these interchange areas. Once these studies are completed, City staff will be more able to attempt to provide an economic impact analysis of this future development. Action Requested The Commission is requested to provide a recommendation to the City Council to accep# the Interchange Financing Study as.prepared by Springsted. A public meeting is in the process of being scheduled in .September to present this Study to property and business. owners in the Co. Rd. 50 and Co. Rd 70 Interchange areas..' CITY OF LAKEVILLE CITY COUNCIL AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES AUGUST 12, 2002 Present: Mayor Bob Johnson, Council Members Mulvihill, Luick, Bellows and Rieb; Economic Development Commission Members Jim Emond, Barry Pogatchnik, Jack Matasosky, Bob Vogel, Robert Brantley, Tom Smith. and Dick Miller; City Administrator Bob Erickson; City Engineer Keith Nelson; Finance Director Dennis Feller; Community and Economic Development Director Dave Olson; Assistant to City Administrator John Hennen; Economic Development Coordinator Ann Flad; and Springsted .representative Dave MacGillivray. ITEM NO. 1. REVIEW INTERCHANGE FINANCING REPORT. City Engineer Keith Nelson provided background vn three interchanges: County Road 50, County Road 60 and County Road 70. Engineering. consultant SRF is currently under contract to complete the interchange preliminary design artd right of way mapping for the County Road 50 project. Mr. Nelson highlighted costs associated with the interchange project including design,. right of way acquisition, and construction of four lanes under the bridge, totaling approximately $20 million. Currently, Phase I of the County Road 60 project is underway, which includes the realignment of Kenrick Avenue, construction of interchange ramps, right of way acquisition, and construction. of a four-lane divided .roadway from I-35W to Orchard Trail In 2004, plans are to construct afour-lane roadway from I-35W to Judicial Road along with the reconstruction of the bridge. Total cost of the reconstruction of County Road 60 interchange is approximately $22 million. Scott County also plans on reconstructing County Road 60 (Scott County Road 21) from Judicial Road to Scott County Road 91. Mr. Nelson mentioned that a neighborhood meeting was recently held regarding the County. Road 70 interchange project. 5RF has been contracted to complete traffic projections for Dakota County and TKDA has been contracted to complete the preliminary design work on the interchange. Total estimated cost for this project is $16 million. Interchange construction is projected to be completed in 2007 subject to funding. Mr. Nelson proceeded then to review .miscellaneous City road construction and overlay projects equaling .approximately $5 million. The three interchange projects and miscellaneous City projects total approximately $63 million. Mr. Erickson mentioned there is a possibility that the federal government may require a third lane along I-35 from County Road 46 to either County Road 50 or 70 as part of theses interchange projects. A third lane could significantly increase the costs, which would jeopardize the projects. City Council / EDC Joint Work Session August 1Z, ZOOZ Page 1- Mr. MacGillivray highlighted his "Interchange Financing Report'; the purpose of which was to determine a funding strategy for the construction of the three interchanges. Mr. MacGillivray highlighted some financing sources which included Dakota County, G.O. Street Reconstruction Bonds, Federal STP-MnDOT funds, MSA Allotments, MSA Bonds, Interchange Improvement Account, Storm Water Trunk Fund, Water Trunk Fund, HRA Tax Levy, Park Dedication Fund, and miscellaneous others totaling approximately $63 million. Mr. MacGillivray proceeded to review several of the specific funding sources such as the state and federal transportation grants and Dakota County participation. Of the approximately $63 million dollars needed for the projects, over $22 million is proposed to be provided by Dakota County and. over $10 million by state and federal transportation grants. Mr. MacGillivray indicated there is a high probability that one-third of the funds proposed to be provided by Dakota County will be available, however, the rest will depend on Dakota County's CIP. Mr. Nelson reviewed Lakeville projects that are currently in Dakota County's CIP. Charts were presented illustrating property tax impacts on a $200,000 residential homestead and on a $1,000,000 commercial site as aresult of tax levies. The'. tax changes were based on the City's tax base growing at a rate of 5% per year resulting from. new residential and commercial/ industrial construction. Mr. Matasosky felt 5% was quite conservative. Mr. Erickson indicated it most likely would be more than 5%, however, in past years it has been beneficial to the City to be conservative in its estimates. Commission Member Vogel suggested staff look at property tax impacts if one of the- interchanges were completed thus driving development and increasing the City's tax base. Mr. Erickson briefed individuals on the Metropolitan Councils proposal to extend a wastewater interceptor to the Elko/New Market area. If the extension of the interceptor proceeds, Lakeville is interested in exploring the idea of extending it along County Road 70 out to the interstate allowing Lakeville property within the . 2010/2015 MUSA to develop. Mr. Erickson and Mr. Feller would recommend the use ofi municipal state aid funds for larger construction projects and protect the pavement management program by using a new funding mechanism that will be presented to the Council in the near future. Mr. Erickson added that even the best financing plans could be changed quickly by the legislature at any given session. Mayor Johnson commented that it's rare to see three interchanges constructed within one city in a ten-year period. This is a new chapter in financing and consultants and advisory committees are going to play a very important role in determining the funding for these interchanges. City Caunci// EDCJoint Work Session August 12,.2042 Page -3- Commission Member Matasosky stated that a large number of people have been waiting for the reconstruction of the I-35/County Road 50 interchange and asked what. is the next step. Mr. Erickson indicated that some level of financial commitment is needed from Dakota County for this project.. He believes the City needs to exert more pressure on the County for this to fiappen. It is Mr. Erickson's understanding that a quarter. of a million dollars has been spent by the Northern Mayor's .Association on lobbying efforts over the years, resulting in abundant federal and state funding for their road construction projects.. The TimberCrest project didn't drive the reconstruction of County Road 60 and I-35, but it did provide the City the added impetus to pursue funding, resulting in the City being the recipient of $5 million for the project. Mr. Feller believes that Dakota County should take advantage of the new laws that would allow them to spread the cost of these interchange projects to more residents in the county. Mr. Erickson believes the next logical step would be to hold neighborhood meetings with the residents of County Road 50 and County Road 70 interchange areas to present them with the estima#ed costs associated with these interchange projects and the role the County must play in order for them to move along, with the hopes that they will have a better understanding of the variety of financing issues involved in interchange projects. Commission Member Matasosky questioned how the City could get Dakota County to the table to commit to the project. Mr. Erickson suggested that. the cities work together and take a respectfully aggressive approach. with Dakota County, requesting commitment to funding of road construction projects. Mayor Johnson would encourage having all the studies and plans completed and on the "shelf', ready to move forward on the projects when funding is available, similar to the scenario at the County Road 60/I- 35 project. Mr. Erickson highly: recommends the purchase of every available piece of property for future Right of Way at the County Road 5011-35 interchange once the moratorium is lifted, since the land will not get any less expensive and the County is required to provide up to 55% reimbursement. Commission Member Pogatchnik mentioned in a high growth community like Lakeville, the goal of being debt-free might be unachievable. Commission Members Pogatchnik, Matasosky, Vogel and Emond recommend the City set up neighborhood meetings with property owners in County Road 50 and County Road 70 interchange areas so property owners understand what the City is facing. People are more likely to support the projects if they are well informed, and it may be an inexpensive way to obtain lobbyists. Commission Member Vogel suggested that a fiscal analysis be completed, showing that the development of the County Road 70 / 1-35 interchange could result in X number of acres being developed equaling X dollars of tax revenue. Economic Development Commission members left the meeting at 6:30 PM. City Council / EDC Joint Work Session ' August i2, 2002 Page -4- ITEM NO. 2. OTHER BUSINESS. Under Other Business, Mr. Erickson informed the Mayor and Council Members that the issue regarding the Elko/New Market interceptor has been quite challenging and frustrating. Representative Holberg and Senator Orfield have jointly created a resolution opposing the Elko/New Market interceptor proposal, which will be presented at committee level at the .State Capitol Both Representative Holberg and Senator Orfield conceded on certain philosophies to complete this joint resolution. Mayor Johnson asked if staff had heard back from the Metropolitan Council or if any meeting had been set up since the Mayor sent out his letter to Met Council Chair Ted Mondale. Mr. Erickson indicated that staff has not yet received a response. Mr. Erickson asked the Council to consider setting a work session at the next Council meeting to continue to the discussion regarding interchange financing along with a strategy to fund the pavement management program. Council Members indicated that they could be available for a work session on Monday, August 26t~ and asked staff to place the item on the next Council meeting agenda. Council Members Luick and Mulvihill indicated they would not be at the August 19, 2002 Council meeting. ITEM NO. 3. ADJOURN. The meeting adjourned at 7:1Q PM. Respectfully submitted, John Hennen, Assistant to City Administrator Agenda Item Y_ ~~~~~~IYQ~~ TO: Economic Development Commission CC: Robert Erickson, City Administrator david L. Olson, Community & Economic Development Director FROM: Ann f=led, Economic Devet~prrtent Coordinator ,~,-y~J DATE: August 22, 2002 RE: Update on exploring feasibility of Lakeville Technology Gerrter .Staff continues to explore the feasibility of developing a Lakeville Technology .center with Dakota County Technical College as requested by the High Tech Subcommittee at their April 03, 2002 High Tech Subcommittee meeting. On August 15, 2002, David Olson and t met with Dr. Ron Thomas of Qakota County Technical CoNege, Mark Uifers of Dakota County CDA, and Barbara Portwood, Bond Counsel #or the CDA. Discussion ensued regarding the feasibility of the CDA issuing Lease Revenue Bonds to finance a Technology Center. Lease Revenue Bonds are repaid from the proceeds of a facility lease and are not backed by the general taxing authority of the issuing entity. Mark Utfers indicated a willingness to exp{ore the possibility further. Ms. Portwood will outline a process to follow for any revenue bond issuance. Dr. Thomas will facilitate a conversation between the Presiden# of Riverland Technical Gotlege and Mr. Ulf®rs in order to discuss how Riverland's Owatonna Technology Center was financed with revenue bonds. Dr. Thomas will also begin identifying potential funding sources to service the proposed debt. Dr. Thomas will also coordinate the services of an architect who can assist with preliminary facility analysis. The City of Lakeviile's role has been to facilitate an ongoing dialog between appropriate parties regarding the feasibility of a Technology Center. The City also assist Technical College in identifying potential sites for this project. Agenda Item MEMORANDUM TO: Economic Development Commission CC: Robert Erickson, City Administrator Ann Flad, Economic Development Coordinator FROM: David L. Olson Communit & Economic Develo ment Director Y p DATE: August 22, 2002 RE: Update on CDBG Downtown Code Improvement Project /Ben Franklin Building Since the EDC recommended approval of the design concept for this project at your June 25th, 2002 meeting, the Downtown Lakeville Business Association and the City Council have also recommended approval of the proposed design concept. The final architectural design work and preparation of bid plans and specifications for the proposed facade renovation for the Ben Franklin building has been completed. A copy of the final Front Elevation and Floor Plan is attached. In addition to working with the building owners and architect on the proposed design, City staff has also been working with Scott and Cindi Erickson, owners of the Ben Franklin business to resolve several issues. These include the pop machines that are currently located in front of the store. These machines are currently not completely on the public right- of-way because of the fact that existing building wall is setback several feet from the sidewalk. The new building wall would be flush with the sidewalk and thus the pop machines would be located entirely on the public right-of-way. This is not permitted under City Ordinance and would pose problems for snow removal and restrict pedestrian flow on the sidewalk. Staff is also working with the Ericksons on new signage for the building. The current wall signage cannot be accommodated on the proposed new building design. Staff is recommending that since the existing signage is part of the overall code improvements being made to the building, that additional CDBG assistance be provided to assist with installation of new signage. The Ericksons are in the process of obtaining proposals for the installation of new signage that will be complementary to the new building facade. The project architect is in the process of obtaining competitive bids for the work to be completed. Provided that acceptable bids are received, the CDBG agreement with J and J Holding (John and Jerry Enggren) for this project could go before the City Council on September 3, 2002. It is anticipated that work would commence on the project in late September and be completed within 90 days. The project start date is intended to allow Ben Franklin to operate under current conditions during their busy early fall season that runs through Lakeville High School Homecoming. O a ~~-,o~ JNtWV2i~ OM 8t11S '~NO~ ~ _ {L e (ij ~ . i+~ (r a 1 0 ~ t ~ ~ ~~G~ 1~ _ z ~ 1 ~ i--.- - o !Ilflfll J~ ~ . ~ v ~ I~ - Z n ~ Z o ~ kz" I U q N W ~ ~ ~ i O ; ' t- in ~ c ~ > N w~ C7 1~ ~ W lr (A Z ~ W N u Z O w ~ ~ Q o ~ U ~d- `wt' i Va ~ ~ Y 0 U~ ~ ~ Q O V' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q . ~ ~ Z ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q ~ ~ ~ E e x V ~ O ~ . ~ ~ ui i U ~ ~ ~ ~-1 ~t?-S ~ f- t~~Ug I ~ Q a i ~ i ~ ~ -~cc m O I I ~ N~Xmw Z ~ i O ~ Nv°a~ ~ Z N il~ ~ ( ~ ~ iA ~~XbZ~ q ~ , ~ og v ~ ~ zzo~Z ~ ? t z n q ~ c~ z ~ a s a I ~o ~ o w i- F tJ = d~ y ~ X~ } _ ~ - w tL ~ ~ ~ , v ~ i I i _ ~ y w - ~t. Zh ~a ~ o ci c c .Q a _w x m Z Z ~ ~ Q J LLi a- z 3' o z€ o ~ f MEMORANDUM - TO: Economic Development Commission CC: Robert Erickson, City Administrator Ann Flad Economic Development Coordinator FROM: David L. Olson, Community & Economic Development Director DATE: August 22, 2002 RE: Amendments to Contract for Private Redevelopment -Advanced Wireless Communications The City Council, with the recommendation of the EDC, previously approved a Contract for Private Redevelopment on April 1, 2002 with Coons Family LLC (Advanced. Wireless Communications). Coons Family LLC has requested several minor amendments to the original contract. The amendments are summarized as follows: • The original contract called for the sale of the property to be completed by July 1, 2002. Coons Family LLC is requesting that this be extended to September 16, 2002 to allow additional time to obtain approval of their necessary financing for the project which includes a Small Business Administration loan. • The original contract called for the project to be substantially completed by December 31, 2002. Coons Family LLC is requesting the contract be amended to extend the completion date until November 1, 2003. The amendment also requires that the footings and foundation be completed by April 1, 2003. If Coons Family LLC fails to substantially complete the building by December 31, 2002, the Minimum Market Value for the property shall still be applicable as of January 3, 2003. This will result in the City receiving the same amount of tax increment for taxes payable in 2004. Thus while Coons Family LLC will have until November 1, 2003 to complete their building, the City will receive the same amount of tax increment in 2004 as it would had the building been completed by December 31, 2002. This amendment to the Contract for Private f~edevelopment was approved by the City Counci! at their July 15, 2002 meeting. City staff is also working with the City Attorney to incorporate an additional source of funding to the project. This source is the City's Revolving Loan Fund that was created with the repayment of the DTED funded loan that was approved for the New Morning Windows project. This proposed loan would be a forgivable loan to Coons Family LLC in the amount of $116,450 and would be paid to the City as the new purchase price for the proposed site in Fairfield Business Campus. As the attached letter from the City Attorney indicates, this option is being pursued by the City and would benefit the Fairfield Campus TIF District and possible future available funding far Interchange improvements at CSAH 70 and provides no additional assistance to Coons Family LLC. However, this additional financing does reduce the letter of credit requirements for Coons Family LLC which has been a concern with the primary lender for the project. Failure to meet the completion date for the building construction will result in the City drawing on the letter of credit for the balance of the market value of the lot or $116,450. Failure to meet the job creation and maintaining the business at this location for five years will result in the payment of the additional $116,450. This proposed amendment will be brought to the City Council for consideration at their September 3, 2002 meeting. Requested Action: A recommendation to the City Council to approve the proposed forgivable loan to Coons Family LLC from the City's Revolving Loan Fund in the amount of $116,450 to be applied to the purchase price of Lof 2, Black 1; Fairfield Business Campus 2"d Addition. cc: Roger Knutson, City Attorney Ben Coons, President/CEO Advanced Wireless Communications Tom McEllistrem, Attorney for Advanced Wireless Communications Exhibit A -Letter from the City Attorney 3 yy p - iot~n i'. Kelly s. x ~ ~ - Soren l1. h4attick '`,'[-~r€;uer-ite M. ~1cCarron CiAn ,b1. F3randt Direct Dial: (651) 234-6215 E-mail Address: rknutson@ck-lnw.com )uly 10, 2002 LAKEVILLE MAYOR & COUNCILMEMBERS Robert D. Johnson, Mayor Mark Bellows, Councilmember David Luick, Councilmember Lynette Mulvihill, Councilmember Laurie Rieb, Councilmember RE: ADVANCED WIRELESS CONTRACT FOR PRIVATE REDEVELOPMENT Dear Mayor and Courieilmembers: During the process of negotiating the First Amendment to the Redevelopment Contract with Advanced Wireless, a means of improving the outcome for both the City and Advanced Wireless came to the forefront. Under the existing contract the City is conveying land to Advanced Wireless with a market. value of $232,900. The City would recapture the ualue in the form of tax increment dollars. The job. creation goals, requirement to build the Minimum Improvements, and the requirement to operate the business on the property for five years are guaranteed by a letter of credit. Rather than selling the. property for $1.00, the City would sell the property for $116,450, one-half of its market value. The City would make a loan to Advanced Wireless for $116,450 out of the City's Development Revolving Loan. Fund to make the down payment. In essence we would be making a loan and getting the money back at the same time. This fund was established with state money in conjunction with the New Morning Windows project. The City would forgive the loan. if the job goals and five year operating requirement are met. Using the loan mechanism rather than TIF will allow the City to use the TIF proceeds for other needed purposes. This will also benefit the developer by reducing the length and amount of the required letter of credit. Lakeville Mayor and Counc~imembers July 10, 2002 Page 2 This proposed change could not be considered with the First Amendment to the agreement because a hearing under the Business Subsidy Law must first be conducted. This will be on your agenda in August. Regards,_ - CAMPBELL KNUTSON , Pr essional Association e x. B _ . • Roger N. Knutson RNKarn cc: Bob Erickson, City Administrator Dave Olson, Community & Economic Development Director Item Igo. T4: Economic Development.Commission CC: Robert Erickson, City Administrator Ann Flad, Economic Development: Coordinator ~ FRAM: David L:`Olson, Community & Economic Deveiaprnent Direr DATE:. 10.ugust 22, 2002 RE: August Qirec#or's Report The following is the Director's Report for August that provides information on a number of issues of interest to EDC members. Current Developments A number of new commercial and. industrial projects throughout the City have been submitted for review and approval. The-following is a listing and brief summary of these projec#s. Bo4se' Ca e Boise Cascade is proposing to c©nstruct a 72,000 square fioot o#fice/warehouse building. an 14.25 acres in the proposed Airlake Development 6"' Addition. The site is along the south side of CSAH 7Q et the intersection with Nalyoke: Ave< Boise Cascade ;will re-locate their... curren# warehouse distribution facility .:located in Minneapolis to this site and will.. receive building materials via rail. The estimated building construction cost is $2.5 million and' will result. in 2Q jabs being relocated. or created at this rtew Lakeville location.: The development will be considered by the City Ceuncil at its September 3, 2002 meeting. Lakeville. Family G+ental Thin professional offir~ building is proposed along Kenrick ,4venue near 164' Street. This building is being dev~aloped by the. owners of Lakeville Family aentai. Grading for this project. should commence in mid-September. Lakeville Town t?ffice [`~vglopmen# This development. is proposed along the north side of 165"' Street near Kenrick Avenue. This development wip consist of five residential style office buildings that contain. 3-5 office units per building that will be available for purchase as condominium. units. This: development abuts the Lakeville Family !?ental site to the south. and will be .reviewed by the Planning: Commission at their September 19,.2002 meeting. This is a type of .office development has n©t previously occurred in Lakeville. Holmberg /Bond Prc?~rty This .property is adjacent to the Lakeville Family Dentai and Lakeville Town ~,?ffitse Development to the east. While. detailed commerciaf development plans have not been submitted for this. property, a proposed grading .plan is being reviewed fof this property. Several joint meetings with the developers and design engineers: for these: three properties -have resulted in the preparation of an overall ,grading grid drainage plan for this entire area. The grading of the MaimberglBond property would .prepare it for commerciaf development and would also provide a storm water manag~rnent pond that would serve this:: property as we11 as the adjacent Lakeville Family Dental and Lakeville Town Office developments. Holiday Station A Holiday Gas/Gonvenience store` is proposed at the intersection of the Go. Rd. 46` {160' Street):. and Garret Rath.: near the entrance to Valley Lake Park,. This new Noiiday store will include an attached automatic car, wash. The Planning. Commission is scheduled to review this proposal at its September 5, 2002 meeting. Prouincfal Bank Provincial Bank :proposes to construc# a new .branch bank location immediately west of the proposed Holiday store along Co. Rd. 46. This new bank building is proposed to be a twaR story bank building with: additional `office space for lease. The Provincial Bank and Holiday Station developments will have a shared access .and have in#er-connected parking lots that requires coordination of grading and drainage plans far both projects. -t~riginslly these two sites were to be the site of a new Qle Piper Restaurant. :Dakota County Economic De~eloprnent Partnership The Strategic Planning Draft report for the Dakota County Economic Development Partnership is attached. This report will be presented to a meeting of the Dakota County Gity Administrators Managers on Friday, August 23`x. While recommendations in the Task Force report suggest the Partnership should re-evaluate its mission and improve its effectiveness, the budgetary cutbacks of many. members of the Partnership may make it difficult for the Partnership to continue to opera#e in its present #orm w~h membership dues as the primary source of revenue. An update of the discussion. of the Dakota County City Administrators Group will be presented at the August 27"' EDC meeting. Census Data A copy. of an analysis of 2000 Census Data for Dakota County as prepared by staff from the Dakota:: County Planning. Department is attached.. This is being provided for infiormation only. DAKOTA COUNTY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIP STRATEGIC PLANNING TASK FORCE DRAFT REPORT August 8, 2002 DCEDP Strategic Planning Task Force g/g~200~ y TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction and Summary Page 1 Findings Page 3 Conclusions Page 5 Recommendations Page 6 Next Steps Page 7 Appendices • Summary of Community Leader Survey Page 8 • Summary of SWOT Analysis. Page 14 • Organizational Options for DCEDP Page 16 THE OSGOOD GROUP DCEDP Strategic Planning Task Force 8/8/2Q02 INTRODUCTION AND :::SUMMARY INTRODUCTION The Dakota County Economic Development Partnership, now l0 years old, created a Strategic Planning Task Force in 2002 to assess the organization's vision, mission, programs and organizational structure. The Task Force was asked to report back to the Board of Directors with recommendations for changes. The Task Force started its work in March and retained the services of The Osgood Group, LLC to facilitate the process. An aggressive work plan was developed and included a survey of 100 Dakota County community leaders, aself-assessment using the SWOT analysis process, a review of the. organization's vision and mission, an organizational structure and funding review, and meetings with some key constituencies and members. The Task Force worked from late March into August 2002. The results of the Task Force's work are contained in this report as Findings, Conclusions, Recommendations and Next Steps. SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Through the strategic planning process, the Task Force learned there is important economic development work for the DCEDP to do in Dakota County. Community leaders feel an organization is needed to promote the county far economic .development purposes, support the work of cities and economic development entities and serve as a clearinghouse of economic development infarrnation in the county. To be successful, the Task Force concluded the DCEDP must take the following critical steps: ¦ Tighten the focus of its mission and programs ¦ Restructure its organization and leadership ¦ Build a strong identity through aggressive communication and marketing ¦ Stabilize and strengthen its funding. The Task Force recommends the DCEDP: ¦ Continue operating, either by merging with another organization or remaining independent. • Revitalize its vision to state "The DCEDP strives to expand Dakota County's economy so that all businesses and residents may prosper." ¦ Focus its mission to (1) become aone-stop clearinghouse of information for economic development in Dakota County and (2) promote Dakota County as a unified economic entity. ¦ Focus its work in the following strategic areas: business creation and retention, marketing Dakota. County as a unified economic entity, international trade, entrepreneurship and technology. THE OSGOOD GROUP 1 DCEDP Strategic Planning Task Force 8/8/2002 In addition, the Task Force recommends he DCEDP: ¦ Form strategic partnerships to support other organizations' work in the following areas: workforce development and training, affordable housing and transportation. • Communicate and market more aggressively and effectively -itself, its members and the County as a unified economic entity. ¦ Restructure to become more efficient and effective - it needs a smaller board of directors ..::..and strongerexecutive director leadership. ¦ Srengthen its funding and strive to secure equal funding from the public and private sectors. ¦ Strengthen its relationships with other economic development entities in the county, including all cities, economic development organizations and.chambers of commerce. TASK FORCE MEMBERS The following individuals served on the Strategic Planning Task Force: Taud Hoopingarner, chair -Dakota County LaDonna Boyd -Dakota Electric Association Bruce Halbasch -Kraus Anderson Cindy Johnson -DCEDP. Staff.: Dave Olson -City of Lakeville Mike Puppe -Merchants Bank and current Chair of the DCEDP Board Dan Rogness -Dakota County Community Development Agency Judy Tschumper -City of Burnsville Deborah Loon Osgood of The Osgood Group, LLC, facilitated the work of the Task Force. Additional assistance and support was provided by Cindy Johnson and Jeanette Ruff of the DCEDP staff.. THE OSGOOD GROUP 2 DCEDP,Strategic Planning Task Force 8/8/2002. FINDINGS The Strategic Planning Task Force took the following steps to gather information for this process: 1. `It surveyed just over 100 community leaders in Dakota County to learn their impressions of economic development in the County and the DCEDP. 2. It conducted aself-assessment using the SWOT Analysis method -Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats. 3. It met with a number of partners, including executives of Deal chambers of commerce, economic and community development: coordinators of a number of Dakota County cities, the executive directors of Progress Plus and Metro EastDevelopment Partnership, and the Dakota County City Administrators/County Managers. (planned for 8/23). Main findings of the survey are reported below. 'The complete. summaries of the community leader survey and SWOT assessment are provided in the appendices. What we learned from the Community Leader Surv~: The top issues facing Dakota County that, could impact the.vitality of its economy are:. • Workforce development • Affordable housing supply • Business retention /growth Community leaders are very or somewhat familiar with the DCEDP, although 1 /3 are only "somewhat familiar." Even members are not fully familiar with the DCEDP - in fact, half of members without a board seat report being only "somewhat familiar." Business retention and development is the most important strategic focus for the DCEDP. Workforce development and training, technology and marketing Dakota County as a unified economic entity also are very important. Global market facilitation and attraction is not viewed as important by respondents (note: this may be partly due to the program being very new). The strengths of the DCEDP are: • Public and private support and leadership. Partnership approach. • .Programs Bankers Seminar, Technology, Job Fairs. • Single source of information in Dakota County for economic development issues and opportunities. • Cooperation, collaboration, unification of communities, business sector. • The volunteers and leaders of DCEDP. • Communication on county-wide issues. Opportunities for communication/coordination. THE OSGOOD GROUP 3 DCEDP Strategic Planning Task Force 8j8j2002 • Networking among public/private agencies. and economic development professionals. Sharing of information. The DCEDP's weaknesses. /areas for improvement are: ~ Tighten the focus, build a strong identity. Improve coordination with other economic development entities. Scope is too broad, Eliminate duplication with other entities. • There is not a universal effort in County promoting economic development. Bea one- stop clearinghouse for E.D. in Dakota County. Voice for ED in county. Coordination role. • Communicate and. market more effectively to both internal .and. external audiences. Increase visibility, credibility and leadership. • Secure adequate resources. for. DCEDP... Increase business. participation,. • Re-structure the:-DCEDP board. be more efficient, get regular turnover on-board and strengthen political support. • Strengthen staffing and management of DCEDP. Need. strong executive director leadership who will "positively" link with all the chambers, cities and economic development leaders to assist in the achieving of their goals. The DCEDP should be restructured to become more efficient and effective -smaller board of directors and stronger executive director leadership. The current apportioning of the DCEDP's annual budget (2/3 public sector funding and 1 /3 private sector funding) is appropriate. Those who feel contributions: should be re-apportioned generally suggest increasing private sector contributions. The DCEDP should continue operating, either by merging with another organization (59%) or remaining independent (38%). THE OSGOOD GROUP t} DCEDP Strategic Planning Task Force 8/8/2002 ...CONCLUSIONS A. Community leaders generally want the DCEDP: to continue operating. They support he DCEDP as an organization that coordinates and promotes economic development in Dakota County. There is not a call for the DCEDP to stop operating. B. The greatest strength today of the DCEDP is the involvement, support and leadership from both thepublic and private sectors -and the collaboration and communication that results. C. .The DCEDP has not fully realized its potential because: + The DCEDP's mission is somewhat off target. The DCEDP has tried to be all things to all people, resulting in a lack of focus and duplication of some services with other . organizations. • The DCEDP has not communicated effectively about its work - in fact, 1 /3 of community leaders are only somewhat familiar with the DCEDP. • The leadership and management of DCEDP have not been as efficient and effective as they should be. The board is too large and many members are not activelp engaged. The former executive director did not successfully build good relationships with all partners. D. Funding for the DCEDP is at risk,' both with the private and public sectors: 'Cities have tight budgets and may consider dropping their financial support for the DCEDP. The recession is hurting the business sector's ability to support organizations like the DCEDP. E. The DCEDP has an opportunity, however, to expand its membership through outreach and ...leadership. Non-members are not active in the DCEDP.primarily because they have never been asked, are unaware of the DCEDP or don't understand the DCEDP... F. The top issues facing Dakota County that could impact .the vitality of its economy, according to the survey, are: • workforce development, • affordable housing supply and • business creation and retention. TASK FORCE MAIN CONCLUSION A. The most important steps the DCEDP can take are to: • tighten the focus of its mission and programs, • restructure its organization and leadership, • build a strong identity through aggressive communication and marketing and • stabilize and strengthen its funding. THE OSGOOD GROUP 5 DCEDP Strategic Planning Task Force 8/Sf 2002 RECOMMENDATIONS A. The DCEDP should continue operating, either by merging, with another organization-or remaining independent. Options are outlined on page xx. B. The DCEDP should revitalize its vision. Proposed new vision statement: The DCEDP strives to expand Dakota County's economy so that all businessesand residents may pro. per. C. The. DCEDP should tighten the focus of its mission. The DCEDP should become cone-stop .clearinghouse of information for economic development in Dakota County and promote Dakota County as a unified economic entity. Proposed new mission statement for DCEDP: The DCEDPpromotes economicgroavth in Dakota County by marketing the county as a unified economic entity, serving as a one-stop clearinghouse of information and facilitating public private cooperation. D. The DCEDP should focus its work in the following strategic areas: • business creation and retention, • marketing Dakota County as a unified economic entity, • international trade. • entrepreneurship and • technology. E. The DCEDP should forth strategic partnerships to support other organizations' work in the following areas: • workforce development and training, • affordable housing and • transportation. F. The DCEDP should communicate and market more aggressively and effectively -itself, its members and the county as a unified economic entity. G. The DCEDP should be restructured to become more efficient and effective - it needs a smaller board of directors. and stronger staff leadership. H. The DCEDP should strive to strengthen its funding and secure equal funding from the public and private sectors. I. The DCEDP should strengthen its relationships with other economic development entities in the county, including all cities, economic development organizations and chambers of commerce. THE OSGOOD GROUP DCEDP Strategic Planning Task Force 8/8/2002 NEXT STEPS A. Reach out to members, non-members and partners. in Dakota County. Share the strategic plan, receive feedback and`begin implementation. B. Determine the optimal organizational structure -whether to remain independent or to merge with a related'organzaton.- C. Finalize the vision and mission statements - make a commitment to-what the DCEDP intends to achieve and how. D. Complete the strategic plan establish goals, objectives and action steps. E. Restructure and strengthen the board of directors and management committee: • 12 to 15 members on board of directors, with at least one member from each. of the following sectors -county, cities, chambers of commerce, business, utilities, developers, workforce organizations, housing organizations; higher education and K- 12 education. • Staggered two-year terms.. • Annual board. nominating and election process.. • Monthly board meetings. • Executive committee of officers (chair, vice chair; secretary and treasurer). • Conduct board training and develop a board manual F. Create ahigh-level advisory board that will meet 1 or 2 times_each year and be informed regularly of DCEDP work and county-wide economic development interests. Include legislators, county' commissioners; mayors, chief executives of largest employers, heads of school districts and colleges. G. Stabilize and strengthen the funding base. Conduct an aggressive fundraising campaign to (1) retain existing members, (2) expand the membership base and (3) secure special funding from other sources. H. Hire new executive director /staff leader with strengths in economic development, marketing,.sales,. fundraising and networking. I. Explore possibility of relocating to the. new CDA building or a Workforce .Center. J. Review and revise the by-laws, as needed. K. Develop an annual work plan for the organization. Develop annual objectives for the executive director and conduct an annual review of the ED. L. Develop and execute a new, aggressive plan to communicate about the DCEDP's work. THE OSGOOD GROUP DCEDP Strategic Planning Task Force 8/$/2002 APPENDIX A DAKOTA COUNTY COMMUNITY LEADER SURVEY - SUMMARY OF RESULTS The Dakota County Economic Development Partnership sent a survey to community ,leaders in Dakota County, including DCEDP members, past members, all cities, county representatives, chambers of commerce, school. district superintendents and local newspapers. 41 responses were received, giving an overall response rate of 40 The respondents break down as follows: Number of Percentage of Res ondents Res ondents All'. res ondents 41 100% Members with Board seat` 17 ' 41% Members w/out Board seat 12 29% Past Members 3 7°/© Non-Members 9 22% Of the 41 respondents, 29 provided their names and affiliations. 12 surveys were anonymous. The .breakdown of known respondents between sectors is as follows: ..Number of Percentage of .Res ondents Res ondents. Private business 9 31 Coun 6 21 Ci 6 21% K-12 school 3 10% Non- rofit or nization 3 10% Chamber of Commerce 2 7% Impressions of Dakota County Economy and Economic Development Efforts Economic development efforts in Dakota County are generally considered well-coordinated and effective. But there is room for improvement, especially in the coordination of economic development efforts. Economic development effoxts'in Dakota County are well-coordinated. Agree - 55% Disagree - 45% Economic development efforts in Dakota County are effective. Agree - 63% Disagree - 38% THE OSGOOD GROUP g DCEDP .Strategic Planning Task Force g/g/200 The top issues facing Dakota County that could impact the vitality of its economy are: Workforce development --`54% of respondents `say this is one of the top two issues Affordable housing supply 38% of respondents say this is one of the top two issues Business retention /growth 29% of respondents say this is one of the top two issues The following are not considered a top issue that could impact the vitality of Dakota County's .economy; Availability of land 12% of respondents say this is one. of the top two issues Availability of capital 2% of respondents say this is one of the top two. issues Community infrastructure 2% of respondents say this is one of the top two issues Familiarity with the DCEDP and its Mission Community leaders are very or somewhat familiar with the DCEDP,.. although 1/3 are only "somewhat familiar." Even members are not fully familiar with the DCEDP - in fact, half of members without a board seat report being only "somewhat familiar." Respondent Very Familiar Somewhat Nof at all Familiar Familiar All res ondents 41 of 41) 59% 37% 5% .Members with Board seat 76% 24% 0% 17 of 17) Members without Board 50% 50% 0% seat 12 of 12) Past Members 3 of 3) 67% 33% 0% Non-Members 9 of 9) 33% 44% 22% A slim majority of respondents feel the. DCEDP's mission is "somewhat off target." The rest feel it is "right on target," except that one respondent feels it is "completely misguided." Respondent Right on Target Somewhat off Completely Tar et Mis uided All res ondents 35 of 41) 43% 54% 3% THE OSGOOD GROUP 9 DCEDP Strategic Planning Task Force 8/8/202 , DCEDP Programs Business retention and development is the most important strategic focus for the DCEDP. Workforce: development. and training,. technology and. marketing Dakota County as a unified economic entity also are very important. Global market facilitation and attracrion is not viewed as important by respondents (note: this may be partly due to the program being very new). a. Business retention and development. Focus: Improve the effective of business retention and development efforts county-wide. Programs: Networking, training and general advocacy. Respondent Very :Important Somewhat Not Very Im octant Im octant All res ondents 39 of 41 77% 18% 5% b. Workforce development and training: Focus: Increase productivity, bring. economic benefit to Dakota County and enrich local residents' lives by connecting employment opportunities that meet or exceed their career. opportunities. 'Programs: Job fairs, conferences, employer training at community college. All res ondents 38 of 41) 68% 24% 8% c. Global market facilitation and attraction. Focus: Gain market access to Chinese industry sectors that hold the most promise for Dakota County exports and. investment. Programs: Expand Sister City, co-sponsor international trade seminar. All res ondents 38 of 41 13% 66% 21% d. Marketing Dakota County as a unified economic entity Focus: Promote communication, coordination and cooperation among those involved in economic development. Programs: Annual reports, newsletters, web site, media relations. All res ondents 39 of 41) 49% 41% 10% e. TechnoloQV. Focus: Establish Dakota. County as a technology leader and serve as a magnet to spur ongoing economic growth. Programs: Host business seminars, create forum and website for information exchange, drive development of tech infrastructure. All respondents (38 of 41) 50% 39% 11% THE OSGOOD GROUP 10 . DCEDP. Strategic Planning Task Force 8J8/20Q2 Involvement in DCEDP Programs Members became involved in DCEDP through: Committee /Board member - 91 Attended event or activity - 61% Helped with event or activity - 57% Attended social event - 52% Gained economic. benefit - 13% Past members are not active in the DCEDP because: Not able to find the time necessary 67% Frustrated with the leadership or lack of leadership 33%. Non-members are not active in the DCEDP because: Never been asked - 40% Unaware of the DCEDP - 40% Don't understand the DCEDP - 40% Don't agree with the focus - 20% Other ("politics"} - 20% Respondents feel the most beneficial DCEDP programs and events are networking opportunities,. Dakota County Capital,. job fairs, bankers seminar. and technology seminar. Pro rams and Events Beneficial Not Beneficial Networking Opportunities 65%, 9% Dakota County Capital 62% 3% Job Fairs 59% 12% Bankers Seminar 59% 12% Technology Seminar 53% 18% Business Visitations 41% 18% Annual Meeting 38% 18% Employment Training 29% 29% Seminar Hastings Enterprise 32% 24% Facilitation THE OSGOOD GROUP 1 1 DCEDP Strategic Planning Task Force 8/8f2002 Strengths, Weaknesses and Suggestions The strengths of the DCEDP are: • Public and private support and leadership. Partnership approach.. • Programs Bankers Seminar, Technology, Job Fairs, • Single source of information in Dakota County for economic development issues and opportunities. • Cooperation, collaboration, unification of communities, business secfor. • The volunteers and leaders of DCEDP. • Communication on county-wide issues. Opportunities for communication/coordination. • Networking among public/private agencies and economic development professionals. Sharing of information. The DCEDP's weaknesses /areas for improvement are: • Tighten the focus, build a strong idenrity. Improve coordination with other economic development entities. Scope is too broad.. Eliminate duplication with other entities. • There is not a universal effort in County promoting economic development. Bea one- . stop. clearinghouse for E.D.. in Dakota County. Voice for ED in county. Coordination role. • Communicate and market more effectively to both internal and external audiences. .Increase visibility, credibility and leadership. • Secure adequate resources for DCEDP. Increase business participation. • Re-structure the DCEDP boaad be more efficient, get regular turnover on board and strengthen political support. • Strengthen staffing and management of DCEDP. Need strong executive director leadership who will "positively" link with all the chambers, cities and economic development leaders to assist in the achieving of their goals. THE OSGOOD GROUP 12 DCEDP Strategic Planning Task Force 8/$/2002 DCEDP Qrganizational Structure and: Membership. Dues The DCEDP should be restructured to become more efficient and effective. -smaller board of directors and stronger executive director leadership: The current apportioning of the DCEDP's annual budget (2/3 public sector funding and 1/3 private sector funding) is appropriate: Do you feel the current contributions to the Partnership are distributed appropriately. between the public and private sectors? Yes - 61% No 39% Respondents who feel contributions should be re-apportioned generally suggest. increasing private sector contributions. The. DCEDP should continue operating,. either by merging with another organization (59%) or remaining independent (3$%). One respondent.feels the DCEDP should cease operations and dissolve. THE OSGOOD GROUP 13 DCEDP Strategic Planning Task Force g7g/2002 APPENDIX B` SWOT ANALYSIS BY TASK FORCE (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities<and Threats) The Task Force completed a sel£-assessment of the DCEDP by doing a SWOT analysis on April 24, prior to receiving the results of the community leader survey: The results are summarized below. Strengths ¦ Structure Partnership already exists; minor investment compared to other organizations, small organization, relatively easy to make decisions and implement ideas ¦ Programs Develops new initiatives for ED; long-term commitment to ED; ideas; opportunities to reach new heights; one-stop shop; strong programs; promotes Dakota County'as a great place ¦ Attitude /Approach Cooperative approach through public-private partnership; input from many different perspectives; regional perspective; collegial atmosphere; heart is in the right place; cities more united and cooperative; strong interest in working together for benefit of all; combining resources to maximize outcomes ¦ Commitment of the people and organizations involved; volunteers ¦ Communications ¦ Networking opportunities Weaknesses ¦ Communication -not enough internal communication and coordination ¦ Marketing -not very visible, difficult showing benefit; web site needs upgrading ¦ Resources - lack of finances, cash flow problems not enough staff, not enough members, need more volunteers, lack of strong private involvement, lack of strong political support, need better transition plan (move leaders through ranks) ¦ Structure /Decision-Making -board too large, inefficient decision-making, lack of strong management and leadership, cumbersome oversight. Opportunities ¦ One Stop Shop - be point of contact for lots of county-wide issues; increase coordination and collaboration with other ED organizations; re-organize and/or align more closely with other organizations ¦ Marketing of DCEDP (increase visibility of DCEDP) and county (a great county to brag about) ¦ General promotion of ED programs -link education, work force development, economic development; tourism; strong business environment; job creation ¦ Tackle big issues with quality programs -globalization, technology, infrastructure ¦ Rally around county-wide issues - e.g., economic growth issues like rail service, housing Threats ¦ Image concerns -perception of not having act together; empathy among members; perception that economic development is not acounty-wide priority ¦ Support -Declining revenue and membership base; poor economy may make it worse THE OSGOOD GROUP l4 DCEDP Strategic Planning Task Foree $/8/2Q02 ¦ Programs Duplication of services /competition with other organizations (perceived and real); shot-gun (all things to all people) vs. targeted programs? ¦ Results -can we explain what the DCEDP provides that is of value? Value is different for various organizations (e.g, public sees value differently than private) THE OSGOOD GROUP 15 DCEDP Strategic Planning Task Force 8/8/2002 ' APPENDIX C ORGANIZATIONAL OPTIONS CONSIDERED FOR DCEDP 1. Remain an independent, non-profit organization. Consider co-locating with Community Development Agency or Workforce Center to minimize overhead costs and take advantage of organizational synergies. Pros: • Retains public-private partnership. • Keeps private sector involvement. • Able to maintain confidentiality in its work (no data practices issues). • Being private has more flexibility than being public. Cons: • Fundraising challenge, especially in current economic climate. 2. Merge with Community Development Agency. Create an economic development department /position within CDA. Locate at new CDA building. Pros: • Logical extension for CDA. • CDA has credibility with public and private organizations. • Private sector could be involved through sponsorships. Cons: • CDA has narrow focus and is reluctant to take on new, unfunded work. • Fundraising challenge, • Is there a role for DCEDP board or does CDA board govern? 3. Merge with Workforce Council. Create new umbrella organization with two departments - workforce development and economic development. Locate at one of the Workforce Centers and establish a Business Development Center. Pros: • Has a business service center. • DCEDP started here. • Board with more private than public members. • Use its 501(c)(3) status. • Some money available for economic development work in much larger budget. • Other workforce councils around the country are doing economic development. THE OSGOOD GROUP 16 DCEDP Strategic Planning Task Force 8/8/2002 Cons: • Public organization -lose private sector support and involvement? • Is there a role for DCEDP board or does Workforce Council board govern? 4. Merge with Progress Plus -eliminated as an option, as Progress Plus was not interested. 5. Merge with Metro East Development Partnership -this option was eliminated by the task force, due to the loss of focus on Dakota County. Pros: • Organization that is successful at economic development work targeted for DCEDP in strategic plan. • Would be merger of two similar organizations that today have only some overlap in memberships. • Do economic development on region-wide level. • Reduce costs. • Eliminate duplication /competition between the two organizations. Cons: • Lose focus on Dakota County -become part of larger organization with much larger geographic focus. THE OSGOOD GROUP 1'] 1 C O U N T Y Operations, Management, and Budget Division Dakota County Administration Center 1590 Highway 55 Hastings, Minnesota 55033 (651) 438-4419 Date: August 6, 2002 To: Members, Board of Commissioners Brandt Richardson, Administrator From: Douangdara Insisiengmay, Office of Planning, Evaluation, & Development (x4627) Heidi Welsch, Office of Planning, Evaluation, & Development (x4570) Subject: 2000 Census Data Update Introduction Recently, the US Census Bureau released Demographic Profi/e: 2000 containing general demographic, social, economic, and housing characteristics data (DP-1 to DP-4) from the 2000 Census. Earlier, we reported to you on the general demographic characteristics (DP-1) for Dakota County and its communities, such as gender and age data, race, household type, and rental vacancy and occupancy. The purpose of this memorandum is to highlight social, economic, and housing characteristics for Dakota County from the 2000 Census data that recently became available. The data is presented according to each characteristic profile: Social, Economic, and Housing. ¦ Social Profile: The social characteristics profile contains information on school enrollment and level of educational attainment, marital status, residence of individuals, nativity and birthplace, region of birth, type of language spoken at home, and ancestry. ¦ Economic Profile: The economic profile consists of data such as employment status, type of transportation used to commute to work and the mean travel time, occupation and industry related data, class of workers, household and family income, and poverty status data. ¦ Housing Profile: Although an earlier memo touched on rental vacancy rates and occupancy, this profile includes data on housing topics such as number of units in the structure, year the housing structure is built, number of rooms, house heating fuel type, value, mortgage status and costs, and gross rent. In summary, some of the key points in the Demographic Profile data for Dakota County are: ~ Y ¦ Increased Educations/Attainment The County shows a large percentage growth over the past decade in the number of individuals with a bachelor's or graduate/professional degree. In addition, the County is also experiencing a slight increase in the proportion of individuals who have never been married. This shift in marital status and post-high school education could contribute to the increase in family and household income between 1990 and 2000, as discussed in the following social section. ¦ R/sin4 Incomes and Fa//ing Poveriv Economic indicators appear strong, based on the Census data. The labor force continued to increase, while the unemployment rate declined from 1990 to 2000 in Dakota County. Median household and family income also increased since 1990, by 47% and 51% respectively. Dakota County's per capita income grew by 57%, from $17,237 in 1990 to $27,008 in 2000. (In a separate report, The Bureau of Economic Analysis ranked Dakota County 95~' among the nations 3,110 counties in per capita personal income. 2000.) The percentage of families living below the poverty level declined, from 3% of the total family population to 2% in 2000, ¦ Increasin4 Home and Rents/ Costs The median monthly mortgage cost in the county rose by 37% between 1990 and 2000, from $899 per month to $1,231 per month. In addition, median gross rents in the county also increased over the same time frame. In 2000, the median gross rent in Dakota County was $722, up 33% from 1990 ($542). While there have been positive developments in the past year to increase the accessibility and affordability of housing in Dakota County, the trend of increasing housing cost and rent in the Census data support the need for action. ¦ Continued Sing/e Passenger Commute Driving alone continues to be the most popular way Dakota County citizens get to work. In 2000, 83% of the labor force population drove to work alone, while 9% carpooled, 2% used public transportation, 5% either walked or worked at home, and the remaining 1% uses other means of transportation. The mean travel time from home to work in the County increased in 2000 by 2.7 minutes, from 20.1 minutes in 1990 to 22.8 minutes in 2000. ¦ Increased Diversity Through Immi4ration Over the last decade Dakota County demonstrates increasing numbers of residents who are foreign- born and who speak a language other than English in the home. This growth can be attributed largely to the growth of the Mexican, Russian, and Somali communities, along with increased immigration from the Southeast Asian countries. This trend and the changing needs of the population are currently being studied by the Human Services Advisory Council (HSAC). 2 ~ e SOCIAL PROFILE (DP-2) The social characteristics profile contains information on school enrollment and level of educational attainment, marital status, residence of individuals, nativity and birthplace, region of birth, type of language spoken at home, and ancestry. 1. School Enrollment and Educational Attainment: The Census defines educational attainment as the highest level or degree of school completed. The proportion of individuals with a Bachelor's degree in Dakota County increased by 5 percentage points between 1990 and 2000, compared to the State's increase of 3 percentage points over the same timeframe. In comparison to the other metro counties, Dakota has the third highest growth in the proportion of individuals with a Bachelor's degree. Carver and Scott Counties had the largest increase in the proportion of individuals with a Bachelor's degree (9 percentage points). (See Chart 1.) • Similarly, Dakota County also follows an increasing trend with the proportion of individuals with a Graduate or Professional degree, growing 3 percentage points since 1990, again above the State's growth {2 percentage points). (See Chart 2.) ¦ Cities in Dakota County all experienced a growth in the proportion of individuals with a Bachelor or Graduate/Professional Degree between 1990-2000. (See Charts 3 and Chart 4.) Lakeville has the greatest increase in the proportion of individuals with a Bachelor's degree. Eagan has the greatest increase in the proportion of individuals with aGraduate/Professional degree. - In the 2000 Census, the proportion of the total population of 3 years old and older in Dakota County enrolled in school in Dakota County increased by 2 percentage points, from 27% of the population enrolled in 1990 to 29% of the population enrolled in 2000. (Refer to Chart 5.) Chart 1: Educational Attainment, Proportion of the Population 25 years old and older with a Bachelor's Degree 30% 25% - - _ 20% - - - 15% - 10% 0% Minnesota Anoka Carver Dakota Hennepin Ramsey Scott Washington - - - - 01990 16% 12% 17% 21% 23% 19% 14% 19% 02000 19%_- 16% _ 26%__ 26% - 27% - 22% ~ 23% 23% 3 Chart 2: Educational Attainment, Proportion of the Population 25 years old and older with a Graduate or Professional Degree 14% 12% 10% 8% 6% - 4% - 2% 0% Minnesota Anoka Carver ~ Dakota Hennepin Ramsey Scott Washington X1990 6% 4% 5% 6% 9% 10% I 3% 7% 02000 8% 5% 8% 9% 12% 13% 6% 10% Chart 3: Education Attainment, Proportion of the Population 25 years old and older with a Bachelor's Degree, by City 40% 35% 30% - 25% - 20% - - 15% - 10% - 5% 0% Apple Valley 8umsville Eagan Farmington Inver Grove Lakeville I Mendota Rosenount S.St. Paul W.St. Paul Heights I Heights ¦1990 29% 27% 31% 10% ---14% ~ 16% 29% 15% 9% 13% 02000 30% 27% 35% 19% 22% 28% 34% 23% 12% 17% Chart 4: Educational Attainment, Proportion of the Population 25 years old and older with a Graduate or Professional Degree, by City 25% 20% 15% - - _ 10% 0% Inver Grove Mendota Apple Valley Burnsville Eagan Farmington ! Lakeville Rosemount S.St. Paul W.St. Paul Heights ~ Heights _ _ I_ _ ®1990 8% 7% ~ 8% 3% 4% 5% 19% 4% 3% 5% X2000 11% 10% 13% 4% 8% 7% 21% 6% 4% 6% 4 Chart 5: Proportion of the Total Population 3 years old and older Enrolled in School 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% - - 10% 5% - - - 0% Minnesota Anoka Carver Dakota Hennepin Ramsey Scott Washington ¦1990 27% 28% 27% 27% 25% 27% 27% - 29% X2000 28% 28% 30% 29% 27% 29% 28% 29% 2. Martial Status: Dakota County is experiencing a slight increasing trend in the proportion of individuals who have never been married, from 24% of the population in 1990 to 26% in 2000. (Refer to Charts 6a & 6b.) .There is a decline in the proportion of married individuals, dropping 2 percentage points in 2000. The county's divorced proportion grew slightly, from 8% in 1990 to 9% in 2000. ¦ The state of Minnesota and Anoka, Hennepin, and Ramsey Counties also saw an increase in the proportion of individuals who have never been married. (See Chart 7.) ¦ The proportion of individuals who are married also declined in the counties of Anoka, Ramsey, and Washington. ¦ The proportion of separated individuals stayed at 1% for all the metro counties. (See Chart 8.) ¦ The widowed proportion for aN the metro counties decreased between 1990 and 2000. In Dakota County four percent of population was widowed in both years. (See Chart 9.) ¦ The proportion of individuals who are divorced increased for all the metro counties in the past decade. Chart 6a: 1990 Marital Status for Dakota Chart 6b: 2000 Marital Status for Dakota County County Other Never Never 1% married married 24 j 26% Separated r 1% _ Separated 1% W idowed Married ~ W idowed Married 4% 60% 4% 62% Divorced ~ Divorced 8% 9% 5 Chart 7: Proportion of the Population 15 years old and olderNever Married or Married 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% - - aF, - 20% = - 10% - _ 0% Minnesota Anoka Carver Dakota Hennepin Ramsey Scott Washington ¦ Never Married 90 27% 25% 23% 24% 32% 32% - 23% 24% _ Never Married 00 28% 26% 22% 26% 33% 34% 23% 23% ¦Married 90 57% 62% 65% 62% 50% 50% 64% 63% OMarried 00 56% 60% 66% 61% 50% 48% 65% 64% Chart 8: Proportion of the Population 15 years old and older Separated or Divorced 10% 8 % - - - h 6% 4% 2% _ _ III) ~ _ _ 0% ~ ~ - Minnesota Anoka Carver Dakota Hennepin Ramsey Scott Washington ¦Separated 90 1% 1% 1% 1 % 2% 2% 1% 1 OSeparated 00 1 % 1 % 1 % 1% 1 % 1% 1% 1% ¦ Divorced 90 7 % 8 % j 6 % 8% 9% 9 % 6% 7% O Divorced 00 9 % 10 % 7% 9% 10% 10 % 8 % 8% Chart 9: Proportion of the Population 15 years old and older Widowed or Other 8% 7% 6% - - 5% - 4% - 3% - - - 2% 1% - 0 Minnesota Anoka Carver Dakota Hennepin Ramsey Scott Washington ¦Widowed 90 7% 4% 5% 4% 6% 7% 5% 4% OWidowed 00 I 6% 4% 4% 4% 5% 6% 3% 3% DOther90 1% 1% - 1%--- 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% - r - - iOOther 00 - - - - - - i - - 6 3. Nativity and Place of birth: As defined by the US Census Bureau, the native born population includes people born in the United States, Puerto Rico, or the U.S. Island Areas. Also included are people born in a foreign country that have at least one American parent. In order to be classified as foreign born, you must not be a U.S. citizen at birth. The total population in Dakota County increased by 29% between 1990 and 2000, more than double the state's population increase (12%) over the same timeframe. However, this growth did not occur equally among the native and foreign born populations. The rate of increase in individuals born in a foreign country residing in Dakota County increased far more rapidly during the decade (188%) than the growth of either the total population (29%) or the number of individuals born in the United States (26%). (See Chart 10.) In comparison to the other metro counties and the state, Dakota County had the second highest increase in foreign-born population. Scott County had the largest. increase between 1990 and 2000. ¦ There are 18,049 foreign born Dakota County residents in 2000, or 5% of the total county population. Of the foreign born population, 50% entered the US between 1990 and 2000. (Refer to Chart 11.) Furthermore, forty-three percent (43%) of the foreign-born population is from Asia, 21% from Europe, 21% from Latin America, 8% from Africa, 6% from Northern America, and 1% from the Oceania region. ¦ Burnsville and Eagan had the largest number of foreign-born population than any other city .in the county (4,434 and 4,874). Of the foreign-born population, over 50% entered the US between 1990 and 2000. (See Chart 12.) Chan 10: Nativity and Place of Birth, Percentage Change from 1990 to 2000 600% 500% 400% 300% - - - 200 100% - - 0% Minnesota Anoka Carver Dakota Hennepin Ramsey Scott Washington iTotai population 12% 22% ' 47% 29% 8% 5% 55% 38% - - - ®Nativepopulation 9% 20% ! 43% 26% 2% 0% 50% 36% OForeign-bom population 130% 163% i 276% ~ 188% 150% 98% ~ 570% ~ 150% Chart 11: Foreign Born Entering the US Between 1990-2000, By County 70000 ~ 60000 d ~ 50000 - - w 40000 m 30000 28,277 20000 - - - - o 0 9,047 10000 a 141,968 1,322 1,767 2,787 ~ 0 z Minnesota Anoka Carver Dakota Hennepin Ramsey Scott Washington 7 Chart 12: Foreign Born Entering the US from 1990 to 2000, by City 6,000 5,000 4,874 4,434 N 4,000 m 3 '6 3,000 2,47 at 2,000 1,298 1,295 1,150 1,06 1,000 _ - 781 330 532 437 368 389 499 174 79103 107 19 Apple Valley Burnsville Eagan Farmington Inver Grove Lakeville Lilydale Mendota Rosemount S.St. Paul W.St. Paul Heights Heights ®Eniered 1990 to March 2000 .Foreign Bom 4. Type of Language spoken at home: The number of persons who speak a language other than English at home includes those individuals who sometimes to always speak a language other than English only in the home. It does not include individuals who speak a language other than English only in school or at work. Also, whether an individual is foreign-born or a native does not determine if he/she speaks a language other than English at home. According to the 2000 Census, approximately 8% of the population 5 years old and older speaks a language other than English at home. (See Chart 13.) This represents an increase of 130% (from 10,852 in 1990 to 24,943 in 2000), substantially higher than the state increase of 72%. Of these persons, the Spanish speaking population in Dakota County increased 192% (2,915 individuals to 8,499 individuals), while the Asian and Pacific Islander speaking population increased slightly more but with fewer individuals (198%, from 2,105 individuals in 1990 to 6,277 individuals in 2000). During the same period, the state's Spanish speaking and Asian and Pacific Islander speaking population grew 212% and 117%, respectively. (See Chart 14.) ¦ The largest increase in the proportion of Spanish speaking residents in Dakota County. occurred in West St. Paul, an increase of 5 percentage points. ¦ Lilydale had the greatest increase in the proportion of Asian and Pacific Islander speaking residents of all the cities in Dakota County, an increase of 7 percentage points. ¦ In comparison to the other metro counties, Hennepin County had the largest increase in the proportion of Spanish speaking residents and Ramsey County had the largest increase in the proportion of Asian and Pacific Islander speaking residents. Chart 13: Proportion of the Population who Speaks a Language other than English 16% 1G 14% 12% - - 'D 6% 4 % - - - 0% Minnesota Anoka Carver Dakota Hennepin Ramsey Scott Washington p 1990 6% 3 % 5% ~ 4 % ~ 7 % 9 % 4% 4% p2000 8% 6% 6% S% 13% 16% 7% 6% 8 Chart 14: Population who Speaks Spanish and AsiaNPacific Islander Languages, 1990 and 2000 45,000 40,000 35,000 - a 30,000 - - 25,000 - - c 20,000 - - `0 15,000 - 10,000 5,000 - 0 Minnesota Anoka Carver Dakota Hennepin Ramsey Scott Washington ®Spanish 90 42,362 1,640 308 2,915 11,267 7,334 376 1,372 OSpanish 00 132,066 ~ 4,623 1,704 8,499 42,540 20,356 2,435 3,474 ¦Asian & Pacific 90 47,776 1,615 185 2,905 19,324 16,791 241 827 17ASIan & Pacific 00 103,520 3,005 610 6,277 38,401 36,415 1,357 3,088 ~ 5. Ancestry: Dakota County experienced a great increase of individuals reporting themselves as Sub-Saharan African between 1990 and 2000, from 89 individuals to 2,006 individuals, the largest growth of all the ancestries reported. (Refer to Table 1.) However, overall Sub-Saharan Africans make up only 0.43% of all the reported ancestries in the County. According to the 2000 Census, about 65% of the County is of German and European ancestry (30% German and 35% other European) and 19% of Scandinavian ancestry. (See Chart 15.) Chart 15: Percentage of Ancestry in Dakota County for 2000 Russian Table is Number of Individuals within each Ancestry... oss% Other for Dakota Coun Arab 11.86% Ances 1990 2000 o.ao°i° German 138,913 139,083 Sub-Saharan German Scandinavian 72,603 89,537 0.43% 2g,g2% Other European 151,112 165,275 American merican 3,544 10,196 2.16% Sub-Saharan 89 2,006 rab 1,102 1,858 Russian 2,288 3,077 Other Other 32,167 55,330 European 35.44% Scandinavian 19.20% IMPLICATIONS FOR THE COUNTY The County shows a large percentage growth over the past decade in the number of individuals with a bachelor's or graduate/professional degree. In addition, the County is also experiencing a slight increase in the proportion of individuals who have never been married. This shift in marital status and post-high school education could contribute to the increase in family and household income between 1990 and 2000, as discussed in the following social section. Overall, Dakota County demonstrates increasing numbers of residents who are foreign-born and who speak a language other than English in the home over the last decade. This growth can be attributed largely to the growth of the Mexican, Russian, and Somali communities, along with increased immigration from the Southeast Asian countries. This trend and the changing needs of the population are currently being studied by the .Human Services Advisory Council (HSAC). 9 ECONOMIC PROFILE (DP-3) The economic profile consists of data such as employment status, type of transportation used to commute to work and the mean travel time, occupation and industry related data, class of workers, household and family income, and poverty status data. 6. Employment status: - The Census defines labor force as the number of individuals aged 16 years old and older who are employed and unemployed at the time of the Census. Individuals not in the labor force include: students, parents who choose to stay home with children, retired workers, seasonal workers and people doing only minor unpaid family work (less than 15 hours during the reference week). The labor force population in the County as a whole has increased, but the proportion of individuals 16 years old and older in the labor force in 2000 decreased by 2 percentage points, from 80% of the population in 1990 to 78% of population in 2000. (See Chart 16.) This decrease could be a result of the increasing proportion of retired and elderly population. ¦ Farmington and Eagan had the largest proportion of individuals 16 years old and older in the labor force in 2000 (82%), followed by Apple Valley (81%). (See Chart 17.) ¦ West St. Paul has the greatest proportion of individuals not in the labor force in 2000 (34%), followed by Mendota Heights (32%). Chart 16: Employment Status, Proportion of the Population 16 years old and older 100% 80% 60% - - 40% 20% - 0% ~ Anoka Carver Dakota Hennepin Ramsey Scott Washington State ¦Proportion in labor force 90 79% 78% 80% 74% 71% 78% 76% ~ 70% ~ Proportion in labor force 00 77% 78% 78% 73~ 70% 79% ~ 75% 71 O Proportion not in labor force 90 21 % 22% 20% 26% 29% 22% 24% 30% OProportion not in labor force 00 23% 22% 22% 27% 30% 21% 25% 29% Chart 17: Employment Status, Proportion of the Population 16 years old and older, by City 100% 80% 70% - 60% - - - 50% - 40% - 30% 20 10% - - - - - 0 Inver Grove Mendota Apple Valley Burnsville Eagan Farmington Lakeville Rosemount S.St. Paul W.St. Paul I Heights Heights ¦ Proportion in labor force 90 84 % I 83 % 87 % 76 % 80 % 85 % 70% 84 % 69 % 65% O Proportion in labor force 00 81 % 80 % ~ 82 % 80 % i 78 % 82 % 68 % 80 % 72 % 66 ¦ Proportion not in labor force 90 16 % 17 % 13 % 24 % 20 % ! 15 % 30 % 16 % 31 % 35 _ - Proportion not in labor force 00 19 % 20 % 18 % 20 % 22 % 18 % 32 % 20 % 28 % 34 10 . 7. Type of Transportation used to Commute to Work and Mean Travel Time: The Census defines type of transportation as the principal mode of travel used to get from home to work. Mean travel time is the average travel time that is takes to get from home to work (one-way). Driving alone continues to be the most popular way Dakota County citizens get to work. In 2000, 83% of the labor force population drove to work alone, while 9% carpooled, 2% used public transportation, 5% either walked or worked at home, and the remaining 1% uses other means of transportation. (See Charts 18 and 19.) The mean travel time from home to work in the County increased in 2000 by 2.7 minutes (13%), from 20.1 minutes in 1990 to 22.8 minutes in 2000. (See Chart 20.) r Dakota County's proportion of individuals that drove alone increased 1% from 1990 to 2000, from 82% in 1990 to 83% in 2000. ¦ The percentage of the labor force that carpools to work declined from 11% in 1990 to 9% in 2000. ¦ Dakota County saw a no change in the proportion of the labor force that uses public transportation to commute to work from 1990 to 2000. Chart 18: Proportion of the Population 16 years old and older Commuting to Work by Driving Alone or Carpooling 100% 80% - - - 40% - 20% 0% Anoka Carver Dakota Hennepin Ramsey Scott Washington State ¦ Drove Alone 90 80% 77% 82% 74% 73% 80% 80% 74% ODrove Alone 00 82% 83% 83% 75% 75% 84% 84% 78% ¦ In Carpools 90 13% 12% 11 % 10% 11 % ~ 12% 13% 11 Oln Carpools 00 10% 9% 9% 9% 11% 9°0/ 9% 10% Chart 19: Commuting to Work by Public Transportation or Walking/Worked at Home, 7990 and 2000 12% 10% - - w m 8% ~ - v 6% - - c - - O 4% - - - 2% _ - - - 0% Anoka Carver Dakota Hennepin Ramsey Scott Washington -State •PublicTransportation90 3% 1% 2% 8% 7% 1% 1% 4% ~ OPublicTransportalion00 3% _ - 1% 2% 7% i 6% 1% 1% , 3% ¦WalkedlWorkedatHome90 4% 10% 4% 7% 7% 7% 5% 10% OWalkedlWorkedalHome00 4% 7%__ 5% 7% 7% 6% 5% 8% 11 Chart 20: Mean Travel Time to Work for the Population of 16 years old and older (minutes) State _ 21.9 12.1 Washington _x - 4.6 21.6 - = 2 .3 Scott - 21.6 Ramsey - 1'2 12.5 Hennepin - 22'2 ~ ~:!.5 Dakota = - - = _ 22.8 20.1 Carver - _ _ - - `@-~ 25.6 21.3 Anoka - _ ~ - - - 27.3 2 .0 0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 ¦ 1990 ¦ 2000 8. Incomes: Household income, as defined for the Census, includes the income of the householder and every person 15 years old and older in the household, whether related to the householder or not. Family income is calculated by taking the incomes of all members 15 years old and older in each family and summing them together to result in a single amount. Because many households consist of only one person, household income is usually less than family income. Dakota County's median household income, median family income, and per capita income all remained above state averages, although they increased at a lower rate between 1990 and 2000 than did the state. During 1990-2000, the US inflation rate increased by 32%. Over the same period, the median household income increased from $42,218 in 1990 to $61,863 in 2000, about a 47% increase. The County's 2000 median family income increased 51%, from $47,136 in 1990 to $71,062 in 2000. Per capita income increased 57%, from $17,237 in 1990 to $27,008 in 2000. (See Table 2.) ¦ The percentage of households earning incomes below $50,000 dropped by 25 percentage points between 1990 and 2000, whine the percentage of households that earn $75,000 or more increased 23 percentage points over the same period (i.e., not adjusted for inflation). (See Table 3.) ¦ .The percentage of Dakota County families earning incomes below $50,000 declined by 27 percentage points over the decade. Families earning incomes of $75,000 or more grew by 31 percentage points between 1990 and 2000 (i.e., not adjusted for inflation). (See Table 4.) Table 2: Median Income B Coun for 1990 and 2000. 1990 2000 % 1990 2000 % 1990 Per 2000 Per % HH HH Chan a Famil Famil Chan a Ca ita Ca ita Chan e Anoka $40,076 $57,754 44% $42,931 $64,261 50% $14,554 $23,297 60% Carver $39,188 $65,540 67% $43,554 $73,577 69% $16,116 $28,486 77% Dakota $42,218 $61,863 47% $47,136 $7:1,06/ 51% ~17,?37 $27,008 57% Hennepin $35,659 $51,711 45% $44,189 $65,985 49% $18,496 $28,789 56% Ramsey $32,043 $45,722 43% $39,926 $57,747 45% $15,645 $23,536 50% Scott $40,798 $66,612 63% $43,890 $72,212 65% $15,341 $26,418 72% Washington $44,12? $66,395 50°i~ $48,098 $74,576 55°i~ $17,435 $28,148 61% Minnesota $30,909 $47,111 52% $36,916 X56,574 54~% $14,389 $73,198 61% US Inflation 32% 32% 32% Rate 1 For income data by city please refer to Appendix 1. 12 Table 3: Dakota County Household Income Table 4: Dakota County Family Income Percents a of Total Percents a of Total 1990 2000 1990 2000 Less than $10,000 6% 3% Less than $10,000 3% 2% $10,000 t0 $14,999 4% 2% $10,000 t0 $14,999 3% 1% $15,000 to $24,999 12% 7% $15,000 to $24,999 9% 4% $25,000 to $34,999 16% 10% $25,000 to $34,999 14% 7% $35,000 to $49,999 24% 15% $35,000 to $49,999 25% 13% $50,000 to $74,999 25% 25% $50,000 to $74,999 29% 27% $75,000 to $99,999 8% 17% $75,000 to $99,999 9% 21% $100,000 to $149,999 4% 14% $100,000 to $149,999 4% 17% 150 000 or more 2% 6% 150 000 or more 2% 8% 9. Poverty status2: Poverty is determined by the Census using 48 thresholds that vary by family size, number of children and age of the householder. Families are considered to be living below the poverty level if their total family income is lower than the threshold appropriate for a family of that size and characteristic. (Please refer to Table 5 for an outline of the various thresholds.) Dakota County shows a decrease in the number of families living below the poverty level from 1990 to 2000. The County shows a lower proportion of families below the poverty line than the state in 2000. (See Chart 21.) , ¦ In looking at the percentage of families in each household type that live below the poverty level, Dakota County is among the lowest of the metro counties, with 2% of the family population living below poverty. ¦ While 2% of the family population was living below the poverty threshold in 2000, 11% of the families with a female householder population were living below poverty in 2000 (See Table 6.) ¦ In comparison to other metro counties, Dakota County had among the lowest rate of female householder families living under poverty (only Scott County is lower among the metro counties). ;'Table 5: Poverty Thresholds in 2000 by size of Fatuity and Number of Children Under 18 Years (Average of the 12 Monthty Values) w . _ 3~Number of people Number of related children - ~-----,~---------~,`~---------~-~-----~--g---_ - 1None Ane Two Three ~ Four -Five Six Seven Ei ht plus [One person under 65 vears [ $8,959 ~ ~ W . One person, 6` r- ~ i . , ors or older ~ 8,259: y (Two people, RI- uuJer 65 years 11,531 ~ $11,869 Two people, RP 65 years or i 10,409 , 11 824~I ~T ~ `si ,older f ~ ~ ~ _ _ w _ , - - Three people.,, 13 470'i 13,861 $13,874 ~ ~ ~ _'i _ _ ,FOUrpeople 17,761=j 18,052 17,463' $17,524 F ,Five people 21,419 { 21,731 i 21,065 , 20,550 ? $20,236 ~ _ s~~_j ~ _ _ _ j - ~ m ;Six people j 24,636 I 24,734 24,224 j 23,736 009: 22 579 _ jseven people ~ _~,3-~? 28,524 ~ 27,914 ' 27,4891 26,696 25 772 ' $24,758 ~ a ~ _ _ ~ Eight people 1, ~i i-t ' 31,984 31,408 ~ 30,904 ~ 30,188 29 279 'i 28,334 ~ $28,093 ~ ? w.....~ iNine or more people ~ ~0,1~0 , 38,322 37,813 i 37,385 36,682 35,716 ~ 34 841 ~ 34 625 # $33 291 Source: US Census z For Poverty data by City please refer to Appendix 2 13 Chart 21: Families Living Below the Poverty Level by Household Type, 1990 and 2000 18,000 16,000 14,000 12,000 m 10,000 m c 8,000 ~ 6,000 - - 4,000 - 2,000 - Anoka Carver Dakota Hennepin Ramsey Scott Washington State Families 1990 2,690 494 2,460 16,538 9,813 513 1,430 82,888 OFamilies2000 2,309 436 2,246 13,579 8,923 475 1,122 64,181 ®FemaleHH1990 1,717 216 1,397 11,147 5,951 264 811 39,519 OFemale HH 2000 1,273 188 1,288 7,570 5,094 203 576 31,233 Table 6: Percents e b Household T e Livin Below the Pove Level b Coun Female Householder Below Families Below Poverty Poverty 1990 2000 1990 2000 Woks 4% 3% 22% 12% Carver 4% 2% 19% 11% Dakota 3% 2% 16% 11% Hennepin 6% 5% 27% 17% Ramsey 8% 7% 28% 21% SCOtt 3% 2% 19% 9% Washington 4% 2% 19% 10% State 7% 5% 28% 19% IMPLICATIONS ON THE COUNTY Economic indicators for Dakota County appear strong, based on the Census data. The labor force continued to increase, although the share of the population in the labor force declined slightly, while the unemployment rate declined from 1990 to 2000. Median household and family income also increased since 1990, by 47% and 51% respectively. Dakota County's per capita income grew by 57%, from $17,237 in 1990 to $27,008 in 2000. (In a separate report, the Bureau of Economic Analysis ranked Dakota County 95th among the nations 3,110 counties in per capita personal income 2000.) The percentage of families living below the poverty level declined, from 3% of the total family population to 2% in 2000. Driving alone continues to be the most popular way Dakota County citizens get to work. In 2000, 83% of the labor force population drove to work alone, while 9% carpooled, 2% used public transportation, 5% either walked or worked at home, and the remaining 1% uses other means of transportation. This minimal percentage in the carpooling population could be attributed to individuals having different schedules. The mean travel time from home to work in the County increased in 2000 by 2.7 minutes, from 20.1 minutes in 1990 to 22.8 minutes in 2000. 14 HOUSING PROFILE (DP-4) Although an earliermemo touched on rental vacancy rates and occupancy, this profile includes data on housing topics such as number of units in the structure, year the housing structure is built, number of rooms, house heating fuel type, value, mortgage status and costs, and gross rent. 10. Housing Value: In the 2002 Indicators Report, the median value of a housing unit is $162,000, which is reported to us from the Southern Twin Cities Association of Realtors Regional Multiple Listing Service of Minnesota, Inc. The Southern Twins Cities Association of Realtors gathers this data based on the sale of new and existing homes in Dakota County, in which price reflects actual value. The US Census calculates its median housing value by asking each respondent to estimate how much the property would sell for if it were for sale. As reported by the Census in 2000, the median value of housing in the county is $152,400, about 25% higher than the state's 2000 median dollar value of $122,400. (Refer to Chart 22.) Overall, 67% of homes in Dakota County are valued between $100,000 to $199,999. (See Table 7.) As of March 2000, 53% of the homes in Dakota County were built in the past two decades. (See Table 8.) ¦ The median home value was highest in the cities of Sunfish Lake ($538,800), Lilydale ($245,500), and Mendota Heights ($209,000). ¦ The median value was lowest in Mendota ($101,300), South St. Paul ($110,300), and West St. Paul ($124,100). ¦ Compared to the other seven metro counties and the state, Dakota County's median home value ($152,400) is above the state median ($122,400) and below that in Carver County ($170,200). Chart 22: Median Value of Housing Units State 74,000 , 122,400 Washington ~ ~ ~ ~ n. ~ i Scott i.'_'0 Si0~~ f Ramsey ~J.b0u $12a.4nC 1 Hennepin i 1'i i00 ~5143.4U0 Dakota ~°S 90~? ,a 152, 400 Carver S 170,20f) Anoka ~ ~ a~31.3 j $20,000 $40,000 $60,000 $80,000 $100,000 $120,000 $140,000 $160,000 $180,000 ®2000 01990 15 Table 7: Percenta a of Homes Valued Within Each Cate o for 2000 Anoka Carver Dakota Henne in Ramse Scott Washin ton State Le55 than $50,000 0% 0% 0% 1% 2% 1% 0% 8% $50,000-$99,999 19% 9% 9% 17% 27% 8% 11% 27% $100,000-$149,999 50% 30% 39% 37% 38% 36% 35% 33% $150,000-$199,999 20% 25% 28% 20% 18% 28% 25% 17% $200,000-$299,999 9% 22% 18% 14% 10% 20% 19% 10% $300,000-$499,999 2% 12% 6% 7% 4% 6% 8% 4% $500,000-$999,999 0% 3% 1% 2% 1% 1% 2% 1% 1 000 000 or more 0% 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% Table 8: Number of Homes Built Within Each Year Cate o Anoka Carver Dakota Henne in Ramse Scott Washin ton State 1999-March 2000 3,553 1,513 4,358 5,742 1,488 2,749 3,709 48,172 1995-1998 10,462 3,516 14,802 17,381 5,128 5,182 9,864 136,340 1990-1994 12,817 3,869 18,318 21,728 7,900 4,186 11,618 148,759 1980-1989 23,680 4,592 33,741 70,232 23,778 6,429 13,877 299,068 1970-1979 22,179 4,104 28,084 78,434 34,125 5,539 14,126 375,503 1960-1969 16,763 2,027 16,335 65,487 28,648 2,628 7,540 247,952 1940-1959 15,158 2,065 11,536 108,311 47,968 2,489 6,592 382,877 1939 or earlier 3,479 3,197 6,576 101,509 57,413 2,407 6,309 427,275 11. Housing Cost: The US Census defines median monthly mortgage cost to be the sum of payments for mortgages, such as payments for the first and second mortgages, home equity, insurance on the properly, utilities and fuels. Median gross rent for the Census is calculated by taking the rent plus the estimated average monthly cost of utilities and-fuels for all units. In the 2002 Indicators Report, average monthly rent in the county is reported by number of bedroom units, based on a voluntary survey, which is reported to us by the County's Community Development Agency. Based on data collected by Dakota County's Community Development Agency, the average monthly rent fora 1- bedroom unit in 2000 for the county is $675; for 2-bedroom units $818; and for 3-bedroom units $1,076. The median monthly mortgage cost in Dakota County increased by 37% from $899 in 1990 to $1,231 in 2000. This change represents the second lowest increase over the decade when comparing the metro counties and the state. Ramsey County had the smallest rise in monthly mortgage cost (36%). Median monthly rent in the county increased from $542 to $722 (or 33%) over the past ten years, again the second lowest increase among the metro counties and state. Anoka County had the smallest increase in monthly rent (30%) during this timeframe. (See Chart 23.) 16 Chart 23: Median Monthly Mortgage and Gross Rent Cost, by County for 1990 and 2000 $1,600 $1,400 $1,200 $1,000 $800 $600 $400 - $200 - Moka Carver Dakota Hennepin Ramsey Scott Washington State 0 median mortgage($)90 $775 $879 $899 $833 $778 $877 $863 $724 pmedian mortgage($)00 $1,099 $1,382 $1,231 $1,166 $1,058 $1,276 $1,263 $1,044 ¦ medianrent($)90 $498 $442 $542 $487 $450 $475 $489 $422 ®medianrent($)00 $649 $637 $722 $654 $606 $655 $699 $566 ¦ % change median mortgage($) 42 % 57 % 37 % 40 % 36 % 45 % 46 % 44 change median rent 30 % 44 % 33 % 34 % 35 % 38 % 43 % 34 % IMPLICATIONS ON THE COUNTY The median monthly mortgage cost in the county rose by 37% between 1990 and 2000, from $899 per month to $1,231 per month. In addition, median gross rents in the county also increased over the same time frame. In 2000, the median gross rent in Dakota County was $722, up 33% from 1990 ($542). While there have been positive developments in the past year to increase the accessibility and affordability of housing in Dakota County, the increasing housing cost and rent continue to pose concerns. Cc: Susan Hoyt, Physical Development Dave Rooney, Community Services Tom Novak, Public Services & Revenue Jack Ditmore, Operations, Management, & Budget 17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o a o 0 0 0 d~ N ^ O .~-i ti ti N .-t ~ N d N M N O .-a ~ N ~ .Ni ~ N ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O ~ o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 y O Oi N .I~i ~ t~0 V' N .~-i ~ ~ Vl V O~ ~^y N N t0 M .~-i 3 ~ 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o a° o 0 0 0 o a a o u, o~~ N rv ~o a o M N rn~ of M~ ~ N N .W = O M 01 W O l0 M ~ ~ Y O 117 N l0 O~ n N M ~ N Q7 ~ .r .ti .ti N .~1 7 ~ .~-I ti N N ~ ~ ~ ~ R N ~ ~O M M N ~ ~ C 0 N ~ M l!1 M M N ti ~ ~ N p N d 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o d o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 111 M ti M N n N .-1 O G1 ~ M 00 ti M N O N y~ N y~~~ ~"I M o 0 o O O o 0 0 o i~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Z O M N L(l Ill ti N .^-r-r Q1 i~ ~ O O N ~ OJ N ~ N N OI = N = N o 0 0 0 0 0 ~ ~ o N o o e o 0 0 0 0 0 ~ N N l0 .~i ti N .~i~ N ~ Ol .~-i N ~ O ti N ~ .Ni ~ d rl d H 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 o e o 0 0 0 0 ~ 7 ~ 00 .N-i .M-I N .M-i ~ Ol ~ O t0 ~ N N O N ~ N ~ N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o T o 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 J OO1 7 V ti ti N O n ~O M J ~ O O n .M-i M N ..~-i n M Ol O1 N ei 0 o e o 0 0 0 0 o O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O G .ti N ~ O O N N W 00 O G .~-I M u'1 O N N N ~ N ~ N ~ ~ e o 0 0 0 0 0 o Y o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 J ~ M M Oi ~ N M n 7 J ~ N M n ti M M ^ ~ ~ Q1 Ol ri *'I M o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o i1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 L O M N n .~-1 ti Ill tp ti ~ = O N .~-I ~O O .~-I N N .0a ~ ~ ~ O N ~ O ~ = N = N O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 F ~ O n M ~ O V' 7 Lfl M yaj C7 O t0 M .Mi IN N N I~ M N N O y O1 F- y 01 N 'i H O H 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ o O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 V O $ M N V' 01 ti M O 01 N. a ~ O O M 01 ~ ~ N O N a ~ N iv' C N 0 0 0 0 0 o O o o L ~ o o 0 0 0 ~ o o ~ .~-I M. .Mi 01 M Ql 7 O a. ~ N N .~-i 01 M N N O V LL N LL H 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ O N N Vl 01 .~-i N W .^-i O C .-i .-r M ~O N N N O G1 R N ~ R N ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o ~ R o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ W ~ M M 01 .Ni t0 O 01 V' O W d1 N N O ..-I N M .~-I ~ ~ N M U ~ 9 M O s o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Vl 0 ~ M n .•~-i .I~i N l.-~i .N-{ tD O ~ N N LA OD .Mi N .Oi-I t~ I~ O ~ N W N C o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o C o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m ~ ll'1 ~ .N-I .~-I N N O ~ N 3 m ~ C M 1~ ti N M ti u'f N O ~"I Upp ei 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 }7 O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ O N N VI 00 ti ~ O n W T .--I .--i M N .ti V' R ~-'I O N O N N Y d O N N N G ' N ~ ' N d o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o V' d o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O _Oa. ~ M M 01 ti N f0rl ..-1 O N O C ~ N N i~ O N M .M-i n M o+ v a o+ a, rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn d rn rn rn rn m rn rn d o of o+ o+ o+ o+ a+ ~ y V o rn m o+ rn rn rn a; ~ V. O Ql Ol O~ O~ Ol Ol ~ L O Ol Ol O~ 01 Ol Ol ~ ° L O ti ~ ~ pl 7 O~ ° ~ O .~-i ~ C Ol 7 O~ d O N M d' i~ ~ !A ~ a O N M d' n Ol tR Q, 1A b4 Hf Hf tPr +Pr W M iPr fPr +Pr H4 i .,x-0 0 0 0 0 0 0°~ O' `A 0 0 0 0 0 0 ° _ ~ ~ °o °o °o °o o °o o °o d L O O O O O O O O N ~ O O O O O O ~ O O O O O O O O O pa', ~ vii o ~ vi vi o vl o ~ o ti vi Iri o IPl o~. Q H ~ ~ .n w ~ ~ ~ yr F ~ v~ +n ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r ~ dl Q1 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 t N t0 N N 00 .-r n n lff l!'1 t0 ~ . t0 t0 t0 I~ M M lA Lfl ~ O V n M n ~ M N ~ n O O 00 I~ 01 lD 00 O 01 N O .r O~ LA a Oi i~ O N Vl ~O N 01 M M N N M N N N ~ M N N N 0 0 N tR t~ e~ a!f tt? +tr tt~ tsr +tr tR aa+ V M M N O 7 t0 i0 0 .--i Ln 00 I~ N O N W 1~ N ~ M O N ~ .--i Lf1 t0 I~ tT N n 01 W n a ~ ~ OO .M-1 H M N .~-~M-~ H O Ot O~ ri v~ to yr +sr ~n- ~r ttr ur trr ttr d r0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Z W Ln I~ n M ~ l0 .--i 00 M I~ U ~ M u~ in ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 M n ~ 000 N VN' O ~ N .Oa 00 O M CIS O M ~D In O to Q~ i~ ~ O~ I~ O ~ 00 ~O N M W V' O C n ~ CO ~D i0 f~ 00 01 l0 lA t.f) N try v? ~sr isr t~n ur ttr +tf +n [t I~ N ~ N~ O 7 N ONi ~ ~O N O ~O N I~ ~f1 lA f~ CO ~ M O ti ff N ~D tD l0 M I~ 00 ~ lA V1 l!] 'V' V' 7 'd" l0 ~ M M Of ri fA iPr i!4 VT tPr fPr fA ifF tR {Pr O ~ O' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1. O M Ln O O .--i f~ ~ I~ 0 ~ ~ d' M - ~ I~ ~ O M M u1 'cr M C R O 0 O~ T rl = W ~ I~ O~ M W O V n 01 N ~ 3 N ~ ~ ~ t~D t0A n ~ 00 ~ ~ ~ ~ Vh e~4 iR yr ur yr to tsr +n ttr U .u Y 2 _ .-i O N 00 O O O ~ N M M 00 N 00 I~ N 01 01 00 L ~ O~ ~O l0 N M Ch LfI CT 01 l0 ~ 7 ~ ~ M M ~ ~ l0 [1' M M V ifT iA !fT +R V~ V~ +Pr iA if} fPr @' V C H ~ ~ a CT N ~ ~ _ ri ~ m ~ T C ~ ~N ~ X ~ ~ o f x c a ~ - rn ~ a, ~ o ~ o ~ w N c m~ v~~ ~ v~~ Y T y O) Q F Q 0] W ii ~ ~ J~ o' to Appendix 2 Chart 24: Families Living Below the Poverty Level by Household Type, 7990 and 2000 600 500 a 400 d .W 300 `o ~ 200 100 - Apple Valley Bumsvilte Eagan Farmington lover Grove Lakeville Mendota Rosemount S.St. Paul W.St. Paul Heights Heights ¦Families 1990 243 488 275 17 370 140 25 95 303 200 ~Families2000 140 586 317 44 240 173 43 88 218 188 ®Female HH 90 114 322 153 10 242 84 11 28 197 99 IO Female HH 00 84 306 150 35 141 141 23 38 132 126 Table-S0: Percenta e b Household`:. a Livin Below the Pove Level b Ci Families Below Poverty Female Householder Below Poverty 1990 2000 1990 2000 Apple Valley 3% 1% 13% 6% Burnsville 4% 4% 18% 13% Eagan 2% 2% 11% 7% Farmington 1% 1% 6% 12% Inver Grove Heights 6% 3% 26% 12% Lakeville 2% 1% 15% 14% Lilydale 0% 0% 0% 0% Mendota Heights 1% 1% 6% 9% Rosemount 4% 2% SO% 9% South St. Paul 6% 4% 20% 12% West St. Paul 4% 4% 12% 14% 21