HomeMy WebLinkAbout9A Group P Property ReportPhone 952.447.9800 / Fax 952.447.4245 / www.cityofpriorlake.com
4646 Dakota Street SE
Prior Lake, MN 55372
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: OCTOBER 10, 2016
AGENDA #:
PREPARED BY:
9A
FRANK BOYLES, CITY MANAGER
PRESENTED BY: FRANK BOYLES
AGENDA ITEM: CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A RESPONSE TO THE DEPARTMENT OF
THE INTERIOR, BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS REGARDING THE
PROPOSED FEE TO TRUST APPLICATION OF THE SMSC FOR 72.88
ACRES KNOWN AS GROUP P PROPERTIES
DISCUSSION: Introduction
The purpose of this agenda item is to request city council direction with
respect to the city’s response to the Bureau of Indian Affairs for an SMSC
Fee to Trust Request for 72.88 acres referred to as Group P.
History
The SMSC has been seeking to place lands it has purchased into trust with
the federal government. The Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community
(SMSC) has purchased the 72.88-acre Group P properties (see attached
graphic). A copy of the SMSC Application to the Bureau of Indian Affairs was
previously shared with members of the city council and is also attached
herewith.
The SMSC is seeking to place the seven Group P parcels in Trust with the
Federal Government. The proposed use of the properties is to provide a
residential subdivision for community members on about 3/4s of the property
except that on the east side where the property is closest to County Road
21 construct a Gas Station/convenience store.
On July 26, 2016, the United States Department of the Interior, Bureau of
Indian Affairs (BIA) sent a “Notice of (non-gaming) Land Acquisition
Application” to Scott County, Minnesota Department of Transportation, the
Governor’s Office, and the SMSC (see attached). On August 05, 2016, I sent
a letter requesting a 30-day extension which the BIA accepted on August 16,
2016 confirming that our response would be due on September 27, 2016.
The Council’s Fee to Trust Work Group Consisting of Mayor Hedberg,
Councilor Keeney, City Attorney Schwarzhoff and myself have met once on
this topic. The work group discussed the application noting that this property
includes all or a portion of the North Berens Road right of way depending
upon where it is built. North Berens Road is to be a key collector street
connecting McKenna Road to County Road 21.
The work group asked that I be in contact with Tribal Administrator Bill
Rudnicki on this subject to affirm whether it is the intent of the SMSC to build
North Berens Road through this property to County Road 21.
2
In order to provide the time for additional staff discussions on this subject,
the BIA with the support of the BIA Staff approved an additional 30-day
extension to October 27, 2016. However, at its last meeting the council
asked that the staff place this item on the October 10 agenda.
This week the two staffs agreed that the SMSC would build North Berens
Road from Shepherd’s Path to County Road 21 as a collector street. The
staff’s also agreed that city watermain under this segment of roadway (for
looping purposes) would be the city’s responsibility.
The segment of North Beren’s Road from McKenna Road to Shepherd’s
Path already exists as a rural section. Since private property abuts the road
on the south and SMSC Land on the north the staff’s agreed that the cost of
the new collector street road would be equally split. We also concurred that
maintenance of the road would be undertaken by a maintenance agreement
entered into by the two staff’s at the time of construction.
To document these things the Fee to Trust Application was amended. The
business council reviewed and approved the language. The SMSC Staff
then sent to amended agreement to the BIA.
Current Circumstances
Upon notification of the city of a fee to trust request, the BIA requests the
following information:
This application for Fee to Trust involves seven parcels: 259220010,
259220011, 259220012, 259220020, 259220030, 259220031, and
259220034.
The subject parcels are adjacent to and contiguous to existing SMSC lands
(a precondition for placing land into Trust).
The specific information sought by the BIA includes:
Annual amount of property taxes currently levied by the City of
Prior Lake on the subject parcels is as follows:
City Property Taxes on Group P Properties
Parcel # 2014 2015 2016
259220010 $829.87 $1,159.58 $1,334.01
259220011 $1,207.00 $1,305.77 $1,486.75
259220012 $1,037.33 $1,159.58 $1,334.01
259220020 $1,164.58 $1,272.50 $1,441.38
259220030 $1,659.74 $1,855.32 $2,134.42
259220031 $1,101.57 $1,251.07 $1,407.83
259220034 $408.18 $570.67 $656.31
$7,408.27 $8,574.49 $9,794.71
3
Any special assessments that are currently assessed against
the property:
Parcels 259220011, 259220020 and 259220031 each have $11
assessments against them for 2014, 2015 and 2016 for solid waste
fees.
Any governmental services that are currently provided to the
property by your organization.
Fire (shared with Mdewakanton Fire) and Police.
If subject to zoning, how the intended use is consistent or
inconsistent with the zoning.
The land is guided in the City’s 2030 Comprehensive Plan as R-LD
(urban low density) which anticipates 0-4 dwelling units per acre. The
zoning is agricultural.
Conclusion
The staff has included three possible letters to the BIA for city council
consideration. The first letter provides the requested information and
expresses support for the North Berens Road language incorporated in the
revised agreement. The second and third letters are alterations of the
“Meadows” letters. One includes the language that the city opposes and the
other does not. The council should determine the content of the letter it
wishes to send to the BIA and direct staff to prepare the final draft response.
ISSUES: The city council’s Fee to Trust Work Group, in its discussion identified that
the single biggest issue associated with this property going into trust is to
assure that all portions of North Berens Road are constructed and
maintained.
North Berens Road is a collector street which is located on the southerly
property line of the Group P properties. The roadway has been constructed
to a rural standard from McKenna Road on the west to Shepherd’s Path on
the east. With the development of the Group P properties the SMSC will
want to extend this roadway from west to east to an urban section state
standard. They will want to accomplish this both to provide access and
egress to the County Road 21/ North Berens Road intersection and their
residential subdivision. North Berens Road will also be the major
access/egress to the convenience store/gas station which will be a
significant community investment.
If the city council believes that other issues should be addressed in the letter
to the BIA, they should be identified.
FINANCIAL
IMPACT:
Depending upon City Council action.
4
ALTERNATIVES: 1) Motion and second to approve the city’s response regarding the Group
P Fee to Trust Request which addresses North Berens Road
construction and maintenance.
2) Motion and second to approve the city’s response modeled after the
Meadows letter without the statement of opposition.
3) Motion and second to approve the city’s response modeled after the
Meadows letter with the statement of opposition.
4) Take other action as appropriate.
RECOMMENDED
MOTION:
Alternative 1.
Phone 952.447.9800 / Fax 952.447.4245 / www.cityofpriorlake.com
4646 Dakota Street SE
Prior Lake, MN 55372
October _____, 2016
United States Department of the Interior
Bureau of Indian Affairs
Midwest Regional Office
Attn: Regional Director
5600 West American Boulevard, Suite 500
Bloomington, Minnesota 55437
Re: Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community Fee to Trust Application – Group P
Dear Ms. Rosen:
Pursuant to the Notice of Non-Gaming Land Acquisition Application (“Application”) for the Group
P Parcels dated July 26, 2016, the 30-day extension invoked by the City on August 5, 2016, and
the 30-day extension mutually agreed upon among the City, the SMSC and the BIA, the City of
Prior Lake submits the following response no later than October 27, 2016:
I. INFORMATION REQUESTED BY BIA:
In answer to specific questions asked by the BIA in the notice dated July 26, 2016:
a. Property Taxes. The property taxes levied by the City of Prior Lake on these parcels for
2014, 2015, and 2016:
Parcel # 2014 2015 2016
259220010 $829.87 $1,159.58 $1,334.01
259220011 $1,207.00 $1,305.77 $1,486.75
259220012 $1,037.33 $1,159.58 $1,334.01
259220020 $1,164.58 $1,272.50 $1,441.38
259220030 $1,659.74 $1,855.32 $2,134.42
259220031 $1,101.57 $1,251.07 $1,407.83
259220034 $408.18 $570.67 $656.31
$7,408.27 $8,574.49 $9,794.71
b. Assessments. There are no existing assessments on four of these Properties. Three of
the properties, 259220011, 259220020, and 259220031, have assessments for
_______________ which total $______________.
c. Services. The City provides all police services and joint powers assistance for fire
services to this property.
d. Zoning. The land is guided in the City’s 2030 Comprehensive Plan as R-LD which means
low density residential from 0-4 units per acre. This is the guiding typically used for land
which does not and may never be served by public utilities. The zoning for all parcels is
agricultural.
Regional Director, Midwest Regional Office
U.S. Dept. of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs
October _____, 2016
Page 2
II. POSITION WITH RESPECT TO THIS APPLICATION:
The Group P parcels contain an important collector road for both the City and the SMSC when
the parcel is developed for residential and convenience store purposes. North Berens Road is
already half constructed on the south property line of these parcels. The remainder of the road
including its intersection with County Road 21 is a critical piece of the transportation system.
The SMSC has indicated that it will reserve permanent public right-of-way over the North Berens
Road. In addition, the SMSC revised its Application to state that the SMSC will construct and pay
for North Berens Road from Shepherd’s Path to County Road 21 as a collector street (with the
exception of any City pipes which the City would pay for) when the property develops. The revised
language also states that the segment of North Berens Road from Shepherd’s Path westerly to
McKenna Road which is already constructed to an urban section, would be rebuilt on a 50-50 cost
share basis between the SMSC and the City. Maintenance will be addressed by an agreement
negotiated in the future.
The City requests that the BIA ensure that the SMSC reserves permanent public right-of-way over
North Berens Road and constructs the roadway as it has commited to do in its Application.
Thank you for consideration of our comments and please contact me if there are any questions.
Sincerely,
Kenneth L. Hedberg
Mayor, City of Prior Lake
cc: City Council Members
Business Council Members
Tribal Administrator
Phone 952.447.9800 / Fax 952.447.4245 / www.cityofpriorlake.com
4646 Dakota Street SE
Prior Lake, MN 55372
October _____, 2016
United States Department of the Interior
Bureau of Indian Affairs
Midwest Regional Office
Attn: Regional Director
5600 West American Boulevard, Suite 500
Bloomington, Minnesota 55437
Re: Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community Fee to Trust Application – Group P
Dear Ms. Rosen:
Pursuant to the Notice of Non-Gaming Land Acquisition Application (“Application”) for the Group
P Parcels dated July 26, 2016, the 30-day extension invoked by the City on August 5, 2016, and
the 30-day extension mutually agreed upon among the City, the SMSC and the BIA, the City of
Prior Lake submits the following response no later than October 27, 2016:
I. INFORMATION REQUESTED BY BIA:
In answer to specific questions asked by the BIA in the notice dated July 26, 2016:
a. Property Taxes. The property taxes levied by the City of Prior Lake on these parcels for
2014, 2015, and 2016:
Parcel # 2014 2015 2016
259220010 $829.87 $1,159.58 $1,334.01
259220011 $1,207.00 $1,305.77 $1,486.75
259220012 $1,037.33 $1,159.58 $1,334.01
259220020 $1,164.58 $1,272.50 $1,441.38
259220030 $1,659.74 $1,855.32 $2,134.42
259220031 $1,101.57 $1,251.07 $1,407.83
259220034 $408.18 $570.67 $656.31
$7,408.27 $8,574.49 $9,794.71
b. Assessments. There are no existing assessments on four of these parcels. Three of the
parcels, 259220011, 259220020, and 259220031, have assessments for
_______________ which total $______________.
c. Services. The City provides all police services and joint powers assistance for fire
services to this property.
d. Zoning. The land is guided in the City’s 2030 Comprehensive Plan as R-LD which means
low density residential from 0-4 units per acre. This is the guiding typically used for land
which does not and may never be served by public utilities. The zoning for all parcels is
agricultural.
Regional Director, Midwest Regional Office
U.S. Dept. of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs
October _____, 2016
Page 2
II. POSITION WITH RESPECT TO THIS APPLICATION:
a. North Berens Road. The Group P parcels (“Property”) contain an important collector road
for both the City and the SMSC when the Property is developed. The remainder of the
road including its intersection with County Road 21 is a critical piece of the transportation
system.
The SMSC has indicated that it will reserve permanent public right-of-way over North
Berens Road. In addition, the SMSC revised its Application to state that the SMSC will
construct and pay for North Berens Road from Shepherd’s Path to County Road 21 as a
collector street (with the exception of any City pipes which the City would pay for) when
the Property develops. The revised language also states that the segment of North
Berens Road from Shepherd’s Path westerly to McKenna Road which is already
constructed to an urban section, would be rebuilt on a 50-50 cost share basis between the
SMSC and the City. Maintenance will be addressed by an agreement negotiated in the
future.
The City requests that the BIA ensure that the SMSC reserves permanent public right-of-
way over North Berens Road and constructs the roadway as it has commited to do in its
Application.
b. Need for Property. The Property consists of undeveloped land which the SMSC intends
to develop into residential housing and a convenience store. The SMSC has not
established that the property satisfies needs that make it appropriate for transfer. The
SMSC has already transferred a significant amount of property into trust for residential
housing. In the case of the Group P properties the SMSC has indicated that it has no
intent to develop the residential property within the next 5 years acknoweding that the
Property is not needed.
In addition, allowing the SMSC to transfer a parcel intended for development as a
convenience store establishes an unfair economic advantage. The SMSC is one of the
most economically successful tribes in the Country and has already shown that it is able
to operate many successful businesses. If the SMSC is permitted to transfer additional
commercial proeprties into trust it will no longer be required to pay property taxes or
comply with State or local regulations. The transfer of the parcels for commercial use into
trust improves the SMSC’s competitive position and raises the competitive disadvantages
of similarly situated private enterprises.
c. Impact on City and School District. The removal of the Property from the City tax rolls is
significant. Each time the SMSC transfers property to trust the tax burden is shifted from
the SMSC onto the other residents of the City. This is despite the fact that the SMSC
continues to benefit from many of the services provided by the City including roads,
emergency services, and parks. This transfer does not reduce the services the City must
provide but does transfer the burden onto other residents.
In addition, adding significant additional housing which will not be subject to local taxes
will create a major burden on the local school dsitrcit. As with the City, the school will be
required to provide services for the additional residential properties but will be prohibited
from collecting any taxes from them. The school will be forced to provide additional
Regional Director, Midwest Regional Office
U.S. Dept. of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs
October _____, 2016
Page 3
services with less funding, again, shifting th financial burden onto other residents of the
school district.
d. Jurisdictional Problems. The transfer of the Property into trust also creates jurisdictional
problems. The SMSC itself notes that one of the advantages to the transfer will be to
avoid State and local regulations relating to improvements. This means that the SMSC
would be able to avoid the health and safety regulations that exist for the protection of all
residents.
In addition, the City is under the jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Council in regards to land
use planning and sewer and water provision. The regulations imposed by the Metropolitan
Council are meant to ensure safe and healthy development. The Metropolitan Council
imposes regulations relating to land use density, requiring that the City ensure certain
population densities are met. The Metropolitan Council also imposes sewer and water
regulations, requiring the City to serve certain areas of the City by certain dates. In
addition, the Metropolitan Council has the authority to approve or reject the City’s
comprehensive plan. Transferring the Property into trust will make it practically impossible
for the City to comply with the regional regulations.
e. Cumulative Impact. The SMSC has actively been purchasing land within and surrounding
the City of Prior Lake and transferring that property to trust. In addition, the SMSC has
expressed an intent to continue transferring all of the property it owns into trust. The
cumulative effect of multiple transfers of property within and surrounding the City into trust
is significant. The SMSC has indicated that it currently owns approximately 4122 acres in
the Prior Lake / Shakopee area and that 1844 of those acres are held in trust. It is clear
that one day all 4000 acres will be held in trust. In Prior Lake, the amount is 1886 total
acres owned of which 1047 acres are in trust. The numerous transfers have created a
significant impact on the City in regards to several of the factors to be considered for fee
to trust transfers. The transfers have had a significant impact on the City’s tax base,
shifting the tax burden onto other residents. In addition, the extensiveness of the transfers
is creating jurisdictional conflicts in which the City is unable to comply with regional
regulations and unable to ensure safe and orderly development. The continuation of trust
transfers includes a substantial amount of property and will have an extensive impact on
the City’s planning, land use, tax revenue, operations and ability to provide necessary
services. The City requests that the BIA consider the cumulative impact of trust transfers
on the City of Prior Lake.
Thank you for consideration of our comments and please contact me if there are any questions.
Sincerely,
Kenneth L. Hedberg
Mayor, City of Prior Lake
cc: City Council Members
Business Council Members
Tribal Administrator
Phone 952.447.9800 / Fax 952.447.4245 / www.cityofpriorlake.com
4646 Dakota Street SE
Prior Lake, MN 55372
October _____, 2016
United States Department of the Interior
Bureau of Indian Affairs
Midwest Regional Office
Attn: Regional Director
5600 West American Boulevard, Suite 500
Bloomington, Minnesota 55437
Re: Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community Fee to Trust Application – Group P
Dear Ms. Rosen:
Pursuant to the Notice of Non-Gaming Land Acquisition Application (“Application”) for the Group
P Parcels dated July 26, 2016, the 30-day extension invoked by the City on August 5, 2016, and
the 30-day extension mutually agreed upon among the City, the SMSC and the BIA, the City of
Prior Lake submits the following response no later than October 27, 2016:
I. INFORMATION REQUESTED BY BIA:
In answer to specific questions asked by the BIA in the notice dated July 26, 2016:
a. Property Taxes. The property taxes levied by the City of Prior Lake on these parcels for
2014, 2015, and 2016:
Parcel # 2014 2015 2016
259220010 $829.87 $1,159.58 $1,334.01
259220011 $1,207.00 $1,305.77 $1,486.75
259220012 $1,037.33 $1,159.58 $1,334.01
259220020 $1,164.58 $1,272.50 $1,441.38
259220030 $1,659.74 $1,855.32 $2,134.42
259220031 $1,101.57 $1,251.07 $1,407.83
259220034 $408.18 $570.67 $656.31
$7,408.27 $8,574.49 $9,794.71
b. Assessments. There are no existing assessments on four of these parcels. Three of the
parcels, 259220011, 259220020, and 259220031, have assessments for
_______________ which total $______________.
c. Services. The City provides all police services and joint powers assistance for fire
services to this property.
d. Zoning. The land is guided in the City’s 2030 Comprehensive Plan as R-LD which means
low density residential from 0-4 units per acre. This is the guiding typically used for land
which does not and may never be served by public utilities. The zoning for all parcels is
agricultural.
Regional Director, Midwest Regional Office
U.S. Dept. of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs
October _____, 2016
Page 2
II. POSITION WITH RESPECT TO THIS APPLICATION:
The City objects to the transfer of this Property into trust for the following reasons:
a. North Berens Road. The Group P parcels (“Property”) contain an important collector road
for both the City and the SMSC when the Property is developed. The remainder of the
road including its intersection with County Road 21 is a critical piece of the transportation
system.
Although the SMSC has indicated in a revised application that it will it will reserve
permanent public right-of-way over North Berens Road and will construct and pay for
North Berens Road from Shepherd’s Path to County Road 21 as a collector street, the
City has no assurances that this will actually occur. If the SMSC elects not to reserve for
public use and construct North Berens Road the City will have a significant gap in its
infrasctrucutre.
b. Need for Property. The Property consists of undeveloped land which the SMSC intends
to develop into residential housing and a convenience store. The SMSC has not
established that the property satisfies needs that make it appropriate for transfer. The
SMSC has already transferred a significant amount of property into trust for residential
housing. In the case of the Group P properties the SMSC has indicated that it has no
intent to develop the residential property within the next 5 years acknoweding that the
Property is not needed.
In addition, allowing the SMSC to transfer a parcel intended for development as a
convenience store establishes an unfair economic advantage. The SMSC is one of the
most economically successful tribes in the Country and has already shown that it is able
to operate many successful businesses. If the SMSC is permitted to transfer additional
commercial proeprties into trust it will no longer be required to pay property taxes or
comply with State or local regulations. The transfer of the parcels for commercial use into
trust improves the SMSC’s competitive position and raises the competitive disadvantages
of similarly situated private enterprises.
c. Impact on City and School District. The removal of the Property from the City tax rolls is
significant. Each time the SMSC transfers property to trust the tax burden is shifted from
the SMSC onto the other residents of the City. This is despite the fact that the SMSC
continues to benefit from many of the services provided by the City in cluding roads,
emergency services, and parks. This transfer does not reduce the services the City must
provide but does transfer the burden onto other residents.
In addition, adding significant additional housing which will not be subject to local taxes
will create a major burden on the local school dsitrcit. As with the City, the school will be
required to provide services for the additional residential properties but will be prohibited
from collecting any taxes from them. The school will be forced to provide additional
services with less funding, again, shifting th financial burden onto other residents of the
school district.
d. Jurisdictional Problems. The transfer of the Property into trust also creates jurisdictional
problems. The SMSC itself notes that one of the advantages to the transfer will be to
Regional Director, Midwest Regional Office
U.S. Dept. of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs
October _____, 2016
Page 3
avoid State and local regulations relating to improvements. This means that the SMSC
would be able to avoid the health and safety regulations that exist for the protection of all
residents.
In addition, the City is under the jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Council in regards to land
use planning and sewer and water provision. The regulations imposed by the Metropolitan
Council are meant to ensure safe and healthy development. The Metropolitan Coun cil
imposes regulations relating to land use density, requiring that the City ensure certain
population densities are met. The Metropolitan Council also imposes sewer and water
regulations, requiring the City to serve certain areas of the City by certain dates. In
addition, the Metropolitan Council has the authority to approve or reject the City’s
comprehensive plan. Transferring the Property into trust will make it practically impossible
for the City to comply with the regional regulations.
e. Cumulative Impact. The SMSC has actively been purchasing land within and surrounding
the City of Prior Lake and transferring that property to trust. In addition, the SMSC has
expressed an intent to continue transferring all of the property it owns into tru st. The
cumulative effect of multiple transfers of property within and surrounding the City into trust
is significant. The SMSC has indicated that it currently owns approximately 4122 acres in
the Prior Lake / Shakopee area and that 1844 of those acres are held in trust. It is clear
that one day all 4000 acres will be held in trust. In Prior Lake, the amount is 1886 total
acres owned of which 1047 acres are in trust. The numerous transfers have created a
significant impact on the City in regards to several of the factors to be considered for fee
to trust transfers. The transfers have had a significant impact on the City’s tax base,
shifting the tax burden onto other residents. In addition, the extensiveness of the transfers
is creating jurisdictional conflicts in which the City is unable to comply with regional
regulations and unable to ensure safe and orderly development. The continuation of trust
transfers includes a substantial amount of property and will have an extensive impact on
the City’s planning, land use, tax revenue, operations and ability to provide necessary
services. The City requests that the BIA consider the cumulative impact of trust transfers
on the City of Prior Lake.
Thank you for consideration of our comments and please contact me if there are any questions.
Sincerely,
Kenneth L. Hedberg
Mayor, City of Prior Lake
cc: City Council Members
Business Council Members
Tribal Administrator
WRITTEN REQUEST FOR
TRUST ACQUISITION
GROUP P
The elected officials of the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community, acting under authority
delegated by the General Council, hereby submit this written request to the United States,
Secretary of the Interior, to acquire fee land owned by the Community to be held in trust for
the Community and to declare such trust land a part of the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux
Community’s Reservation.
SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY
2330 SIOUX TRAIL NW
PRIOR LAKE, MN 55372
October 5, 2016
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTENT OF APPLICATION ......................................................................................... 1
1.1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 1
1.2. REQUEST FOR TRUST ACQUISITION ............................................................................. 1
2. DESCRIPTION OF LAND ............................................................................................. 1
2.1. TABLE 1, GROUP P PARCELS INFORMATION ................................................................. 1
3. STATUTORY AUTHORITY FOR THE ACQUISITION .......................................... 2
3.1. STATUTORY AUTHORITY ............................................................................................. 2
4. NEED OF THE TRIBE FOR THE ADDITIONAL LAND ......................................... 3
4.1. INDIAN HOUSING ......................................................................................................... 3
4.2. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT .......................................................................................... 3
4.3. SELF-DETERMINATION ................................................................................................. 3
5. PURPOSE FOR WHICH THE LAND WILL BE USED ............................................. 4
5.1. INDIAN HOUSING ......................................................................................................... 4
5.2. ECONOMIC DIVERSIFICATION ...................................................................................... 5
5.3. SELF-DETERMINATION AND SOVEREIGNTY .................................................................. 5
6. IMPACT ON THE STATE AND ITS POLITICAL SUBDIVISIONS RESULTING
FROM THE REMOVAL OF THE LAND FROM THE TAX ROLLS .............................. 7
6.1. TABLE 2, PARCELS PROPERTY TAX BREAKDOWN ....................................................... 7
6.2. TABLE 3, PERCENT OF PARCELS PROPERTY TAXES ON COUNTY, CITY, AND SCHOOL . 8
6.3. TABLE 4, INTER-GOVERNMENTAL AID ........................................................................ 9
6.4. TABLE 5, TRIBAL CONTRIBUTIONS TO SCOTT COUNTY ECONOMY (IN MILLIONS) ..... 10
7. JURISDICTIONAL PROBLEMS AND POTENTIAL CONFLICTS OF LAND
USE 10
8. ADDITIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES THAT MAY ACCRUE TO THE BUREAU
OF INDIAN AFFAIRS ........................................................................................................... 10
9. INFORMATION REGARDING 516 DM 6, APPENDIX 4, NATIONAL
ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT AND 602 DM 2, LAND ACQUISITIONS:
HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES DETERMINATIONS ....................................................... 11
9.1. NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT ................................................................ 11
9.2. PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT ........................................................... 11
9.3. PHASE I ARCHEOLOGICAL SURVEY ........................................................................... 11
9.4. ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT ....................................................................................... 12
10. REFERENCES ........................................................................................................... 12
11. APPENDIX A, BUSINESS AND GENERAL COUNCIL RESOLUTIONS ........ 13
12. APPENDIX B, REAL ESATE DOCUMENTS ........................................................ 13
12.1. COUNTY PROPERTY CARDS ....................................................................................... 13
12.2. PROPERTY TAX STATEMENTS (2016, 2014) ............................................................... 13
12.3. OWNERSHIP DOCUMENTS ........................................................................................... 13
12.3.1. Ahlman Warranty Deed, A922956 12/10/2012 ................................................ 13
12.3.2. Kes Warranty Deed, 922955 12/10/2012 ......................................................... 13
12.3.3. Kinney Seven Trustee’s Deed, A922952 12/10/2012 ....................................... 13
12.3.4. McDonald Trustee’s Deed, A922954 12/10/2012 ............................................ 13
12.3.5. McKenna Warranty Deed, A924810 12/31/2012 ............................................. 13
12.3.6. MorehouseWarranty Deed, A922957 12/10/2012 ............................................ 13
12.4. ALTA SURVEY 05/24/2016....................................................................................... 13
12.5. TITLE COMMITMENT ORTE 742886, 03/30/2016 ..................................................... 13
12.6. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS ......................................................................................... 13
12.6.1. Doc 86394, 08/03/1956, Electrical Easement (Kinney) ................................... 13
12.6.2. Doc 86394, 06/29/1956, Electrical Easement (McKenna & Morehouse) ........ 13
12.6.3. Doc 151047, 07/23/1976, Telephone Easement (McDonald, McKenna,
Morehouse) ....................................................................................................................... 13
12.6.4. Doc 177688, ROW Easement, (McKenna) ....................................................... 13
12.6.5. Doc 177927, 10/01/1980, Electrical Easement (Morehouse) .......................... 13
12.6.6. Doc 507044, 06/05/2001, Roadway Easement (McKenna) .............................. 13
12.6.7. Doc 997944, 03/15/2016, Roadway Easement (Alhman, Kinney, McDonald,
McKenna, Morehouse). .................................................................................................... 13
12.6.8. Disclaimer, McKenna property renter, 06/09/2016 ......................................... 13
12.6.9. Disclaimer, Morehouse property renter, 06/09/2016 ....................................... 13
12.7. DRAFT TRUST WARRANTY DEED .............................................................................. 13
13. APPENDIX C, ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE DOCUMENTS ............... 14
13.1. NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT, DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT,
ATTACHED AS A SEPARATE DOCUMENT .................................................................................. 14
13.2. PHASE 1 ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENTS (2012) ............................................. 14
13.3. PHASE 1 ARCHEOLOGICAL SURVEYS (2013) ............................................................. 14
13.4. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES LETTER, 05/02/2016 ............................................... 14
13.5. ALHMAN WELL RECORD ........................................................................................... 14
13.6. MCKENNA / KINNEY OBSERVATION WELLS 12/29/2005 .......................................... 14
14. PLATES ....................................................................................................................... 14
14.1. PLATE 1, REGIONAL LOCATION MAP ......................................................................... 14
14.2. PLATE 2, SUBJECT PARCEL LOCATION MAP .............................................................. 14
14.3. PLATE 3, SITE CONCEPT ............................................................................................ 14
14.4. PLATE 4, CITY OF PRIOR LAKE 2030 MAP ................................................................. 14
1
1. INTENT OF APPLICATION
1.1. Introduction
This document constitutes a formal written request by the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux
Community of Minnesota (“the Tribe”) for the United States of America to acquire 73.59 acres
of land in trust for the Tribe and declare it part of the reservation. The Tribe is a federally
recognized Indian Tribe organized under Section 16 of the Indian Reorganization Act. Fed.
Reg. 5019, 5023 (Jan. 29, 2016).
1.2. Request for Trust Acquisition
The Business Council of the Tribe, acting under the authority delegated by the General
Council (Appendix A), hereby requests the Secretary of the Interior to acquire approximately
73.59 acres (“Group P”) in trust for the Tribe and declare it part of its reservation.
The Tribe owns Group P in fee simple absolute. The parcels are adjacent and contiguous
to existing trust and reservation lands (Plates 1 and 2). The Tribe’s written request is an on-
reservation acquisition under 25 CFR Part 151.
2. DESCRIPTION OF LAND 1
Group P is located west of Eagle Creek Avenue (CSAH 21) and consists of seven parcels
located in Section 22, Township 115 North, Range 22 West of the Fifth Principal Meridian
(Table 1), in the City of Prior Lake (“the City”), within Scott County (“the County”), and the
State of Minnesota. The legal description is shown on both the ALTA Land Title Survey dated
May 24, 2016 and the draft trust warranty deed (Appendix B).
2.1. Table 1, Group P parcels information
Parcel Name Acres PID Municipality
Alhman 10.00 259220031 Prior Lake
Kes 4.92 259220034 Prior Lake
Kinney 20 259220030 Prior Lake
McDonald 10 259220012 Prior Lake
McKenna 9.69
8.98
259220010,
259220020
Prior Lake
Morehouse 10 259220011 Prior Lake
Total: 73.59
Data source: County property tax statements, Tribal GIS
1 25 C.F.R. § 151.9
2
The current Group P lies approximately four miles southeast of the historic Sakpe Village
of Mdewakanton Dakota along Minnesota River. Group P contains agricultural fields,
disturbed natural areas, rural residences, and an abandoned small-scale gravel mine. Adjacent
land contains the following:
North: Tribal trust residential and natural area
South: City senior assisted living, church, and recreation center, open land
East: County State Aid Highway 21, Electrical Substation
West: Tribal trust residential area
3. STATUTORY AUTHORITY FOR THE ACQUISITION 2
3.1. Statutory Authority
The Supreme Court recently confirmed that the fee to trust process “provides the proper
avenue” for an Indian Tribe “to reestablish sovereign authority over territory.” City of Sherrill v.
Oneida Indian Nation, 125 S.Ct. 1478, 1494 (2005). Section 5 of the IRA provides clear
statutory authority for acquisitions of land in trust for Indian Tribes. “Acquisition of land in trust
for Indian Tribes and individuals is authorized by the Indian Reorganization Act, 25 U.S.C. §
465.” Georgiana Kautz v. Portland Area Director, BIA, 19 IBIA 305, 308 (1991). Under the
IRA, Indian Tribes can purchase land and request the Secretary of the Interior to place the land in
trust pursuant to §465. Chase v. McMasters, 573 F.2d 1011, 1015-16 (8th Cir. 1978); City of
Sault Ste. Marie, Mich. v. Andrus, 532 F. Supp. 157, 162 (D.D.C. 1980). Section 5 of the IRA,
25 U.S.C § 465, provides the statutory authority for this acquisition.
Regulations implementing § 465 are found at 25 C.F.R. Part 151. McAlpine v. United
States, 112 F.3d 1429, 1431 (10th Cir. 1997). While 25 U.S.C. § 465 vests the Secretary with
discretion to make trust acquisition determinations, that discretion is guided by the implementing
regulations and requires that the Secretary’s “final decision should be reasonable in view of its
overall analysis of the factors listed in section 151.10.” Ross v. Acting Muskogee Area Director,
BIA, 18 IBIA 31, 34 (1989); McAlpine v. Muskogee Area Director, BIA, 19 IBIA 2, 6 (1990).
This request is within the scope of the regulations governing trust acquisitions by the
United States, and fulfills the policy as articulated at 25 C.F.R. § 151.3(a)(1)-(3). First, statutory
authorization for the acquisition is found at 25 U.S.C. § 465, et seq., thus satisfying the
2 25 C.F.R. § 151.10 (a)
3
requirement of 25 C.F.R. § 151.3. Second, in accordance with 25 C.F.R. § 151.3(a) (1), the
Tribe owns this parcel in fee simple absolute. Third, as set forth in 25 C.F.R. § 151.3(a)(2), this
parcel is adjacent and contiguous to the Tribe’s reservation. Fourth, the Tribe’s request is
necessary to facilitate self-determination and provide Indian housing. Trust acquisition of the
subject parcels are within the intended scope of § 465 of the IRA 3.
4. NEED OF THE TRIBE FOR THE ADDITIONAL LAND 4
4.1. Indian Housing
Communal living on the land in this area over time is an essential component of Dakota
culture. Dakota people have suffered significantly from U.S. government Indian policies that
forced them from their lands and away from each other. The separation of Dakota people from
their relatives and land was an important aspect in attempts to destroy Dakota culture. The Tribe
recognizes the damage caused by separation. Today, the need to live in close proximity with
relatives on its own inalienable land is imperative as the Tribe seeks to restore and sustain its
culture.
4.2. Economic Development
Indian tribes are vulnerable when they rely too heavily on a single source of economic
development to support its government and economy. The Tribe recognizes that its current
economy is dependent on a single enterprise. Economic diversity is necessary to promote the
long-term health of the Tribe. The Tribe aims to ensure that resources will be available for seven
generations in the future. In this case, the Tribe seeks to foster diversity in its economy and have
the inalienable land base to continue that diversity for generations to come.
4.3. Self-determination
Historic Federal and State policies sought to enervate Dakota people by making critical
decisions for them that frequently resulted in the loss of Dakota land, assets, or opportunities.
Today, Federal law and Congressional policy support the right of a tribe to govern themselves.
In order to legitimately govern its own affairs, then the Tribe needs to be the primary jurisdiction
responsible over its own resources and future. The trust acquisition process affords the only
3 The intent of the IRA’s trust acquisition statute, as stated by the Representative Edgar Howard, the bill’s House
sponsor, was to provide “a land acquisition program to provide land for Indians… who can use the land
beneficially.” 78 Cong. Rec. H11, 730 (1934). The Eight Circuit Court of Appeals likewise determined that the
legislative history indicates an intent to develop Tribal economies “to conserve and develop Indian lands and
resources,” and prevent any further loss of Indian lands. South Dakota v. Dept. of the Interior, 423 F.3d at 798.
4 25 C.F.R. § 151.10 (b)
4
avenue for the Tribe to fully obtain its right of self-governance. In this case, the Tribe has
determined to secure inalienable lands to facilitate Indian housing in close proximity to relatives
and for economic development.
5. PURPOSE FOR WHICH THE LAND WILL BE USED 5
5.1. Indian Housing
The Tribe intends to use the Group P parcels for Tribal housing to meet a portion of its
future housing demand. The Tribe has a set planning process for the establishment of Tribal
housing. Land is held by the Tribe, and enrolled Tribal members are eligible for a Tribal land
assignment at the age of 18; at this point they can establish their own household. Approximately
one-half of all enrolled members are under the age of 18. Demographic projections indicate this
trend will continue into the foreseeable future. As of April 15, 2016, the actual known demand
will be for an additional 250 housing units by 2030. Figure 1. By 2050, the Tribe will need a
total of 1097 housing units. Our long-term projections take in account Tribal member death,
which opens up existing land assignments.
Figure 1—Additional Housing Demand. Actual demand based on current living members who are under
the age of 18 and will become eligble for establishing a household when they turn 18.
5 25 C.F.R. § 151.10 (c)
5
The proposed residential development will contain all the typical components of housing
developments in this area. After consideration of the wetland features on-site Group P will be
able to provide approximately 38 residential lots. Plate 3. All infrastructure and services for the
residential development will be provided by the Tribe.
Like other governments in the area, the Tribe looks for the most fiscally responsible ways
to provide goods and services to its members and to utilize its land base in a self-determined
highest and best use. The subject parcel is adjacent to existing Tribal drinking water and sanitary
sewer infrastructure, making it economical to provide new Tribal housing units needed for the
near-future.
5.2. Economic Diversification
The County State Aid Highway 21 (Eagle Creek Avenue) currently sees 10,000 vehicles
per day. The corner of CSAH 21 and 42 (140th St NW) has the traffic volumes to support
economic enterprises in the vicinity. There is a potential for a successful neighborhood-level
retail enterprises on the eastern edge of the Group P parcels. The purpose of the acquisition was
to diversify and develop the Tribal economy via neighborhood level retail. Group P’s location
makes it particularly suitable for this type of enterprise. This application allows the Tribe to
meet a portion of its need for economic development and diversify the Tribal economy through
neighborhood retail.
5.3. Self-determination and sovereignty
The Tribe cannot fulfil its long-term responsibilities as a sovereign government unless it
has primary jurisdiction over its own land required to meet those responsibilities. A trust
acquisition provides the Tribe with the greatest level of jurisdictional uniformity and certainty.
In this case, some of the responsibilities are residential housing, economic development, storm
water management, and building permits. The Tribe provides these services at its own expense
utilizing its government revenues and resources. The governmental systems and infrastructure
must be under the Tribe’s jurisdiction, which is the government providing the service. The Tribe
has the regulations, staffing, equipment, and resources necessary to meet its governmental
obligations to Tribal members and overall public safety. For example, the Tribe provides the
following regulations, programs and resources:
• Cultural Restoration
o Communal living
6
• Public Health and Safety
o Building Inspection
The Tribe has adopted the International Build Code and the
International Fire Code. The Tribe maintains certified building
officials and inspectors, and has a well-defined and operating permit
program.
o Emergency Services
Mdewakanton Public Safety provides full-time, professional fire and
ambulance services 24 hours a day, seven days a week. The Tribe and
local cities also provide mutual aid to one another.
Police service. Under Public Law 280, the Tribe does not have
criminal jurisdiction over its trust land. The Tribe has an agreement
with the City to provide police service. Per the agreement, the Tribe
compensates the City for the police services they provide.
o Road Design
Road design will follow the Tribe’s Design Standard Manual. The
manual adopts MN/DOT Standard Specifications for Highway
Construction / Drainage Manual with modifications that further
restricts runoff generation.
o Civil infrastructure
The Tribe’s Design Standard Manual covers water, sewer, lift station,
and other civil infrastructure requirements.
o Public Works
The Tribal Public Works department provides snow removal, street
cleaning service and other similar services.
• Natural Resource Management
o Surface Water Management
National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit
Tribal U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued permit
covering protection for surface waters for impacts that may result from
7
construction activities. This Tribal permit is more stringent than the
related permits held by the local governments.
o Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Sytem (MS4) Permit
Tribal EPA issued permit to covering stormwater discharge.
o Wetland Delineations
The Tribe retains certified wetland delineators, who assess wetland for
inventory and special projects.
6. IMPACT ON THE STATE AND ITS POLITICAL SUBDIVISIONS RESULTING
FROM THE REMOVAL OF THE LAND FROM THE TAX ROLLS6
Property taxes paid on Group P (Table 2) are less than 0.0072% and 0.0418% of the
respective budgets of the County and City (Table 3). In 2016, the property taxes paid on the
Group P parcels totaled $43,164. This amount is the full extent of tax revenue loss resulting
from the removal of Group P from the tax rolls to the state and its political subdivisions.
Evaluating the current level of tax payment is the proper measure of tax impact.7 The Tribe will
provide for all the proposed infrastructure and services required for Group P.
6.1. Table 2, Parcels Property Tax Breakdown
Year Parcel Tax County City State Other*
2016
$43,164 $11,080 $9,795 $0 $23,257
2015 $32,630 $9,809 $8,574 $0 $14,751
2014
$30,738 $9,567 $7,408 $0 $14,126
2013 $32,764 $9,958 $7,810 $0 $14,996
2012 $28,238 $8,770 $6,726 $0 $12,742
2011 $26,718 $7,988 $6,909 $0 $11,822
2010 $26,978 $8,054 $7,140 $0 $11,784
Data Source: Scott County Property Tax Statements (PID 259220031, 259220034, 259220030,
259220012, 259220020, 259220010, 259220011).
* Includes special taxing districts.
6 25 C.F.R. § 151.10 (e)
7 State of South Dakota v. U.S. Department of the Interior, 423 F.3d 790 (8th Cir. 2005). The
Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a determination that an annual tax loss of $2,587.02 is
not significant. Id. at 801-02.
8
6.2. Table 3, Percent of Parcels Property Taxes on County, City, and School
Year
County
Revenue
% of County
Revenue City Revenue
% of City
Revenue
2014 $133,717,657 0.0072 $17,735,118 0.0418
2013 $116,884,691 0.0085 $19,067,723 0.0410
2012 $116,120,975 0.0076 $19,549,504 0.0344
2011 $125,565,140 0.0064 $15,987,684 0.0432
2010 $120,830,212 0.0067 $16,934,217 0.0422
Data Source: State of Minnesota Auditors Office, 2016. The most recent County and City Revenues available are
2014.
The Tribe has proven to be a reliable partner in directly contributing an equitable share
towards government projects benefitting the surrounding community and the Tribe. Table 4.
For three decades, the Tribe has had contractual agreements with the City of Prior Lake to
provide emergency services on trust lands. The current agreement specifies a payment by the
Tribe of $430,000 for 2016 and of $470,000 for services to be provided by the City in 2017 (City
of Prior Lake, 2016). Furthermore, a similar agreement with the County has the Tribe directly
paying $300,000 per year from services they receive from the County (including road
maintenance, county administration, Sheriff’s Department, and County Attorney’s office) (Scott
County, 2016).
The Tribe has contributed to non-Tribal government projects where a need has been
identified, but funding was not available. The following projects are normally funded through an
increase in taxes (higher tax rate, bonds, or special levy), but were funded by the Tribe: the
inter-change on U.S. Highway 169 in Belle Plaine (Scott County); improving local trails;
providing an additional sheet of ice for the area (Dakotah! Ice Center); and depositing residential
yard waste at the Tribe’s Organic Recycling Facility at no cost to the cities of Shakopee, Prior
Lake, and Savage, as well as food waste from the Prior Lake-Savage School District 719 at a
reduced rate.
Another consideration is that in August 2015, the Minnesota Department of Agriculture
confirmed the presence of the invasive species Emerald Ash Borer (EAB) in the City of Prior
Lake, placing the entire County on quarantine. The Tribe’s ORF has a compliance agreement
with the USDA APHIS Plant Protection and Quarantine for handling ash wood from quarantined
areas. It is the only facility in the County that can provide this service at this time. This service
9
can help slow the spread of EAB within the County, softening the economic blow to
municipalities where ash trees will be lost, cut down, and replaced.
6.3. Table 4, Inter-governmental Aid
Item Contribution Item Contribution
1996 Scott County Sirens $ 60,000 2004 Scott County Transit $ 5,000
1996 Shakopee McKenna
Road $ 242,095 2004,
2009- 2013
Shakopee SCALE
Training Facility $ 247,386
1996-2004 Blue Lake Sewer
Access $ 482,550 2006 Prior Lake Ryan
Park $ 450,000
1996,
1998-2000
Prior Lake Fire
Department Donation $ 49,668 2006 Highway Patrol
Defibrillators $ 62,814
1996-2009 Blue Lake Wastewater
Treatment $ 4,751,175 2006-2008 Scott County CR 82
Upgrade $ 1,664,276
1996-2013 Prior Lake Police and
Fire $ 5,928,992
2008-2009
Prior Lake/Spring
Lake Channel
Improvement
$ 176,167
1998 Scott County CR 42
Upgrade $ 300,000 2010-2013 Scott County CR 83
Upgrade (4 lane) $ 4,109,467
1998-2000 Scott County CR 83 /
21 $ 443,805 2011 Scott County
CR42/17 $ 1,505,000
1998-2003 Scott County CR 42 /
83 $ 2,525,546
2012
Chiefs of Police
Assoc. within Scott
County training
$ 17,000
1998-2004,
2008-2013
Scott County
Agreement $ 3,192,500
2013
General purpose
grants to 5 cities and
1 county
$ 900,000
1999-2000 Shakopee Parks $ 70,233 2014 Trails grants to Scott
County cities $ 350,000
2000, 2008 Scott County CR 83
Overlay $ 514,715 2013 -2015 Shakopee Police
Agreement $ 255,000
2002 Prior Lake Skate Park $ 25,000 2015 TH 169 Additional
Lane $ 1,500,000
Total $ 29,778,389
10
Data Source: Tribal accounting.
The Tribe has a sustained record of contributing to the local economy. The Tribe is the
largest employer in the County, and many of its employees are also County or City residents.
The income from these employees, as well as the tax derived from that income, is an integral part
of the County’s economy. In addition, the Tribe also purchases goods and services from Scott
County-based vendors, which positively impacts the local economy. Table 5.
6.4. Table 5, Tribal Contributions to Scott County economy (in Millions)
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Vendor
payments in
Scott County
$8.2 $9.4 $9.4 $12.3 $17.7 $15.3 $9.5 $11.9 $10.2 $6.8 $9.6
Payroll paid to
Scott County
residents
$53.8 $54.1 $51.7 $56.9 $62.5 $70.6 $65.1 $72.4 $69.5 $70.2 $77.4
Data source: Tribal accounting and payroll. Data includes payments and payroll from all Tribal enterprises and
government activities. Numbers are rounded.
7. JURISDICTIONAL PROBLEMS AND POTENTIAL CONFLICTS OF LAND USE 8
The City of Prior Lake has guided the corner of CSAH 21 and CSAH 42 for commercial
use, although there are currently no existing or planned projects. A Tribal neighborhood retail
enterprise is consistent with the commercial use of this corner.
Both the City and Tribe will benefit from the future extension of North Berens Road to
the CSAH 21. Give the topography and natural features, the eastern end of the alignment will be
on the Group P parcel (Plate 3, Concept). The timing of this alignment unknown at this time. The
Tribe intends to work closely with the City on the construction and design of North Berens Road.
The SMSC will construct North Berens Road from the terminus of Shepherd’s Path east towards
County Road 21. The Tribe and the City will each be responsible for 50% of the reconstruction
costs of North Berens Road from McKenna Road to Shephard’s Path. On the relevant segments,
the Tribe will allow for the necessary City utilities and for reasonable access points. Both parties
8 25 C.F.R. § 151.10 (f)
11
will be responsible for the installation of their own utilities. The Tribe and City will jointly
manage the stormwater needs for North Berens Road 9. Annual and long-term maintenance of
North Berens Road shall be by agreement.
The Tribe has worked in good faith to share information and create solutions to areas of
common interest with its neighboring jurisdictions through direct interaction between staff, as an
active member of the Scott County Association for Leadership and Efficiency (SCALE), and the
Intergovernmental Working Group (IWG).
8. ADDITIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES THAT MAY ACCRUE TO THE BUREAU OF
INDIAN AFFAIRS 10
The Tribe anticipates minimal additional responsibilities that may accrue to the Bureau of
Indian Affairs (BIA). The roadways proposed on Group P may be added to the BIA road
inventory mileage. The BIA records Tribal residential and commercial leases. No further BIA
responsibilities are anticipated for this proposal.
9. INFORMATION REGARDING 516 DM 6, APPENDIX 4, NATIONAL
ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT AND 602 DM 2, LAND ACQUISITIONS:
HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES DETERMINATIONS 11
9.1. National Environmental Policy Act
Land use will change from agricultural / natural areas to a residential / community
enterprise. This change in land use is not categorically excluded. A separate Environmental
Assessment accompanies this request (Appendix C).
9.2. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
Pinnacle Engineering, Inc. completed a Phase I Environment Site Assessment of the
Group P parcels (Ahlman, Kes, Kinney, McDonald, McKenna, Morehouse in 2012) and found
no recognized environmental conditions (Appendix C). There has been no change in land use,
except for some building demolition, since these Phase I Environmental Site Assessments were
written. These surveys will require updating either by a contractor paid by the Community and
reporting to the BIA or by BIA staff.
9.3. Phase I Archeological Survey
Bolton and Menk, Inc. completed a Phase I Archeological Reconnaissance Survey of the
Group P parcels in 2013 (Appendix C) and the recommended Finding of Fact is “No Historic
9 The Tribe and the City are both MS4 permitees.
10 25 C.F.R. § 151.10 (g)
11 25 C.F.R. § 151.10 (h)
12
Properties Affected.” Given the proposed land use, the Tribe’s Cultural Resources Department
agreed with this finding and determined a Finding of No Significant Impact for placing these
parcels into trust (Appendix C).
9.4. Endangered Species Act
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife lists the Northern long-eared bat as a threatened species
occurring in Scott County (USFWS 2015). In 2015, West, Inc., conducted an acoustic bat survey
on Tribal lands confirming the presence of the Northern long-eared bat in the vicinity. There is
about 16 acres of potential Northern long-eared bat summer roosting habitat on the subject
parcels. Timing of tree clearing for the construction activity or habitat modification will be
outside the summering pupping season for the bat. Consultation letter, Appendix C.
10. REFERENCES
Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs. 2016. Indian Entities Recognized and
Eligible to Receive Services from the United States Bureau of Indian Affairs. 80 Federal Register
1942-02.
Minnesota Auditors Office. 2016. Reports and Data, City and County Financial Database.
http://www.auditor.state.mn.us/default.aspx?page=ComparisonTools
City of Prior Lake. 2016. Local Intergovernmental Aid Agreement between the Shakopee
Mdewakanton Sioux Community and the City of Prior Lake, Minnesota.
Scott County. 2016. Local Intergovernmental Aid Agreement between the Shakopee
Mdewakanton Sioux Community and Scott County, Minnesota.
U.S Fish and Wildlife Services. 2015. County Distribution of Federally-listed
Threatened, Endangered, Proposed, and Candidate Species. Available at:
http://www.fws.gov/Midwest/endangered/section7/sppranges/minnesot-cty.html
13
11. APPENDIX A, BUSINESS AND GENERAL COUNCIL RESOLUTIONS
12. APPENDIX B, REAL ESATE DOCUMENTS
12.1. County Property Cards
12.2. Property Tax Statements (2016, 2014)
12.3. Ownership documents
12.3.1. Ahlman Warranty Deed, A922956 12/10/2012
12.3.2. Kes Warranty Deed, 922955 12/10/2012
12.3.3. Kinney Seven Trustee’s Deed, A922952 12/10/2012
12.3.4. McDonald Trustee’s Deed, A922954 12/10/2012
12.3.5. McKenna Warranty Deed, A924810 12/31/2012
12.3.6. MorehouseWarranty Deed, A922957 12/10/2012
12.4. ALTA Survey 05/24/2016
12.5. Title Commitment ORTE 742886, 03/30/2016
12.6. Supporting Documents
12.6.1. Doc 86394, 08/03/1956, Electrical Easement (Kinney)
12.6.2. Doc 86394, 06/29/1956, Electrical Easement (McKenna & Morehouse)
12.6.3. Doc 151047, 07/23/1976, Telephone Easement (McDonald, McKenna,
Morehouse)
12.6.4. Doc 177688, ROW Easement, (McKenna)
12.6.5. Doc 177927, 10/01/1980, Electrical Easement (Morehouse)
12.6.6. Doc 507044, 06/05/2001, Roadway Easement (McKenna)
12.6.7. Doc 997944, 03/15/2016, Roadway Easement (Alhman, Kinney, McDonald,
McKenna, Morehouse).
12.6.8. Residential Use Agreement, McKenna, 04/01/2016
12.6.9. Residential Use Agreement, Morehouse, 12/27/2013
12.6.10. Disclaimer, McKenna property renter, 06/09/2016
12.6.11. Disclaimer, Morehouse property renter, 06/09/2016
12.7. Draft Trust Warranty Deed
14
13. APPENDIX C, ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE DOCUMENTS
13.1. National Environmental Policy Act, Draft Environmental Assessment,
attached as a separate document
13.2. Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessments (2012)
13.3. Phase 1 Archeological Surveys (2013)
13.4. Tribal Cultural Resources Letter, 05/02/2016
13.5. Alhman Well Record
13.6. McKenna / Kinney Observation Wells 12/29/2005
14. PLATES
14.1. Plate 1, Regional Location Map
14.2. Plate 2, Subject Parcel Location Map
14.3. Plate 3, Site Concept
14.4. Plate 4, City of Prior Lake 2030 Map