83-12-06 CITY OF MOUND
MOUND, MINNESOTA
AGENDA
MOUND CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
TUESDAY, DECEMBER 6, 1983
Approve Minutes of November 15, 1983, Regular Meeting
Petition Request to Restrict Parking on Either side
of Piper Road from Tuxedo Blvd. to Warner Lane
3. On Street Parking Variance Request
4. Revision of Planning & Dock Fee's for 1984
5. CASE #83-264 - Harold L. Kutzner, 4653 Carlow Road,
Location: North side of Carlow Road,
Lots 1,2,3,4,5 & 26, Block 14, Seton
RE: Lot Split/Subdivision
CASE #83-26) - Lowell Zitzloff, 6365 Bay Ridge Roa-d,
Lots 1 & 2, Block 2, Anderson Second
Addition
RE: Variance for Accessory Building Provisions
7~
Set Date for Public Hearing on Vacating a Part of
Lagoon Park, The Highlands
Suggested Date: J~nuary 17, 1984
CASE #83-258 - Continuation from November 15th
Meeting, Schlee Builders, Inc.- Lots
in Woodcrest 3rd Addition
Application for Bingo Permits:
- Our Lady of the Lake Catholic Church
- American Legion Post #398
10. Purchase of Investigator Automobile
11. Quotation to Paint City Hall Interior:
- Minnetonka Painting & Decorating Co.
12. Bid Tabulation for Purchase of a 4 Wheel Articulated,
Rubber Tired Front End Loader
13. Tonka Building Strategy Memo
14. Payment of Bills
Pg. 2814-2826
Pg. 2827-2831
Pg. 2832-2833.
Pg. 2834-2836
Pg. 2837-2841
Pg. 2842-2848
Pg. 2849-2852
Pg. 2853-2877
Pg. 2878-2879
Pg. 2880
Pg. 2881-2884
Pg. 2885-2886
Pg. 2887-2888
Pg. 2889
Page 2812
~5. ~NFORMAT~ON/~SCELLANEO~S
A. Memo on Sewer & Water Funds
B. Letter from Hennepin County on Repairing the Black
Lake Bridge in 1984
C. Minnehaha Watershed District Agenda & Minutes
D. S.R.A. Minutes
E. League of Cities Legislative Contact Form
F. Memo from Bud Robb on Solid Waste Resource
Recovery
G. Ehlers & Associates, Inc. Newsletter
H. Invitation to Cable Consul.tant's Holiday Party
I. Report on Fiscal Disparities
J. Cable T.V. Memo
K. Twin City Labor Market Information
L. Westonka Chamber Waves
M. MWCC Meeting Notice
Pg. 2890-2896
Pg. 2~97-2U98
Pg. 2899-2911
Pg. 2912-2917
Pg. 2918
Pg. 2919-2932
Pg. 2933-2934
Pg. 2935
Pg. 2936-2942
Pg. 2943-2944
Pg. 2945-2948
Pg. 2949-2950
Pg. 2951-2952
Page 2813
November 1), 19B3
R£CULAR M££TINC
OF THE
CITY COUNCIL
Pursuant t6 due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City
Council of the City of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, was held at
5341 Maywood Road in said City on November 15, 1983.
Those present were.: Mayor Bob Polston, Councilmembers Phyllis Jessen,
Gary ?aulsen and Russ Peterson. Councilmember Pinky Charon was late
and arrived at 8:05 p.m. Also present were: City Manager Jon Elam,
City Attorney Curt Pearson, City Engineer John Cameron, City Planner
Mark KoegIer, Building Official Jan Bertrand, Water Superintendent
Greg Skinner, City Clerk Fran Clark and the following interested
citizens: Larry Connolly, Bernard Benz, Allan Moran, Tom Giere, Nan~y
Clough, Harold Meeker, Tom Huberty, Jack Wang, Melvin Larson, Jim
Bloom, Richard Smith, Glenn Smith, Terry Frovik, Mary Grudnowski,
Harriet Pirk, Paul Axt, William Dunkley, A1 Reiners, Robert Floeder,
Bev Schroeder, Rick Rone, Don Ulri'ck, Roger Rager.
The Mayor opened the meeting and welcomed the people in attendance.
MINUTES
The Minutes of the.November 1, 1983, Regular Meeting were presented
for.consideration. Paulsen moved and Peterson seconded a motion to
approve the Minutes of the November 1, 1983, Regular Meeting as
presented. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
PUBLIC HEARING: TENNIS COURT, OUTLOT A, THE 'BLUFFS
The Mayor opened the public hearing~and asked for comments for or
.against the construction of a tennis court on Outlot A of The Bluffs.
Paul Axt, 3014 Bluffs Drive stated that he is against the
construction of this tennis court. He stated he had originally
signed the petition for the tennis court because he thought it
would only cost a couple of hundred dollars and the engineering
report is now estimating an assessment far above that. He
further questioned why the City is proposing a tennis court on
Outlot A. The Mayor explained that the initiation of the
proposed tennis court came as a result of the petition that was
submitted to the City by the residents of The Bluffs asking for a
tennis court on Outlot A.
Bernie Benz, 3025 Bluffs Lane stated that he wants his name
stricken from the petition for the tennis court because he is
against it if he is to be assessed for it. He did not want any
more tax burden.
The City Attorney explained the processes an improvement must go
thrU, according to State law, when a petition for an improvement
November 15, 1983
iS presented.
A1 Reiners, 3006 Bluffs Drive stated that he is against the
proposed improvement. He submitted a paper with the signatures
of 11 residents in The Bluffs opposed to the proposed tennis
court.
Terry Frovik, 3023 Highview Lane, stated he is opppsed to the
proposed tennis court.
Glenn Smith, 2991 Highview L~ne, stated he is opposed to the
proposed tennis court.
Robert Floeder, 3017 Bluffs Lane, stated he is opposed to the
proPosed tennis court.
Dick Smith, original developer of The Bluffs stated that when'he
platted The Bluffs the tot lot was dedicated as such and could
not now be changed to a tennis court. The City Attorney looked
at the plat and stated that'there is nothing on the plat that
states Outlot A is a dedicated tot lot. As far as he knows
Outlots A and B were dedicated to the City for public use and
Minnesota Statute 429 list a number of things that can be for the
public use.
Tom Huberty, 2996 Bluffs Lane, stated that he is opposed to the
tennis court if a ceiling on the cost cannot be guaranteed.
Bev Schroeder, 2999 Highview Lane, stated she is opposed t'o the
tennis court.
Rick Rone, 3018 Bluffs Lane, stated that he was the one who
originally started the petition for the tennis court because he
felt it would enhance all the properties in The Bluffs. At the
time he intiated the petition'he did not know what the total cost
would be but even now knowing the cost he still feels the tennis
court would be a good idea.
Don Ulrick, 3003'Bluffs Lane, stated that he had not taken a
stand either for or against the tennis court because he lives
next door to Outlot A and he wanted to see if the-neighborhood
was for it. If it was he would consider taking the risk of
having the tennis court with fencing next to his property. He
now feels the neighborhood is opposed to the tennis court and he
is willing to take a stand against it.
The Mayor closed the public hearing.
Councilmember Charon arrived at 8:05 P.M.
Councilmember Paulsen asked the City Engineer how much per lot the
tennis court would cost. The City Engineer replied approximately
$935.00.
November 15, 1983
Peterson moved.and Paulsen seconded a motion that the improvement of a
tennis court on Outlot A, The Bluffs NOT be made. The vote was unani-
mously in favor. Motion carried.
PUBLIC HEARING;
REALLOCATING OF $1,250 OF 1983 CDBG FUNDS
The City Manager explained that the reallocatfng of $1,250 of 1983
CDBG Funds is for paying part of the cost of installing a ~andicapped
access at Pond Ice Arena.
Jessen moved and Charon seconded th~ following resolution:
RESOLUTION ~83-200
RESOLUTION REALLOCATING $1,250 OF THE 1983
CDBG FUNDS
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion Carried.
CONTINUATION.FROM OCTOBER 18TH MEETING:
THREE POINTS TAVERN
LICENSES FOR ROGER RAGER DBA
The. City Manager explained that he has derived some conditions for the
issuance of the licenses from the reports of the City Planner, Police
Chief and the Building Official. Mr. Rager was present and asked to
present the Council with his answers to those conditions. The
conditions and answers were as follows:
"1 ·
Limit ho6rs the deck may be used from 11:00 a.m. to 10:00
p.m." .... Will be complied with immediately.
t, 2.
Complete entrance driveway hard 'surfacing." .... Has been.
completed.
"3.
Install parking posts on north side of parking lot."--aWill
be installed in conjunction with improvements to north slope
area. . -
"4.
Submit plans for the installation of a retaining wall by May
15, 1984, and have the project completed by September 1,
1984."---Plans for a retaining wall or an approved alterna-
tive will be completed in accordance with the suggested sch-
edule.
"5 .
Complete landscaping plan for area near the deck and north
side of parking lot."---Will be completed in accordance with
schedule in ITem #4 above.
"6 .
Existing trash dumpster to be placed on a concrete pad and
screened with a wooden fence enclosure."---To be completed
by December 1, 1983.
"7 .
The removal of the wooden pallets and replace with concrete
parking bumpers."---To be completed by December 1, 1983.
November 15, 1983
"8 ·
Grade back-side of parking lot and remove, fill to facilitate
drainage."---To be completed in conjunction with item #4
above.
"9 .
That the temporary licenses be extended for 6 months to May
15, 1984, at which time we will have detailed 'police reports
for the location and the applicant will have had time to
submit final site improvement plans."---Work with the Police
Department and neighborhood- residents to resolve potential
operational problems and submit plans in accordance with
Item #4'above.
The Mayor asked the Council if they had any items to add. He then
asked the City Attorney if the City can condition the issuance of
licenses. The Attorney stated yes, he believed they could.
Mr. Rager staled that he and his planner have come up with'an alter-
nate idea for- a retaining wall that would be as effective but not as
costly. Their idea consists of regrading the slope to 3:1, mulching,
seeding with Crown Vetch or Ajuga' ground cover, and stabilizing the
~l. ope and plant material with staked nylon mesh. The City Planner
stated that he would agree that this alternate idea could accomplish
basically the same thing as a retaining wall but would like to suggest
something other than Crown Vetch because it spreads too much. Mr.
Rager stated that he is open to suggestions on the type of ground
cover to be used.
The Council then discussed adopting an Evacuation Ordinance which
would set a limit on the time patrons'can stay on the property' of a
licensed liquor establishment past closing time.
Peterson moved and Paulsen seconded a motion to approve the issuance
of temporary "On and Off Sale Beer Licenses" and a set up license to
Roger &Gail Rager, dba Three Points Tavern. The licenses shall
expire on May 15,' 1984,to be revie'wed by the Council at that time for
renewal. The licenses are issued with the above 9 conditions,
amending #4 on the retaining wall to the alternate suggestion by the
applicant. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
Charon moved and Paulsen seconded a motion instructing the City
Attorney to prepare an Evacuation Ordinance and bring it back to the
Council for adoption. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion car-
ried.
Charon moved and Paulsen seconded a motion to authorize the issuance
of the following temporary licenses to Roger &Gail Rager, dba Three
Points Tavern: Pool Table Licenses, Games of Skill Licenses, Juke Box
Licenses, Entertainment Permit, Restaurant License, Cigarette License.
Licenses to be reviewed May 15, 1983, for renewal. The vote was
unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
Mr. Rager asked the Council to allow him to respond to the Police
Chief's memo of November 10, 1983, regarding several incidents at
November 15, 1983
Three Points Tavern. The Council agreed. Mr. Rager contended that a
number of the items in the memo were inaccurate. He was in Hawaii
when some of the reports listed were made. Also some of the police
· c'ontacts made were due to he or his staff calling-the police for help.
Ne gave a detailed account of some of the incidents.
PUBLIC HEARING;
ZONING CHANGE AMENDING RESTAURANT CLASSIFICATIONS
The City Manager explained that this amendment came abou~ when Mrs.
Moy was consideration applying for a liquor license for her restaurant
and it was discovered that the Zoning Ordinance did not allow liquor
in the Central Business District. The Planning Commission asked that
the Staff prepare an amendment to the zoning ordinance for restaurant
classifications. This was done and the Planning Commission and the
Staff are now recommending approval. It just needs .to be put in
ordinance amendment form now.
The Mayor opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to
speak for or against the proposed amendment. There was no comment.
The Mayor closed the public hearing.
Charon moved and Paulsen seconded a motion authorizing the Staff to
prepare an ordinance amendment as recommended by the Planning
Commission and the Staff with regard to restaurant classifications.
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
PUBLIC HEARING;
DELINQUENT UTILITY BILLS
The Mayor opened the public hearing-and asked if there was anyone
present who wished to speak with regard to a' delinquent utility bill..
There'was no comment. The Mayor closed the. public hearing.
Peterson moved and Jessen seconded the. following resolution:
RESOLUTION ~83-201
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE THE DELINQUENT UTILITY
BILLS IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,574.19 AND AUTHOR-
IZE THE STAFF TO SHUT-OFF WATER SERVICE FOR
THOSE 'ACCOUNTS
The vote was unanimously in favor.
CONTINUATION FROM 11-1-8~,, MEETING;
,LOTS IN WOODCREST ~RD ADDITION
Motion carried.
CASE #~-2~8 - SCHLEk BUILDERS,.
The City Manager reported that Mr. Fierst of Schlee Builders has asked
that this item be continued to the' December 6, 1983, Regular Meeting
because they are getting the drawings of the house placement on the
lots in question and they are not ready yet.
Peterson moved and Jessen seconded a motion to hold this item over
until the December 6, 1983, Regular Meeting. The vote was unanimously
in favor. Motion carried.
5
November 15, 1983
The Council then decided that since the original developer, Mr. Dick
Smith, and the City Engineer were present they would discuss this item
briefly.
Councilmember Peterson asked if there would have been a drainage
problem if the original grading plan had not be altered. The City
Engineer replied no, but that it appears a ~considerable amount of dirt
was moved to the other side of the road.
The City Engineer answered the question that the Council asked at the
last meeting as t~ whether the storm sewer pipe under Setter Circle
was concrete or corregated metal. That storm sewer is the same as all
others in Mound, concrete pipe.
Mr. Smith stated that when he developed Woodcrest there were covenants
filed that ma~e the minimum house size 1300 square feet with 2 car
attached garages and he has seen several homes being built recently
that do not comply with these. The City Attorney stated apparently
the covenants were never filed on the plat of the deeds and therefore
would not be enforceable.
Mr. Smith stated that the grading, of Woodcrest was done in 1976 and
that the design and grading were supervised by McCombs Knutson. The
City Engineer stated that McCombs Knutson would have supervised the
road grading put not the lot grading. Mr. Smith stated that the lots
in question were to have residences with tuck under garages. The City
Engineer stated that according to his plan the grading plan was not
adhered to by the developer. Councilmember Paulsen stated that he
watched dirt being moved, from those lots, onto the road to bring up
the grade.
The City Attorney asked the City Engineer if a bond was file for the
grading plan. The City Engineer responded that he has not found one.
No action was taken on the agenda item until the December 6th meeting.
CASE ~83-260: MIKE SMITH, 9448 SHORELINE BLVD,, SIGN VARIANCE
The City Manager explained that Mr. Smith has requested that he be
allowed to erect a 40 sq. ft. wall mounted sign on his building at
5448 Shoreline Blvd. The current sign ordinance states 9 square feet
but the proposed new sign ordinance that the Planning Commission is
currently working on would allow a 48 sq. ft. sign. The Planning
Commission and the Staff are recommending approval.
~Paulsen moved and Peterson seconded, the following resolution:
RESOLUTION ~83-202, RESOLUTION TO CONCUR WITH THE PLANNING COM
MISSION RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE A SIGN VAR-
IANCE FOR MIKE SMITH - PID ~13-117-2~ 33 0024
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
November 15, 1983
CASE $85-261: 'THOMAS GRUDNOWSKI, 5229 BARTLETT BLVp,, RECOGNIZE
,EXISTING NONCONFORMING, ACCESSORY BUILDINGS
The City Manager explained that this variance is to allow the eonstue-
tion of an'attached garage with entry and kitchen to the~dwelling with
conforming setback to the property lines. The existing accessory
structures on the property have nonconforming setbacks to the property
lines and therefore need to be recognized as such. T~e Planning
Commission and the Staff have recommended approval.
Peterson moved and Paulsen seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION ~83-203
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A VARIANCE TO RECOG
NIZE AN EXISTING NONCONFORMING ACCESSORY
BUILDING FOR NWly. 85 FEET OF LOT 32,
AUDITOR'S SUB. ~170, PID ~24-117-28 2~ 0007-
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
CASE
THOMAS GIERE, 170~ JONES LANE, LOT 1, BLOCK 1, REPLAT
OF HARRISON SHORES,, FRONT YARD VARIANCE
The City Manager explained that Mr. Giere has applied for a 10 foot
variance to allow the construction of an open 12 by 26 foot deck
within 20 feet of the Jones Lane front property line and that the
Planning Commissioh has recommended approval due to the topography of
the'lot and the adjoining structure to the south of the property.
Polston moved and Paulsen seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION ~83-204
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE'A 10 FOOT FRONT YARD
VARIANCE FOR .LOT 1, BLOCK 1, REPLAT OF HARRI-
SON SHORES PID ~13-117-24 22 0026
The vote was unanimously in favor. MotiOn carried.
CASE'#8~-26~;
ALLAN MORAN, PT,. OF GOVT, LOT ~, UNPLATTED 2311724,
10 FOOT VARIANCE
The City Manager explained that Mr. Moran has' applied for a variance
to allow the construction of a detached accessory building within 20
feet of the Westedge Blvd. front property line and the Planning
Commission h~s recommended approval.
Paulsen moved and Jessen seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION f83-205
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A 10 FOOT FRONT YARD
VARIANCE FOR PT. OF GOVT. LOT 3, UN?LATTED
PID ~23-117-2~ 2~ 0010
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
7
NOvember 15, 1983
COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRESENT
The Mayor asked if there were any comments or suggestions from the
citizens present. There were none.
WEST HENNEPIN HUMAN SERVICES PLANNING BOARD; NANCY CLOUGH
.The City Manager introduced Nancy Clough as beiSg Mound's
representative to the West Hennepin Human Service Planning'Board. She
is here to give the Council an update on the Board.
Ms. Clough explained that she is a new representative to the Board and
has only attended 3 meetings so far. She gave some background of the
Board and the services that it supports. She had numerous handouts
that the Council had received in their packets. She explained the 184
Mound residents had received energy assistance last year. She brought
up the increa, se in the contribuion that the Board is requesting for
1984 from $364 to $1,164.
The Council asked that she, in the next few months, assess the effec-
tiveness of the Board and consider the overlapping or duplicating of
services and then report back to the Council.
She explained that part of the reason for th'e increase in contribu-
tions is that there was a $14,000 deficit in the Board's budget due to
the cuts Hennepin County made. The Board is having a Budget meeting
in December to review the 1984 budget and she will have more informa-
tion then and will be able to ask specific questions at that meeting.
She wiI1 then 'report back to the Council on this and how effective she
feels the Board is in decentralizing services.
REQUEST, TO DEFER, SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
The City Manager'explained that the City has received a request to
defer the special assessments on PID #1411724 41 0001. The owner has
met the guidelines with regard to income, homestead status and age.
Paulsen moved and Charon seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION #83-206 RESOLUTION TO APPROVE APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL.
ASSESSMENT DEFERRAL ON FID ~14-117-2~ ~1 0001
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
ANNUAL (M,S,A,) MAINTENANCE ALLOTMENT
The City Manager explained that this is a once a year request for
Municipal State Aid. This year's amount requested is $17,250.00.
Peters.on moved and Jessen seconded the. following resolution:
8
November 15, 1983
RESOLUTION ~83-207
RESOLUTION REQUESTING AN INCREASE IN M.S.A.
MAINTENANCE FUNDS DUE TO INCREASED MAINTE-
NANCE COST ON CITY 0F MOUND M.S.A. STREETS
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried·
AUTHORIZE ADVERTISING, ,FOR BIDS. FOR NEW FRO'NT END LOADER
The City Manager explained the present loader is on it last legs and a
new loader was budgeted for in 198~. The recommended date for a bid
opening is November 30, 1983. at 10:00 A.M.
Peterson moved and Jessen seconded a motion authorizing the staff to
advertise for bids for a new four wheel articulated, .rubber tired
front end loader to be opened November 30, 1983, at 10:00 A.M. The
vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
SALE OF CITY OWNED LAND; LOTS 29,_ 30, & 31, BLOCK 1, ARDEN
The. City Manager explained that we have someone who wants to purchase
3 lots in Arden. These lots are off of Cumberland and the person
would be paying $8066.52 for the 3 lots, plus assuming the assessments
that are against them. The Staff recommends selling the lots.
Polston moved and Charon seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION ~83-209
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND THE CITY
MANAGER TO ENTER INTO A PURCHASE AGREEMENT
FOR THE SALE OF LOTS. 29, 30 AND 31, BLOCK 1,
ARDEN TO JOUNI V..PAASONEN
The vote was unanimously in favor. Mo.tion carried·
AMENDMENT TO THE SEWER ORDINANCE
Utility Superintendent Greg Skinner was present asking the Council to
change the Sewer Ordinance to to read as follows:
That the City will maintain all sewer mains, laterals,
and/or trunk lines.
That the property owners will maintain their individual
se~er services from the sewer main, lateral and/or trunk to
the dwelling.
Exemption is if the sewer main, lateral and/or trunk is
found to cause a break and/or damage to an individual
service (building sewer) on the City rightofway, it
would be the City's responsibility to repair such
damaged or sunken service.
The Council discussed this at great length and decided they did not
want to amend the ordinance as proposed.
November 15, 1983
pAYMENT REQUEST: WEBCO TANK, INC,, ISLAND PARK WATER IMPROVEMENTS, IN
THE AMOUNT OF $5,044.40
Paulsen moved and Peterson seconded a motion to approve the payment
request of Webco Tank, Inc., in the amount of $5,044.40 for the Island
Park Water Improvement. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion
carried. .
TRANSFERS
The City Manager explained that there are three resolutions that the
Council needs to approve for transfers.
Peterson moved and Charon seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION ~83-210
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING TRANSFERS FROM THE-
GENERAL FUND TO THE AREA FIRE SERVICE FUND
AND THE FIRE CAPITAL OUTLAY FUND
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
Charon moved and Paulsen seconded the following resolution:
RESOLUTION ~83-211 RESOLUTION TO MAKE THE 1983 LIQUOR TRANSFER
TO THE GENERAL FUND - $50,000
The' vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
RESOLUTION #83-212 RESOLUTION TO TRANSFER $57,408.53 FROM THE
LIQUOR FUND TO THE 1983 SEAL COAT PROJECT
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
PAYMENT OF BILLS ' '
Paulsen moved and Jessen seconded a motion to approve the bills as
presented on the prelist, in the amount of $105,636.35, when funds are
available. A roll call vote was unanimously in favor. Motion
carried.
FINAL PAYMENT REQUEST; F,F, JEDLICKI, 1983 wATER IMPROVEMENTSt
IN THE AMOUNT-OF. $9,810.85
· Polston moved and Peterson seconded a motion to approve the final
payment request of F.F. Jedlicki, for the 1983 Island Park Water
Improvements in the amount of $9,810.85. The vote was unanimously in
favor. Motion carried.
INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS
A. LMCD Meeting Schedule for November and December 1983.
B. Chamber of Commerce Newsletter for November.
10
November 1), 1983
Notice - That Mark Koegler is the PrineiDal Planner for YanDoren,
Hazard & Stallings.
Notice from the Leagu'e of Minnesota Cities regarding important
publid hearings: Minnesota Tax Commission·
Evensen Dodge Report.
F. American Legign Gambling Report - October, 1983.
G. Metro Council "Review" - October 28, 1983.
Action Alert - Industrial Development Bond Authority Attacked in
Congress.
Town Square Project Area Appraisal Report - The City Manag%r
reported that he has taked to Saul Smiley and Saul is questioning
the financial viability of the project. The project needs to add
4.5 million to be feasible. He will keep us posted on the
project.
COUNTY ROAD
The Mayor stated that at the meeting in Orono on County Road 15 there
was discussion on having a 3 person committee (one representative from
each city, Mound, Spring Park, and Orono) get together and try and
work out a. viable solution to the County Road 15 problem. He asked if
the Council would like to appoint a representative from Mound to serve
on that Committee.
Councilmember Paulsen stated that after thinking about this he will
only support a 4 lane road and wants it to be on record that'he is
totally opposed to a 2 lane road. He stated he does not believe
Orono will be willing to compromis.e, at a21.
Charon moved and Jessen seconded a motion to appoint Mayor Polston as
Mound's representative on the 3 person committee to study County Road
15, The vote was'four in favor with Councilmember Paulsen voting nay.
Motion carried.
,SPECIAL MEETING
The City Man~ger asked if the Council would schedule a special meeting
for December 13, 1983, so he can present the Labor Contracts. They
should be thru with negotiations by then.
Jessen moved and Paulsen seconded a motion to call a special Council
Meeting on December 13, 1983 at 7:00 P.M. to go over the Labor
Contracts. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
?aulsen moved and Jessen seconded a motion to adjourn at 10:30 P.M.
The vote.was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
11
November 15, 1983
Fran Clark, City Clerk
Jon Elam, Cit~ Man~ger
12
BILLS .... NOVEMBER 15, 1983'
AirComm, Inc. 75.05
Blackowiak & Son 56.00
Holly Bostrom 141.00
Badger Meter 181.85
'Jan Bertrand 31.56
Coast to Coast 148.98
Copy Duplicating Prod. 39.25
Robert Cheney 334.00
Bill Clark Oil 3,465.55
Cargill Salt 733.60
Donaghue Doors 215.00
Jon Elam 40.34
E1 Marketing 284.67
John Henry Foster 42.54
Feed-rite Controls 238.46
Govt Training Service 25.00
Glenwood Inglewood 32.25
Harmon Glass 43.00
Henn Co. Sheriff's Dept 291.72
Island Park Skelly 10.00
Internatl City Mgmt Assn 240.00
Internatl Assn Chiefs Police 58.00
'Lutz Tree Service 1,885.O0
Lowel ls 41.67
L.O.G.I.S. 1,409.35
Mpls Oxygen Co. 21.00
Minn Comm 28.75
Mound Fire Dept 4,256.10
Mpls. Saw Co. 26.50
Medi'cal Oxygen & Equip 17.50
Minnegasco 435.77
P.D.Q. Food Stores 2,145.15
Regal Window Cleaning 10.75
Real One Acquisition 675.00
Nels Schernau 6.38
Spring Park Car Wash 91.90
Shepherds Rug RentaJ 16.80
Stevens Well Drilling 886.55
Sterne Electric Co. 61.OO
Suburban Community Services 831.7.5
Thurk Bros. Chev. 32.11
Twin City Testing 420.00
Unitog Rentals 285.25
Village Chevrolet 108.02
Water Products Co. 54.40
Western Tree Service 725.00
Western Area Fire Train 240.00
Westonka Sewer & Water 90.00
Pam Amidon 89.19
Lynn Cote 6.00
Bill Clark Oil 225.97
Fire Dept Officers 4,300.00
Griggs, Cooper 3,553.51
Reinhard Hohenstein 75.00
Johnson Bros. Liquor 4,170.06
Johnson Paper 210.13
N. Craig Johnson 6,500.00
Metro Waste Control 26,126.47
" " " 841.50
MN Public Empl.. Labor Reltn 50.00
Old Peoria Co. 466.52
David Norton 25.00
Ed Phillips & Sons 2,481.30
Research Inst. of Amer 36.00
Suburban Homes ' 250.00
Greg Skinner 47.38
Webco Tank 5,044.50
Lowell Zitzloff 35.00
Butch's Bar Supply 65.80
Kool Kube Ice 120.90
Pepsi Cola/7 Up 183.45
Royal Crown Beverage 92.60
Coca Cola 211.70
City Club Distributing '2,766.30
Thorpe Distributing 5,346.34
A.J. Ogle Co. 1,894.O5
Day Distributing 2,574.34
Twin City Home Juice 61.OO
East Side Beverage 3,100.95
Pogreba Distributing. 3,450.15
Bryan Rock'Prod. 144.O3
The Laker 69.08
Marina Auto Supply 466.72
Wm Mueller &'Sons 2,879.99
N.S.P. 4,443.64
Navarre Hardware 363.22
Popham. Haik Schnobrich 1,339.O4
TOTAL BILLS
105,636.35
CITY of MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364
(612) 472-1155
TO: BRUCE WOLD
FROM: JON ELAM
DATE: NOVEMBER 10, 1983
Enclosed is a petition requesting that the city
"restrict parking on either side of Piper Road from
Tuxedo to Warner Lane."
Could you investigate this and write up a
recommendation for the council. I've enclosed the
appropriate map.
Thanks.
P.S. Only five of the sixty or so names are on
Piper so this may be a'tough fieighborhood issue.
INTEROFFICE MEMO
DATE December 1,
Oon Elam; City Manager
FROM: Bruce Wold; Police Chief
SUBJECT: Petition for No Parking - Piper Rd.
I usually begin my research on these issues by consulting the ordinance
book to find out the standard for the rest of the neighborhood. Had I followed
this procedure this time, I would have found an existing ordinance governing
the parking on this stretch of Piper Road.
Ordinance 46.29 (b) (21) states: "No parking on the south side of Piper
Road from Tuxedo Blvd. to Warner Lane". This seems to be another case of the
failure of the City to re-install no parking signs after the completion of
the paving project. Conversations with some of the petitioners shed some
light on the reason for the request and a possible reason for ammending the
ordinance as written.
The concern of the petitioners is the character of the roadway and the
lines of sight along the roadway. Piper Road serves as an arterial to Warner
Lane and for those residents living on Cedar Point. The road has a fairly
steep hill which is difficult to climb during some of the winter months. A
retaining wall on the south east corner of the intersection of Piper Road and
Warner Lane severly limits visibility for cars travelling north on Warner and
attempting to view traffic travelling west on Piper. Residents complain
about near head on collisions because cars travelling west on Piper Road are
forced to the wrong side of the road by cars parked on the north side of
Piper Road.
Further aggravating the problem is the Ellingson and' Nassif families who
have a tendency to accumulate abandon and junk vehicles (as defined by city
ordinance). Both families reside on the north side of Piper Road at 5238 and
5228 Piper Road respectively. The complaints include the parking of cars, by
these families, on the roadway or extending from driveways often with the doors
left open. This type of practice would severely li~it the space to maneuver a
car on an already narrow roadway.
The petitioners asked me to extend the no parking ban on both sides of
Piper Road to Tuxedo Blvd. Currently parking is banned on both sides of Piper
Road from Warner Lane to Charles Lane. I discarded this recommendation because
the stretch of Piper Road from Warner Lane to Tuxedo Blvd. is wide enough to
permit parking on one side of the street. I felt it would be a hardship on
persons living on Piper Road to find parking for guests who wanted to visit.
I recommend that the council ammend Ordinance 46.29 (b) (21) to ban
parking on the north side of Piper Road from Warner Lane to Tuxedo Blvd.
This action would serve to eliminate the parking hazard on the north side
of Piper Road and facilitate orderly traffic flow. I would also urge immediate
installation of the no parking signs before frost enters the ground.
J ~
C e.5 ~' z 'e_~-
./
BLVD
",1
CITY OF MOUND
PHONE - HOME
BUSINESS
VEHICLE NFOm ATION
MAKE ,,.\,C~'qq MODEL ~015~o~_ ~l ~) LICENSE
DIAGP~M OF LOT ~ Usa ~aversa si~af this ~aquasn:
RKMARKS BY INDIVIDUAL MAKING REQUEST:
RECOmmENDATION
SIGNATURE
CITY of MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
· MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364
(612) 472-1155
December 2, 1983
TO:
FROM:
CITY COUNCIL
CITY MANAGER
Enclosed is alist of the existing and proposed fee's for consideration.
The Planning Fee's more accurately reflect autual Staff costs and break
st'eps down to more closely reflect the work that is required.
In addition, they shouldn't cause any problems since the increases are
modest, but do reduce the subsidy the services have been receiving from
the General Fund.
The. Dock Fee increase of $10.00 reflects our need to build a Capital
Improvment Fund for Commons Maintenance. This should amount to $4,000
per year, enough to start our rip-rap program and our dredging of storm
sewer outlets that we have previously carried out with Federal Revenue
Sharing Funds.
· JE: fc ..
CITY of MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364
(612) 472-1155
TO: CITY COUNCILMEMBERS
FROM: JON ELAM
DATE: NOVEMBER 21, 1983
RE: REVISION OF PLANNING & DOCK FEE'S FOR 1984
As a follow-up to the 1984 budget reviews, I am proposing a
list of planning, zoning, and dock fees for 1984, that more
closely reflect the actual costs of the city in incurring,
in reviewing, and processing them. If changed, they will
become effective January 1st.
1983 PROPOSED
APPLICATION COSTS 1984 COSTS
Variance
Conditional Use
Wetland Permit
Street or Easement Vacation
$ 35.00 $ 50.00
100.00 200.00
'100.00 I00.00
IOO.OO 150.O0
SUBDIVISION
(P'~~ . .
~Preliminary plat
Final Plat
Lot Split (Waiver of prOvisions
of City Code, Chapter 22)
Zoning Amendment
Dock Permit (year)
Commercial Dock License
200.00
0.OO 150~OO
o.oo t.~00~.~
35.00 50.00
100.00 200.00
65.OO 75.OO
100.00 150.00
CITY of MOUND
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364
(612) 472-1155
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
S'UBJECT:
Jon Elam, City Manager
Jan Bertrand, Building Official
November 18, 1983
Review of Fees
I would suggest a review of the present zoning fees and
include a provision in the resolution that all costs for
the City Engineer, City Planner and the City Attorney be
sessed against the applicant up front of processing the
a cation.
P~esent P
Var e $ 35.00 $
Condit 1 Use 100.00
Wetland ~it IO0.C
Street Vacat 1 O0
Sign Permit N/A
Subdivision 200.00 plus
7.00 per lot
Prelimi
Final ! O~ -
Lot- lit (Waiver of 35.00 plus
pi isions of City 7.00 per lot
22) over two
Amendment 1
,, /00~~
~.O0 '
~n Bertrand
JB/ms
Cas~ No. 83-264
'. '. CITY OF MOUND
· . Mound, Minnesota
Planning Commission Agenda of.November 28, 1983:
Board of Appeals
Case No. 83-264
Location: North side of Carlow Road
'Legal Desc.: ·Lots 1,2,3,4,5 & 26, Block 1'4,
Seton..
Request: Lot-split Subdivision
Zoning Dist:
Applicant
Harold L. Kutzner
4653 Carlow Road
Mound, MN. 55364
Phone: 472-2747
The applicant is requesting that the present tax parcel of Lots 1., 2, 3, 4, 5
and 26 be split up as follows:
Lot 5 will' be combined with Lots ~,7,g ~ 9, Block 14, Seton;
Lot~ 26 and the 5. ½ of Lots 1,2,3 & 4 will be combined with
.. parcel Lots 23, 24 & 25;
.. North ½ of Lots 1,2,3 & 4 will remain as one parcel.
Also, he is requesting the waiver provisions of subdividing of land, Chapter 22.
The site going north from Carlow Road has a gradual ;lope with the wetlands
starting approximately 120~ from the right-of-way. The house on Lots 23, 24
and 25 of Block 14, Seton, is on a knoll with the backyard continuing gradual-
ly to the north with a steep.(l:l ratio) slope abutting the wetlands approxi-
mately 6 foot h-igh.
Comments: If the north 1/2 of Lots 1, 2, 3 and 4 a're ~llowed to be split, it
will create an unbuildable site even if the lot'area.is 6,400 square
feet. It will be in the designated wetlands/-
"/Jan Bertrand
Building Official
JB/ms
MINUTES OF THE
MOUND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF
NOVEMBER 28, 1983
Present were: Chairman Frank Weiland; Commissioners Robert Byrnes, Liz Jensen,
Geoff Michael, Thomas Reese and Michael Vargo; Council Representative Pinky Charon;
City Manager Jon Elam; City Planner Mark Koegler and Secretary MaYjorie Stutsman.
Commissioner Stan Mierzejewski was absent.
Also present for the regular meeting were: Harold Kutzner, Ronald Ci'oud, Lowell
Zitzloff, Dr. Charles Carlson and Mr. and Mrs. Ned Podany.
Chairman Frank Well.and opened the regu.lar meeting at 7:10 p.m. as no candidates
for membership on the Planning Commissio.n were present.
M I'NUTE's
The minutes of tl)e Planning Commission meeting of'November 14, 1983 were presen.ted
for consideration. Jensen moved and Michael seconded a motion to approve the minutes
as presented. The vote was unanimously in favor.
~OARD. OF APPEALS
.. Case. No. 83-264 Lot-split subdivision '.
Lots.],' 2, 3, 4, 5 and 26, Block 14, Seton
Harold Kutzner and Ronald Cloud were present.
Fi~st~ Mr. Kutzner explained that Mr. Cloud would like to take over Lot 5.
Lot 5 is higher.than Lot 4 and can be maintained and reached easily only
from..Mr. Cloud's property - Lot 22. Mr. Cloud also owns Lots 19, 20 and 21.
Mr. 'Kutzner wants .Lot 5 separated and to be transferred to Mr. Cloud to be
combined with his parcel.
Mr. Kutzner wants to combine the South 1/2 of-Lots 1, 2, 3 and 4 with Lots
23, 24, 25 and 26 so that the house his daughter is living in will have.more.
land. The daughter will ul.timately be t'he owner of this and.will be. able to
homestead'rt. Mr.. Kutzner plans to keep the North 1/2 of Lots.l, 2, 3 and 4
as access to Lots 37, 38, 39, 2, 3, 4 and 5, of Block 10 (providing a ~ay to
the lake which he wants someday to deed to his grandchildren). This land is
Wetlands 'and unbuildable. The Planning Commission discussed that Mr. Kutzner
wants to get rid of some of his property now.
Reese ~oved'and Byrnes seconded a motion to recommend subdividing Lot 5 of
Block 14 from the rest of parcel; Lot 5 to be combined with Ronald Cloud's
property which is Lots 19, 20, 21 and 22 of Block 14, Seton. 'The vote was
unanimously in favor.
Charon moved and Jensen seconded a motion to recommend dividing Lots 1,2,3,4
· and combining the south 1/2 of these lots with Lots 23, 24, 25 and 26 of
Block 14; Seton; the north 1/2 of Lots 1,2,3,4 to be combined with Harold
Kutzner'.s Lots 37, 38, 39, 2, 3, 4 and 5 in Block 10, Seton. The vote was
unanimously in favor.
The question of assessments was discussed and Mr. Kutzner stated he doesn't
want ~o have to pay off the special assessments at this time; wants to con-
tinue paying them as before.
CR'Y
.), MOLIND
,PPLICATION FOR SUBDIVISION OF LAND .
Sec. 22.O3-a CASE NO. 83-264
VILLAGE OF MOUND ~
FEE $ ~'~ ~
FEE OWNER
· PLAT
PARCEL
/?- 1/7-~-3
Location and complete legal description of property to be divided;
ZONING ~ -2,
To be divided as follows:
{attach survey or scare drawin~ showing adjacent streets, dimension of proposed
building sites, square foot area of each new parcel designated by number}
A WAIVER IN LOT SIZE IS REQUESTED FOR..:
New Lot No. From
Reason: ·
Square feet TO
Square feet
Applicant's interest in the property: '/"~~'~¢://~"~" ~-"'~-~>~' ~:~'
This application must be signe e OWNERS of the property, or an explan-
ation given why this is not the case.'~. ).
T,,_. NO. ¢/??.- ?
o AT E ,'¢'/~- "~,,'¢
,
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
~.~ 24 !25 Z6
16'17 18 19
12 I:
ROAD
ROSCOMM( ROAD
ROAD
\ 6 .
PROPOSED RESOLUTION
Case #83-264
Ao
Bo
C°
RESOLUTION TO CONCUR WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDATION AND APPROVE THE FINAL SUBDIVISION
FOR LOTS 1,2,3,4,5, AND 26, BLOCK 14, SETON
PID # 19-117-23 22 0127
WHEREAS, the final subdivision of Lots 1,2,3,4,5, and 26, Block
14, Seton, has been submitted in the manner required for platting of land
under the City of Mound Ordinance Code, Section 22.00 and under Chapter 462
of the Minnesota Statutes and all proceedings have been duly conducted
thereunder, and
WHEREAS, said subdivision is consistent with the City Plan and the
regulations and requirements of the laws of the State of Minnesota and ordinance
of the City of Mound, and
WHEREAS, the applicant has requested a waiver to the subdivision
requirements contained in Section 22.00 of the City Code, and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request and recommends
approval subject to conditions, and
WHEREAS, it is hereby determined that there are special circumstances
affecting said property such that the strict application of the ordinance would
deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of his land; that the waiver is
necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right;
and that granting the waiver will not be detrimental to the public welfare
or injurious to the other property owners.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND,
MINNESOTA;
That the request of Harold L. Kutzner for the waiver from the provisions
of Section 22.00 of the City Code for platting of land and the request to
subdivide property of less than five acres, described as PID# 19-117-23 22 0127
Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 26, Block 14, Seton, is hereby granted to permit
division of the property in the following manner:
Lot 5 to be combined with Lots 19, 20, 21, 22, Block 14, Seton
North 1/2 of Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, to be combined with Lots 37, 38, 39, 2, 3, 4,
and 5 in Block 10, Seton
South 1/2 of Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, Block 14, Seton to be combined with Lots
23, 24, 25 and 26 of Block 14, Seton with the present assessments.
That the City Clerk is hereby directed to supply a certified copy of this
Resolution to the above named owners and subdividers after completion of
requirements, for their use as required by M.S.A. 462.358.
This final subdivision shall be filed and recorded within 180 days of the
date of the adoption of this resolution in the Office of the Register of Deeds
or the Registrar of Titles of Hennepin County to show compliance with the
Subdivision regulations of this City.
· CITY OF MOUND
~ound, Hinnesota
Pl'annlng Commission Agenda of November 28, 1983:
Board of Appeals Applicant
Case No. 83-265 Lowell Zitzloff
Location: 6365 Bay Ridge Road 6365 Bay. Ridge Road
Legal Desc.: Lots 1 & 2, Block 2, Anderson Mound, MN. 55364
Second Addition Phone: 473-4680
Request: Variance for.Accessory Building Provisions
Zoning District: R-1
CZ.se No. 83-265
The applicant is requesting to put a bathroom facility into an accessory buildi.ng
which is under construction on his property.
The lot area, se~acks and bulk (square footage) of the buildings conform to the
zoning ordinance. The City Code Section 23.604.4 allows Garages as a permi'tted
accessory use in the R-1 Zoning District. However, the definition for garages,
~r.ivate - Section 23.302 (50) defines it as "an accessory building or accessory
portion of the principal building which is intended for and used to store private
passenger vehicles of the family resident upon the premises".
Comments:
The structure will have two (2) overhead doors, it will be heated, and
does meet the energy code requirements for insulation of the roof, walls
and slab. The sewer to the house is "Y"d off to the garage and the
water is "Y"d off with another shut off and water meter to be installed.
Recommendation:
! would recommend the requested variance upon the condition t~at
the plans be part of the adopted resolution; and if any further
remodeling is planned for the accessory building, another vari-
ance approval would be required.
The. abutting neighbOrs, have been'notified.
Jan .Bertrand
Building Official
JB/ms
Planning Commission. Minutes
November 28,. 1983 - Page 2
e
Case No..83-265 Variance for Accessory Building a't 6365 Bay Ridge Road
Lots~l and 2', Block 2, Anderson Second Addition
Lowell Zitzloff was present.
The City M~nager explained that the reason the Building Inspector brought
this to the Planning Commission is that she~was concerned this accessory
building could be turned into a rental unit if lavatory facilities were
installed. The building itself meets the ordinance and conforms so far
as lot area, setbacks and square footage are concerned.
Mr. Zitzloff explained home is split entry and there is no room for storage
or a work shop. The garage is work,hop and hobbyshop. House is down hill
and if there is~rain or snow, it get slippery. As a result of an accident,
he has a problem wish his knee and as he gets older, feels he would like
the convenience of facilities in his garage workshop. Mr. Zitzloff under-
stands that the accessory building can't'be con~rted for living areal he
willo give the City something in.writing drawn up by his attorney stating
~.Hat nei'ther he nor someone that might buy the property would use the garage
fOr .li~ing quarters.
By'r'nes moved and Charon ~seconded a motion to recommend approving the vari-
ance With the stipulation that ah¥"remo~ing on this accessory building
"would be brought back before the Planning Commission. The vote was un-
animously in favor.
CITY OK HOUND CASE 83-265
Date Fi]ed
APPLICATION TO PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
(Please type the following information)
Legal Description of Property: Lot?_~
Block
Day Phone No.
Address
Type ~f. Request:
(~j~riance ( ) Conditional Use Permit
( ) Zoning int~rpretation & Review
( )' Wetland Permit ( ) P.U.D.
('. ) Amendment
( ) Sign Permit
· .( )*Other
*if other, specify:
· Has an appl~catlon ever been made for zoning, variance, or'conditional use permit or
· other zoning procedure for this property1 ~%~ ~, 'If so, list' date(s)
list. date(s) of application, action taken and provide Resolution No.(s)
Copies of previous resolutions shall accompany present request.
I certify that all of the above statements and the statements contained in any required
papers or plans to be submitted herewith are true and accurate. I consent to the entry in
or upon the premises described in this application by any authorized Official of the City
of Mound for the purpose of inspecting, or of posting, maintaining and removing such
S,gnature of Applicant
Planning Commission~On:
Date
Council Action:
ResoluTion No.
~Reque~ for Zoni.ng Variance Procedure
D. Loca'tion of: S. igns, easements, underground utilities, etc.
E. Indicate North compass direction
.~." Any additional information as may reasonably be required by the Eity Staff
and applicable Sections of the Zoning ~rdinance.
Case # 83~265
II!. Request for a' Zonin9 Variance
A. All..i~formation below, a site.plan, as described in Part 11, and general
.application must be provided before a hearing.will be scheduled·
B. Does .the present'use ~f. the property'conform to all use regulations for
the zone district in ~hich it is located? Yes (1~)~ No ( )'
If !'no", specify each ~on-conforming use:
· 'Co
Do .the existing.structures comply, with all area height and bu]k.~egulations
for the ~n~ district in'which i't'is'.located?' Yes (1~' No ' ( ) .......
If !'no", specify each non-conformin9 use:
Which unique physical characteristics of the subject property prevent .its
reasonable use for any of the ·uses .permitted in that zoni.ng.district?
( ) .Too qarrow (.) Topography
() Too. small' :. .( )' Drainage-
( .) Too shal'low (.) Shape
( ) Soil
'(. ) Sub-surface
( ~ Other: Specify.'.
~as-the' hardship described ab~ 'create~ by the a~tion.of anyone havi.ng
pcoperty interests in the land after 'the Zoh'ing Ordinance was adopted?
Yes ( ) No ~ If yes,. explain:.
F: Was' the hardship created by"any'other man-made change, such as the reloca-
t'ion of a road? Yes ( ) No-(~ if yes, explain:
Are the conditions of hardship for'~hich:¥ou request a vari~oce peculiar
only to the property described'in this petition? Yes (~ No ( )
If no, how.many other properties are similarly affected?
What is the "minimum" ~dification ivariance) from the area-bulk regulations
that will permit you to ~ke reasonable use of your land? (Specify, using
maps, site plans with dimensions and written explanation. Attach additional
sheets, i'f necessary.) ~ ~
Will granting of the variance be materially detrimental to prope~ ~n ~ne
same zone, or to the enforcement of this ordinance?
4 ~ F~,,dAU
I
I
PROPOSED RESOLUTION
Case #83-265
RESOLUTION TO CONCUR WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE THE VARIANCE FROM ACCESSORY
BUILDING PROVISIONS FOR LOTS 1 AND 2, BLOCK 2, ANDERSON
SECOND ADDITION, PID # 23-117-24 33 0005~0006
WHEREAS, the owner of the property described as Lots 1 and 2, Block 2,
Anderson's Second Addition has applied for a variance to allow the construction
of plumbing and water closet facilities in an accessory building, and
WHEREAS, the City Code states that garages are allowed as a permitted
use in the R-1 zoning district and is defined as "an accessory building
or accessory portion of the principal building which is intended for and
used to store private passenger vehicles of the resident upon the premises", and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended approval of this variance
with certain conditions.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA:
That the City Council does hereby concur with the Planning Commission
recommendation to approve the variance from the accessory building provisions
with the stipulation that any remodeling on this accessory building
wou]d be brought back before the Planning Commission for variance approval.
for Lots 1 and 2, Block 2, Anderson's second addition (6365 Bay Ridge Road)
.i
L E'i NG
~15 80
APPLICATION FO~ STREET VACATION
CITY OF MOUND
~dany
ADDRESS '6~65 Sinclair Road~ Mound, M~ 55364
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY OWNED BY APPLICANT: PLAT
LOT 1 & 2 BLOCK 17 SUBDIVISION
· PARCEL
The Highlands
Part of PARK shown on plat of The Highlands '- see attached
STREET TO BE VACATED
.description.
REASON FOR REQUEST This portion of the PARK is of no use' to anyone other than the
.applicant, ~ho is ~illin~ to grant permanent walkway easement to' City.
Address
6~65 Sinclair Road, Mbund, MN 55364
.Applicant's Interest in Property
Tel. No. 472-4051
Vendee qnder Contract for Deed
Residents and owners of property a~ut~ing the street to be vacated:
Recommended by Utilities: NSP ; Minnegasco ;
Continental Tel..-
That part of the PARK as shown on "The Highlands", according
to the recorded plat thereof, which lies Easterly 'of the
East line of Lot 2, Block 17, Northerly of the Northerly
line of Lot 1, Block 17, said "The Highlands", and WestErly
of the following-described line: Commencing at the Northeast
corner of said Lot 1; thence Northwesterly along the
Northerly line'~f said Lot 1 a distance of 8.80 feet to the
point of beginning of the line being described; thence
Northerly parallel with the East line of said Lot 2 a
distance of 58 feet; thence Northwesterly to the Northeast
corner of said. Lot 2, and said line there ending; ..
Planning Commission'Minutes
November 28, 1983 - Page 3
Case No'. 83-267 Vacation of Park Land/Land Exchange
Block 17, The Highlands
Mr. & Mrs. N~d Podany were present.
The City Manager explained'that since 1974 the City has attempted to work
out an arrangement of the property li.ne with Mr. Podany to get access tO the
beach on Priest's Bay without walking on private property; have tried a
variety of ways to achieve that goal. The Park .Commission'and also the
City Council have concurred that they'want to have an exhange of' land. He
explained the Building Inspector wants to create a parcel for the garage so
it wouldn't need any variances and the proposal now is giving 3400 square
feet for 300 square feet. City Manager feels the worst is that we lose high
.ground and the City would retain a very narrow piece of land and would prob-
ably have to put a fence in to keep public off'the private property. He
doesn't know that the City would be.satisfied with the proposed land desCrip~
tion and division line, but a public hearing does'have to be held before
final proposal would be worked out. The City beoefits by getting access to
their land and Podany would get land for a garage. 'They will have a lot of
legal work ahead/there is another vacation procedure that will. have to go .
through District Court. The Park Commission has.recommended this action
and the Planning' Commission should'take some action also.
Reese moved and Jensen seconded a motion support'lng the recommendation of
the vacation of land with a more definable and useable walkway. The vote
was unanimously in favor.
? A
Cer~i£ica%e of Survey
for Ned C. Podany
in Lots i and 2, Block l?, The HiEhlands
Henne?in County~ Minnesota
I hereby certify that ~his is a ~rue'and correct
representation of a survey of the boundaries of:
A/ Lot 2, Block l?, "The Highlands", e~cept that
part thereof lying Easterly of the following-
described line: Commencing at the Northeast corner
of said lot; thence South along the East line of
said lot a distance of 50 feet to the point of begin-
ning of said line; thence deflecting to the right
3°52' to the shoreline of Lake F~nnetonk~, and there
ending;
_B/ That part of Lot 2, Block 17, "The Highlands", :
lying Easterly of %he folios'lng-described line:
Com~nenclng at the Northeast corner of said lot;
thence South along the E~st line of said lot a dis-
tance of 50 feet to the point of beginning of said
line; theuce deflecting to the right ~°52' to the
s~boreline of Lake M~nnetonka, and there ending;
~ ALSO t~hat oarb of ~he PARK as 'sho~n on "The High-
~ lands" according to the recorded plat thereof,
'~ which lies Easterly of the East line of Lot 2,
~ Block l?, Northerly of the Northerly line of Lot l,
~J Block 17, said "The Highlands", and Westerly of the
~ ~ following-described line: Co~mencing at the-~orth-
~ east corner of said Lot l; thence Northwesterly
along the Northerly line of said Lot i a distance
o£ $.~O feet to the 'P°in~ of beginning of the line
being described; thence Northerly parallel with
the East line of said Lot 2 a distance of 58 feet;
thence Northwesterly to the Northeast corner of
said Lot 2, and said line there ending; A~O Lot l,
Block 17, "The Highlands", according to the recorded
plat, except that part of said Lot I lying Easterly
of the follo~ing-descrlbed line: Commencing at the
Northeast corner of said Lot l; thence Northwesterly
along the Northerly line of said Lot i a distance of
8.gO feet to the point' of beginning of ~he line
being described; thence Southeasterly ~o a point on
the East line of said Lot i distant 60 feet South-
erly of the Northeast corner of said Lot l, and said
line there ending,
and the location of all existing buildings thereon.
It does not purport to sho~' other improvements or
encroachments.
Scale: 1'" = L0'
Date : 6-29-22
0 : ~ron marker
Area of dry land = 15680 sq.
OORDOh' R. COFFIN CO., INC.
Gordon R. CoffLu Re~g. ~c. 6064
Mark $. Gron~rg Reg. Nc..12755
Land Surveyors and Planners
Long k~k~., Minnesot~
CASE NO. 83-25B
CITY OF MOUND
Mound, Minnesota
Planning-Commission Agenda of October 24, 1983:
Board of Appeal.~
Case No. 83-258
Location: Woodcrest of Mound, 3rd Addn.
Legal Desc.: Lots I - 5, Block 1;
Lot 4, Block 2; Lots 1 and 2,
Block 3; Lot 3, Block
Woodcrest of Mound 3rd Addition
Request: 1D Foot Front Yard Setback Variance
Zoning Dist~.
Applicant:
Schlee Builders, Inc.
Russ Fierst
3140 Harbor Lane North
Plymouth, MN 55441
Phone: 559-2200
The applicant, MF, Fierst, has attached to my comments his explanation for the .
requested l'Ofoot variance for 9 lots as described. He has provided one ~et of
up-to-date surveys' of the lots described in his [equest with existing and proposed
yard grades. He has provided (12) copies of the City approved grading plans for
the subdiv~sion,'the plat copies and a signed petition of neighbors' approval to
h~s request.
The developer had an approved grading plan with the City which was not adhered to
before the property was forfeited back to the financial'instituti~n. Before for-
feiture, Deerwood Drive was installed with utilities. The lots, 1 - 5, Block 1,
were undercut and a portion leveled with some of the fill removed'& placed for road
purposes, and on the south side of the road, Lots 1 .and 2, Block 3 and Lot 4,
Block 2. 'In doing so, the developer left a steep hill to the south and fil.led
..... the area to the north with twb ridges, one'at about the.30 foot setback line and
ode at the approximate boundary of the wetland. The foundation'area of the pro-
..... posed building site has not been determined to be suitable for placing a structure,
as it possibly was not a controlled compaction of the filled foundation area.' I
~ -would llke the Planning Commission to'note that Paragraph (2).does state that t~e
...building contractor would like to minimize, their soil corrections.
· . Lot 3, Block 4, off of Setter Circle has a large drainage ditch. The ditch was
dug as 'a temporary drainage way for th~ area until the permanent culvert and catch
., basins were installed· Outlot A is drained north by storm sewer to Lake Langdon.
The permanent system'is installed and functioning· The temporary drainageway can
.... now be filled and graded. -
Comments: The main questions before the Commission are: Does the City want to have
the building contractor adhere to the original grading plans? Or, does the City want
to allow some grading modification, but not. grant the variance? And/or, does the
City want to modify the grading by granting the variances as requested? Of the lots
remaining in the Woodcrest Additions, the're are others with similar situations.
Recommend: The Staff recommends denial of the request as it is not of oood planning
practice. However, I would also recbmmend a modification in the approved grading
plan on file with the City for Lots 1-5, Block l~ Lot 4, Block 2; and.Lots 1 and 2,
Block 3. The revised grading to be approved by the City Engineer with slope reran-
sion plans for any slope greater than 1:3 ratio.
Jan ~ertrand
FOX MEADOWS OFFICE PARK · SUITE 30'~ · BUILDING 3
3')~O HARBOR LANE · MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55~41
TELEPHONE 559-2200
City of Mound
3341 Maywood Rd.
Mound, MN 55364
RE: Lot Variances -..20' set back
Lots 1 - 5, Block 1, Uoodcrest of Mound 3rd addition
Lot 4, Block 2, Woodcrest of Mound 3rd addition
Loks 1 & 2, Block 3, ~oodcrest of Mound 3rd addition
Lot 3; Block 4, Woodcrest of Mound 3rd addition
· .Dear City of Mouhd: ..
I am requesting lot variances on the above mentioned lots for the following
reasons: Lots 1 - 5, Block 1 have a large, steep bank on the rear of the
· p'roperty. The land contours were changed from the proposed grading plan,
which was approved on the final plat. .'Now, if a 26 x 42 home is placed on
those lots, with the current 30' set back, the home is right at the bottom
of the steep bank. This in our mind creates future drainage plroblems.
With a 20'set back from the street, we will be able'to contrdl that problem.
Also, behind Lots 1 & 2, Block 1, is a ponding'area that needs some special
attention in keeping'the water out of the future home's basements. By
having the 20! set back from.the street, we will be far enough from the pond
to be able to control the natural drainage to.that pond. Also with the vari-
ance, the future homeowner's will be able to have a small area thai'will be
usabl%.
Lots 1 & 2, Block 3, and Lot 4, Block 2 arb very steep in %he rear yard. Wit~
-. a normal 30' set back, a 26 x 42 home is very close to being in the park area.
This is very wet and a lot of soil correction~will be needed. With
antes, we could keep the home5 out of the wet areas and minimize our soil
corrections.
Lot 3, Block &', has a large drainage ditch in the rear of the lot. When a
26 x &2 is put on the lot, with the normal set backs, the rear of the home
is right on the edge of the'ditch and drainage pond." A 20' set back would
allow us to be lO' from the ditch and ponding easement area. Also, it would
help us to properly drain off the wa~er run-off. ...
So with the above mentioned hardships, we feel that a ~0' front set back
is well warranted.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
SCHLEE BUILDERS, !NC.
Eugene ~. 5chlee, rresident
follows: iLo~s 1-5, 'Block 1; Lot ~ Block 2' Lots 1
block 4; a)l )n ~oodcFest of Mound
Bud Schlee and ~uss F)erst were ~resent.
The applicant is requesting street fron't variances for 9 lots in the ~oodcrest
3rd Addition due to drainage, soil and topography problems. Soll borings
been taken in two places and in some areas the topography drops 23~ feet.
The Building Inspector e~plained that the origlnal grading plan for the
· development was no~ adhered.to -- ~hat was proposed for the lots to the
south of Deerwood was not to cut the hill so drastically or whbt they'have.
The developer came in and cut hill leaving a steep hill to the south
(topography drops approximately 23 feet) and then used that to level off
for the ro~d and took some of d)Ft and filled the side north of the road.
On the north side of. road toward ~btlo~ A, there are 2 ridges now; one is
at about the edge of the wetlands vegetation and the other )s at where the
proposed setback line was. (Deerwood sites)
Off of Setter Circle on Lot 3, Block 4, there is a drainage.easement marked
on the north portion of that to Westedge. A large ditch was d~g as a tempo-
F~F¥ dr~in~oe way to back part of lot; now i.~' permanent culvert andlcatch
bas~n~tailed tO .h~ndle drainage from Outlot A north to Lake Langdon and t'he
temporary ditch is not required.
Chairman questioned type of structures'being proposed.for various lots.
Fierst' thoughtlLOt 1-5,'Block 1 'on Deerwood would probably be 'tuckunders;
one on Setter might'be split entry with attached garage, or a rambler;.the
houses on north side of Deerwood would probably be split entry. Fierst
stated that they are finding out there is ~ lot of p~oblems with some of
the lots; some have drainage problems, some soil problems, some fill. The
original .developer sold the good lots and the ones that are left hdve prob
)ems. Discuss'~ cont)nued. ~"~
· Byrnes'suggested that Planning Commission do these in three parts: 1). :'
Setter Circle lot, 2) Area south of Deerw~od an~ 3)'Are~ north of Deerwood
1) Setter Circle lot - discossed that temporary ditch could be fillKd;
would ~till drain'due to elevations. ~)chael questioned "if you fill in
ditch, presuming drainage would be okay, you would not. need a variance,
would you?" He feels that if.we .could save trees and not 'have to give
variance, be better off in the long run. Fierst stated trees would be lost
anyway with driveway, etc. and variance to keep drainage away from the
house would be better. Discussed.
Byrnes. moved and Jensen seconded a motion to deny a variance on Lot 3,
Block 4 (Setter Circle lot). The vote was unanimously in favor of ~he
denial.
3) Discussed the lots north pf Deerwo°d with t.he two ridges i~ them (Lots
1 and 2, Block 3 and Lot ~, Block 2). Lots could have more fill original
elev.
proposal was to bring back of property to 9~1/'- would take a lot more work
and soil compaction. Byrnes asked if City Engineer has looked at lots to
see about feasibility of filling. Discussed whether fill put in was in a
controlled m~nner. The Building Inspector stated Engineer has been out;
~he soil borings that were done did not indicate any soil problems ~t alt.
Fierst stated that only one house has been built on Deerwood and they feel the
whole ~lock should ge~ variances because ~here would be consislency of
house setback lines--h~ve nice ~ooking stree:. Lots drop off--whole block
sP, ould be pulled forward. Other lots on street were sold by them, but are
Planning Commission Minutes
October 24, 1983 - Page 3'
that developer should have been required to have a bond to do 'grading
job rig~.t;.develop~ so.Id.choice lots and Bank got the problem lots back.
Also, covenant was not file~ and is unenforceable.
Byrhes moved and Jensen seconded a motion to deny variances on Lots 1 and
2, Block'3 and Lot 4, B.lock 2, Woodcrest 3rd Addition.
Discussed. Michael asked "argument for consis'tency or conformity in neighZ
borhood as opposed to vacant land sitting there has no merit--if Vote would
be to remain consistent with first one, where are we?" Chairman stated
.first lot off by itself.'
The vote on the motion was Byrnes, Jensen and Charon in favor of the denial;
Michael and Weiland opposed to the denial." Motion carries 3 to 2.
2) 5 lots in Block .1 - the Building'Inspector stated ~ot 4 has a 23 fo~t
fall; lots were overcut or undercut,' however you look. at it.- Charon feels
there is more of a hardship on th'ese lo'ts - others can be filled; can't do
much with a steep slope. Discussed. Anything more'than a 3:1 slope has
'to be sodded or.seeded.
Charon moved and Byrnes seconded a motion.to approve lO foot variances
for Lots. I, 2, 3, 4 and 5, Block 1, Woodcrest 3rd Addition. The vote
was unanimously in favor. _.
Applicant requested tha't this be considered at the November 1st Council meeting.
Appl, lcant '(if other than o~ner):
Type:of Request: ~Vari'ance ( ) .Conditibnal Use
*If other, specify:
) Amendment
] Sign Permit
)*Other
Present'Zoning District ~(~--
Exist.lng Use(s). of Property_
other zoning procedure for this property?. ' If so, .list'date(s). of
list d.ate(s) of application, action taken a~d provide Resolution No.(s)
Copies of previous resolutions shall accompany present request.
certify that all'of the above statements and the statements contained in any
,pars or plans to be submitted herewith are true and accurate. ) consent to the eh. try
upon thc premises described in ·this ~pplica~ion by any au. thorized of Ylcial of the City.
: Kound for the' purpose of inspecting, or of posting, malntainFn~ and removing such
~t)ces a.s may be req~i~ed by law.
)arming Com, miss~on ~eco~mendation:
Date 10-2/~-83
~jnci 1 Action:
Refolutlon No..
Request for Zonine. . Variance Procedure
De
Loca'tion of: Signs, easements; underground utilities, etc.
Indicate. No.r,th compass direction
an~ ~pp]icable Sections of. the Zoning O~dinance. ..
Iii. Request for a Zonin~ Variance ..
A. All.i~formation below, 'a site plan, as described in Part II, and general
.application must be provided before a hearing.will be scheduled.
B. Does .the present use of. the property'conform to all use regulations for
the zone distri~ in which., it is located? Yes (~ }1o ( )'
If !'no", specify each non-conforming use:
~.. Do '.the e~isting structures comply, with all area height and bulk.~egulations
for the z~ne district'in'which i't' is .located? Yes (/~) . No.'( . ..
If."no", specify ~ach non-conforming use:
~ich unique physical characteristics of the subject property prevent its
reasonable use for.any .or,he uses.permitted in that zoni.ng.distrlct?
( ) .Too qarrow (~0 Topography ~:~ Soi~
( ) Too. small ' :. .(~0" Drainage.· ( ) Sub-surface
(~<) Too shallow (.) Shape ( ) Other: Specify:
E..Was .the hardship described above create~ by the a~tion of anyone havi.ng
property interests in the land altec Zhe 2o~'ing ordinance w~s adopted?
Yes ( ) No ~/' If yes, explain:.'
F. ~as the hardship created by"~ny'o.~i~e~ man-made change, such as the reloca- · .tion of a road? Yes ( ) No~ If yes, explain:
G. Are the conditions of hardship for'which:you request a variance peculiar
only to the property d~scribed in this petition? Yes ( ) No ~
If %o, how m~ny other p, roper les are similarly affected?
H.'.~,'i-,at is the "minimum" ~dification (variance) from the ~rea-bulk regulations
that will permit you to make reasonable use of your land? (Specify, usin
maps, site plans with dimensions ~d written~xplan~tiDn. Attach additlonal
1. ~i]l ~ranting of :h'e variance be materi~ y dezriment~] t proper, in the
5~me zone, or to ~he enforcement of this ordinance?
oo
-I
/
/
,.
O Denotes iron Monument
' Denotes Wood Stake
X00o.0 Den6tes Existing Elevation
(000.0) Denotes Proposed Elevation
-4 ..Denotes Direction of Surfac~ Drainage
Proposed Top of Foundation Elevation-- '.
Proposed Garage Floor Elevation =
Proposed Lowest Floor Elevation--
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of a suryey of the boundaries o(:
Lot !, Block !, WOODCREST OF MOh~D 3RD ADDITION, Hennepin County,
Minnesota.
And of the location of all buildings, if any. thereon, and all visible encroachments, if any. from or _
on said land. It also shows the Iocaton of the slakes as s~t for a proposed building As surveyed/.,"
79~l / ////Z. .
by me this llth day of ]4ay 19. .
.~.~(~-~e~ ~ Thomas S. Bergculs~ /~.
~2-~ SJ$ . LandSu~e"or ~nn'Re~ No 77~' '
CER/[FICAIE OF SURVEY
for
DICX
/
!
./
L.'.o ·
O Denotes Iron Monument
· n Denotes Wood Stake
XO00.O DenOtes Existing Elevation
(000.01 Denotes Proposed Elevation
< - Denotes Direction of Surfac~ Drainage
./
Proposed Top of Foundation Elevation
Proposad Garage Floor Elevation =
Proposed Lowest Floor Elevation---
I hereby certify that this is a true and' correct representation of a su~ey of the boundaries of:
Lot 2, Block 1, WOODCREST OF MOL.~D 3RD ~.~DITION, Hennepin
County, Minnesota.
And of the location of all buildines, if any. thereon, and all visible encroachments, if any. from or
on said land. It also shows the Iocaton of the stakes as/,et for a proF~sed b~ldmg. As surveyed
bymeth,s, ll~ndayof /Ray 19 ?-' · ,'
7-12-D~ EJS. ~ndSu~eyor. Minn. Reg. No.7725
x,
O Denotes Iron Monument
a. Denotes Wood Stake
XOO0.O Denotes Existing Elevation
{000.0) .Denotes Proposed ESevation
...Denotes Direction of Sur[ac~ Drainage
PtoposeEl Top of Foundation Elevatlon--
Proposed Garage Floor Elevation
Proposed Lowest Floor Elevation =
i hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of a survey of the boundaries
Lot 3, Block I, WOODCREST OF MOUND 3RD ADDITION, Hennepin County?
Minnesota.
And of the location of all buildings, if any, thereon, and all visible encroachments, if any, from or
on said land. tt also shows the Iocaton of the slakes as set for a prop,c~e~ding. As' suqEey/d
z~-~ ~e~-.~ (,~4 Thomas S. Bergquist//~/
Land Survey,or. ~inn. Reg. No. 7725
CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY
for
Denotes iron Monument
Denotes Wood Stake
0
XO00.O Denotes Existing Elevation
(O00.O) Denotes Proposed Elevation
Denotes Direction of Surfac6 Drainage.
Pr'oposec~ Top of Foundation Elevation--
Proposed Garage Floor Elevation ~
Proposed Lowest Floor Elevation ~
hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of a sur~ey of the boundaries of:
Lot 4, Block 1, WOODCREST OF MOUND 3RD ADDITION, Hennepin County,
Minnesota.
And of the location of ail buildings, if any. thereon, and all visible encroachments, if any. from o~
on said land. 1: also shows the Ioca'ton of the s~akes as/~_e~ ,or a proposed~b~'lding. A~.su~ey~
· ~
by me this ~t~ day of ,.~ay 19 39 .'~/ ./ / '/~"~ ~.. ~z...~f~/,,~ ~ .
/~s.,. '~" . - .,,
~-~.~ ~¢¢ e~.~ Thomas S. Ber~quist
7-~2-~ 5JB · Land Su~eyor, Minn. Re9. No."7725
~~ . ~'~--~ cERTIFiCATE OF SURVEY
~ rk,,cOOr¢,=S-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. ~ ~¢ ~'~
0 Denotes Iron Monument,
Denotes Wood Stake
XO00.0 Denotes Existing Elevation
'[OOO.O) Denotes Proposed Eieval~on
< ' Denotes Direction of Surfac~ Drainage
'5
' Proposed Top of Foundation Elevation
Proposed Garage Floor Elevation =
Proposed Lowest Floor Elevatlon----
· !
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of a survey o( the b.oundaries of:
Lot 5, Block 1, WOODC~ST O? MOU?iD 3RD ADDI?ION, Her~epin County, .
V'.irme $ o ts.
And of the location of all buildings, if any. thereon, and all visible encroachments, if any. from or
on s~d land. It also shows the Iocaton of the szakes a~, e~ fora prop ,,~sed building. As su_.,~eyed/
¥ ~. : .
Th°~.as S. Bercouis% /~ ·
5J~ Land Su~eyor. ~nn. Re~. No. 7725
O~S-~U~SON ~ssoc~s, ~NC.~~ I'~ i for
D/CH
O Denotes Iron Monument
D" . Denotes Wood Stake
X000.O Denotes Existing Elevation
(000.0) Denotes Proposed Elevation
Proposed Top of Foundation Elevation-~
Proposed Garage Floor Elevation
Elevation
-<------ Denotes Direction,o,f Sudaq6.Dr.air)age, Proposed Lowest Floor
! hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of a sur~ey of the boundaries of:
Lot 4, Bloc);
]~innesota.
2, WOODCREST OF 14OU],~D 3RD ADDITION, Hennepin County,
And of the location of all buildings, if any, thereon, and all visible encroachments, if any, from or
on said I~nd. It also shows the Ioca~on of the stakes as~se~ for a proposed building. As surveted
~.~ ~ ~ .~-- .. ·
~ncr~as S. ~e. gquz~
Minn. Reg. No. '7725
for
D/C J M 1 'TH
O Denotes iron Monument
· c~ Denotes Wood Stake
XO00.0 Den6tes Existing Elevation
{000.0} Denotes Proposed Elevation
Denotes Direction of Surfac~ Drainage
Proposed Top of Foundation Elevatlon--'
Proposed Garage Floor Elevation =
Proposed Lowest FJoor Elevation =
Lot
I hereby Certify that this is a true and' correct representation of a survey of the b~undaries of:
!, Block 3, wOODC~EST OF MOL~D 3_~D ADDITION, Hennepin County, Minnesota.
And of the location of all buildings, [f any, thereon, and all visible encroachments, if any. from or
on said land. It also shows the locaton of the stakes as s,~ (or a proposed building. As surveye~
,_~(~=~.;~ Thomas S. Bergquist /~
/~,/~= tsnd Su~eyoL M{nn. Reg. No. 7725
CERTIFICATE OF suRVEY
for
D lC K $ I'-FH L
O Denotes Iron Monument
~' · Denotes Wood StaKe
XOO0.O Den6tes Existing Elevation
{000.0) Denotes Proposed E~evation
~ '. Denotes Direction of Surfac~ Drainage.
Propose'd Top of Foundation Elevation----- '
Proposed Garage Floor Elevation= '
Proposed Lowest Floor Elevation--
I hereby certi~ that this is a ~rue and correct representation of a survey of the boundaries of:
Lot 2, Block 3, WOODCREST OF ]~OUND 3RD ADDITION,
Hennepin County, Minnesota.
And of the location of ali buildings, if any, thereon, and all visibie encroachments, if any, from or
7-12 °53 5J,,~ ' k~nd Surve'
~~ ~ r./,cCOM~S-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, ]NC.
on said land. it also shows the Ioca~on of the stake~
bymethis 16th dayof ~ay 1
zor, Minn. Reg. No. 7725
CERT~FICAIE OF SURVEY
for
DICi JA4 /TH
%
I
!
!
&,T/ti TY
O Denote~ Iron Monument
o Denotes Wood Stake
XO00.O Denotes Existing Elevation
(OO0.0) Denotes Proposed Elevation
Denotes Direction of' Surfac~ Drainage
937
.P. fopose..d Top of Foundation Elevation--
Proposed Garage Floor Elevation:
Proposed Lowest Floor Elevation'=
i hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of a survey of the boundaries of:
Lot 3~ Block 4, WOODCAEST OF MOUIND 3AD ADDITION, }:.ennepin County, Minnesota.
And of the location of all buildings, if any. thereo'n, and all visible encroachments, if any, from or
on s~id [and. It also shows the locaton of the stakes as .s~. t for a prop. osed buildin(:; As surveyed
· ,.___b-, .: f~~ - · i
LandSu~e,,or, Minn. Reg. No. 7725
~ ~cCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES,' INC.
CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY
I
for
D/CH JM / T/-t.-
/
o
I
-"~1~ -7'
_/
0
I
--i
PROPOSED RESOLUTION
CASE NO. 83-258
RESOLUTION NO. 83-
RESOLUTION TO CONCUR WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO
APPROVE A FRONT YARD SETBACK VARIANCE FOR LOTS 1 - 5,
BLOCK ~, WOODCREST OF MOUND 3RD ADDITION
WHEREAS, the owner, Schlee Builders, Inc.,.of the property described as Lots 1- 5,
Block 1; Lot 4, Block 2; Lots 1 and 2, Block 3;-L~ot 3, ~ ~I; all in
Woodcrest of Mound 3rd Addition PID Numbers 23-117-24 23 0087/0088/0089/
OO90/OO91/OO96/OO97/OO95, has applied for a 10 foot building setback vari-
ance from the required 3'0 foot street front in the R-1 2oning District, and
WHEREAS, the Planni.ng Commission has reviewed the request and recommends denial of
the request for Lot 4, Block 2; Lots 1 and 2, Block 3; Lot 3, Block 4; all
in Woodcrest of Mound 3rd Addition due to the fact that no hardship was
established, and
WHEREAS, the .Planni.ng Commission does recommend granting the 10 foot variance for
Lots 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5, Block 1, Woodcrest of Mound 3rd Addition as the
extreme top.ography of the rear portion of these described lots create a
hazard to the structures, if placed too close .to the slope"'
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLYED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF ~HE CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA:
That the City Council does hereby concur with the Planning Commission to
approve a 10 foot front yard setback variance for Lots 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5,
Block 1, Woodcrest of Mound 3rd A~dition.
2
<x
~77
CITY OF MOUND
APPLICATION FOR BINGO. PERMIT
Date November 18, 1983
Name of Applicant (kit Lady of the 'Lake Ca~olic church _
(If an organization, give organization name)
Address 2385 Commerce Blvd. Mound~MN 55364 Phone .No.472 1284
Bingo Manager (Name) Rev. JOhn Sweeney, Pastor
Address 2385 Commerce Blvd. Mound MN 55364
Address of where Bingo will be played 241i commerce Blvd.
Mound M~ 55364
School Cafeteria
Dates and Hours Bingo will be played Have'Bingo every Thursday'
during 1984 and 4 Saturdays (date~ to be determined)
(Attach sep'arate sheet if more room necessary).
Is Licen'se Fee a~tached? Yes N~ X Amount
Fidelity Bond: '. ''
(b)
(c)
Amount
Name of Bon~ing Company
Expirati'on Date of Bond
* (Minimum $10,000.)
*Note:
Fraternal', religious, veteran.and other non-profit
organizat'ion's may r~uest th'e Bond t6 be waived.
Ple'ase indicate below if you ar.e making such a request'.
Yes, we.would like.it waive~
Signature of ~erson. mak~.ng application
CITY OF'MOUND
A'PPLICA~ION FOR BINGO' PERMIT
· ' Date
(If an organization, give .organization name) ''
3. Bingo Manager (Name)Z~'J ../~k~J. '~7~"/~ ..
Address /%4 ~ ~ "..
4. 'Address of where Bingo will be played ~_~F% ' "./~/' ~ ,~'~
5' Dates and Hours Bingo will be played '-- 6) ~4/~--~/\/~-,~z4~i..
-/. (Attac~ s~parate sheet if more room necessary)· ' -
N'~ ~ Amount
· 6. Is License Fee' a{tached? Yes
* (Minimum $10,000.)
(a) Amount
*Note:
Name of Bonding Company
Expirati~on Date .of Bond
Fraternal., religiousl veteran and other nonJprofit
organizat'ion's may r~'~u~s.t the Bond t6 b'e waived.
Please. indicate below if you are making such a request.
(b)
(c)
Signature of person making applica
~n
INTEROFFICE MEMO
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Jon Elam, City Manager
Chief Bruce Wold
Purchase of Investigator Auto
DATE~
November 14
Approximately four months ago I spoke to you about the purchase of a different car
for the police investigator. The investigators current car is an AMC Hornet with
approximately 60,000 miles. The car is in good condition with respect to the
engine, drive train and suspension. However, the body is beginning to fall apart
from rust and the front seat is completely broken down.
A year ago we spent over $100 rebuilding the front seat of the car. A year later
the seat is again broken do~ and beyond repair. Sgt. Hudson complained to me about
back pain he thought was brought on by the poor seat he had to sit on in his car.
'The rust finally ate a hole in the right front fender. Additionally,' the driver's
door does not operate properly because the hinges are about to rust away. Other
parts of the car are also eaten away by rust.
Our origial discussion centered on purchasing a used car for approximately $2500.
The reasoning behind the purchase was to provide a quality used car that the City
Owould sell every one to 1½ years. This would allow the City to turnover the car
before it .depreciated too much, before rust consumed it, and before any major
repairs became necessary. A side benefit to this' type of. policy is the inability
of person~ familiar with Sgt. Hudson to predict the make of car he will be driving.
I spent two weeks looking at various makes and models of cars trying to find a
quality car for the price. Unfortunately~ the used car market is very tight and
quality used cars have risen in price. Quality used cars four to five years old
with 50,000 to 60,000 miles are priced near'S3400. Although this price is not high
when considering the price of a new car, I would prefer to keep the price down.
Two months ago, Sgt. Hudson purchased a '1978 Ford Thunderbird. He paid $2500 for
the car and has spent an additional $200 on tune-ups and licensing. Sgt. Hudson
is willing to sell the car to the City for $2600. The average book value for this
is $2900. -
I have seen the car and I feel the car would be a good buy for the City. The
integrity of the body is good, the car has ample room, the mechanical parts and
tires seem to be good, the brown color makes .the car inconspicuous, and the style
of the car is the antithesis of the unmarked police car.
Please consider the purchase of this car and let me know your feelings.
CITY of MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364
(612) 472-1155
December 2, 1983
TO:
FROM:
CITY COUNCIL
CITY MANAGER
Enclosed is the one quotation I have been able to secure for painting the
interior of the City Hall. I have asked three other painters, but none
submitted a quotation.
Minnetonka Painting did a top notch j o~on the exterior of the City Hall
and I think they will do an equally good job on the interior. I
recommend accepting their quotation.
The only remaining work to be done is 'the replacement of the tile floors
in the. bathrooms, which I will try and do later this winter.
JE: fc
ene.
PrOposal
. ~.~'. , MTKA PAINTING & DECORATING CO
I ~'*) !~-~' SPEC,AL,Z,NG ,N r,NCr W~LLCOVE"'NG Sheet No.
~ ~-d 0010 Woodridge Road
Mound, Minnesota 55364 Date 1 1 /1 /83
612/472-2092
Proposal Submitted To Work To Be Performed At
Name ~i+.~r nf' Mn~qc] .Street ,qRmP.
Street 53/t1 HRy~,rnc~c] ~nRc] City State
City MC~llT~ s Date of Plans
Stat~ M-; ~ ~ ~ c~-,~ Architect
Telephone Number
We hereby propose to furnish all the materials and perform all the labor necessary for the completion of
-Tn~er~or work - ci. tv to supply all paint, contractor to supply all
equi pment.
For ~a~nting ~re~ara%ion and work %~ be done see painting specifi-
cations.
All material i~ guaranteed to be os specified, and the above work to be per{armed in accordance with the drawings
and specifications submitted for above work and comgleted in a substantial workmanlike manner for the sum of
~ree .T~o~s~nd FiYe ~uDc].red and ~o/100 ......... Dollars($ ]~00.00.).
with payments to be made os follows:
Any alteration or deviation from above specifications involving extra costs, will be executed only upon written orders, and will
become an extra charge over and above the estimate. All agreements contingent upon strikes, accidents or delays beyond our
control. Owner to carry fire, tornado and other necessa'ry insurance upon above work. Workmen's Compensation and Public
Liability Insurance on above work to be taken out by ~±D. netonka ~a'[nt±n~ & ~ecoratin~ Co.
Respectfully submitted
Per '-
Note- This proposal may be withdrawn by us if not accepted within days
ACCEPTANCE OF PROPOSAL
The above prices, specifications and conditions are satisfactory and are hereby accepted. You are authorized to dc the work as
specified. Payment will be made as outlined above.
Accepted Signature '"
Date Signature
MTKA PAINTING & DECORATINGCO.
SPECIALIZING IN FANCY WALLCOVERING
5016 Woodridge Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 612/472-2092
CITY OF MOUND
PAINTING SPECIFICATIONS
PREPARATION
- Vinyl wallcovering will be removed in police office, police
chief's office and interviewing room.
- Wall~will.be washed or have a coat of smoothing material so
wail can be primed before painting.
- Ail other areas that have been taped will have a prime coat on
before finish coat.
- Ail holes, cracks set in wall and ceiling will be fixed before
painting.
- Ail areas with gloss finish will be sanded~to etch the surface.
Ail other areas will have normal sanding.
- Ail furniture and floors will be protected.
- Ail furniture and filing cabinets that possibly can be moved
from wall will be moved.
PAINTING
- Ail areas to be painted will receive one coat of pain~ unless
otherwise'stated.
- Colors to be painted will be according to Benjamin Moore color
recommendations.
- Hand rail and wood cap will be trim color.
AREAS TO BE PAINTED
- Complete interior of building will be painted including storage
rooms and ceilings.
MTKA PAINTING & DECORATING CO.
SPECIALIZING IN FANCY WALLCOVERING
5016 Woodridge Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 612/472-2092
MISCELLANEOUS
- Work will be done on weekends. (Friday night, Saturday, Sunday.)
- On Sunday all areas being worked in will be left in clean and
neat manner. No work will be done during regular weekdays.
- Lettering'on doors will be replaced. Painting specification
will be part of contract proposal #301.
ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS ·
ONE (1) FOUR WHEEL ARTICULATED, RUBBER TIRED FRONT END LOADER
FOR THE CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA
The City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota,. will receive sealed bids for
furnishing and delivering One (1) Four-Wheel Articulated Rubber Tired Front End
Loader. Bids will be received until 10:00 A.M. on November 30, 1983, at the City
Hall, 5341 Maywood Road, Mound, Minnesota, at which time and place the bids shall be
~opened, read aloud, and tabulated. The bids will be considered by the City Council
at 7:30 P.M. 6h Tuesday, December 6, 1983.
Proposal forms, including specifications, are on file and may"be obtained at the
office of the City Clerk. Proposals must be made on the forms as furnished and shall
be submitted to the office of the City Clerk on or before the time stated above.
Proposals must be placed in a sealed envelope with an indication thereon statir
"PROPOSAL FOR ONE (1) FOUR WHEEL ARTICULATED RUBBER TIRED FRONT END LOADER" and
addressed to Fran Clark, City Clerk, City of Mound, 5341 Maywood Road, Mou~d,
Minnesota 55364. All bids must be accompanied by a cash deposit, certified check, or
bid bond, payable to the City of Mo~hd i~ the amount equal to ten percent (10%)
of the total bid. .~
The City Council reserves the right to accept or reject any or all bids, to waive any
informalities in the bid and to make such award as it may deem to be in
interest of the City.
Franeene C. Clark, City Clerk
Publish in The Construction Bulletin November 11, 1983
and The Laker November 8, 1983
the best
ONE (1) FOUR WHEEL ARTICULATED, RUBBER TIRED FRONT END LOADER
~OR THE CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA
The City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, will receive sealed bids for
furnishing and delivering One (1) Four Wheel Articulated Rubber Tired Front End
Loader. Bids will be received until 10:00 A.M. on November 30, 1983, at the City
Hall, 5341 Maywood Road, Mound, Minnesota, at which time and place the bids shall be
opened, read aloud, and tabulated. The bids will be considered by the City Council
at 7:30 P.M. on Tuesday, December 6, 1983.
Proposal forms, including specifications, are on file and may be obtained at the
office of the City Clerk. Proposals must be made on the forms as furnished and shall
be submitted to the office of the City Clerk on or before the time stated above.
Proposals must be placed in a sealed envelope with an indication thereon stating
"PROPOSAL FOR ONE (1) FOUR WHEEL ARTICULATED RUBBER TIRED FRONT END LOADER" and
addressed to Fran Clark, City Clerk, City of Mound,. 5341 Maywood Road, Mound,
Minnesota 55364. All bids must be accompanied by a cash deposit, certified check, or
bid bond, payable to the City of Mound in the amount equal to ten pePcent (lOS)
of the total bid.
The City Council reserves the right to accept or reject any or all bids, to waive any
informalities in the bid and to make such award as it may deem to be in the best
interest of the City.
Francene C. Clark, City Clerk
Publish in The Construction Bulletin November 11, 1983
and The Laker November 8, 1983
SPECIFICATIONS FOR ONE (1) NEW ARTICULATED
FOUR WHEEL DRIVE LOADER (Latest Model Available)
e
Se
INVITATION FOR BIDS: Sealed bids will be received at the office of the City
of Mound, Minnesota until 10:00 A.M. on November 30, 1983
for furnishing and delivery of one new Articulated Four Wheel Drive Loader
to the City of Mound in accordance with the specifi.cations set forth herein
and the other terms, conditions, and instructions to the specifications
attached hereto and made a part hereof-as though fully set forth herein. Said
loader shall include all items necessary for efficient operation whether or not
specifically mentioned in these specifications.
INTENT OF CONTRACT: Furnish and deliver to the City of Mound one (1) new
rubber tired loader which would fully meet the following specifications. Bid
price to include the costs of the new machine less trade-in of used .unit, plus
guaranteed five (5) year maintenance costs. Only loader models in current
production and in common usage will be considered in the award.
GENERAL SPECIFICATIONS: Unit bid will be currently advertised standard pro-
duction model with all latest changes and features.
WEIGHT: Standard basic advertised specification sheet shipping weight to include
cab, not including attachments as called for in the specifications, but with tire
ballast as specified, shall not be less than 19,O00 pounds. This standard machine
arrangement shall have a static tipping load rating of not less than 13,390
pounds straight ahead and 12,290 pounds in full turn.
ENGINE: Diesel engine shall be equipped as follows: 4 cycle 425 cu. in.
displacement minimum; 80 net H.P. rating at flywheel; fuel filter, full flow oil.
filter; dry type air cleaner with service indicator; governor; muffler, rain cap
or curved type exhaust stack; direct electric key start system; starting in neutral
position only. Must be equipped with starting aid to start in cold weather.
Fuel tank to hold minimum of 39 gallo'ns.
HYDRAULIC SYSTEM: Shall have sealed, full flow oil filtering system, gear or
vane type pump, shall furnish a minimum of 33 gpm @ 2200 RPM, sight gauge in
reservoir, 19 gallons capacity minimum.
AXLES: Four wheel drive with planetary reduction in each wheel.
BRAKES: Four wheel with separate circuit on each axle. Because of the obvious
savings due to the ease of servicing, inspection, and maintenance, self-adjusting,
caliper type dry disc brakes on all wheels. Shall have double pedal control with
one pedal operating brake and neutralizing the power to the drive wheels. The
other shall operate in normal manner. A locking type mechanical parking brake
system, operating on the transmission, shall be provided. Machine shall be
equipped with an emergency braking system. Uses parking brake. When air
pressure drops an audible warning sounds, then brake automatically applies
to bring machine to a controlled stop. Operator may also apply manually.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
17.
STEERING: Articulated type full hydraulic power steer with followup which
provides smooth "automotive feel" steering at any speed. Steering provided
by double cylinders of at least 3" diameter, hinge points at each end of
cylinders to be equipped with "sealed" bushings which provide for lubrication
intervals of 2~0 hour minimum. Because o~ the operating advantages o~ ~ront
and rear wheels tracking, center point articulation will be preferred.
Articulation joint bearings shall be bronze bushing - top - and roller
bearing - bottom.
TRANSMISSION: Full power shift, automatic minimum 4 forward and 3'reverse
speeds, must be c~pable of continuous full power, on-the-go shifting.
Transmission shall be neutralized upon application of parking brake.
Minimum road speed forward 20 miles per hour.
CAB: Furnish full enclosed frame mounted all weather steel cab with ROPS
protection to meet federal standards, safety glass windows with 360 degree
vision, with ventilation and doors locking open or closed. Furnigh with
heavy-duty 25,000 BTU truck and bus heater and defroster; defrost fan; electric
windshield wiper front and back (including washers); adjustable bucket seat,
air cushioned and padded; seat belt; air horn; and step for entry on either
side. Cab doors to lock from outside with key. Operators' compartment shall be
located on the main rear section of the chassis. Cab to include all standard
and optional sound suppression and ~bsorbtion att~'~----~"exceptions allowed.
FENDERS: Front and rear wheels to be guarded by fenders.
TIRES: Shall be traction tread, first line tubeless 17.5 x 25 minimum size,
12 ply rating, CaC17 solution hydro-inflated in rear tires to be included in
bid price. Tire inflation kit to be included as part of bid.
LOADER: Because of the obvious reduction in cost of daily maintenance and the
increase in service life, it will be preferred that all hinge points in loader
lift and dump linkage to be sealed against dirt and have a minimum of 50
operating hours between lubrication intervals on bucket pins and 100 service
meter hours on other linkage pins. Two Hyd. Pistons on loader lift arms.
PAINT: Hi-visibility yellow.
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM: The electrical system shall incorporate the following
requirements:
A. Minimum 24 volt system
B. 50 amp minimum alternator, high output at idle
C. Minimum of 172 amp hour rated heavy-duty battery
D. Two (2) sealed beam guarded headlights chassis mounted and two (2)
cab mounted
E. Tail and stop lights each side front and rear turning signals with
4-way flashers and dash lights
F. Wire and switch installed on top-Amber Strobe, 6 x 8 orange strobe
OPERATING DIMENSIONS: Ground clearance 13' minimum. Reach ahead of tires
at 7' at 45 degree dump angle shall be not less than 4' 1" Bucket hinge
pin height at maximum lift shall be not less than 11' 7".
18.
BUCKET: General purpose, SAE rated capacity not less than 1 3/4 cu. yds.; bucket
width shall cover full tire width. Bucket to be equipped w]th bolt on replaceable
and reversible bucket cutting edge, with two Hyd. Pistons for bucket control.
Bucket controls shall have automatic kickout and automatic bucket positioners.
19. ACCESSORIES:
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
D
E
f
G
H
I
J
me
L.
M.
N.
O.
P.
Q.
Tool box.
Fuel pressure gauge
Engine hour meter
Engine coolant temperature gauge
Engine oil pressure gauge
Torque convertor temperature guage
Brake Indicator light on parking brake
Ammeter
Heavy duty dry type air cleaner with restriction gauge
Replaceable cartridge type full flow heavy-duty oil filter for engine,
torque convertor and hydraulic system.
Rear view mirror inside cab
Engine side panels - partial
Fan guard
Bucket position indicator
Tire inflation kit
Drawbar
Slow moving vehicle sign
TRADE-IN: The successful bidder shall be required to take in trade one (1) used
1975 Cat Loader S/N 62K6735. This loader will be available for inspection at
the City Garage in Mound by appointment.
PAYMENT: The City of Mound agrees to pay for the new unit, less trade-in
'(Item #2 on Bid Form), a sum equal to the net bid figure, within 30 days after
delivery of the Wheel Loader.
TRAINING PERIOD: The vendor-contractor agrees to provide a training program
for employees in sufficient scope to assure efficient and economical performance
and maintenance of the equipment.
SERVICE MANUALS AND WARRANTY: The vendor shall furnish a "Standard Warranty"
in line with current policy and shall define such with the bid. The successful
bidder shall furnish a parts book and service manual and assemb!y line order
sheets (of the complete unit and any major component supplied by other equipment
manufacturers). Operating books shall be furnished for each unit together with
other applicable manuals, and recommend maintenance schedules for component parts.
Ao
WARRANTY
One year standard manufacturers warranty applies from date of delivery
including all parts and labor.
Guaranteed maintenance expense starts one year from date of delivery,
GUARANTEED MAINTENANCE: The vendor-contractor will be expected to maintain
this unit in good operating condition for a total period of five (5) years
or 6000 hours, whichever comes first, and will be responsible for all parts,
servlce and labor expense over and above the amount, quoted on Item #4 on
BID FORM. The City of Mound will be responsible for costs of repairs due to
fire, theft, accident, operator's and mechanic's negligence, or vandalism.
In addition, the City of Mound will.assume the cost of tires, tubes, tire
repairs, lubrication, filters, grease, fuel, anti-freeze, cutting edges,
glass breakage, brake linings, electrical parts, and other similar items
normally consumed in day-to-day operation. The vendor-contractor will be
notified in advance of any repairs contemplated and the details thereof when
the cost of repair parts to be installed may exceed One Hundred Dollars ($100.)
Vendor-contractor will have the right to inspect the machine and these parts
before replacement is made. The. City of Mound has the right to sell, lease
loan, trade or otherwise dispose of the Wheel Loader at its discretion. Such
action will make this contract null and void. The City of Mound also agrees
to provide such preventative maintenance and daily and monthly service as-
prescribed by the manufacturer.
25.
SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE COSTS: The attached scheduled maintenance form shall
be completed in its entirety. The total figure shall be included on Line #5
of the bid form and shall be used to compute the bid unit's total cost. Any
falsification or non-compliance of this section shall be reason for rejection.
DOWNTIME: Throughout the five (5) year period of the contra~t, the vendor-
contractor agrees to furnish at no cost to the City of Mound a unit in good
operating condition equivalent to the unit called for herein, OR, the vendor-
contractor will credit City of Mound with $50.00 per hour after any.continuous
48 hour period, excluding weekends and holidays, of inoperation due to any'
mechanical failure that is covered by this contract and which the vendor-contractor
has been notified of. This agreement is considered NOT as a penalty, but rather
as liquidated damages to compensate for any additional costs accrued by the City
of Mound due to extended downtime.
SERVICE FACILITIES: Because the maintenance of this equipment in good operating
condition without protracted time out for repairs is critical, repair parts and
service must be adequate and readily available. The bidder will certify that he
maintains an adequate stock of parts within the area, available on short notice.
The bidder shall state in his proposal the location of service shop, parts depot
and servicemen.
27. REPURCHASE: Should the City of Mound exercise its option to sell the unit on the
open market through solicitation of bids, at any time during the 5 year agreement,
the contractor hereby agrees to submit a bid in an amount not less than the
repurchase price set forth in his bid on this contract and shall promptly make
payment to the City of Mound upon written notification of the award.
28.
PERIOD OF THE CONTRACT: Period of the contract will be from the date of delivery
to five (5) years from that date. Should the City of Mound exceed a total of 6000
hours on a machine prior to the expiration of the five (5) year period, the vendor
has the right to declare the contract null and void on that particular machine.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
COMPLIANCE: No ;mportant dev;at~on from the terms o~ th~s specie'cat'on ;s
acceptable. ANY exception must be clearly outlined in the proposal. Failure
to l|st ALL except|ohs will disqualify the bid.
Loader must meet all OSHA requirements.
DELIVERY: The Wheel Loader called for herein shall be delivered at no cost
to the City of Mound. The bidder must state the delivery date on the proposal
form. Early delivery will be a consideration in this bid.
BOND: The successful bidder will be required to furnish a performance bond
to cover the total repurchase price, warranty and service guarantee in favor
of the City of Mound against any breach of the contract. The bond will
remain in effect for the five (5) year period.
BASIS OF AWARD: Award of the contract will be based upon the factors of
guaranteed total cost concept as delineated herein; however, deliveny date,
availability of parts and service facilities, and a complete analysis and
comparison of specifications details along with past experience of the City
of Mound with similar or related equipment will be weighed in making a final
decision of award. No important deviation from the terms of this specification
is acceptable. It is understood and agreed that the City of Mound reserves
the right to reject any and all bids, as authorized by law, and to award to
other than the lowest bidder at its discretion, if the best interests of the
City of Mound are thereby served.
34. INSTRUCTION TO BIDDERS:
35.
A. All bids must be written in ink or typewritten.
B. Bidder must bid on all items on Bid Form. Failure to do so will
disqualify bid.
C. Bidder to supply current list of government agencies (names, addresses
and phone numbers) in the seven county metropolitan area who own
specified machine. State model and purchase date.
PRICING: Successful bidders shall be prepared, prior to award, to substantiate
that their bid prices are no higher than the published factory list prices,
plus freight, in effect at the time of the bid opening. Such substantiation
will be made to the buying officials directly from said factory price lists
and will be kept strictly confidential by the buying officials. Refusal to
comply with substantiation of bid prices shall constitute a reason to reject
said bid.
SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE
CALCULATION FORM
FOR
WHEEL LOADERS
INSTRUCTIONS: The intent of this form is to determine the total scheduled
maintenance costs that can be expected during the first 6,000 hours of owner
ship. Service intervals, number of grease fittings, and capacities should be
taken directly from the manufacturer's lubrication instructions. Costs given
are equal for all bidders. Although there may be a slight variance due to
refill capacities, these total costs are made up of labor, overhead, lost
production, gaskets, lubricant, filters, and supervisory time. The comparison
examines the' service intervals for the various units bid and assumes that the
manufacturer's recommendations, if followed exactly,, will allow the costs that
are to be incurred on each unit to be calculated with reasonable accuracy.
The City of Mound believes that scheduled maintenance is an integral part of
the overall cost of the operation of a wheel loader and is therefore.asking for
its inclusion as part of the total cost of the unit bid.
1. Grease Fittings
Total Hours ~ Service No. of Fittings Cost
of operation Interval X @ Each Interval X per Fitting = 'Total Cost
6,000 ~ 10 Hrs X X $ .25 : $
6,000 ~ 50 Hrs X X $ .25 = $
6,000 + 100 Hrs X X $ .25
6,000 ~ 200 Hrs X X $ .25 = $
6,000 ~ 250 Hrs X X $ .25 = $
6,000 ~ 500 Hrs X X $ '.25 = $
6,000 ~ 1000 Hrs X X $ .25 =
TOTAL COST : $
Determine number of fittings at each interval, insert each number as
indicated (if none, write none), perform calculations and total last column.
II. Engine Oil & Filter
'Total Hours Service
of Operation ~ Interval X Cost per Change = Total Cost
6,000 ~ X $ 60.00 : $
From factory maintenance manual determine crankcase drain and fill interval.
Insert this hourly number and perform the calculation to arrive at the total
cost for an engine oil change.
(ti)
III.
Transmission Oil
Total Hours Service
of Operation ~ Interval
X Cost Per Change = Total Cost
6,000 ~ X $ 100.O0 : $
From factory maintenance manual determine transmission drain and refill
interval. Insert this hourly number and perform the calculation to arrive
at the total cost for a transmission oil change.
(Ill)
IV.
Other Fluid or Oil Changes
Total Hours Service Hyd. System Cost
of Operation ~ Interval X Capacity (Gals.) X Per Gallon = Total Cost
6,O00 + X X $1.45
From the ~c~ry maintenance manual determine the service interval for draining
and filling the hydraulic system. Insert this hourly number, insert the total
capacity (in gallons) and perform the calculation as indicated.
(~v)
TOTALS
Listed below are each of the categories just calculated. Insert the total
number for each category and add the column, This total figure should be
.entered on Line #6 of the Bid Form.
Grease Fittings ' '
II Engine Oil & Filter
Ill Transmission Oil
IV Other Fluid or Oil Changes
TOTAL
(11)
(iii)
(iv)
(enter this
figure on
Line #6 of
Bid Form)
BID FORM DATE:
.1.
MAKE AND MODEL OF EQUIPMENT BEING BID:
MAKE MODEL
F.O.B. , MINNESOTA
(Delivery Point)
MUST MEET ATTACHED.MINIMUM SPECIFICATIONS
LESS TRADE-IN
MODEL: S/N
F.O.B. MOUND, MINNESOTA
PURCHASER PAYS ONLY THIS AMOUNT
$
S
S
S
$
MAINTENANCE EXPENSE, for 5 years or 6,000
whichever occurs first, SHALL NOT EXCEED
GUARANTEED "MINIMUM REPURCHASE" IN 5 YEARS
SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE COSTS (from attached
work sheet) for 6,000 hours
TOTAL COST BID (Item #3, Item #4, Less Item #5,
Plus Item #6) (Includes 1 3/4 cu. yd. bucket
and bolt on cutting edge)
DELIVERY DATE: Days After Award
NOTE: Bidder must bid on all items and will be paid only Item #3.
Failure to 'bid on all items will disqualify bid.
(-)
(+)
(-)
(+)
NAME OF BIDDER
ADDRESS
SIGNED BY
(Title)
BID ACCEPTED
BY
TITLE
Out State
SWEENEY BROTHERS TRACTOR INC.
DISTRIBUTORS OF
CONSTRUCTION, FORESTRY, INDUSTRIAL, MINING and MUNICIPAL MACHINERY
P. O. BOX 9B 12540 DUPONT AVENUE SOUTH
SAVAGE, MN 55378 BURNSVILLE, MN 55337
PHONE (612) 894-9595
TOLL FREE
(8o0) 552-1189
(800) 328-2185
OFFICES:
EVELETH -- 1011 SOUTH HWY, 53, 55734
PHONE (218) 7,44-4343
December 6, 1983
City of Mound
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, Minnesota
55364
Gentlemen:
The following is a brief analysis of the bid results comparing
our bid to the Caterpillar Model 920.
Fiatallis 345-B
1. List Pric~:
2. Less Trade for 920:
3. Net Trade Price:
4. Maintenance Expense:
5. Guaranteed Repurchase:
6. Scheduled Maintenance:
7. Total Cost Bid:
$64,665.00
$38,665.00
$26,000.00
$4,500.00
$34,000.00
$8,526.00
$5,026.00
Cat 920
$59,913.00
$26,500.00
$33,314.00
$3,100.00
$46,500.00
$1,857.00
($8,J29.~0)
We would like to highlight several points in this bid so you
may better understand the total cost bid concept.
#3 Net Trade Price: The 345-B is $7,314.00 less outright.
Amortize this balance over five years at 10% simple interest
and this translates to $11,779.26 under the 920.
#4 Maintenance Expense: This figure is basically an in-
surance policy representing the maximum maintenance costs
will not exceed during a five year period. The 345-B has
a 2 Year Power Train Warranty as standard which is repre-
sentative of the quality of our machine.
#5 Repurchase Amount: This figure represents the repur-
chase amount any time during the five year period. It
must be realized, however, that the trade unit 920 was
purchased under this type of bid and the repurchase option
was not exercised. If you take into consideration that the
initial cost will be $11,779.26 greater than the 345-B for
the repurchase option, is this in the best interest of the
City of Mound?
UEBHE
Page 2
#6 Scheduled Maintenance Costs: This figure is an attempt
to analyze the maintenance costs over a five year period.
It charges 25¢ for each grease fitting at the recommended
service interval. Since the 920 has sealed bucket linkage,
you can see the effect this has on this calculation. With
labor rates at $20.00 per hour, this 25¢ should be closer
to 11¢. Daily maintenance should be part of any maintenance
program as the operator is more likely to spot a potential
problem before it gets worse.~
The advocates of the total cost bid concept will say that they
are able to offer such high repurchase amounts because of their
resale value. Attached is a copy of the 1982 Green Guide pages
where we have highlighted the 1978 resale figures on both machines
compared to the list price at that time. The following is a
summary of this comparison.
345-B 920
New Price:
$51,935.00
$63,975.00
1978 Resale Price:
$29,500.00
$37,500.00
Net Difference:
$22,435.00
$26,475.00
Net Percentage of New: 57% 59%
As you can see, the 920 has only a 2% advantage in resale price
on a five year old machine.
We would like to thank you for the opportunity of submitting our
bid and your consideration.
Sincerely,
SWEENEY BROS. TRACTOR, INC.
Timothy Gaynor
Sales Representative
TG:rjs
attachment
TABULATION OF BIDS
4-WHEEL ARTICULATED, FRONT END LOADER
COMPANIES BIDDING:
MAKE:
MODEL:
2. LESS TRADE IN
3. PURCHASER PAYS ONLY THIS AMOUNT:
MAINTENANCE EXPENSE, for 5 years
or 6,000 hours, whichever occurs
first, SHALL NOT EXCEED
GUARANTEED "MINIMUM REPURCHASE"
IN FIVE (5) YEARS
SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE COSTS
(for 6,000 hours)
7. TOTAL COST (Items 3, 4, -5, 6)
CASE SWEENEY
POWER EQUIP. BROS. TRACTOR
ZIEGLER, INC.
J.I. CASE FIATALLIS CATERPILLAR
'W 14 H 345B 920
41,763.00 $ 64,665.00 $ 59,913.00
~20,000.00 -38,665.00 26,500.00
26,000.00
$ 21,763.00
$ 33,413.00
+ 4,000.00 + 4,500.00 + 3,100.00
- 30,000.00 - 34,000.00
+ 6,591.90 + 8,526.00
$ 2,354.90 $ 5,026.00
- 46,5OO.OO
1,857.90
-8,129.10
CITY of MOUND
534t MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364
(612) 472-1155
TO: CITY COUNCILMEMBERS
FROM: JON ELAM
RE: TONKA PLANT STRATEGY
DATE: NOVEMBER 21, 1983
With the closing of the Tonka Plant' in December, we need to clarify
our efforts to determine a future use for the facility.
Since the inevitability of the delinquent sewer bill going to court
my (our) relationship with Tonka has declined to the point where, when it
comes to the future use of the Mound facility, I'm given very limited and
basically unusable information
Thus, I feel we are somewhat at a crossroads. We can continue as we
have, letting Tonka make its own determination of the buildings future use or
we can develop a more aggressive, forceful style. This latter step could lead
to a closer (although forced) partnership with Tonka that could result in our
partic!pation in determining the building future use(si.
As of November 20th, there is not a single building user in the wings.
What is there, is a West Coast Developer who Tonka is seeking to work out a
joint venture agreement with. My information is that no money would change
hands, but the actual day to day redevelopment or resale efforts would be
headed by this unknown development group.' 'I'm n6t sure what is in this for
Tonka except a recognition that over the last 14 months they are not very good
at either selling or leasing their ProPerties. How effective these new people
could be is hard to say except that when the negotiations take place in a suite
at the Dunes Hotel in Las Vegas, I become even more concerned.
Several things are now becoming very clear to me:
.1. The buildings are a major liability to Tonka. Between Sp~ing Park
and Mound, the cost in lost revenue and direct expense may equal
$1,000.000 per year. (Using Tonka's figures).
2. With this, their positions with .regards to these facilities are not
one of community social concern or one where the city might be given
much of a chance to veto or negotiate with someone who wishes to buy
or lease the facilities. Tonka will sell or lease to anyone who will
take the facility.
3. The City of Mound is basically not a factor of consideration in Tonka's
planning process.
With this, how do we respond, at a time when the residents of our city
may well be asking us what we're going to do about Tonka moving out.
~Si~ce we have $25,000 in HUD CDBG Funds earmarked for dealing with
this problem, there doesn't seem to me to be a reason not to move.
1. I've asked Mark Koegler to investigate what ways we might go about
suspending or invoking a new zoning classlf~catlon for the plant
site. By doing that the company would be forced to sit down with
the city and submit any proposed.uses and receive the city's approval
before any of them could be put in place with the site re-zoned
accordingly. This strategy might work if there are proposed uses,
if there are not, it leaves us about where we are right now.
2. The next step I would propose would be to designate the entire site
as a Development District for purposes of redevelopment. This would
give the city the ultimate power of condemnation, if necessary., to
prevent the use or abuse of the facility by Tonka in a way the Council
felt was not responsible. In addition, it could make the site eligible
for redevelopment.
3. With the designation complete, I would propose the development of a
Request For Proposals (RFP) and seek from interested developers proposals
for the redevelopment of the site.
Minneapolis recently did this in a small business area and received a
number of exciting proposals, which now can be put together into a formal rede-
velopment package.
In our case, there might be a number of potential users for the facility
and site but they just don't want to come forward knowing Tonka wants an inflated
$3 million+ for the facility with heavy remodeling costs on top of that.
With the city's power of condemnation, the facility might be.sold, for
$2.5 million, and resold, for $1,2 million, with a developer putting in another
$4-5 million in remodeling. That could meet the 3 to 1 tax increment ratio needed
to create a feasible project and result in a much more attractive facility in the
city, than we now have. This step is a long shot but could turn out to be very
successful. The CDBG Fund's should be enough to do all of this.
I have not worked out all the formal details of this approach, but if you
feel comfortable developing these ideas further, I will start the ball rolling
so that when the plant finally closes around December 15th, we would be in a
position to hold a press conference in front of the facility to announce the
.city's plans.
BILLS .... DECEMBER 6, 1983
Amer Steel & Industr Supply
AirComm
Earl F. Andersen
Armor Security
Anchor Paper
Acro-Minnesota
Besco Masonry
Badger Meter
Holly Bostrom
Burlington Northern
Berry Auto & Body
Bradley Exterminating
Bowman Distribution
Conway Fire & Safety
Cash Register Sales
Chapin Publishing
Davies Water Equip
~Dependable Services
First Bank Mpls
Flexible Pipe Tool
Eugene Hickok & Assoc
Hawkins Chemical
Heiman Fire Equip
Hayden-Murphy Equip
dories Chemical
Robert E. dohnson
Internatl Assn. Fire Chiefs
dohnson Service
Lowells Auto
McCombs Knutson
Minnegasco
Mound Fire Dept
Mound Medical Clinic
City of Mound
Newman Signs
NW Bell Telephone
Natl Fire Protection Assn
Pitney Bowes
P.D.Q. Food Stores
Pitney Bowes Credit
Regal Window Cleaning
Real One Acquisition
Nels Schernau
SOS Printing
State Treas--Surpl us
Suburban Ti re
Swenson Nursery
Thrifty Snyder Drug
The Thomas Co.
Treas--MCFOA
77.51
100.00
306.85
56.60
312.38
49.53
380.00
1,103.08
386.00
533.33
13.50
19.00
142.20
228.92
861.30
29.40
1,450.00
33.OO
4. OO
515.69
585.84
695.50
181.5o
18o.25
169.84
3,OOO.OO
6o. oo
8O.OO
24.99
1,440.O0
241.33
1,212.00
297.00
55.O8
235.50.
96.40
353.82
2-38.25
1,t88.85
26.00
10.75
675.00
31.29
136.85
7.7O
911.56
559.35
18.15
73.56
15.00
Tonka Printing
Wurst, Pearson, Hamilton
Western Tree Service
Widmer Bros.
Wacon ia Ford-Mercury
Warner Hdwe
Xerox Corp
Ziegler, Inc.
Amer Planning Assn
Century Auto Body
Commissioner of Revenue
Cont inental Tele
Mark Carvatt
Griggs, Cooper
Gene GarvaJs Bldr
Robert E. Johnson
Johnson Bros. Liquor
I CMA
MN State Document
Mound Postmaster
M.A.D. House
City of Hound
II II II
Old Peoria
N.S.P.
Publication Office
Ed Phillips & Sons
State Treas-Surplus
Jori Scherven
Howard Simar
Xerox Corp
TOTAL BI LLS
168.30
3,125.00
585.00
426.62
42.71
17.26
151.39
48.34
29.00
500.00
5,800.42
1,205.93
19.96
3,927.43
35.00
4.4O
6,376.85
22.25
109.25
107.40
28.36
38.15
'25.00
2,639.OO
4,768.16
8.95
3,791.80
25.00
75O.OO
155.O0
961.28
55,296.86
ORDINANCE NO. ~55
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION ~6.29, SUBD.
(b), SUBSECTION ~8 AND REPEALING
SECTION q6.19, SUBD. (b), SUBSECTION
The City of Mound does ordain:
Section 46.29, Subd. (b), Subsection 18 of the City Code
is amended to read as follows:
18.
Both sides of Piper Road from Tuxedo Blvd. to
Charles Lane.
Section 46.29, Subd. (b), Subsection 21 of the City Code
is repealed.
Attest:
ss/Bob Polston
MAYOR
City Clerk
Adopted by the City Council December 6, 1983
Publish in official newspaper, The Laker December 13, 1983
ORDINANCE NO. 455
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 46.29, SUBD.
(b), SUBSECTION 18 AND REPEALING
SECTION q6.19, SUBD. (b), SUBSECTION
The City of Mound does ordain:
Section 46.29, Subd. (b), Subsection 18 of the City Code
is amended to read as follows:
18.
Both sides of Piper Road from Tuxedo Blvd. to
Charles Lane.
Section 46.29, Subd. (b), Subsection 21 of the City Code
is repealed.
Attest:
City Clerk
Adopted by the City Council December 6, 1983
Publish in official newspaper, The Laker December 13, 1983
October 31, 1983
CITY of
MOUND
TO:
FROM:
RE:
City Council
City Manager
SEWER AND WAT~ER FUNDS
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364
(612) 472-1155
Attached are the nine month reports'fo~ the Sewer & Water Funds for 1983. As
you remember, during the Budget, we delayed making any decisions on 1984 rates
until the finances became clearer. I think that may be happening now, so I
thought I should pass this information along so you could spend some time
thinking about it.
First the Water Fund. After nine months, the fund has generated revenues in
excess of expenses of $185,0OO. This all comes in the'form of additional
revenue rather than reduced expenses, although they are up only $11,OOO over
1982. The reason for this is that we budgeted expecting Tonka to close, they
didn"t and thus the Water Fund reaped an extra benefit.
Orginally it looked like we would have to raise water rates about 20% in both
1983 and 1984 to offset.the 40% loss of revenue'from ~onka. We raised those
rates in late 1982 and it's given the fund such a surplus that we shouldnit
have to raise the rates at all in 1984. Hopefully by January 1985 a use for
the Tonka plant will become clear, thus. we can use 1984 as a transition year.
A variance to this idea could occur if the Council wanted to use this estimated
$200,000 surplus (by years end) to reduce the amount of money we need to borrow
for the Island Park Water Improvements, estimated to cost $425,000.
The only other need the water system has at this point is the pa. inting and
reli'ning of both water towers. This $40,000 is in the 1983 Water Fund Budget,
but we held off until a better picture of our finances came in. That is now
clear enough so that Greg is doing a tower needs study with Twin City Testing
and by the end of November should be in a position to plan for this work in
the Summer of 1984.
By the end of 1984, our water system should be one of the finest and most complete
in the region.
The Sewer Fund is somewhat a different story because it's biggest cost is not
controllable by us. For 1984, MWCC costs will exceed $400,000, one and one-half
times our total water system.
Page 2
City Council
October 31, 1983
For 1983, the fund is about 2'0% short of revenue (this translates into
$100,O00 Or so). For 1984, MWCC has built into ou~ cost a 5% rate increase
and that coupled with a fund balance shortfall of 20%, could require a 25%
increase in rates for 1984 just to bring the'fund into balance (a total of
$125,OOO).
Enter,~i~' ~ ' ~ Tonka and its un~aid Sewer bill. At this point it
sounds like none of you would settle for anything less than $200,000. So
you can see that, this revenue would be enough to'.cover the projected 1984
deficit and most.of 1983. If we could, settle for $250,000, then the deficits
for both.1983 and.1982 would be covered.. With this, no rate increase would
be required for 1984, but unless something changes with the MWCC, we could
still be looking at a.major 25% increase in 1985, as we would have used the
Tonka funds'-to offset past shortfalls not build up the ongoing fund revenue.
Again perhaps a year from now the picture will be clearer and a better decision
could be made.
An alternative might be a 5-10% rate increase now to soften a similar increase
in 1985, but I can see how that might not appeal to yery many of you.
In conclusion, we need to. insure 'any settlement with Tonka does not include
a refund of the money they have paid since September 1982 at the 70% rate.
If we were to settle for say 50% instead for 1983, that would mean a refund
to Tonka of $24,000 and $11,000 for 1982, thus adding further problems to the
revenue shortfall picture for 1984.
We. tan spend'some time talking about this at the November 15th or December 6th
meeting.
Hope this is helpful.
JE:fc
eno.
CITY of
MOUND
5341 MAYW0OD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364
(612) 472-1155
Date: October 24, 1983
To: Jon Elam
From: Sharon Legg
Re: 'Sewer Fund "
Attached is a Balance Sheet and a Statement of Revenues over Expenses
for the Sewer Fund for the periods ending September 30, 1983 and 1982.
Notice, through September 1983, we had an operating loss· of 573,707.
Also, for your information, through September 30, 1983, Tonka has been
billed $86,848 for sewer on meter #4, which is 70% of the water usage
for that meter. They have paid another $13,411 .towards sewer on meter
t which is not being disputed. If we were to refund 75% of the meter
4 bill, through September 30, 1983, it would amount to $55,830.86 for
1983. We would keep $31,017.30.
Tonka began paying the 70% in September of 1982.
they were billed for amounts to $43,663.92.
1983 1982
100% $124,069.20 $ ~2,419.20
70% $ 86,848.16 ' $'43,663.92
25% $ 31,017.30 $ 15,604.80
Refund? $ 55,830.86 $ 28,059.12
In 198.2, the 70~ that
I .suppose the Council has considered the option'of negotiating lower on
the unbilled portion of the bill and billing since September 1982 at
100~ (or 70%). Thus·, the City i:n effect accepts more of the blame for
not billing for all these years and not giving them the benefit of the
doubt since September 1982, since they did have the option of installing
a meter to measure the flow.
At some point soon, I'I1 figure out what rates we will need to charge
for 1984. We'll have to build in a 5% increase to cover MWCC's increase
and possibly another 202 to cover expenses, bring rates to $ 1.50/1000.
This is a very rough prejection.. I'll have a better ides of what to
charge if we settle with Tonka.
CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA
SEWER FUND
BALANCE SHEET
AS OF .SEPTEMBER 30,1983 AND 1982
ASSETS
Cash
Accounts receivable
Accounts receivable - customers
Taxes receivable
Special Assessments receivable
Prepaid Expense
Fixes Assets L~'s's Accumlated Depreciation
TOTAL ASSETS
1983
192,745
437,892
50,723
O
2,216
O
683,576
$ 3,046,207
$ 3,729,783
1982
$ 58,663
508,455
31,483
26,797
647
19,277
645,322
$ 3,o98,818
$ 3,744,140
LIABILITIES AND FUND EQUITY
Current Liabilities
Accounts payable - MWCC
Accounts payable - Sac Charges
Accounts payable - Benefits
Deferred Revenue
Fund Equity
Reserved for encumbrance
Contributed capital
Retained earnings
TOTAL LIABILITIES & EQUITY
.$
9,995
2,524
7,816
20,335
O
4Ol
4,375
3,704,672
3,709,448
3,729,783
o
1,687
3,311
$ 4,998
486,425
0
4,75o
3,247,967
3,252,717
3,744,140
CITY
STATEMENT
OF MOUND,'.MINNES0TA
SEWER FUND
OF REVENUES OVER EXPENSES
Operating Revenues
Sewer Sales - billed
Sewer sales - unbilled
Penalties
1983
Budget Actual
$ 503,358 $
309,869
50,723
5,287
1982
Actual
248,555
31,483
4,201
Total Operating Revenue
$ 503,358
$ 365,879
$ 284,239
Operating Expenses Personal services
Supplies and repair materials
Professional services
Communications
Printing and legal publications
.Insurance
Utilities
Repair and maintenance
Logis
Disposal charges
Miscellaneous
Depreciation
Total Operating Expenses.
74,989
10,940
1,785
3,391
25O
6,968
16,397
12,7OO
5,tlO
382,942
35O
52,811
568,633
62,600
6,248
5,747
902
10
3,055
15,560
14,379
3,785
288,O02
65
39,233
43,812
8,151
2
2,O22
79
4,140
11,233
17,535
3,574
186,714
201
39,228
439,586 $ 318,892
· Operating Income (Loss)
$ (65,275) $' (73,707) $ (34,653)
Non-Operating Revenue
Taxes
Permits
'Connection Charges
Interest on special
Interest' from MWCC
Miscellaneous
assessments
Total Non-operating Revenue
$ . $ 1,O32 49,337
6O0 2,460
'' 8,562 .. 189
71
17,ooo 12,749
5,0oo 403 54
$ 21,OOO $ 23,346 $ 52,lll
$ (44,275) $ (50,361) $ 17,458
$3,755,434 $3,230,509
$3,705,o73 $3,247,967
Net Income (Loss)
Retal.ned Earnings January 1 ....... -
Re~ained Earnings September 30 ' - ....
(1)
The method of reporting MWCC changed from 1982 to 1983. The entire cost for
treatment is shown as an expense and the credits no longer net out. The credits
are recognized as a revenue at the end of 1982. See the 1982 financial statements.
Current Assets' Cash
Accounts receivable - billed
Accounts receivable - unbilled
Due from General Fund
Due from Building Fund
Inventory
CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA
WATER FUND
BALANCE SHEET
AS OF SEPTEMBER 30, 1983 AND 1982
ASSETS
S
Restricted Assets
Cash
Taxes receivable - current
Special Assessments receivable - Current
Sp~cia! Assessments receivable - Delinquent
Special Assessmeht's receivable - Deferred
~i'Xed Assets Less Accumulated Depreciation
Work in Progress
Total Assets
LIABILITY AND FUND EQUITY
Current Liabilities (payable from current assets)
Accounts payable - contractors
Accounts payable - sales tax
Due to other funds
Current Liabilities (Payable from restricted assets)
Accrued interest on bonds
Bonds payable - current installment
Long-Term Liabilities
Benefits payable
Bonds payable
Total Liabilities
Fund Equ;ty
Reserved for encumbrances
Contributed Capital
Retained earnings
Total Fund Equity
Total Liabilities and Fund Equity
1983
160,115
104,251
38,999
17,403
320,768
39,407
3,968
840
9,297
53,512
1,365,656
218,997
$1,958,933
11,646
1,269
12,915
6,237
37,000
43,237
6,957
251,000
257,957
314,109
164,544
1,750
$1,478,530
51,644,824
S1,958,933
1982
192,239
80,992
28,292
4,280
2,000
20,877
328,680
33,785
8-, o88
1,518
· .' (612)
12,897
55,676
1,398,236
$1,782,592
1,216
1,'216
10,686
37,000
47,686
5,344
288,000
293,344
342,246
1,900
$1,438,446
$1,44o,346
$1,782,592
CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA
'WATER FUND
STATEMENT OF REVENUES OVER EXPENSES
AS OF SEPTEHBER ~0, 1~8~ AND 1~82
1983
3perating Revenues
Water sales-billed
-unbilled
Penalties
Water meter sales and outside readers
Charges for services
Misc. (over-remittance of sales tax)
Total O~erating Revenues
.Budget
$ 360,000 $
$ 360,000
Actual
347,622
38,599
5,287
3,283
239
395,43O
Operating-Expenses Personal Services
Supplies and repair materials
Professional Services
COmmbnications
Transportation
Printing and Legal Publication~
Insurance
Utilities
Repair and maintanence
laneous
Other contractual services
Depreciation
Total Operating Expenses
,1982
Actual
206,381
4,062 .
1,429
70
'(167)
$ 211,775
Operating Income
Non'OPerating Revenues (Ex~nses)
Taxes
Water Connection Fee
Interest on Assessments
Interest on debt
Paying agent fee
Miscellaneous
Total Non-operating Revenue(Expense)
107,346 73,979 77,537.
32,490 33,954 18,737
5,485 2,242 19,843
3,891 921 2,378
200 49
4OO 11 4O8
8,003 6,852 4,891
33,OOO 29,280 23,471
32,15~ 28,105 24,653
5,500 4,O73 3,686
710 1,265 742
40,000 5,925
35,209 23,477 22,229
304,388
$- 210,O84
185~346
Net Income
:55,612
Retained Earnings January 1
571
5,ooo 8,588
100 1,226
(18,675) (17,908)
( 180) ( t84)
1,5oo 425
Retained Earnings September 30
S (12,255) $ (7,282)
S 43,357 S 178,064
$1,465,010
Sl,643,074
198,624
13,1'51
19,982
2,375
1,109
(20,046)
( ~53)
64
S 3,331
16,482.
Sl,421,964
Sl,438,446
HENNEPIN
IL
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
320 Washington Av. South
Hopkins, Minnesota 55343
935-3381
TI'Y935-6433
November 10, 1983
Mr. Jon Elam, Manager
City of Mound
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, Minnesota 55364
Re: CSAH 125 (Interlachen Road)
County Project 7586
Bridge Over Black Lake/Spring Park Channel
Dear Jon:
We have, for same time, been negotiating with the Cities of Mound and
Spring Park for the construction of the Black Lake Bridge on CSAH 125.
Our previous position required that the cities assume jurisdiction of CSAH
125 upon completion of construction.
In view of the serious safety problems that we have at this bridge site
and'the impasse over the matter of acceptance of jurisdiction by the
cities, the Hennepin CountyDepartment of Transportation has decided to go
ahead with the reconstruction of this bridge without the requirement for
takeover of jurisdiction by the cities. We anticipate a late 1983 letting
with construction beginning in the Spring of 1984 and completion in the
Fall of 1984.
Our Design personnel will be contacting city staff shortly regarding this
project and our Right of Way personnel will be contacting the abutting
property owners for necessary property acquisitions.
Very truly yours,
~-~ J/ames M. , PE.
Chief, Planning and Programming
J~14:pl
HENNEPIN COUNTY
on equal oppoflunlty employer
'~£0 O~
MINNEHAHA CREEK
WATERSHED DISTRICT
P.O. Box 387, Wayzata, Minnesota 55391
BOARD OF MANAGERS:
P~vtd H. Cechr~n, Pres. · Albert L. Lehm, fl - John E. Thoml$ * Bad)~r~ R. GudmumJ~ofl · Michael B. C~lrmll
LAKE MI#HETO#KA
WATERSH£O IOUNDARY
/
OTA
Permiq Application No: 81-98
Date: November 22, 1983
Appl i cant:
Att enti on:
Location:
Hennepin Co. DOT
320 Washington Ave. So.
Hopkins, MN 55343
James Ault, P.E.
City of Spring Park, Sec. 19ABD, Spring Park Bay,
Black Lake Channel ~ Lake Minnetonka
Purpose: CSAH 125 bridge replacement
At the regularly scheduled November 17, 1983 meeting of the Board
of Managers, ~he subject permit application was reviewed along
with the following exhibits:
Permit file 81-98.
Letter from the applicant requesting an extension.
The Board approved an extension of Permit 81-98 with the following
condition:
All 'potential erosion areas will be controlled as required' to
prevent erosion and maintained unt.il construction is complete
and bare slopes are stabilized.
This document is your permit from the MCWD. It is valid for one
(1) year. If construction is not complete within one (1) year, an
extension must be requested. Please contact the District at
473-4224 when the project is about to commence so an inspector may
view the work in progress.
EUGENE* A. HICKOK AND ASSOCIATES
Engineers ,f~r th~ D_istr/id~t
Mic)laeT A. P~nz-er, 'P.E./
November 17, 1983
Date of Issue
cc: Board
Z~tyaCOmbe r
of Mound
City of Spring Park
F. Mixa, LMCD
DNR, Metro Region Waters
bt
AGENDA
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District
No~ember 17, 1983
St. Louis Park City Hall
7:30 p.m.
oo
Call to order; present, absent, staff.
Reading and approval of minutes of the regular meeting of
October 20, 1983.
3. Approval or amendment of November 17, 1983, agenda.
-4. Hearing of permit applications.
A. 81-98 Hennepin County DOT - CSAH 125 bridge
replacement, Spring Park Bay, Black Lake Channel, Lake Minnetonka,
~Spring Park.,
B. 82-64 Schlee Builders - "Boni-Highlands, a 42-unit
townhouse complex, Trista Lane and CSAH 92, St. Bonifacius.
C. 83-96 Landform, Inc. - grading and drainage plan for
Phase II, Boulder Bridge Farm, Smithtown Road NE of Boulder Bridge
Circle, Shorewood.
D. 83-109 Hennepin County DOT - grading and drainage,
roadway construction and surfacing, CSAH 5, Minnetonka Mills,
Minnetonka.
E. 83-110 Hennepin County DOT - grading and drainage,
roadway construction and surfacing, CSAH 5 and TH 101 intersection,
Minnetonka.
F. 83-111 Cargill, Inc. - grading and drainage plan for an
office building, cafeteria and parking ramp additions, Cargill
Office Center, Minnetonka.
'G. 83-112 City of Minnetonka/MDOT - 1-394 freeway and
interchange-construction project, TH 12 between TH 101 and 1-494,
Minnetonka.
H. 83-113 Essex-12 Partners - grading and drainage plan for
a 16,000 sq. ft. retail building, Essex Road at TH 12, Minnetonka.
I. 83-114 Cheyenne Land Co. - grading and drainage plan
for 5-lot residential subdivision, floodplain development along
Minnehaha Creek, wetland alteration (DNR Wetland 715W), east of
Frederick Avenue at Minnehaha Creek, St. Louis Park.
J. 83-115 Hunter Trail Partnership - grading and drainage
plan for a 12-iot rural residential subdivision on 50 acres, Hunter
Drive west of Mooney Lake, Mediha.
K. 83-116 Minneapolis Cablesystem$, Inc. - ins%allatlon of
buried. CATV across creek channel, Upton Avenue South at Minnehaha
Creek ,' Minneapolis ·
L. 83-117 Tom Cousins - rip-rap placement along Minnehaha
Creek at Edina Mill Pond, 4800 West Sunnyslope Road, Edina.
· - M. 83-118 Fred Hodgdon - placement of 60 lineal ~eet of
rip-rap shoreline erosion protection, Upper Lake, Lake Minnetonka,
Shorewood.
N. 83-119 Bruce Fruen - beach sand blanket, Lafayette Bay,
Lake Minnetonka, Tonka Bay.
O. 83-120 Michael G. P!uhm - construction of 17 feet of
aluminum seawall, Walters Port, Carman's Bay, Lake Minnetonka, Oro~o.
5. Correspondence ·
Hearing of requests for petitions by public for action by the
watershed district.
7. Reports of Treasurer, Engineer and Attorney.
A. Treasurer's Report - Mr. Carroll
(1) Administrative Fund
B'. Engineer's Report - Mr. Panzer
(1) Taylor's Bridge
(2)
Minnehaha Creek Channel ImprOvements at State Highway
10'0/Cooperative Project No. CP-8
C. Attorney's Report- Mr. Macomber
8. Unfinished Business.
B.
C.
D.
Rule and Regulation Revision/Chapter. 509
District Initiated Maintenance Projects
Bridge Obstruction
Draft Permit Application Guidelines
9. New Business.
10. Adjournment.
0896o
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
BOARD OF MANAGERS OF THE
MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT
October 20, 1983
The regular meeting of the Board of Managers of the
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District was called to order by
Chairman Cochran at 7:30 p.m., October 20, 1983, at the Wayzata
City Hall, Wayzata, Minnesota.
Managers Present: Cochran, Lehman, Thomas & Andre
Manager Absent:
Carroll
Also present were board advisors Panzer and Macomber.
Approval of Minutes
The minutes of the regular meeting of September 15,
1983, were reviewed. Following discussion it was moved by
Lehman, seconded by Thomas, that on Page 22, the item "Costs of
Upper Watershed Study Prior to December 11, 1983" be amended to
read "Costs of Upper Watershed Study Prior to December 11,
1980" and that as amended, the minutes be approved. Upon vote
the motion carried.
Approval of Permit A~lications
The managers reviewed a memorandum from the engineer
dated October 13, 1983, indicating those applications which
comply with the applicable standards of the district and which
were recommended for approval on the terms and conditions as
set' forth in his written memorandum. Following discussion and
review of the written memorandum, it was moved by Thomas,
seconded by Lehman, that the following permit applications be
approved subject to all terms and conditions as set forth in
the engineer's memorandum: -
81=77 John Fisher - grading and drainage plan for
an abandoned gasoline station, Highway No. 7 and
Highland Road, Minnetrista.
83-97 Ed Mahoney - placement of 45 lineal feet of
rip-rap shoreline erosion protection, Carman's Bay,
Lake Minnetonka, Orono.
October 20, 1983
Page 2
83-98 Susan Carrier - placement of 58 lineal feet
of shoreline erosio~-~ion,.The Bluffs, Halsted's
Bay, Lake Minneton~
83-99 A. Bruce Fruen - placement of 80 lineal feet
of rip-rap shoreline erosion protection, Lafayette
Bay, Lake Minnetonka, Tonka Bay.
83-102 Mike Hayes - placement of 48 lineal feet of
rip-rap shore~~ protection, Spring Park Bay,
Lake Minneto~/a~
83-i03 Russel~eck - placement of approximatelY
117 lineal feet of rip-rap shoreline erosion
protection, Maxwell Bay,' Lake Minnetonka, Orono.
83-104 Kenneth Dahlgren - placement of 50 lineal
feet of rip-rap shoreline~ protection, Spring
Park Bay, Lake Minnetonk~~ .
83-106 Elizabeth B. Owen - placement of 221 lineal
feet of steel sheeting seawall to replace a wooden
seawall, Peavy Pond Channel, Brown's Bay, Lake
Minnetonka, Wayzata.
Upon vote the motion carried.
Tabling of Permit Application
The engineer's written memorandum dated October 13,
1983, recommended tabling of the following application until
such time as all required exhibits had been received. It was
moved by Lehman, seconded by Thomas, that the following
application be tabled until all required exhibits had been
received: _
83.-108 Darrel Geske - commercial'development of
Outlot D,-Victoria Commercial Development 2nd
Addition, Victoria.
Upon vote the motion carried.
Noble Company - grading and drainage for an 8 lot residential
subdivision, west of Grant Lorenz Road, Shorewood. 83-30
The engineer reviewed the application for approval of
a revised grading and drainage plan providing for storm sewer
placement along a different alignment than that which was
October 20, 1983
Page. 3.
granted conceptual approval on May 19, 1983. Mark Gronberg,
P.E., appeared on behalf of the applicant 'and reviewed the
pr-oposal with the managers. Following discussion in which it
wa's noted that the property is adjacent to a wetland, it was
moved by Andre, seconded by Lehman,- that the revised
application be approved as submitted with the modification that
the weir be placed further upstream at the inlet of an existing
CMP culvert. Upon vote the motion carried.
P. Gary Petersen - grading and drainage plan for a 10 lot
residential subdivision, east of Willow Drive, south of Luce
Trail, Or oho: 83-90
The engineer reviewed the application for grading and
drainage plan approval and recommended approval as submitted.
It was moved by Lehman, seconded by Andre, that the apPlication
be approved as recommended by the engineer. Upon vote the
motion carried.
Bruce Olson - dredging, steel sheeting seawall, Enchanted
Island, Up~er Lake, Lake Minnetonka, Minnetrista. 83-107
The engineer reviewed the application for dredging an
existing harbor and placement of steel sheeting seawall. The
engineer advised the board that the project constituted
maintenance dredging of an existing harbor and recommended
approval as submitted. It was moved by Lehman, seconded by
Andre, that the. application be approved as recommended by the
engineer. Upon vote the motion carried3
Charlton Consolidated Companies, Inc. - 180 unit condominium
development of 13.93 acres, NE corner of Plymouth Road and
Hilloway Road, Minnetonka. 82-83
The engineer reviewed the application for a revised
grading and drainage plan. The engineer advised the board that
the revised.plan represented a slight improvement from the
approved concept plan in reducing the rate of runoff from the
site and that the plan exceeded the storage requirements of the
City of Minnetonka. The engineer .advised the board that he had
granted administrative approval to the revisions on October 11,
1983, and recommended that the board ratify the administrative
action taken by the engineer. It was moved by Andre, seconded
by Lehman, that the administrative action of the engineer on
October 11, 1983, approving the revised plan be ratified and
approved. Upon vote the motion carried.
October 20, 1983
- Page 4
Department'of Natural Resources - construction of a public
access, boat ramp and parking areas, Lake Virginia outlet,
Vi.ctoria. 83-61
The engineer reviewed the after-the-fact application
of the Department. of Natural Resources for construction of a
public access boat ramp and parking areas on Lake Viriginia.
The engineer advised the managers that the matter had been
tabled in July of 1983 until a grading and drainage plan had
been submitted for the project. The engineer informed the
managers that the DNR had advised the district that a grading
and drainage.plan was not available for the project and that it
appeared that the DNR did not intend to submit one. In light
of the apparent position of the DNR not to submit a grading and
drainage plan for the project, the managers took no further
action with respect to the application and the matter remained
tabled ·
Ben Katzman - shoreline setback variance, 46.0 feet, for the.
construction of a porch addition, 5050 Meadville Street,
Excelsior Bay, Lake Minnetonka, Greenwood. 83-85
The engineer reviewed the application for a variance
from the district's setback requirements for reconstruction of
a porch addition. The engineer advised the managers that the
City 'of Greenwood and the adjacent property owners have
consented to the reconstruction. It was moved by Lehman,
seconded by Thomas, that the application be approved. Upon
vote the motion carried.
John C. Thonander - grading and drainage plan for Golden Ridg.e
Woods, a 4 lot residential subdivision, Westridge Lane, north
of Cedar Lake Road, Minnetonka. 83-101
The engineer reviewed the application for grading and
drainage plan approval and advised the managers that the plan
is in compliance with the City's storm water.management plan
and recommended approval as submitted. It was moved by Lehman,
seconded by Andre, that the application be approved as
recommended by the engineer. Upon vote the motion carried.
City of Minnetonka - utilities plan for Golden Ridge Woods,
Westridge Lane, north of Cedar Lake Road, Minnetonka. 83-100
The engineer reviewed the application by the City of
Minnetonka for the utilities plan for permit 83-101 and
recommended approval as submitted. .It was moved by Lehman,
October 20, 1983
Page 5
seconded by Andre, that the application be approved as
recommended by the engineer. Upon vote the motion carried.
L~ndform, Inc. - grading and drainage plan for Phase II,
Boulder Bridge Farm, Smithtown Road NE of Boulder Bridge
Circle, Shorewood. 83-96
The engineer reviewed the pending application for
approval of a Phase II grading and drainage plan for Boulder
Bridge Farm. The engineer advised the managers that a portion
of the documentation required by the managers at the last
regular meeting had been received in his office and that the
consulting engineer for the applicant had agreed to certify to
the remaining facts regarding compliance with the original
permit terms but had not done so as of the date of the
meeting. The managers expressed, concern that on a visit to the
site, water had been observed flowing across the road which
would appear to indicate lack of compliance with the original
permit conditions. Following discussion it was moved by Andre,
seconded by Lehman, that the application be tabled until the
next regular meeting and verification of all facts originally
required by the district by letter of September 19, 1983. Upon
vote the motion carried.
ShaVers Lake Home Owners Assoc. - cattail removal by mechanical
method, construction of a temporary dam, Shavers Lake,
Minnetonka, Deephaven and Woodland. 83-105
The engineer reviewed the matter of proposed cattail'
removal at Shavers Lake and recommended that the board advise
the applicant that no permit is.required for this work. The
engineer advised the board that dredging was not involved in
the project and that the lake had no outlet or public access.
The engineer advised the board that disposal of cattail
material is proposed to be done at the shoreline which would
significantly reduce the potential beneficial impacts of the
project. It was moved by Andre, seconded by Lehman, that the
board adopt the engineer's recommendation and advise ~he
applicant that no district permit is required for this work as
proposed. Upon vote the motion carried.
Robert Schmitt - dredging for navigational access, Excelsior
Bay, Lake Minnetonka, Excelsior. 83-08
The engineer advised the managers that Mr. Robert
Schmitt was present regarding the pending application for
dredging in connection with an existing marina facility· The
engineer advised the managers that since the last regular
October 20, 1983
Page 6
meeting, the DNR has issued a permit for maintenance dr'edging
of the facility. The engineer also advised the managers that
an application was pending with the Lake Minnetonka
C~nservation District for additional dockage at the site. Mr.
Schmitt requested action by the board conditioned on compliance
with subsequent .required governmental approvals. Following
discussion it was moved by Lehman, seconded by Andre, that the
application be approved conditioned upon issuance of an amended
DNR permit of the same scope and upon issuance by the LMCD of a
docking-permit to expand the docking facility. Upon vote the
motion carried.
Correspondence
The following correspondence was noted:
Notice from the Water Resources Board regarding
meeting on size of Board of Managers on November 3, 1983.
Treasurer's Repor~
Manager Thomas distributed the Treasurer's monthly
Administrative Fund Report dated October 20, 1983. Following
review of the report and the expenditures as shown in that
report, it was moved by Thomas, seconded by.Andre, that the
monthly Administrative Fund Report dated October 20, 1983, be
approved and the bills paid as set forth in that report and
further that Acting Treasurer Thomas be authorized and directed
to reinvest the balance of the funds in appropriate
instruments. Upon vote the motion carried.
Upper Watershed Storage and Retention Project/Painter Creek
Subwatershed CP 5 - 1984 Pro3~ect Budget
The managers reviewed a memorandum from the engineer
dated October 18, 1983, expressing the individual lin~ items in
the budget for the Upper Watershed Storage and Retention
Project/Pai'nter Creek Subwatershed CP-5 in 1984 dollars. The
engineer reviewed the budget and indicated that amended figures
had been prepared for Projects 1-7 inclusive, contingencies,
engineering, legal, administrative and easement acquisition in
response to the directive of the managers at the last regular
meeting. It was noted that the total project cost was
unchanged from that approved by the board on September 15,
1983. Following review by the board, it was moved by Lehman,
seconded by Andre, that the following budget, expressing
individual line items in 1984 dollars, be adopted for the Upper
Watershed Storage and Retention Project/Painter Creek
October 20, 1983
Page 7
Subwatershed CP-5 and that the following budget replace the
budget contained at page 21 of the minutes of the meeting of
September 15, 1983:
UPPER WATERSHED STORAGE AND RETENTION PROJECT/
PAINTER CREEK SUBWATERSHED CP-5
PROJECT BUDGET
Project No.
1
Project Name
Lake Katrina Outlet Control
Structure
Cos t
27,994
2
South Katrina Marsh Channel
Improvements
South Katrina Outlet Control
Structure
28,617
13,122
4
Painter Marsh Channel Improvements
5
6
Painter Outlet Control Structure
Pond 937 Outlet control Structure
7
Fish Migration Barrier
Contingencies - 10%
Engineering - 12%
Legal and Administrative - 5%
costs of Upper Watershed Study
Prior to December 11, 1980
Painter Creek Watershed Study Costs
through September 27, 1983
Estimated 'Easement Acquisition
Costs CP-5 (1984 Dollars)
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
(1984 Dollars)
72,602
32,210
23,830
21,987
22,037
26,444
11,018
51,087
59,963
96,174
487
Upon vote the motion carried.
The engineer also distributed a revised completion
schedule for Project CP-5 which schedule replaces the previous
project schedule dated May 1983.
October 20, i983
Page. 8 ·
Private Bridge Obstruction/il907 Cedar Lake Road, Minn~tonka,
Mi nnes ora
The engineer reported that Pursuant to the direction
of the Board of Managers at the last regular meeting a written
agreement had be~n signed by Mr. and Mrs. Taylor providing for
removal of the present bridge span, replacement with a
substitute span at a higher elevation, granting of an easement
to the district for a pedestrian portage across the Taylor
property on the north side of the creek and providing for cost
contribution, by the district upon completion and approval of
the project by the district. Chairman Cochran executed the
settlement agreement on behalf of the Board of Managers.
Preliminary Design/Channel Improvements at Highway 100 - CP-8
The engineer reviewed a draft of a proposed agreement
between the district, the City of Edina and the Minnesota
Department of Transportation for the undertaking of a
cooperative project to reconstruct the Minnehaha Creek Channel
in the vicinity of U.S. Highway 100. The engineer distributed
a memorandum dated October 20, 1983,~ providing estimated costs
for the project and containing preliminary estimates of
allocations of proposed costs between the parties to the
.agreement. The engineer also reviewed the plans and
specifications for the project with the managers. Manager
Andre inquired as to the basis for the proposed allocation of
costs between the parties and questioned whether the allocation
proposed was consistent with prior pro.jects undertaken by the
district. Discussion ensued regarding whether or not standards
should be developed for cost contribution by the district to
such projects and, if so, whether such standards should be the
same for projects funded under the Water Maintenance & Repair
Fund and those under a cooperative agreement such as the
present proposal. T~e manag.ers agreed that the matter
warranted further review and discussion at a subsequen~t
meeting. I-t was then moved by Thomas, seconded by Lehman, that
the draft agreement submitted with the engineer's memorandum of
October 14, 1983, the preliminary estimated costs as set forth
in the memorandum dated October 20, 1983, and the draft plans
and specifications be approved and the engineer directed to
proceed to complete all documents and return the same to the
board for final approval. Upon vote the motion carried.
City of Minneapolis/MWCD Creek Study
The engineer discussed a cost overage on the Minnehaha
Creek Hydraulic Study of approximately ~5,590, indicating that
October 20, 1983
Page 9
the overa~e was largely'attributable to additional elements in
the study requested by the City of Minneapolis. The managers
exloressed the view that such costs attributable to the City's
r~quest should be paid for by the City in full and directed the
engineer to bring the matter back to the board at the next
regular meeting.
Watershed Management Planning
The board reviewed as memorandum from the engineer
dated October 5, 1983, distributing a proposed questionnaire to
be sent to each member of the district's technical advisory
committee and each city engineer not yet represented by the
committee,'to receive information relevant to the district's
planning activities under Chapter 509. The managers reviewed
the questionnaire and authorized the engineer to proceed to
distribute the questionnaire as recommended.
The engineer also recommended scheduling a meeting of
the technical advisory committee for November 10, 1983. The
managers authorized the engineer to proceed to schedule a
meeting as recommended.
EPA~Grant Application
The engineer informed the board that the USEPA had
recently indicated that no Phase I grant monies would be
available during fiscal 1984 in connection with the pending
grant application of the district. The matter was discussed by
the board. The engineer distributed an outline of the grant
study elements, identifying those items which would be
appropriate for inclusion in the district's Chapter 509
planning process. The board authorized the engineer to proceed
to complete the grant application so that the application would
be on file with the USEPA at such time funding is available.
Public Official Liabili'ty Insurance Coverage
The managers reviewed a memorandum from the attorney
submitting quotations received from the district's insurance
agent for public official liability insurance. Following
review of the memorandum it was moved by Thomas, seconded by
Lehman that a policy with liability limitations of ~2 million
be secured from International Surplus Lines at a quoted premium
of ~601. Upon vote the motion carried.
October 20, 1983
Page 10
Upper Watershed Storage and Retention Pro~ect CP-5 Fund
The managers reviewed a memorandum from the attorney
recommending creation of a separate account for purposes 9f the
Upper Watershed Storage and Retention Project CP-5, separate
and distinct from the Administrative Fund and other funds of
the district, similar to the manner in which in account was
established for the Creek Improvement Project. Following
discussion manager Thomas moved the following resolution and
moved i~s adoption, seconded by Lehman:
RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING
uPPER WATERSHED STORAGE AND RETENTION PROJECT
CP-5 FUND
WHEREAS, the Board of Managers of the Minnehaha Creek
Watershed District has authorized and ordered the undertaking
of the Upper Watershed Storage and Retention Project CP-5 and
has, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes §112.61, subd. 3, levied a
mill rate sufficient to produce ~487,085, bu~ not to. exceed
one-third (1/3) of a mill, upon all taxable property in the
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Number 3, Hennepin and
Carver Counties, State of Minnesota, for the year 1984 by
resolution dated September 29, 1983; and
WHEREAS, current procedures of the office of the Finance
Director, Hennepin County, will not automatically segregate the
funds produced by this levy from funds produced by the other
levies made for the District; and
WHEREAS, it is necessary and desirable that the accountant
establish a separate fund for. the revenues generated by the tax
levy made by the managers on September 29, 1983, for purposes
of the Upper Watershed Storage and Retention Project CP-5;
-NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT:
A.' The managers hereby establish and direct the
accountant to create a separate fund to be known as the
Upper Watershed Storage and Retention Project CP-5 Fund for
purposes of accounting for all funds generated by the
special tax levy and for the payment of all bills
associated with the project.
B. That the District staff is hereby authorized and
directed to make the necessary requests of Hennepin County
staff to secure the appropriate accounting data from
Hennepin County for purposes of this resolution.
Upon vote the motion carried.
October 20, 1983
Page 11
Management Policy for Headwaters Control Structure - A~endment
of Policy Notebook dated 12/14/81
The managers reviewed a memorandum dated July 14,
1983, from the attorney and the engineer submitting substitute
documents for the management policy notebook dated December 14,
1981. It was moved by Andre, seconded by Lehman, that the
modifications recommended in the memorandum be made and that
the policy notebook be amended accordingly. Upon vote the
motion carried.
Adjournment
There being no further business to come before the
regular meeting, Chairman Cochran declared the meeting
adjourned at 10:45 p.m.
John E. Thomas, Secretary
0851o
R?tl
MINUTES OF QUARTERLY MEETING
OF SUBURBAN RATE AUTHORITY
October 19, 1983
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the quarterly
meeting of the Suburban Rate Authority was held at the
Ambassador Motor Hotel, in the City of St. Louis Park,
Minnesota, on Wednesday, October 19, 1983, commencing at
6:30 p.m.
1. Call to Order: The meeting was called to
order by the Chairman, Fred Moore.
2. Roll Call: Upon'roll call, attendance was
found to be as follows:
Brooklyn Park
Burnsville
Columbia Heights
Deephaven
Edina
Excelsior
Fridley
Greenwood
Hastings
Hopkins
Maplewood
Mendota Heights
Minnetonka
New Brighton
North St. Paul
Plymouth
Richfield
Roseville
Victoria
Margaret Snesrud
James K. Spore
Gayle Norberg
Bruce G. Nawrocki
William D. Schoell
J. N. Dalen
Charles Thomson
Edward Hamernik
Wm. Schoell
Gary E. Brown
John J. Strojan
John C. Greavu
0rvil J. Johnson
Robert DeGhetto
Donald Asmus
Henry Smith
Glenn Anderson
Frederick Moore
John Cartwright
Charles Honchell
Raymond Hoag
Also in attendance were SRA attorneys Clayton LeFevere and
Glenn Purdue.
3. Approval of Minutes: The minutes of the quarterly
meeting of July 20, 1983, were presented for approval as
mailed. It was moved by Mr. Hamernik, seconded by Mr.
Asmus, that such minutes be approved. Carried unanimously.
4. Chairman's Report: The Chairman reported on
correspondence that he has had with prospective members of
the SRA and with communities which have inquired about the
SRA's recommended Uniform Gas Franchise. He expressed the
hope that Apple Valley, Maple Grove and Coon Rapids might
become members of the SRA as a result of such correspondence.
He reported that the City of St. Anthony had been invited to
join but that he had been advised that the city council had
decided on September 27, 1983, that it would not join the
SRA at this time. He also reported that by a letter dated
September 9, 1983, the City oF Lakeland indicated that it
had determined to drop its voting membership in the Suburban
Rate Authority.
The Chairman also reported that an assessment notice had
gone out to all member communities.
He reported further that he had sent letters to the governor's
committee reviewing the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission's
operations. He indicated that as a consequence of this
correspondence the SRA has received an invitation .to appear
before the governor's committee to express such concerns as
it has about the MWCC.
5. Secretary-Treasurer's Report: J.N. Dalen,
SRA Secretary-Treasurer, presented his financial report for
the nine months period ended September 30, 1983, showing
that the SRA had a cash balance of $8,888.05 and investments
costing $47,044.75 with a face value of $47,000. It was
moved by Mr. Dalen, seconded by Mr. Norberg, that the
report be approved. Carried unanimously.
6. Claims: Mr. Dalen presented the following claim':
LeFevere, Lefler, Kennedy., O'Brien & Drawz,
for legal services from July 1, 1983 through
September 30, 1983, as follows:
GENERAL:
Legal Fees: $ 2,912.50
Disbursements: 469.45 $_
3,381.95
NSP:
Legal Fees: $ 35.00 $ 35.00
MWCC:
Legal Fees: $ 17.50 $ 17.50
NW BELL:
Legal Fees:
TOTAL
$ 140.00 $ 140.00
$ 3,574.45
It was moved by Mr. Dalen, seconded by Mr. Johnson, that the
foregoing claim be paid. Carried unanimously.
7. Northwestern Bell Telephone Company: Mr.
Purdue, SRA attorney, made a report concerning the recent
rate filing of Northwestern Bell Telephone for a rate increase.
On September 29, 1983, Northwestern Bell filed a petition
with the Public Utilities Commission asking for a $109.46
million increase in local telephone rates in Minnesota.
This figure equals a 16.7% rate of return on common equity.
Bell has requested an interim increase of $54.77 million, a
19.2% rise in rates, effective about November 28, 1983.
We have met with Bell's rate design manager, Arnold Albrecht.
While it has kept the Tier System, the requested dollar
increase.is the same in each tier.
This is a change from the last case where a uniform percentage
increase (therefore increasing dollar amounts outward from
the core cities) was made across the tiers. Mr. Albrecht
acknowledged that this change was prompted in part by SRA's
argument in the last case. The increases now proposed for
residential service are 77% in Tier I, 72% in Tier II, 63%
in Tier III, and 51% in Tier IV. This is an increase of
$8.94 per month, or $107.28 per year per line.
Bell has also requested a decrease in most business rates.
This is an effort to prevent businesses from bypassing Bell ~
facilities and establishing their own systems. Interim
rates for business lines will rise the 19.2%, however, due
to a statutory formula which utilities must follow in rate
increase petitions.
In a separate rate filing initiated on September 30, 1983,
Bell has asked for an additional charge of $2.98 per month'
for residential lines and $5.41 per month for business
lines. This tariff is a direct result of the deregulation
of the telecommunications industries scheduled to take
effect on January 1, 1984. All local telephone carriers
must now pay long distance carriers such as AT&T, Sprint and
MCI for access to their networks. The customer will be
required to pay this cost. The additional charge includes
$2.00 for interstate access and $.98 for intrastate access,
regardless of long distance usage. Congress may prohibit
the $2.00 fee.
Mr. Purdue then provided a short history of the origin of
the tier system and previous SRA positions as to it and
other rate design matters.
Chairman Moore reported that the matter of engaging a rate
expert and intervening in the rate case had been presented
to the SRA's Executive Committee and that the SRA Executive
®
Committee determined to recommend to the full SRA Board that
it take the following action:
Authorize the Chairman to enter into an agreement engaging a
rate expert to provide an analysis and testimony in the
proceeding for the SRA. The total cost of the expert's
services is not to exceed $20,000;
Authorize the Executive Committee to state the position of
the SRA on the rate filing through one or more spokesmen
whom it may select, on questions of rate design, in a manner
consistent with previous Board discussion and resolutions;
and
Authorize SRA's attorneys to intervene in the rate filing,
presenting such witnesses and arguments as will serve the
goals and policy of the Board on this matter.
After considerable discussion, it was moved by Mr. Norberg,
seconded by Mr. Greavu, that the SRA Board adopt the recommen-
dation of the Executive Committee concerning the Northwestern
Bell Telephone Company rate proceeding. Carried unanimously.
The Board thereafter discussed at length'the ways' in which
the SRA might most appropriately make itself heard on
questions of telephone rate design including hearings by the
PUC and legislative hearings. There was general agreement
that the SRA should make its position known to public officials
and legislators and that the rate consultants engaged by the
SRA should be called upon to assist in expressing the SRA
position for that purpose.
8. Membership: Members'of the Board then discussed
ways of recruiting additional members of the SRA. It was
the consensus that the members of the Board should be provided
with a list of municipalities in the metropolitan area,
showing the present members of the SRA Board. The officers
could then request specific directors to contact specific
non-member communities in the area of their own municipalities
urging them to join. It was agreed that personal contact
with potential members should be undertaken rather than just
a written invitation to join.
A question was raised as to whether a new member should be
required to pay a 1984 assessment calculated on the same
basis as such assessments were calculated for existing
members. After discussion, it was moved by Mr. Dalen,
seconded by Mr. Hamernick, that this be done.
9. General Discussion: Members of the Board then
discussed in general the decline in service being provided
by utilities in certain areas. Mr. Gary Brown indicated,
for example, that United Telephone Company ~emoved its local
office from Hastings and service in the Hastings area thereafter
declined noticeably. He expressed concern that Minnegasco
also is pulling its local office out of Hastings. He reported
that he had encountered a lot of difficulty in obtaining
personal local gas service and asked what actions might be
taken to obtain improved service. It was suggested that he
contact both'PUC and the Company. Mr. LeFevere indicated
that his office would contact the gas company about the
complaint concerning Minnegasco.
10. Adjournment: There being no further business to
come before the meeting, it was moved by Mr. Johnson, seconded
by Mr. Dalen, to adjourn. Carried unanimously.
Secretary
Attest:
Chairman
Attachment
SUBURBAN RATE AUTHORITY
ANALYSIS OF CHANGE IN CASH BALANCE
SAINT LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
For Nine Months Ended September 30, 1983
Balance at January 1, 1983
Additions:
Interest income
Sale of investments
Interest receivable
Special assessments:
City of Brooklyn Park
City of Saint Louis Park
$ 2,208.60
2~208.60
Deductions:
Accounts payable:
LeFevere, Lefler, Kennedy, O'Brien & Drawz-
Legal service
Systems Capital Corporation - Surety bond
Legal services - LeFevere, Lefler, Kennedy,
O'Brien & Drawz
Conference expense - Robert J Foxen & Assoc.
Investments purchased
Annual audit
Balance at September 30, 1983
Note A:
The breakdown of legal costs
are as follows:
Northern States Power
Northwestern Bell Telephone
Minnegasco
Metropolitan WasteControl
General
.$ 1,240.90
13,473.20
1,376.60
2,208.63
15~978.70
TOTAL
$ 34~278.03
4,427.00
32,409.61
4,249.72
· $
3,595.34
4~417.20
45,503.53
$ 49,098.87
11,773.52(A)
125.00
11,898.52
22,504.51<A)
263.04
5,044.75
500.00
40~210.82
8,888.05
Federal Farm Credit Bank Bonds
Federal Farm Credit Bank Bonds
INVESTMENTS
9.20%
15.25%
Due 10-3-83
Due 7-23-84
TOTAL COST
TOTAL FACE
$ 5,044.75
42,000.00
$ 47,044.75
$ 47,000.00
LEGISLATIVE CONTACT FORM
Thank you for serving as a legislative contact during the 1983 Legislative Session.
We are preparing a new list of legislative contacts for 1984, and need to know if you
wish to volunteer again for this very important task.
League of Minnesota Cities legislative contacts receive a free subscription to the
weekly Legislative Bulletin service during the Legislative Session. As a legislative
contact you will be expected to contact your legislators on major issues of concern to
cities - either by phone, letter, or in person. You will be briefed in, advance of
t~ese contacts by League of Minnesota Cities staff through the Legislative Bulletin,
"Action Alerts", and/ow personal contact by phone or meetings in your area. You may
also be asked to occasionally assist the District Coordinator in your Senate district
by making some phone calls, attending a meeting in your district, etc. (Note: Not
Senate districts have a District Coordinator. This is a new program initiated by the·
League to improve communication between city officials and legislators. If you are
interested in volunteering, call Peggy Flicker at the League.)
If you wish to serve, please return the form below to Peggy Flicker, League
Legislative Counsel, at the address below:
YES! I WANT TO BE A LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES LEGISLATIVE CONTACT PERSON
Legislative District: House Senate
(if known)
Name of Senator:
Name of Representative:
My Name:
My Title:
My City:
My Home Address:
My Home Phone: AC /
My Work Phone: AC /
Do you know your legislator(s)? Please indicate how (e.g., worked on campaign, active
in political party, relative, friend, business associate, etc.:
Are you especially interested in/knowledgeable about any city issues? Please identify.
PF:rmm
11/10/83
E. F. ROSB. JR.
COMMISSIONER
BOARD OF HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
24.00 GOVERNMENT CENTER
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55487
November 17, 1983
PHON£
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
MINNESOTA LEGISLATORS REPRESENTING HENNEPIN COUNTY
E. F. Robb, Jr., Commissioner
Solid Waste Resource Recovery
Enclosed is copy of notice concerning sOlid waste resource recovery
facility hearing, Monday, November 28, 1983, 7:00 P.M., Government
Center, recently sent to Hennepin County municipalities and neighborL
hood groups. Your presence and testimony will be most welcome.
The enormity, complexity, disagreeableness, and importance of dealing
with solid waste disposal probably will arise at this hearing which may
be crucial to timely, continued progress towards abatement of landfill
requirements.
Also enclosed for your information is a copy of the Hennepin County
Large Scale Energy Recovery Plant Schedule illustrating some of the
Problems we all face dealing with this issue.
If you have any questions, kindly let me know.
CC:
Hennepin County Mayors and Metropolitan Council Members
Hennepin County Commissioners
Mr. A. J. Lee, Associate County Administrator
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND ENERGY
320 Washington Ay. South
Hopkins, Minnesota 55343
935-338'1
TRY-935-6433
N~ICE OF PUBLIC ~ARING P3~4t~DING ~ SRr.~fION AND PURCRASE OF
THE WEST RIVERBANK SITE FOR A SOt.rD WASTE RES(XlRCE RECOVER~. FACILITY
The Public Service Committee of the ~ennepin County Board of Commissioners will
hold a public hearing at 7:00 p.m., Monday, November 28, 1983 in the Board Room of
the Hennepin County Government Center, 300 South Sixth Street, Minneapolis,
Minnesota, on the above-referenced subject.
The West Riverbank site, which is approximately 17 acres in size, is located on
the west bank of the Mississippi River between 33rd Avenue North and 36th Avenue
North.
The County Board 'has approved, as a concept, the construction of an up to 2000
ton-per-day resource recovery facility, utilizing the West Riverbank site. A task
force, consisting of County Board members'and Minneapolis City Council members,
after analyzing various sites for a resource recovery plant and considering
criteria such as access, cost, pollution control, emissions, environmental
factors, soil suitability and proximity to energy markets, recommended the use of
the West Riverbank site.
Enclosed with this mailing is a copy of the press release, dated November 10th,
and a copy of the resolution adopted by the Public Service Committee on November
10th establishing the public hearing.
For information on the conduct of the public hearing or to ask to be put on a list
to testify, please call Mary Ellen Hudson at 348-3168. For information on
technical issues relating to the selection and purchase of the site and resource
recovery, please call Warren Porter at 935-3381.
Sincerely,
Luther D. Nelson, P.E.
Director
Encl. 2
HENNEPIN COUNTY
WHEREAS, ,Nlnnesota Statutes 473.803 require the adoption of a sanitary
landfill abatement plan; and
WHEREAS, Hennepln Count/ adopted, by Resolution 83-6-485, a resource
recovery concept plan, Identl fylng a 2000 ton-per-day resource recovery plant as
a major component of than' plan~ and
WHEREAS, the'Cf?y/County Siting Cc~mlttee, after analyzlng various sites for
a resource recovery plant fo~ approximately one year, .looking at such crlterla as ,
access, cost. poi lutron control, ealsslons, envlronaental factors, sol I
sultablllty and proximit7 to energy markets, recoamended use of the West
Riverbank Site; and
WHEREAS, It Is necessary for the tlmely progress of the resource recovery
proJec~ to designate a slte and acquire It; and
WHEREAS, the County Board has authorized negotiation for the purchase of the
I~est Riverbank Slte, by Resolution 83-6-382 on June 7, 1983; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution 83-6-485, adopted June 29, 1985, the County
and Its consultants developed engineering, land use and environmental Information
for t~o alternate sltes known as the Pacific and Plymouth Avenue Sites, In a
manner similar to that developed fo~ sltes considered In the Cll~//County slting
process; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution 83-8-587 and 83-8-625, Hennepln County
retained a consultant experienced In Industrial and commercial real estate, to
develop an estimate of costs associated with purchase or condemnatlon and
rei ocatlon, and the wllllngness of various owners to sell wlthln the Pacific and
Plymouth Avenue Sites (the Pal?on Report); and
WHEREAS, the Pal?on report estimates that the Plymouth Site and the. Pacific
Site would cost $10,155,400 and $20,640,525 respectively; and
WHEREAS, It rs antlclpated that the West Riverbank site can be acquired for
substantially less cost than the Pacific or Plymouth sltes~ and
WHEREAS, prior studies of the Paclflc and Plymouth Avenue Sites Indicate the
existence of hazardous was?es on at leas? a portion of the Plymouth Avenue Site;
and
WHEREAS, staff of the City and County have been negotiating the purchase of
the West Riverbank site, pursuant to Resolution 83-6-582, and such negotiations
have been based In part on work performed by solls consultants, appraisers, and
other speclallsts;
BE IT RESOLVED, the Public Service Committee of the Hennepln County Board of
Commissioners shall hold a public hearlng at 7 p.m. untli adjournment on Honday,
November 28, 1983 In the Board room of the Hennepln County Government Center to
take testimony from the public and Hennepin County staff regarding the selectlon
and purchase of the West Riverbank site for a resource recovery faclllty.
Novem e
FOR'I~4EDIATE RELEASE
The Public Service Committee of the Hennepin County Board
of Commissioners will hold a public hearing at 7 p.m. Monday,
Nov. 28, to take testimony from the public and county staff
regarding the selection and purchase of the West Riverbank site
in north Minneapolis for a resource-recovery facility.
The hearing will be in the County Board room on the 24th
floor of the Government Center, 300 S. 6th St., Minneapolis.
The West Riverbank site, which is approximately 17 acres
in size, is located on the west bank of the Missi~sippi~River
between 33rd Avenue N. and 36th Avenue N.
The County Board has approved as a concept the construction
of an up t° 2,000-ton-per-day resource-recovery facility,
utilizing the West Riverbank site. A task force of County Board
members and Minneapolis City Council membe~analyzed several sites
for a resource-recovery plant for about one year and recommended
use of the West Riverbank site. Criteria reviewed included
cost, accessibility, soil suitability, access to markets; and
emissions and other environmental factors.
The County Board in June 1983 authorized county staff to
negotiate with the City of Minneapolis for the purchase of the
West Riverbank site.
Hennepin County is considering two technologies for a
large-scale resource-recovery project -- mass burn and refuse
derived fuel (RDF). In a mass-burn system, unprocessed solid
waste would be burned in a combustion facility to produce steam
or electricity. In an RDF system, solid waste would be processed~~
l HENNEPIN COUNTY
SUMMARY OF SITE SELECTION PROCESS AND SITING CRITERIA FOR TRANSFER STATIONS
AND RDF PROCESSING FACILITIES
AND' RESULTS OF PUBLIC MEETINGS ON PRDCESS AND CRITERIA AND sEARC~ AREAS
November 17, 1983
SITE S~.~CTION PROCESS
In 1980, 'Hennepin County generated and disposed of an estimated 900,000 tons of
municipal refuse. The rapidly diminishing capacity of exiting landfills used by
Hennepin County, the Waste Management Act of 1980, and citizen concern over new
landfill sites have led to serious consideration of resource recovery as an alternative
to continued landfilling. Hennepin County is currently considering two technology
alternatives as part of their large-scale energy project.
The first of these technologies is mass burn, in which waste, received from the
collection trucks, is burned to produce steam used for making electricity and/or
heating. The other technology involves processing the waste into a refuse-derived fuel
(RDF) which is also suitable for' combustion to produce steam. Hennepin County is
currently completing siting of the combustion facility for either mass burn or RDF
technologies.
Hennepin County has initiated a process for siting transfer stations and RDF
processing plants. 'A transfer station is a place at which several small' collection
trucks can transfer their loads to a larger semi-trailer, in order to minimize
transportation costs. The transfer stations and RDF prOcessing plants will have a
capacity of up to 1000 tons per day. A 1000 ton-per-day transfer station requires
about 5 acres if a square, or nearly square, site were used. A 1000 ton-per-day RDF
prOCessing plant requires about 10 to 15 acres depending on the shape of the site and
access.
The siting process for RDF processing and transfer stations has been designed
according to the following objectives:
1. Public involvement should be sought at each important step in the process.
2. The process should consider a variety of criteria which can be utilized to
identify sites which are most suitable based on land use, site development,
environmental and cost considerations.
3. The process must effectively identify sites within a reasonable time frame
and not substantially delay large-scale energy recovery implementation.
Approach
The site selection process emphasizes public involvement at each important
decision-making stage of the process. Two public meetings have been held. The first
was on the siting process and site-selection criteria sunm~rized in this paper. The
second was on general Search Areas derived from application of these criteria. Two
more public meetings are scheduled to receive public comment on: a) candidate sites;
and b) proposed sites which appear to be the most economically feasible. ~&~
Overall, the proposed siting process involves the Hennepin County' Board, Itennepin
County staff, Henningson,. Durham and Richardson, Inc. (HDR) (engineering and siting
consultant) and Faegre and Benson (legal consultants).
Work Products
· The following work products will be produced during the si~e-selec.tion process,
reviewed by the public, and sunmarized in the final site study report:
Facf]ity Description: A description of a typical RDF processing and a typical
transfer station has been prepared. These will essentially define what ia to be sited
and-establish basic site requirements (e.g., land space required).
~ Criteria 'used for identifying search areas in the County, candidate
sites within these search areas, and the most cost-effective alternatives were prepared
at the beginning of the process and reviewed by the public. These criteria address
land use, site .development, environmental, and cost factors important to identifying
the most feasible and. prudent sites.
Search Areas Map~ Key siting criteria have been used to identify areas in the .
County where facilities may be sited. These areas were identified based on key
criteria which were subject to public conm~nt, including zoning, ownership, access and
othe.r important factors.
Candidate Site Map: A list of Candidate Sites has been prepared based on
evaluation of Search Areas in accord with siting criteria. These cr.iteria included
site development, land use and environmental factors.
Cost Evaluations: Candidate sites will be evaluated based on cost factors. These
factors will include land costs, transportation costs and system costs. A computer
evaluation will be performed to identify transportation costs.
~ite Study_ Report: A site study report will be prepared which incorporates and/or
s~L,~arizes all the information utilized in the site-selection process. This report
will be prepared for review by the County Board.. The 'report will be completed in .
advance of the last public meeting.
Hearing TranscriptS: A written transcript has been made of each public meeting,
and will be provided to the County Board so that all public input is fully considered.
The site-selection process is scheduled to be completed by mid-January, 1984.
Site acquisition will follow this site-selection process.
II. SITING CRITERIA
Transfer stations and refuse-derived fuel (RDF) processing facilities will be
sited using a process which initially considers the entire County. Three sets of
criteria have been reviewed at a prior public meeting, and are being used for the three
major steps in the siting process. The three steps, described below in more detail,
are: 1) identifying search areas within the County; 2) identifying candidate sites
within the search areas; and 3) performing cost evaluations for candidate sites.
Key sitin~ Criteria
The following Criteria have been used to identify search areas within Hennepin
.. ~ese criteria primarily consider essential elements required for a facility.
i. Zo~ing~ Preferred areas are zoned by local governmental units as .suitable
for light, limited, or heavy manufacturing or equivalent zoning
classifications.
2. County_ Propert_v. Preferred areas are vacant land owned by Hennepin County,
including Park Preserve land.
3. ~ Preferred areas are one mile or less from a road which can be used
year-round, by vehicles which have an axle weight of at least nine tons.
4. ~rea. Preferred areas have an area of at least five acres.
Candidate Site Criteria
The following criteria have been used to identify and evaluate candidate sites.
1. · ~ite Development Factors
a. Site area. Preferred sites for transfer stations and RDF processing
stations have at least 5 and 10 acres respectively.
b. Site development issues. Preferred sites minimize the need for off and
on site construction.
c. Ownership. Preferred sites are owned by Hennepin County or are
privately held and currently for sale.
d. Access. Preferred sites minimize the distance to nine ton or better
roads and minimize traffic congestion.
· Tand Use Factors
a. Zoning. Preferred sites are in industrially-zoned areas, in areas
buffered from residences, and minimize the need for conditional
zoning approvals.
b. Land use. Preferred sites are those which are most consistent
with local land-use plans for the site and along the access route
and minimize the need for changes in the local land-use plan.
Environmental
a. Visual screening. Preferred sites are well bufferd and minimize
visual impacts on residences.
b. Noise. Preferred sites are at least 1000 feet from the nearest
residence and are well buffered from residential areas.
c. Water quality. Preferred sites minimize water quality impacts
on wetlands, streams, rivers and lakes.
d. Recreation. Preferred sites minimize impacts on existing facilities.
Cost Criteria
The foll~ing criteria will be .Used to identify cost impacts of candidate sites.
It is anticipated that cost evaluations will be performed on the candidate sites which
appel. ~r to be most feasible and prudent based on candidate site criteria.
1'. -~ Preferred sites are those which are either currently ~__ed by
~ennepin County or those which minimize site acquisition costs.
0
Tran _sportation Cost. Preferred sites minimize haul distances and
-transportation costs of refuse hauled to the facility and to the
combustion facility.
~ Preferred sites minimize overall system costs by minimizing
capital, operational and maintenance costs.
The proposed criteria form the basis for the siting of transfer stations and RDF
processing facilities in Hennepin County. It is anticipated that sites considered in
this process will all have major advantages and disadvantages. Decision-makers will
have .to balance these considerations and select the most feasible and prudent siting
alternatives.
III. COMMENT AND RESULTS FROM PRIOR PUBLIC MEETINGS
Public meetings were held on October 5, 1983 and November 9, 1983 as previously
announced and publicized, to review the site-selection process and siting criteria and
Search Areas. Questions and con~ents were solicited. Many of the questions at both
meetings sought information. One question was about the need to acquire land in'
advance of construction. This was answered by the need to identify a site in the
Request for Proposal document, which will request proposals 'for the construction .of a
facility on a specific site.
~ One issue raised was that Park Preserve La~d should be included in the
County-~wned land to be' investigated for possible sites. Considerable sentiment was
expressed at the second meeting that Park Reserve land should not be used; and the
County's consultants noted the use of park land would conflict with land use .an.d . .
environmental criteria. Other co~nents were that consideration be given to minimizing
adverse environmental impact, locate facilities in proximity to developed areas to
reduce transportation costs, and land uses along access routes to the facilities. As a
result, the Site Criteria have been modified corresponding to the co~ents.
The process of siting transfer station and refuse-derived fuel (RDF) facilities
wilI progress with a review of the Candidate Sites selected by means of the criteria
reviewed at the prior public meeting.
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND ENERGY
320 Washington Av. goufh
Hopkins, Minnesota 55343
935-3381
TTY-935-6433
November 17, 1983
To Interested Parties
Re: Public Meeting on Siting of Transfer Stations and Solid Waste
Processing (RDF) Facilities
I would like to invite you to the third of a previously-announced series of meetings on
siting the above kinds of facilities, a part of the resource recovery system being .
developed by Hennepin County. These meetings ~ pertain to siting of combustion
facilities, sanitary landfills or hazardous waste treatment facilities.
Th~ third meeting, on candidate sites for transfer stations and processing facilities,
will' be held Wednesday, November 30, 1983 at 7:30 p.m., at the Plymouth City Center,
3400 Plymouth Boulevard, Plymouth. The first meeting focused on the siting process to
be used and general siting criteria, while the second covered Search Areas resulting
from application of the siting criteria.
The paper enclosed with this letter, titled "Candidate Sites for Transfer Station and
RDF Processing Facilities", describes the candidate sites which have resulted from
application of the criteria reviewed at the prior meetings. Also enclosed is a'paper,
titled "Summary of Site Selection Process and Siting Criteria for Transfer Stations and
RDF Processing Facilities", which summarizes the process and siting criteria we are
using, which were the subject of the first meeting.
The overall site-selection process we are using will identify proposed locations for
'transfer stations and RDF processing plants. This process will become more specific,
leading to a future meeting on proposed sites based on an economic evaluation of the
candidate sites. Although the County is not required to conduct any meetings on this
matter, we want to afford con, unities and interested and affected parties a number of
opportunities for input at the various stages of this process. We expect a future
meeting to be held in early in January on proposed sites.
I ask that representatives of groups limit their comments to ten (10) minutes, while
individuals limit their comments to five (5) minutes.
Should you have questions before or after the meetings, contact ~. Warren Porter,
Project Manager, at 935-3381, extension 235. Written conments may be submitted either
before or after the meeting, and may be considered as long as they are received in this
office not later than seven, calendar days after the meeting.
Y~uly,
Luther D. Nelson, P. E.
Director
LDN/WKP:mvr
Enclosures
HENNEPIN COUNTY
an equal oppodunity ~mploycr
CANDIDATE SITES FOR TRANSFER STATION
AND RDF PROCESSING FACILITIES
November 17, 1983
Introduction
Transfer stations and RDF processing facilities are being Sited in
Hennepin County by use of three types of criteria: 1) key siting
criteria, 2) candidate site criteria, and 3) cost criteria. Key siting
criteria were used to identify search areas in Hennepin County where
facilitiescould potentially be sited. The Search Areas Map of October
20, 1983 identified areas which were zoned industrial (or an equivalent
zoning classification) or owned by Hennepin County. In these areas parcels
less than five acres in size and over one mile from a nine-ton capacity
or better road were eliminated from further consideration. Identification
of candidate sites is the second of a three-step process including:
1) identification of search areas utilizing key driteria, 2) identifi-
cation and evaluation of candidate sites utilizing candidate site criteria,
and 3) evaluation of property, transportation and system costs utilizinQ
cost criteria.
The remaining sections of this document.briefly summarize the
process for identifying candidate sites, and describe the location of
the candidate sites.
Process
Field investigations were conducted to identify the feasibility of
locating facilities in the previously identified search areas. Areas
identified in red on the Search Areas map were inspected to determine
whether a minimum of five acres vacant land existed. Zoning maps were
used in the field to determine the exact boundaries of each area identified
on the Search Areas map. Areas containing sufficient vacant land which
met the key siting Criteria were identified as potential locations for
transfer stations and RDF processing facilities. An engineering evaluation
was made to determine the feasibility of each potential site. Potential
sites were eliminated which contained insufficient land, appeared to have
significant site development constraints (e.g., existing structures), or
did not have suitable access. Candidate sites were identified on the
basis o~ site development and land use candidate siting criteria. Candi-
date sites were evaluated for their use as transfer ~tation and RDF
processing facility sites primarily on the basis of available land and
the configuration of each site. A candidate site map was prepared
which identified the general location of each candidate site. Candidate
sites are currently being evaluated according to all candidate Site
criteria. Each candidate site will be evaluated and rated based on its
relati've compliance with site development, land use and environmental
criteria.
CANDIDATE SITES
Name
A. Hassan Township Site
B. Maple Grove North Site
C. Brooklyn Center Site
D. Brooklyn Park East Site
Eo Brooklyn Park West Site
F. Maple Grove South Site
G. Hennepin County Gravel Pit Site
H. New Hope Site
I. Hennepin County Adult Correction
Facility Site
J. Plymouth Site
K. Medina Site
L. Long Lake Site
M. Chanhassen Site
N. Eden Prairie South Site
O. Eden Prairie North Site
P. Hennepin County Glen Lake Site
Q. Hennepin County Hopkins Site
R. Bloomington East Site
S. Bloomington West Site
T. Minneapolis Industry Square Site
U. Minneapolis Lyndale Yard Site
General Location
Near the intersection of Highway lO1 and
147th Avenue North '
Near the intersection of Highway'152 and
Zachary Lane
North of 1-694 between Xerxes Avenue and
Shingle Creek
East of Winnetka Avenue, generally northwest
of the intersection of 1-694 and 169
Southeast of the intersection of County
Roads 130 and 18
Southwest of the intersection of County
Roads 130 and 18
In Maple Grove near the intersection of County
Road 109 and 85th Avenue North
East of Winnetka.Avenue at'51st Avenue North
In Plymouth southeast of the intersection of County
Road 6 and Vicksburg Lane
Northwest of the intersection of Peony Lane Nortl
and County Road 9
South of Highway 55 between Arrowhead Drive and
Willow Drive'
South of Highway 12 and west of Willow Drive
North of Highway 5 and east of Highway lO1
North of Highway 5 and west of County Road 60
South of County Road 67 and west of County Road 60
North of County Road 67 and west of County Road 4
West of County Road 18 and south of County Raod 3
Southeast of the 'intersection of James Avenue
and 94th Street
South of County Road 1 and west of Normandale
Boulevard (County Road 34)
North of the intersection of 1-35W and Washington
Avenue
North of Highway 12 and west of Colfax Avenue
i--
Z
0
Z
RST NATIONAL-SOO LINE CONCOURSE
EHLERS AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
FINANCIAL SPECIALISTS
507 MARQUETTE AVE. MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA 55402 339-B291 [AREA CODE 612)
FILE:
FINANCIAL SPECIALISTS: EHLERS AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
PLEASE DISTRIBUTE TO GOVERNING BODY MEMBERS
NOVEMBER 1, 1983
NEWSlFTTER
As we've written before, all interest rates especially tax-exempt rates remain very high. Some say that high
tax-exempt rat~s are caused by reductions in the top tax rates, but we all know that the price of any commodity,
tax-exempt bonds included, is determined by the price at which the last, least affordable unit must be sold. This is
true of grain, livestock~ stocks -- any commodity. $o, as we saturate the high tax-bracket investment market and
dealers must sell some bonds to lower-bracket taxpayers, the entire price level drops (interest rates rise) to that
price necessary to sell some bonds to the lower, bracket taxpayer). As of October 13, the Bond Buyer Index was
c).67 and the Bond Buyer's 30 year Revenue Bond Index was 10.15%.
Question: Does this market saturation bootstrap taxable rates too? As tax-exempt interest rates approach 85% to
'c70% of taxable rates buyers in the 50% tax bracket receive an equivalent of about 21% before tax yield (using the
Bond Buyer Revenue Bond Index). Logically these extraordinary yields act as a magnet keeping taxable rates
artifically high. All borrowers compete for funds and if a competing yield for comparable quality investments is
extraordinarily high a borrower of taxable funds must pay a higher yield if he hopes to be funded. If true, the
excessive issuance of tax-exempt bonds not only inflates tax-exempt yields but also forces taxable yields up so
that those borrowers, including the federal government, can be funded. Thus, a.case can be m'ade that the liberal
yields provided by excessive issuance of tax-exempt bonds forces up taxable rates and that limitin9 the supply of
tax exempts will also reduce interest rates on conventional, taxable business' loans and home mortgages. This
reduction may benefit all borrowers far more than the marginally lower yields provided by exempting some
borrowings from taxation.
Minnesota Property Tax Relief Act: There is a great deal of interest in Ehlers and Associates' computer analyses
showing how any proposed levy actually impacts individual homesteads, ag and non-ag, subtracting state-paid
property tax credits and refunds. It may be late to consider 1983/84 tax measures but it is time to start thinking
.about next year. One cannot fully inform constituents, voters, without these analyses.
Our Wang computer conversion is near completion with word processing' capability up and running and the data
processing computer version moving along. We are keeping the IBM's so that our unequalled capacity to serve our
cliental quickly and accurately will continue. Ehlers and Associa. tes leads the industry in the exclusive adaptation
of computer sciences to gove[-nmental finance. We do not provide such services to the underwriting trade because
of the obvious conflicts of interest.
We (most of us) look forward to Winter as a challenge. By March we'll have had enough but just now the prospect
of snow and the invigorating winter weather attracts. We'll hope to see you, nothwithstandin9 wind and storm.
With warmest personal regards, we are
Very trul~c.yours, ~
EH A OC .
./
STERN, LEVINE, SCHWARTZ, LIFSON,
CREIGHTON & BUNIN, P.A.
cordially requests your attendance for on
evening of food and spirits in celebrati.On
of the holiday season
saturday, decembe~r 1'7, 1983
7:00 p.m. - midnight
1300 mount curve avenue
minneapolis, minnesota
btock ti~ optionol
r.s.v.p. 3'77-8620
A REPORT ON FISCAL DISPARITIES:
A NEED TO EXAMINE MINNESOTA TAX POLICY
Since March 1983, a number of suburban city managers and finance
directors have been me~ting as a committee to explore the effects of the
Fiscal Disparities Act. The committee-'s work has led to the identification
of facets of the.law.~that~need.to~be .carefully analyzed~and~ i-n.some case~,
changed.
Elimination of the metropolitan tax-base sharing system was not an
objective of this committee. However, in its review of the Fiscal Dis-
parities Act, the committee looked for ways to strengthen tax-base sharing
by more fully recognizing the balance that must be achieved between all
metropolitan communities in order to preserve the economic integrity of the
TwinCities area.
The Fiscal Disparities committee reviewed written materials on tax-base
sharing prepared by the Metropolitan Council and the Citizens League.
Presentations on this topic were also made by Gene Knaff and John Kari of -
the Metropolitan Council; Paul Gilje and Robert de la Vega of the Citizens
League; and Charles Weaver, the author of the Fiscal Disparities Act. A
common theme throughout every presentation was the need for comprehensive
review of the performance of the Piscal Disparities Act and the observation
that many aspects of the Act have resulted in u._n~n~ended inequities among
~ n~_um__ber_of met.~opolitan communities
The~r6po~t"~hich fo~'str°n~Y-'capitali.zes on many of the observations
and~suggestions offered throughout these presentations. Background infor-
mation on the Fiscal D~sparities Act is provided as apreludeto a discussion
detailing areas of the Act needing further analysis and revision.
The Fiscal Disparities Act
A major impetus for tax-base sharing came in the late 1960's with the
creation of the Metropolitan Council. Because the Metropolitan Council and
other entities, such as the Metropolitan ~aste Control Commission, could
dictate development decisions affecting local governments, many legislators
feared that existing tax base inequities would be further exacerbated in
some communities if the addition of new commercial-industrial developments
were effectively foreclosed at the metropolitan level.
The Fiscal Disparities-Act was enacted in 1971 as a way of redistri-
buting the taxing capacity of local governments. Although revenue re-
distribution may be a result of tax-base sharing, the primarS objective of
the Act remains th~ redistribution of the metropolitan tax base.
Imple~entation of the Act did not' begin until 1975, but the tax-
base sh~ring formu'la, which is still used today, treats 1971 as the base
year from which commercial-industrial tax base growth is measured. Com-
mercial-industrial tax base growth includes all increases in valuation
e
.resulting from_ construction occurring after 1971 and from.~he revaluatio]~
,~f--~ommercial-indUstrial property constructed prior to 197]. Forty per-
cent of the commercial-industrial tax base growth is placed into the
metropolitan pool.
'The distribution formula in the tax-base sharing program involve~ two
factors -- population'and wealth as measured by the market value of
taxable property. Ih effect, t~be distribution formula is based on com-
parative_per capita market values throuqhout the metropolitan area.
The distribution formula also includes a factor that places a minimum
on the amount which all communities can receive. This minimum works such
that any jurisd~ction's fiscal capacity which exceeds twice the average
fiscal capacity,throughout.the.metropolitan area iF treated as.if,i~s.~iscal
capacity were exactly twice the average.
A significant part of the Fiscal Disparities Act, which is frequently
'overlooked, concerns the way that a taxing jurisdiction makes its con-
tribution to the pool. While the amount ~contributed to the pool is
equivalent to 40 percent of a city's net growth of commercial-industrial
~ssessed valuation, the contribution is raised uniformly from al. 1 commercial-
industrial properties located in the city. This occurs because an area-wide
mill rate is established based on the average of all metropolitan mill
rates. In communiti~ where the local mill rate is below the metro-
politan rate, commercial-industrial property pays more in taxes than it
would have without the Fiscal Disparities Act. Conversely, commercial-
industrial properties in communities with mill rates .higher than the
metropolitan rate pay less in taxes than they would have without the Act.
A 1983 analysis of the Fiscal Disparities Act prepared by the Citizens
League shows that 22'percent of the region's commercial-industrial tax
base, which represents $884 million in assessed value, is in the 1983
tax-base sharing pool. Net contributors placed $500 million of assessed
value into the pool, while net gainers contributed $384 million of assessed
value. The net transfer of~assessed value in 1983 is $278 million. This
analysis also shows the ratio between a municipality with the highest per
capita commercial-industrial valuation and the lowest a=s 4.7 to 1.
According to the Citizens League, the ratio would have.been 13 to 1 without
the Fiscal Disparities Act.
~Policx Changes
There are a number of ways that the Fiscal Disparities formula could
be changed to enhance equity among metropolitan communities.
Throughout the history of tax-base sharing, many have questioned
whether pre-1971 commercial-industrial value should be shared. While this
change would give equal treatment to'all-commercial-industrial property,
the 1971 benchmark was originally established to protect cities that had
pledged bonds against an established tax base level.
Whether or not to share only new construction is another aspect of
the formula that has been questioned. However, it should be recognized
that the formula presently captures some of the pre-1971 development'
through inflation.
The only new construction which takes place in the metropolitan area
~does not_contribute to the fiscal di~s~.~ri___ty pool occurs in tax increment
dis__..~tr~cts.-'Simi~ar~'~ none of the growth in the value of commercial-industrial
property-l'ocated in tax increment districts is contributed to the pool. A
recent change in State law requires that non-residential tax increment
districts established after August 1, 1979 contribute 40 percent of net
growth to the metropolitan pool. But construction occurring in similar
districts created before August 1, 1979 continues to enjoy an exemption
from the Fiscal Disparities Act. Tax increment districts provide some
'cities with a way to hide their tax base growth to avoid making contributions
tO the pool.
One glaring inequity that exists in the current law allows.communities
that prohibit commercial and industrial zoning to receive distributions ....
from the pool. If the zoning of a community reflects a desire to rule out
commercial-industrial development, it hardly seems fair for that community
to profit from the growth of the metropolitan commercial-industrial tax base.
Still another way to address the situation described above would be to
change the formula so that all o~..a ~ortion of residential Value is also
shared ~.hr°~ghoUt"th~' ~e~rop~litan~'~ea~'' However, if residential property
~ere-§hared in a manner similar to the commercial-industrial tax base, the
local tax base woul~ fall only partially on residential property. The
total residential t~x burden of a community would then become dependent
upon the actions taken by all other metropolitan governments. Including
residential properties in the pool would also make it possible for com-
munities to "raid the pool".by increasing their tax rates. Under the cur-
rent formula, communities cannot raid the pool without raising residential
taxes as well.
Yet another potential area for modification iDxolves the need to
e~ualize assessment levels wi%hin the seven-county metropolitan area. With-
out this equalization, some communities are contributing substantially more
than 40 percent of the growth in their commercial-industrial tax base
while similarly-situated communities are paying substantially less than the
40 percent due to the level of their assessment standards.
Future Direction
The Fiscal Disparities Act is only one piece of the puzzling maze of
~io£~l government finance. Any policy changes in the Fiscal Disparities Act
~'" (m~st also be examined in the context of the entire package of state taxing
policies including local government aid, homestead credits and school aids.
The need for such an examination is pressing. Evidence of the inequities
in the Fiscal Disparities Act as well as those inequities which exist
throughout the entire local govenment finance system became apparent during
the last Legislative session. These inequities have produced tension and
conflict among cities. Suburban communities which are especially fee,ling
the brunt of these inequities formed a group called the~..Metropolitan'.
~ whose purpose was to educate state policy makers with their
special concerns. The group has evolved into a group called the Municipal
Caucus whose PurPose is to play ~'maj.'o~'.f.o.l.~'.'i'n'~he de'velopment~f'state
taxing policY'~nd the d~Vel~)pment'~of.'varlous governm~ht~-aid"fd~mulas.
Recommendation
Recently Governor PeKpi~h. announced the.formation o? a special Skate Tax
Policy Commission ~o be headed by St. Paul Mayor George Latimer. This
committee will provide an importantfortm for the discussion of many of
the concerns identified in this report. It is important that suburban
'interests be represented throughout the committee's work.
The Fiscal Disparities committee has identified several alternatives that relate to the
Fiscal Disparities Law. The firs~ alter~ative'fs'to~e~amine thC'prob"and
cons of m~int~iSi'6g fiscal disparity as it now exists'or completely dropping
fiscal disparity from the tax structure. The committee feels that this
needs further examination.
The second alternative is to examine the formula by which the Fiscal Dis-~
parities Law is'implemented. In late 1982, the Citizens League published a
document entitled "Issues in Metropolitan Tax Base-Sharing (Fiscal Disparities)."
This report is attached and has been the subject Of discussion at committee
meetings. The committee feels that several .of these proposals merit
further examination
It is therefore recommended to the Municipal Caucus that the Fiscal Dis-
parities Committee be directed to examine the above-described alternatives.
It is further recommended that staff members of the Citizens League, the
Association of Metropolitan Municipalities and the Metropolitan Council be
invited to attend meetings of the Fiscal Disparities Committee. Finally,
~..it.-is--recommended that this'~r~pO~t'be~S~'bmitted to the Latimer Commission,
the Citizens League, Revenue Resources Committee of the Association of
Metropolitan.Municipalities, the League of Minnesota Cities, the Metropolitan
~Council and other interested governmental agencies.
James L. Brimeyer
Chairman
PAGE 2
State Establishes New Deal For School Aids
Minnesota's new tiered levy and aid
program allows all school districts to levy
)taxes to raise up to an additional $575
per pupil unit (with some restrictions)
above the basic levy and aid of $1,475.
Ninety school districts have access to
another $25 per pupil unit (in the fifth
tier) if they would have been able to raise
more money with the old formula than
the new one.
Primary-secondary education in
Minnesota is £manced through a combin.
ation of state money and local property
taxes. The foundation of the program is
the state basic aid and levy which allows
school districts to levy 24 mills on the
local property tax base. The ~tate guaran-
tees that $ 1,475 will be available for each
pupil unit. (A pupil unit represents
average district student attendance and
additional weighting for higher educa-
tional costs for the seventh through
twelfth grades.)
Under the system, a school district
levies the 24 mills against the local prop-
erty tax base, and the difference between
the amount of money which comes in
from this tax and the $1,475 guaranteed
per pupil unit is made up by the state.
This means that a district with a relatively
low property tax base will get more in
state aid than a district with a relatively
high tax base.
Besides the basic program and the
tiered program described here, school
districts may levy additional property
taxes at their discretion if they hold a
voter referendum to ratify the decision.
No state assistance is guaranteed for
these referendum levies. .
The new tiered system replaces four
tax sources which districts had available
under state law: the low fund balance
levy, the replacement levy, the grand.
father levy, and the discretionary levy.
The Legislature had set up these taxes at
different times to respond to different
needs. Some districts had access to only
MINNESOTA'S NEW TIERED LEVY AND AID SYSTEM
REFERENDUMS
Unlimited Dollars
TIER FIVE $ 25 Per
(Only available to districts pupil
which had more money available unit
under old system)
TIER FOUR $ , 100
Per '
pupil
unit
TIER THREE $ 100
Per
pupil
unit
TIER TWO $ 150 Per
(Subject to fund balance pupil
subtraction) un it
TIER ONE $ 225 Per
(Cost differential) Max. pupil
unit
No Guarantee
50% Guarantee
50% Guarantee
75% Guarantee
100% Guarantee
100% Guarantee
BASIC
TOTAL
$1,475 Per
pupil
unit
100% Guarantee
$2,050 (plus $25 for some districts and
unlimited referendum spending)
some of the taxes and others did not.
A key feature of the Minnesota sys.
tem is the guarantee to a school district
that a given tax effort (expressed in the
number of mills levied on the property
tax base) will result in a guaranteed sum
of money. This concept was central to
the Minnesota Miracle school finance re-
form of the early 1970s and is embodied
in the basic school aid program which
guarantees $1,475 per pupil unit to a
district which levies 24 m~s.
In the tiered system, the first two
tiers are fully guaranteed. This means that
if a district chooses to levy a certain
number of mills, the state will guarantee
a maximum of $225 per pupil unit in the
first tier and $150 in the second. This
guarantee works the same way as the
basic program, meaning that if the school
levies the required number of mills, the
state is committed to paying the differ-
ence between what the mill levy brings in
and the $225 or $150 per pupil unit.
For the third and fourth tier, the
revenues are equalized at 75 and 50 per-
cent respectively, meaning that the levy
of a certain number of mills will result
in 75 percent or 50 percent of the
guaranteed per-pupil figure. Low tax
base districts must levy higher property
taxes to get the full revenue available.
The new tiered system gives more
equal access to revenues because it
applies equally to all districts. In the
old system, all districts could Use the
discretionary levy, but only some dis-
tricts had access to the low'fund balance,
replacement, and grandfather levy. Access
to those levies was determined by past
practices and other factors.
Although the tiered system establishes
a more equal access to revenues for
school districts, it does take into account
differences among districts. ,The first
tier is expressly designed to take into
account teacher education and training,
and has set up a formula for determining '
the additional access to revenues for
districts with a more highly-educated
and more senior teachers. In addition,
the second tier restricts the amount of
money a school district can raise if it
has a large fund balance. Districts with
more than $500 per pupil unit in the
bank can raise less with tiffs levy than
without fund balances of that size.
The tiered system will be phased in
over a four-year period beginning in the
fall of 1984.
bit after the
School.
itened
High
n the stale is mi.c.,;ing in
! the trofit of the audi-
.';,:; and fam'ily placed
'-!onged Io T~shmack
:c,r Ires his youth, a
and a Marin.e Corps
yesterday was som-
!dtchael Callahan,
ormer English teach-
been a "subdued
s~uc;ents since news
ed on page IOA
- nce
ack
:nning an attack was
)-Iranian Shiite Mus-
t b;:~on ktlown as the
and the Party of
· k on Oct. 23, wh!ch
Marine headquar.
rut airport, U.S. and
~,ence officials said
plinler.~roup ap-
been involved. ,
{ued on page 10A
Be/ore the landing, the Pentagon
had speculated that Cuban antiair-
craft batteries and a radar station
were on the island, although journal.
tsts whd had visited It In the last
week had reported that there was no
Ctiban presence there beyond three
"medical workers and a schoolteach-
er.''
In Washington, a Pentagon official
said that 17 Grenadian army prison-
ers had been taken on the island.
There was no explanation for the
discrepancy between reports from
U.S. military officials on the scene
and those from the Pentagon, which
also said that the landing had been
unopposed.
:Almanac
Wednesday, November 2, 1983
306/h day; 59 to go this year
Sunrise: 6:51. Sunset: 5:02
Today's weather/
Turning cooler
Dense morning fog and falling after-
noon temperatures are forecast for
the Twin Cities area. The predicted
high is in the upper 50s, and winds
will be picking up.
Top stories inside/
23¢ stamp in your future?
The Postal Service has proposed rais-
Ing mall rates to counter a potential
deficit of $2.3 billion. Postage would
rise from 20 cenL~ to 23 cents for first-
Class letters. The changes wouldn't go
into effect until next October at the
earliest. Page ~A.
American troops. Page 5A.
A Pentagon official in Washington
said that the Marines had found a
weapons cache in Carrlacou with
proximately 700 rifles, 38 AK47 as-
sault rifles, "a quanUty" of rocket.
propelled grenades, 150 cases of am.
munition, two jeeps, one truck, one
generator, some radio equipment
and 12 cases of TNT.
After sending patrols out around the
tiny island -- part of a chain of isles
that extend northeast from Grenada
-- the Marines rebearded their ships
and rejoined their main force, the
22nd Marine Amphibious' Unit, to
.sail off to the Mediterranean to re-
lieve Ihe Marine force in Beirut.
Camp LeJeune, N.C., had been at
on the way ~o Lebanon when the~,
were diverted to Grenada after
· Prime Minister Maurlce Bishop and
some of his ministers were executed
Oct. 19 by hard.line Marzlsts. After
that, the mtltta~ chief, Gen. Hudson
Austin, proclaimed a 16-m~*mber
Revolutionary Military Cour h~t
ruled until the U.S. invasion .,eek
ago.
The United States said yesterday
that it was checking into intelligence
reports of "death threats" emanating
from Cuba against Americans ill Lat.
in America and elsewhere in retails.
tiaa for the invasion of Grenada.
State Department officials in Wash-
Grenada continued on page
Minneapolis 'will lose
more than it takes in
under tax sharing laW:
By Robert Whereatt
Staff Writer some attempt lo change what is
known as the fiscal disparities law.
For the first time in a decade, Min. The law was Intended to compensate
neapolL% next year will lose more for differences In the ablJltle
than it receives under a complicated communities to generate proI~
and controversial law that requires ' taxes, said Charles Weaver, a forme~-
metropolitan.area cities to share legislator who is corLsidered the
part of the taxes paid by commercial ther of the law.
and industrial property Owners.
Almost $2 million in property taxes
that could have gone to the city bud-
get, lo the Minneapolis school budget
and to the city's portion of the coun-
ty budget will be distributed to other
A large factory or a'big shopping
center provided a sufficient tax base
to keep residential property taxes
relatively Iow, Weaver said, while a
city with little commercial or indu~
trial development generally had to
Erica Bouza gets jail term cities in the seven-county region, impose higher taxes on homeowners
Erica Bouza was ordered to spend 10 The contribution of tax funds by to raise the same amount of money.
days in jail Tuesday on charges stem. Minneapolis commercial and indus- That struck some legislators as lneq:
ming from her Pa~icipation' in recent trli~l property .taxpa.yers rave?es ,a. uitable because a shopping eente'ror
protests at Honeywell. She was sen- 10 year trend tn whtch fha city re indust , can -
fenced along with six other women. _c,ea,iv.ed mote. from other cities than it popul[aZon an.,Se..~ea metropolitan
Page
. _. p o out under lhe sharing law ' rt¢',,,~+:-";:' ,.u.:'qoo ca.n affect met.
· ,.ot, .... an IaCllllles, SUCh as freeway~,
Index/ "~'e were surprised to be a net con- said.
parks and sewer systems, ~eaver
Business -'-~'~- --
_Comics ?C
C~orrecttons 3~
_Crossword 16~-'~
E_Editorial 14,15~
_Classified ads
Obituaries 8D
Theaters 5C
TV, Radio 8C
Variety 1-10C
Weather 2B
8-16D
tributor this year," said Tls Fid-
hetty, a municipal.aid authority in In response, the Legislature P~tSed
the city coordinator's office. Fid- the fiscal disparities law, by which
hetty said officials had e×pected each community shares part of 1~
Minneapolis to take In more than Il . tax base.
paid out for at least four more years.
Fiscal continued on page 12A
.... ~ .The .c.i.ty's~. n=e..w. Sta..tt!.s.. m. ay Prompt
· LOV 1583 ....
1 1/16/83
TO:
FROM:
DI ST. #277
MOUND CITY MANAGER
MOUND CITY COUNCIL
DOW~AT OF MN.
DI RECTOR
DONALD ULRI CK,
SUBJECT: UPDATE ON ACTIVITIES TO DATE RELATING TO CABLE TV
IN THE MTKA. AREA.
THE BASIS OF THIS COMMUNICATION SURFACED IN A MEETING HELD
11/15/83 BETWEEN THE WESTONKA CABLE PRODUCTION COMMITTEE AND
THE DOWDEN CABLE PEOPLE. THE SUBJECT OF THE MEETING RELATED TO
AND DEMONSTRATED THE EQUIPMENT CURRENTLY ORDERED AND TO BE
INSTALLED IN BOTH THE COMPANY STUDIO AND THE STUDIO I1``4 THE
WESTONKA COMMUNITY CENTER (OLD HIGH SCHOOL) IN. MOUND. THE
REFERRED TO BASIS FOR COMMUNICATION WITH EACH OF THE ABOVE
NAMED ENTITYS WAS TO UPDATE YOU ON THE ROLE OF THIS COMMITTEE,
ITS RELATIONS TO. WESTONKA COMMUNITY SERVICES, AND ITS
INVOLVEMENT WITH THE CABLE COMPANY.
THE COMMITTEE WAS CREATED BY VIRTUE OF A SERIES OF
ANNOUNCEMENTS IN THE LOCAL PAPERS SEEKING PARTICIPATION OF
INTERESTED COMMUNITY VOLUNTEERS IN PRODUCING LOCAL ACCESS VIDEO
PRODUCTIONS. NO LIMITATIONS OF MEMBER RESIDENCE WAS OR HAS BE
INITIATED, IT IS AN OPEN OPPORTUNITY TO ANYONE INTERESTED. THIS
COMMITTEE IS SPONSORED BY THE COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT OF
DISTRICT ~277 WITH THE CONCEPT IN MIND OF ASSISTING COMMUNITY
VOLUNTEERS AND STUDENTS IN BECOMING INVOLVED IN CABLE TV IN
WHATEVER FASHION THEY CHOOSE. ONE OF THE UNUSUAL SITUATIONS
RELATES TO A STUDIO LOCATED IN THE COMMUNITY CENTER., A SCHOOL
OWNED BUILDING, WITH CABLE CONNECTIONS TO ONLY 3 OF 5 SCHOOL
BUILDINGS. THE REMAINING 2 BUILDINGS ARE IN ANOTHER
MUNICIPALITY SEEKING CABLE WITH OTHER PARTNERS. THEREFORE,
WHILE THE DEVELOPMENT OF PRODUCTION ACTIVITIES IN THIS DISTRICT
GOES ONWARD, THERE IS CONCERN THAT THIS VERY ACTIVITY MAY CAUSE
MISUNDERSTANDING IN EITHER OF THE MUNICIPAL ARENAS.
THE COMMITTEE, THEREFORE, IS INTENT 01',4 INDICATING TO YOUR CITY
THAT WHILE THEY ARE TALKING TO DOWDEN CABLE, IT IS ONLY IN TWO
AREAS, PRODUCTION EDUCATION FOR VOLUNTEERS (ADULT & STUDENTS)
ON THE EQUIPMENT PROVIDED IN THE FRANCHISE AGREEMENT AND
BEGINNING TO ESTABLISH A WORKING ORGANIZATION THAT CAN ASSURE
ACCESS TO EQUIPMENT & STUDI'OS FOR THOSE INDIVIDUALS OR GROUPS
SEEKING EXPOSURE ON LOCAL ACCESS CABLE. THE CONSIDERATIONS
RELATE ONLY TO THE MOUND FACILITIES IN THE SCHOOL AND COMPANY
BUILDINGS. THERE WILL BE DEVELOPMENT OF A PROCESS OF ACCESS AND
THE ROLE OF BOTH THE COMPANY & COMMUNITY SERVICES TO THE
ADVANTAGE OF THE CITIZENS.
WHEN THE REVENUES <5X) BEGIN TO ROLL INTO THE FRANCHISE~
GRANTORS~ DISCUSSIONS MIGHT BEGIN TO IDENTIFY THE NEEDS &
WISHES OF EACH GROUP AND ON WHAT CONDITIONS THIS MONEY MIGHT
ASSIST THE ACTIVITIES OF THE COMMITTEE. IT WOULD SEEM THAT THE
DISCUSSIONS WITH DOW-SAT WOULD TEND TO REDUCE, EXCEPT IN THE
· AREAS OF EQUIPMENT UPDATE & TRAINING~ AND THE CONSULTING
SERVICES WITH DR. REARDON OR HIS ASSOCIATES AS DEFINED IN THE
FRANCHISE AGREEMENT.
A SIGNIFICANT RELATIONSHIP WOULD SEEM TO CONTINUE BETWEEN THE
MOUND CABLE COMMISION (OR COUNCIL) AND WESTONKA COMMUNITY
SERVICES OR OTHERS LIKE THEM IN THE COMMUNITY. EVALUATION,
REVIEW OF ACTIVITIES, AND ADJUSTMENTS TO SPEAK TO THE NEEDS OF
THE CITIZENS (AND CITY) WOULD BE AN ONGOING ACTIVITY WITH THE
MOUND REPRESENTATIVES FOR CABLE ACTIVITIES.
DR. STEVENSON, ACTING SUPERINTENDENT, DISTRICT.#277 NOTES THAT
NONE OF THE CONSIDERED ACTIVITIES WOULD BE IN THE CURRICULUM
SCHEDULE FOR STUDENTS, CURRENT DEMANDS FOR ATTAINMENT ARE IN
· OTHER AREAS. THERE IS SIMPLY NO COMMITMENT TO EXPEND
EDUCATIONAL DOLLARS IN DISTRICT #277 ON CABLE RELATED
CURRICULUM. NOTE, HOWEVER, THAT IN A MOUND/WESTONKA HIGH SCHOOL
ENGLISH CLASS A COMPONENT ON ANNOUNCING FOR BOTH RADIO AND
TELEVISION HAS BEEN TAUGHT BY MR. DON GULBRANDSON FOR SEVERAL
YEARS AND WILL CONTINUE. MR. DENNIS ERICKSON HAS TAUGHT AUDIO
VISUAL TOPICS AND AT ONE TIME HAD AN "IN HOUSE" TELEVSION
PROGRAM. EITHER OF THESE GENTLEMEN MAY ACCESS~A PIECE OF THE
EQUIPMENT ON A SIGN OUT BASIS FOR A SCHEDULED PERIOD TO ENHANCE
THE EXISTING CLASSES.
IN CLOSING, I HAVE RESPONDED TO THE FEELINGS OF THE PRODUCTION
COMMITTEE THAT NO MISUNDERSTANDINGS SURFACE BECAUSE OF LACK OF
COMMUNICATION ON OUR PART. FURTHER, I SPEAK FOR THE COMMITTEE
WHEN I SUGGEST THAT ANYONE IS INVITED TO JOIN THE ACTIVITIES
OCCURRING, AND INVITE ANY MEMBER CITY OF THE SCHOOL DISTRICT TO
VISIT EITHER THE STUDIO OR THE COMMITTEE MEETING TO GET A
BETTER HANDLE ON WHAT'S HAPPENING. WE SEEK AND WELCOME YOUR
INPUT TO THE BENEFIT OF ALL THE CITIZENS OF OUR COMMUNITY.
CC: GAYLEN THOSTENSON, PRINCIPAL WESTONKA HIGH SCHOOL
TWIN
LABOI
CITIES
MARKET
INFORMATION
LABOR MARKET CONDITIONS
Vol. 7, No. ll NOVEMBER 1983
Labor market cOnditions in the Twin Cities area continued to show improvement in 1983
as the unemployment rate dropped substantialJy from 6.4 percent in August to 5.6 per-
cent in September. The 0.8 of a percentage point decrease in the rate this year was
significantly greater than the O.1 of a percentage point average decrease over the
past thirteen years. The number of unemployed workers' decrease far more rapidly than
usual between August and September, -12.3 percent compared to an 13 year average of
-2.0 percent. Total employment rose more rapidly than usual in September, 1.0 percent
compared to an average of 0.5 percent.
While the 1983 trend definitely has been one of improving labor market conditions, the
September labor force estimates appear to show much greater improvement in the situa-
tion than other local indicators. The survey of nonagricultural wage and salary jobs
in local establishments showed below average growth after allowing for the impact of
Othe settlement of the labor-management dispute in the communications industry. In
addition, the Conference Board's Index of Help-Wanted Advertising remained steady
between August and September, although it is 60.7 percent above the year-ago level.
Taking all these indicators into consideration, one should probably temper the rather
spectacular change in the unemployment rate in September'andsettle for a continuation
of steady improvement in job market conditions.
LA~OR FORCE ESTIMATES
(not seasonally adjusted)
AREA CIVILIAN LABOR FORCE TOTAL EMPLOYMENT UNEMPLOYMENT UNEMPLOYMENT RATE
SEPT.p AUG.~ SEPT.~ SEPT.~ AUG.~ SEPT.~ SEPT.~ AUG.. SEPT.~ ~SEPT.p AUG.~ SEPT.
1983 ' 1983' 1982 ." 1983 ~ 1983" 1982" 1983 r 1983K 1982 K 1983 ' 1983K 1982 R
Minneapolis-
St. Paul SMSA* 1,191.4 1,189.5 1,163.9 1,125.0 1,113.2 1,088.8 66.4. 75.8 75.1 5.6 6.4 6.5
CountY:
Anoka 113,146 113,2~0 110,556 106,497 105,432 103,O70 6,649 2,838 7,486 5.9 6.9 6.8
Car~er 21,052 21,038 20,846 20,129 19,928 19,481 923 1,110 1,365 4.4 5.3 6.5
Chtsago 14,817 14,747 14,540 13,974 13,834 13,524 843 913 1,016 5.7 6.2 7.0
Dakota 111,573 111,213 1og,368 105,472 104,416 102,078 6,101 6,797 7,290 S.S 6.1 6.7
Hennepin 541,539 541,218 528,448 511,523 506,405 495,O63 30,016 34,813 33,385 5.5 6.4 6.3
R~msey 265,339 264,552 258,704 249,827 247,328 241,788 15,512 12,224 16,916 5.8 6.5 6.5
Scott 25,O65 24,865 25,015 23,790 23,552 23,025 1,275 1,313 1,990 5.1 5.3 8.0
Washington 65,020 64,648 63,410 61,710 61,092 59,724 3,310 3,556 3,686 5.1 5.5 5.B
Wright 33,856 33,908 32,991 32,037 31,217 31,006 1,Slg 2,191 1,985 5.4 6.5 6.0
City of
Minneapolis ' 214,303 214,342 209,070 201,559 199,543 195,073 12,744 14,~99 13,997 5.9 6.9 6.7
Clty of
St. Paul 156,169 155,713 152,827 146,832 145,363 142,107 9,337 10,350 10,720 6.0 6.6 7.0
Minnesota* 2,219.2 2,222.6 2,179.5 2,0~4.2 2,062.0 2,020.0 145.0 160.6 159.5 6.5 7.2 7.3
Untted States* 112.,197 113,578 110,546 102,366 103,167 99,851 9,830 lO,411 10,695 8.8 9.2 9.7.
P - Preliminary
£HPLOYHENT, HOURS AND EARNINGS
in the Minneapolis-St. Paul Hetropolttan Area
PERCENT PRODUCT]ON WORKERS' HOURS & EARNINGS~/
Et~PLOYViENT CHANGE
INDUSTRY (0001 FRC)H Average Weekly Average Hourly yerage Weekly
Earnings Earnings Hours
SEPT. Month Year Month Year SEPT. Month SEPT. Month SEPT. Month
1983 Ago Ago Ago Ago 1983 Ago 1983 Ago 1283 Ago
TOTAL NONAGRICULTURAL 1075.7 1064.7 1062.4 1.0 1.3 XX XX XX XX XX XX
HANUFACTURING 234.5 234.0 232.4 0.2 O.g 410.B0 406.13 10.27 10.23 40.0 39.7
Durable Goods 149.0 148.7 147.8 0.2 0.8 422.30 415.75 10.25 10.19. 41.2 40.8
Lumber & Wood ~roductS 4.g 5.1 4.6 -2.4 6.g 426.95 427.64 11.32! 11.31 43.9 44.0
Furniture & Fixtures 1.$ 1.5 1.6 0.7 -2.g 344.11 332.76 8.56! 8.78 40.2 37.g
Stone, Clay & Glass 3.3 3.3 3.1 1.3 6.5 394.'75 386.84 10.281 10.18 38.4 38.0
Primary ~tals 4.0 4.0 4.0 0.3 -0.6 172.82 362.48 8.63 8.61 43.2 .42.1
Fabricated ~etals 26.4 26.3 26.4' 0.2 0.2 490.47 474.25 11.65 11.50 42.1 41.3
Non-Electrical Machinery 60.g! 60.3 59.3' O.g 2.8 408.84 400.80 10.07 10.02 40.6 40.0
Electrical ~achinery 17.S 17.7 18.0' -1.1 -2.8 386.06 380.30 g.17 9.12 42.1 41.7
Transportation Equipment 3.4 3.4 3.4 0.0 -1.8 553.08 556.48 12.57 12.52 44.0 44.2
'Other Durables~/ 27.1 27.1 27.4 -0.1 -1.2 182.85 387.22 9.82 9.78 '- 39.7 39.6
Nondurable Goods 85.5 85.4 84.6 0.1 1.0 393.12 391.40 10.32 10.30 38.1 38.0
Food & Kindred Products 18.5 18.8 18.4 -1.7 0.4 351.71 351.28 g.28 g.22 37.9 38.1
Textiles & Apparel 2.4 2.4 2.6 -0.4 -8.S 229.20 225.04 6.00 5.83 38.2 38.6
Paper & Allied Products 24.3 24.3 23.7 -0.2 2.4 441.00 440.37 10.50 1~.51 42.0 41.9
Printing & Publishing 24.4 24.2 24.7 1.1 -1.1 380.35 376.88 11.32 11.25 33.6 33.5
Chemical Products 6.3 6.3 6.2 0.3 2.2 442.22 436.88 11.73 tl.65 37.7 37.5
Petroleum Products 1.8 1.8 1.7 -2.5 4.0 521.62 g18.87 12.39 12.18 42.1 42.6
Rubber & Leather Products 7.8 7.5 7.3 3.2 6.5 357.63 356.57 9.10 . 9.31 39.3 38.3
NONt~ANUFACTURING 041.2 830.7 830.0 1.3 1.4 XX XX XX XX XX XX
CONSTRUCTION 40.S 40.7 39.1 -0.4 3.6 '580.56 621.70 16.40 16.12 35.4 38.4'
Building Construction 11.2 11.0 10.5 2.5 7.1 573.63 590.55 16.25 lS.Tg 35.3 37.7
Highway & Heavy Construction 5.6 5.9 5.3 -4.3 7.4 483.51 616.47 13.62 14.37 35.5 42.9
Special Trades Contracting 23.7 Z3.g 23.4 -0.8 1.1 604.63 638.62 17.08 16.85 35.4 37.9
TRANSPORTATION 3g.1 37.9 39.5 3.2 -l.1 XX XX XX XX XX XX
Railroads 6.7 6.7 6.g 0.0 -2.6 525.81 525.'81i 11.14 11.14 47.2 47.2
Trucking & ~arehoustng 13.2 13.1 13.7 0.8 -~.S 445.26 441.86 12.30 12.24 36.2 36.1
PUBLIC UTILITIES & CO~t. -' 20.6 15.3 ZO.g 34.4 Jl.5 496.04 510.20 12.37 12.66 40.1 AO.3
~PADE 267.4 265.5 264.( 0.7 1.3 233.58 234.22 7.76 7.73 30.1 30.3
Retail Trade 192.6 lgO.5 189.8 1.1 1.5 182.21 182.44 6.65 6.61 27.4 27.6
General ~erchandise Stores 31.5 30.6 30.9 3.2 1.g 183.27 183.92 6.15 6.09 29.8 30.2
Food Stores 25.2 25.1 25.0 0.4 0.6 242.65 241.02 B.31 B.17 29.2 22.5
Eating & Drinking Places 63.7 63.3 64.4 0.6 -1.1 79.66 72.22 4.26 4.24 18.7 18.7
Wholesale lrade 74.8 75.0 74.2 -0.3 O.B 323.86 393.97 10.23 10.18 38.5 38.7
FIfiAfiCE, INS. & REAL ESTAlE 73.5 73.7 73.4 -0.2 0.2
Finance 31.71 31.7 30.7 0.0 3.3
Insurance 29.~; 29.2 29.4 -0.3 -0.9
Real Estate 12. ! 12.7 13.3 -0.5 -4.6
SEPVICE & MISCELLANEOUS 256.6 254.4 250.3 0.9 Z.5
Business & Personal Services 61.2 60.5 60.3 1.2 1,5
Repair Services 12.3 12.4 11.8' -0.8 4.5
' Hedical Services 74.8 74.8 72.5 0.0 3.1
Hospitals 30.7 30.7 30.6 0.0 0.3
Nursing Ho~s 20.1 20.1 19.B -1.1 1.3
GOVERNMENT 143.5 143.2 142.7 0.2 0.6
Federal 17.2 17.1 17.7 O.1 -3.3
State 42.7 41.1 42.5 3.9 0.5
Local 83.7 85.0 82.5 -1.5 1.5
** Less than .05
l/ Includes Scientific Instrun~nts and Miscellaneous I~anufacturtng
~/ Average eqrnings data are on a "gross" basis and are derived from reports of payroll for full- and part-tt~
production or nonsupervisory workers. The payroll is re~orted before deductions of any kind. Bonuses, retro-
active pay, tips, payment in kind, and "fringe benefits" are excluded.
Source: Current Employ~nent Statistics Program (Figures rounded to nearest hundred)
EMPLOYMENT AND EARNINGS CONDITIONS
Total nonagricultural wage and salary employment increased by ll,O00 between August
September in the Minneapolis-St. Paul metropolitan area. Nearly half of this in-
was due to the settlement of a three week long labor management dispute in the
communications industry, however. Although the manufacturing s~ctor continued to ex-
pand in September, the expansion was not broadly based as most of the growth was con-
centrated in the nonelectrical machinery and printing industries. Eight'manufacturing
industry groups experienced small declines and two other groups, had no change from the
previous month. The length of the average workweek for manufacturing produgtion work-
ers was 40.0 hours compared to 38.9 hours a year ago.
Employment changes in the nonmanufacturing sector were generally lackluster. Both
construction and finance industries experienced small losses of employment in Septem-
ber, but the losses were smaller than average. Trade, service, and government employ-
ment grew in September but at below average rates. The number of jobs in the public
sector grew by only 0.2 percent between August and September compared.to a 13 year
average of 1.5 percent. According to preliminary estimates, the departure from past
trends was due to the fact that the cutback in temporary seasonal workers in local'
government administrative units more than offset the seasonal upturn in local' public
education activity.'
The outlook for October wage and salary emp'loyment is generally positive. Over the
past thirteen years for which data on the nine-county metropolitan area is available,
total wage and salary employment has increased by an average of 0.6 percent between
September and October. Practically all of this growth is due to seasonal upturns in
educational services employment.
cLC~MCTERISTIcS OF PERSONS
ING UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE
The number of ~unemployment insurance
claimants decreased in September by
3,123. The monthly decrease of 19.5
percent compares favorably with a five
year average decrease of '15.2 percent.
The largest decrease occurred in the
Services industry, with 1,353 fewer
claims than August.
Compared to a year ago, claims in the
regular program are down by 13,460. Al-
most half (48.4 percent) of the yearly
decrease occurred in the manufacturing
industry alone, primarily in the fabri-
cated- metal and 'machinery sectors.
There were an additional 2,748 claimants
in extended benefit programs this August
compared to 5,764 a year ago.
CHARACTERISTICS OF THE INSUR£D UNEMPLOYED
(Regular Benefits Program)
MINNEAPOLIS-ST. PAUL SMSA
Week Endlng 9/17/83
Percent Chang~
Industry and From: Percent Percent l/
Occupational Month Year of Long-lermjy Percent
~ttachment Number Ago Ago lotal Unemployed Women
Tota],.All Industries 12,B75 -19.5 -Sl.1 100.0 29.7 39.5
Construction t,238 -5.1 -54.2 9.6 14.'3 7.5
)qanufacturing 3,329 -12.6 -66.2 25.9 30.1 34.2
Durable Goods 2,126 -19.5 -73.3 16.5 30.2 28.3
Nondurable Goods 1,203 2.8 -36.1 9.3 29.0 44.6
Trans., Cor~., and
Public Utilities 584 -40.8 -45.6 4.5 37.0 24.7
Wholesale Trade 1,227 -13.3 -44.1 9.5 36.~ 34.6
Retail Trade 1,998 -22.5 -36.0 15.5 32.5
Fin., Ins., and
Real Estate 653 -10.g -34.0 5.1 3J.5 57.7
Services 3,241 -29.5 -42.6 25.2 31.4 55.7
Public Admin. 27B -17.5 -23.2 2.2 lg.B 5B.3
All Other g9 32.0 -47.1 0.B 13.1 22.2
Inf. Not Available 228 3B.2') 9.6 1.8 0.4 40.8
lotal, All Occupations 12,875 -19.5 -Sl.1 lO0.0 29.7 39.5
Prof., Tech., ~4gr. 3,170' -24.0 -42.8 24.6 34.3 43.3
Clerical 2,404 -17.9 -41.8 18.7 35.2 79.5
Sales 763 -12.B -36.3 5.g 33.2 30.5
Service 1,241 -lg.2 -37.4 9.6 29.3 44.3
Famr,., For., Fish. 64 6.7 -27.3 0.5 14.1
Processing 1~2 -5.0 -65.9 1.3 27.9 18.0
Yechine Trades 989 -ll.9 -65.2 7.7 28.4 17.7
Benchwork 937 -22.5 -72.2 7.3 24.3 47.5
Structural Work 1,626 -6.1 -54.6~ 12,6 17.7 4.1
Miscellaneous 1,481 -31.1 -50.8 ll.5 27.8 18.1
Inf. Not Available 28 -15.2 -66.7 0.2 39.3 53.6
NOTE: Percentages may not total to ~00.0 due to independent rounding.
l/ Long-Term unemployed refers to unemployment insurance claimants whose
- current spell of unemployment has lasted 15 weeks or longer..
THE JOB MARKET
The-following table presents information on trends in total and female enrollment over
the past five years in selected colleges and schools at the Twin Cities campuses of
the University of Minnesota. Total enrollment at the University was down by 938 stu-
dents this fall compared to a 1982 while female enrollment was down by 353. Enroll-
ment declines Were attributable to demographic changes and higher tuition costs. En-
rollment at the six Twin Cities area Community Colleges is up by 249 from a year ago.
Approximately half of those enrolled in Community Colleges are part-ti~e students.
Enrollment figures for the Area Vocational Technical Schools were not Yet available
for this Fall.
Enrollment in the College of Education increased for the second consecutive year,
after experiencing declining enrollment during the 1970's. Projections by the State
Demographer's Office show that by 1985 the school age Minnesota population 5-9 years
old will be almost 1,2,000 larger than in 1980. This age group is projected to conti-
nue to increase through 1995 when it will be 41,200 greater than in 1980. The 10-~9
year old age group will begin to increase in size after 1990. In spite of'this growth
trend, total school age population 5-19 years old in Minnesota is not projected to
reach the 1980 levels in the future. Nationally, the U.S. Census Bureau projects that
three-.fourths of the entire increase in the. number of American children age 5-14 will
occur in the Southern and Western states. There will be an additional demand for new
teachers to replace those who are retiring or leaving the teaching profession.
Enrollment in Selected Schools and Colleges
of the University of Minnesota, Twin Cities Campus
Fall 1983 Females as a Percent of Percent Distribution of Total~/
Total--- ~ Change Total Enrollment .. Female Enrollment by School-College
Schools and Colleges Enrollment 1982-1983 1979 1980 lgS1 1982 '1983 .t979 1980 1981 1982 19B3
TOTAL'ENROLLMENT~/ 46,445 -2.0 44.6 44.7 44.5 44.3 44.4 IO0.O lO0.O lOO.O 100.0 lO0.O
General College 3,351 -2.2 47.6 43.7 43.3 41.0 39.4 6.9 6.9 7.0 6.7 6.4
Liberal Arts 17,)47 -2.3 51.0 51.3 51.0 51.1 50.6 42.8 43.4 43.4 42.7 42.0 ·
Institute of Technology . 6,088 -3.1 13.0 14.1 15.5 16.4 16.B 3.4 3.8 4.4 4.9 5.0
Agriculture 1,293 -15.9 35.8 35.0 34.9 35.6 34.5 2.9 2.7 2.8 2.6 2.2
Forestry 399 26.3 21.7 23.4 24.1 22.2 21.6 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.4
Home Economics 1,362 0.7 93.8 93.9 93.3 91.5 91.1 6.5 6.2 6.1 5.9 6.0
Law 715 -0.7 37.7 38.2 36.7 38.5 40.7 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.3 1.4
Medical School 2,019 0.0 24.2 25.2 26.8 30.5 33.3 2.3 2.3 2.5 2.9 3.3
Dentistry 526 -3.B 13.7 17.2 17.g 19.4 21.9 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.6
Pharmacy 282 -3.1 44.1 47.7 45.1 45.7 48.2 O.B 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.7
Education 2,240 9.7 64.3 67.2 67.B 64.5 64.3 7.0 6.5 6.3 6.3 7.0
~nagement 1,536 -2.6 35.4 36.5 41.0 41.9 42.5 2.6 2.6 2.B 3.1 3.2
Veterinary Medicine 308 -0.6 43.1 43.7 45.0 47.7 48.1 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7
Physical Therapy 61 0.0 81.7 78.7 81.4 91.8 90.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3
Medical Technology 60 -6.3 86.3 82.9 87.3 89.1 73.3 0.6 0.4 0.3 0.3 D.2
Public Health 261 1.6 61.0 64.4 66.7 63.4 68.6 1.1 1.2 l~l 0.8 o.g
1_/ Total includes 7,740 enrolled in graduate school. Categories do not add to total enrollment due to the deletion
of some school~.
2_./ Percentages do not add to 100 percent due to the deletion of some schools.
Source: University of Minnesota, Department of University Relations, University News Service
AVAILABLE PUBLICATIONS
"Manpower Information for Affirmative Action Programs"
Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area (SMSA) and State of Minnesota.
Labor Market Information Summary for 1984 - Minneapolis-St. Paul SMSA.
Employment, Hours, and Earnings 1970-1'983 - Minneapolis-St. Paul SMSA.
Data for Minneapolis-St. Paul
"CHAMBER WAVES" . .
DECEMBER GENERAL MEMBERSHIF MEETING - MinnetonKa Mist - Dec. 21
~:.~O_- Spc%al/12:uu - Eunch ·
TaKe a moment for the.busy Holiday Season to treat yourself
to a relaxing social interlude of good food and music ( pro-
vided by the Mound-We~tonka Senior High Music Dept. ) and
most important good company as we come together at'the last
genersl meeting of the year in an atmosphere of good fellow-
ship, accomplishment, and anticipation of the coming year..
The Christmas Decorating Trophy will be awarded and Santa is
sending door-prizes ( hope you've been good! ). $5.50 per person.
RESERVETIONS ARE A GREAT HELF! THANK-YOU! - 472-6780
FRESIDENT'S L~TTsR:
As the year comes to a close, I wsnt ~o say a special ThanK-you to the
Board of Directors; our Executive Dif~ctor, Chic Remien; and the Member-
¥
ship at l~rge for your support a~d.par~icipation this year. Some of the
goals thatwe have accomplished are the increase of our Membership by
· 1OO% ( a feat that allowed us to finish the year.in'the.blacK ), the
establishment of the Navarre/~pring Fark Retail Council and the Govern-
mental Affairs Council, and the publicatioh of a useI'ul ouszness directory,
but our most important contribution was to continue to emphasis the communal
spirit of the Westonka Area that 1982 Fresicent Jerry Longpre an~ his Board
of Directors so successfully worked to establish! Lets keep the ethic of
"WORKING TOCETHER" going and growing in 1984. To that end, it is with great
pleasure that I announce the Chamber's Officers for 1984 - Ted KoenecKe,
~resident; ~teve Wood, Fresident-Elect; Donna Quigley, Treasurer; Dan Regan,
Secretary..As ~y term of office comes to an end, I am proud to pass the
reigns to such competent people, and I have no doubt that the Westonka Busi-
nesses and the Community in general will benefit from their leaeership. As
one of my last official acts let me direct a warm and heartI'elt salute to
our outgoing Directors - Wayne ~mith, Ron Norstrem, Dave Anderson, an~ Jerry
Longpre. Their care and concern. I'or our community is evidenced Dy their
dedication to the goals of this Chamber of Commerce. Thank-you all again
for your enthusiasm and support this year!
Faul Fond, Fresldent
COM~ ONE!! COM~ ALL!! - OFEN HOUSE~ AT:
TWIN BIRCH HEALTH CAR~ C~NTER - Dec. 4, 2:uu to D:~U - to zntroduce the new
Third Floor Addition and welcome Assistant Administrator Cory GlaG!
KOENIG, ROBIN, JOHNSON, AND WOOD - Dec. 6, 3:5U to 7:UO - to help them
celebrate their newly remodeled offices with some Holiday Cheer!
' UEC. l
13
21
,JAN. 3
FEB. 2d
cALeNDAR
COVER~4ENTAL AFFAIRS COUNCIL - Lafayette Club, 7:3U A.M., Dave
Anderson &7~-8881, Dan ReRan 559-09a0 Subject: Deregulation.
BreaRfdst - Reservations L,71-8~93
NAVARRE/SPRiNG PARK RETAIL COUNCIL=- Park BeAch Eatery,.7:d5 A.M.
Sharoh Stephenson &71-U179, bynett. McCullough dTI-726D
BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING - Twzn Birch Health Care, 7:UU
GES~RAL MEMBERSHIP MEETING - MinnetonRa Mist, ll:3U ~ocial, '
12:00 Lunch. $5.50 per Person, Reservations are helpful - d72-6780
MOUND RETAIL COUNCIL - Mound City Chambers, 7:30 A..M., Don
EnMlish /,72-1819
GOVER~IENTAL'AFFAIRS COUNCIL - Lafayette Club, 7:30 A.M.
GENERAL MEMBERSHIP MEETING -
MID-WINTER BALL
COUNCIL UPDATES:
MOUND RETAIL COUNCIL CHRISTMAS PROGRAM: Santa will be wa~t~ng to visit
with chx£oren youn~ anG dig and give them a candy cane every Nat. in
Dec. thru the 17th from IU:3U to 2:3U in the WestonKa ~ports Mall.
NAVARRE/SPRING PARK RETAIL COUNCIL CHRISTMAS PROGRAM: Treat that special
child in your life to the charming atmosphere of BreaKfast with Mr
ond Mrs. 5ant8 ~t Lord Fletcher's (Children -$1.95, Adults - ~3.W)) on
Dec..].7 I'rom.9:SU to II:UU. Reservations at Lord Fl6tcher's would be
~ qood xdea - d'/I-UbI3. Santa and Mrs. ~anta will be zn the Navarre area
Irom ll:JU to 2:UU 8s will characters from Charles DxcKen's "Christmas
Carol" (al~ds the IndzdnheaG Flayers)f-
banta ~nd Mrs. Santa will 81so he hosting a lunch at McDonald's from
12:UU to 2:Uu on Dec. lu ($2.~u oer ~hild, no reservatzons required).
They will 'be .)o~neO by Victor]~n Car~ler$. The entire group w~£1 be
visiting the Marina Bay Center a~d
COMMUNITY MEMB~NHIF - ~3Y.UO (Rep±aces Individual designation}
N~RVICE AND NON-PROFIT - $37.00
~UNICIPALITIE$ -
NMALL PUSINESS - ~0.O0 (0 to &.Employees)*
MEDIUM BUSINE~ -:l~160.Oo (P to 12 mmpioyees~*
LARGE £USINESS --~365.00 (13 or more Employees)*
ASSOCIATE -
*2 Part-tzme ~mpLoyees = 1 Full tzme Employee
Dues statements ~re currently being mailed to ali 1983 Members if you
have ~ny qu~stxons or concerns please contact the Chamber office
i.mmediately ~t h72-678U.
DECK THE HALLS AND YOUR BUILDINGS TO0!''. · **
Let's ~11 ~9t in the Holiday Spirit! A Christmas Decorating Trophy has
).een ostablighed ]'y the Board of Directors. The Traveling award will be
~r~,nt~d ~t th~ D~c. General Meeting (l~c..2.1..).to...~he..,~Weston~.Area
~u~l~es~ .... i~h the finest ~xterior decorating. GOOD LUCK!
City of Mouno
P3~l Maywood Rd.
Mound, l,tn. 55364
Attn: Jon Elam
').
CITY of MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364
(612) 472-1155
TO: J0N ELAH
FROM: SHARON LEGG
RE: TONKA TOYS OFFER
DATE: DECEMBER 5, 1983
! did a couple of calculations that might help in deciding to take or not to
take Tonka's offer of 40%.
I have made the following assumptions:
1. Settlement on November 15, 1986.
2. Court and legal costs of $20,000 paid at the time of settlement.
3. That the City of Mound keep the 70% payments already received
until settlement date.
4. Interest compounded annually at 10%.
Percent of Net Cash Including
Settlement cash already received
10 $ 97,577.19
20 168,772.58
30 239,967.97
40 -.. -- .... ~ 311,163.36
50 382.358.75
60 453,554.14
70 524.749.53
80 635.944.92
90 667,140.31
1OO 738,335.70
If we were to accept Tonka's offer of 40%, the balance of $145,693.86 to be
paid to us on January 15, 1984 and November 15, 1984, investing this at 10%
and investing the $139,236.72 already received at 10%, compounding annually,
we would have $~196.28 on November 15, 1986. Thus, the court would have
to award us about 4~% of the total billings [or meter #4 since March, '78,
for us t,~ ueet their present offer.
METROPOLITAN WASTE CONTROL COMMISSION
350 Metro Square Building, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101
222-8423
NOTICE OF MEETING
SEWER SERVICE AREA ADVISORY BOARD GROUP "C"
DATE: December 13, 1983
TIME: 7:30 p.m.
PLACE: Deephaven City Hall
(South end of Carson's Bay at
Junction of Minnetonka Blvd.
Cottagewood Road)
AGENDA
A. Call to Order & Roll Call - Charles Britzius, Chairman
B. Approval of Minutes of Meeting of April 14, 1983
C. Report on MWCC New Board and Staff ApPointments
D. Discussion of Criticism of the MWCC in June by the
St. Paul Dispatch
E. Discussion of Status of the Maple Plain WWTP Improvements
F. Other Discussion/Questions
G. Adjournment and next meeting date & location
sEwER SERVICE ADVISORY BOARD MEETING GROUP "C"
Minutes of Meeting Held April 14, lgS~
Orono City hall
CALL TO ORDER - Chairman Britzius called the meeting to order with the' following
present: Board Memebers Van Nest, Widmer, Scherman and Britzius. WaSte Control
Commission Members: Moore, Odde, Lusher, Harrington and Courtney. Visitors:
Rebers, Butler, Keller, Wear and Mr. and Mrs. Jud Ringer.
MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING - The minutes of the meeting held on December 1, 1982
were approved as distributed.
REPORT OF THE MWCC BOARD MEETINGS - Britzius reported that George Frisch is the
new Chairman of the Waste Control Commission. Information about the meetings v~s
mentioned with the suggestion that details be found in the copies of Outfall. It
w~.s noted that following the April issue, publications will be made quarterly.
The. highlights of the monthly Board meetings will no longer be in the Outfall but
will be published in the publication of the Metro CounCil typed Metro Monitor.
Britzius spoke of the proposal before the Waste Control. Commission to construct
a mass burning of waste to provide an energy source for the metro plant. A dis-
cussion followed.
MAPLE PLAIN WWTP PROJECT - William Moore of the WCC presented information as to the
status of the project, telling of three proposals. The first and the one recommended
because of lowest cost would be an interceptor through Orono to connect with the
interceptor there. The second was a connection to the Mound interceptor. The
third was an outlet to the Crow River, which would involve the construction of
sizeable stabilization ponds. An addition to'the plant to improve the effluent'
.quality was not considered a viable option. There followed a discussion in which
the WCC defended the selection of the Orono connection and then Van Nest defended
the Orono position that it should not be constructed, preferring an addition to
the present treatment plant or an outlet to the Crow River. Feeling was expressed
that the cost of the Crow River outlet was excessive and not correct. It was
reported that no decision had been made because of opposition to the WCC proposal
that resulted from recent hearings. Orono was said to be presenting its case to
the Metropolitan Council. More later about this subject.
ADJOURNMENT - Next meeting will be held in about two months at the call of the
Chairman as there is business to be discussed.
Respectfully Submitted
C W Britzius
Chairman
CITY of MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364
(612) 472-1155
December 2, 1983
TO: CITY COUNCIL
FROM: CITY MANAGER
As some of you have probably heard, Bruce Wold has decided to move
to Arizona at the end of December. So I need to gear up the system
for selecting a new Chief.
I've written up an ad to run in the Minneapolis Tribune, League of
Minnesota Cities, and the Police Chief's Magazine.
I set a cut-off date for January 31, 1984. From there I will follow
the process that was used to hire Bruce, which is outlined on the
attached sheet.
If you have any questions, please let me know.
JE:fc
enc.
CITY OF MOUND
JOB DESCRIPTION
JOB TITLE: Chief of Police
DEPARTMENT: Police
JOB SUMMARY:
This is an administrative position responsible for the
planning, organization, direction, control, and supervision
of all the operations of the Police Department in the City of
Mound. This position is under the supervision of the City
Manager. Individual discretion is exercised in the planning,
implementation, and correlation of the areas of
responsibility. The Chief of Police may be assigned other
responsibilities as directed by the City Manager.
JOB DUTIES:
1.
The Chief of Police
Promulgates, defines and communicates Departmental
rules, regulations, operating policies, goals.and objec-
tives.
Provides direction and control over all department
personnel.
Plans, organizes, supervises, directs, reviews and
~ evaluates the performance of all Department personnel to
assure that law enforcement and public services of the
hi-ghest standards are being provided within the
municipality.
Initiates or recommends to the City Manager salary
adjustments, promotions, transfers, disciplinary
actions, or terminations based upon demonstrated work
performance of the Department personnel.
Participates in and recommends the selection of
qualified applicants for positions within the Police
Department.
Coordinates and administers the Police Department budget
and submits recommendations on it to the City Manager
for review and approval.
Promotes good morale with the Department personnel, and
goodwill and cooperation with citizens, community organ-
izations, other City departments, and other law enforce-
ment agencies.
Shall act in the capacity of the Assistant Civil Defense
Director and shall prepare emergency planning which can
be implemented in the event of a natural or man-made
disaster.
Maintains a through knowledge of the principals and
practices of modern police administration and police
methods and of Federal, State and local laws and
ordinances which are enforced by the Department.
10.
Keeps the City Manager informed as to the working
operations, needs, and requests of the Police Department
to function efficiently.
KNOWLEDGE, SKILLS AND ABILITIES:
Comprehensive knowledge of police administration and
police methods.
Comprehensive knowledge of scientific methods or crimee
detection, criminal identification, and radio
communications.
Knowledge of enforcing and controlling laws and
ordinances.
Ability to supervise the activities of other Police
personnel.
Ability to communicate clearly and effectively both
orall.y and in writing.
Ability to establish and maintain effective working
relationships with other City departments, employees,
and the general public.
MINIMUM JOB QUALIFICATIONS: This position requires.
A four year accredited college degree plus a minimum of
four years experience, or in lieu of the four years of
college, two years college plus eight years successful
experience in law enforcement. At least three years of
those in progressively responsible administrative or
supervisory positions.
Must meet all minimum standards prescribed by the
Minnesota Peace Officers Training Board.
Must undergo a complete phychological examination and an
oral examination and may be required to undergo a
medical examination to determine any conditions which
may adversely affect the performance of the duties as
Chief of Police.
2
ADVERT I SEMENT
POLICE CHIEF
The City of Mound, MN.,-is seeking candidates for the position of
Police Chief. 10 person force. Population 9450. Applicants must
have extensive law enforcement experience, demonstrated supervisory
and leadership ability. Submit resume of experience and letter
outlining reasons for your interest to: City Manager, City of Mound,
5341Maywood Road, Mound, MN. 55364, no later than January 31, 1984.
PROPOSED POLICE CHIEF HIRING
PROCESS
e
10.
Applications submitted to City Manager
City Manager screens out inexperienced or unqualified applicants.
City Council acting as a citizen screening committee selects
those persons they would like to interview.
City Manager selects Professional Law Enforcement Oral
Screening Committee to evaluate the City Manager's selections
in the area of law enforcement and Police Department manage-
ment. They rate the candidates as being qualified and not
being qualified.
The City Manager combines the advice of the Council and the
Professional Screening Committee to develop a final slate of
candidates for interview.
Interviews are held with two interviews going on simultaneously
(for 30-40 minutes). The Law Enforcement officials would inter-
view around Police Management questions and the City Council
again acting as a citizen screening committee around the issues
of public relations, community acceptance, management skills and
past experience.
At the completion of the interviews each interviewer will'be
asked to rate their choices in a 1'2-3 order. These lists will
be totaled~ discussed by all those present and hopefully a con-
census reached.
The City Manager will take these ratings and begin his background
investigation using the resources of the BCA and other persons
suggested by the Council or the Screening Committee.
Once the investigations are completed, including appropriate
testing, the results along with a recommendation will be sub-
mitted to the City Council. In addition, the top rated applicant
will be asked to return for a final interview with the Council
and City Manager.
If everyone is generally in agreement, the City Manager will then
make the appointment.
STERN, LEVINE, SCHWARTZ, LIFSON,
CREIGHTON & BUNIN, P.A.
cordially requests your attendance for an
evening of food and spirits in celebrati.on
of the holiday season.
saturday, december 17, 1983
7:00 p.m. - midnight
1300 mount curve avenue
minneapolis, minneso~:a
block tie optional
r.s.v.p. 377-~520
CITY of MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364
(612) 472-1155
TO: CITY COUNCILMEMBERS
FROM: JON ELAM
DATE: NOVEMBER 21, 1983
RE: REVISION OF PLANNING & DOCK FEE'S FOR 1984
As a follow-up to the 1984 budget reviews, I am proposing a
list of planning, zoning, and dock fees for 1984, that more
closely reflect the actual costs of the city in incurring,
in reviewing, and processing them. If changed, they will
become effective January 1st.
1983 PROPOSED
APPLICATION COSTS 1984 COSTS
Variance
Conditional Use
Wetland Permit
Street or Easement Vacation
$ 35.00 $ 50.00
100.00 200.00
100.00 I00.00
100.OO 150.00
SUBDIVISION
(plus $7.00 per lot)
200.00
Preliminary plat
Final Plat
Lot Split (Waiver of provisions
of city Code, Chapter 22)
Zoning Amendment
Dock Permit (year)
Commercial Dock License
0.00 150.00
o.oo .'?~-Z~.
35.00 50.00
100.00 200.00
65.OO 75.OO
100.00 150.00
CITY of MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
· . MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364
(612) 472-1155
December 2, 1983
TO:
FROM:
CITY COUNCIL
CITY MANAGER
Enclosed is alist of the existing and proposed fee's for consideration.
The Planning Fee's more accurately reflect a~tual Staff costs and break
st'eps down to more closely reflect the work that is required.
In addition, they shouldn't cause any problems since the increases are
modest, but do reduce the subsidy the services have Been receiving from
the General Fund.
The. Dock Fee increase of $10.O0 reflects our need to build a Capital
Improvment Fund for Commons Maintenance. This should amount to $4,000
per year, enough to start our rip-rap program and our dredging of storm
sewer outlets that we have previously carried out with Federal Revenue
Sharing Funds.
JE:fc ..
INTEROFFICE MEMO
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Jon Elam, City Manager
Chief Bruce Wold
Purchase of Investigator Auto
DATE November 14 1983
Approximately four months ago I spoke to you about the purchase of a different car
for the police investigator. The investigators current car is an AMC Hornet with
approximately 60,000 miles. The car is in good condition with respect to the
engine, drive train and suspension. However, the body is beginning to fall apart
from rust and the front seat is completely broken down.
A year ago we spent over $100 rebuilding the front seat of the car. A year later
the seat is again broken down and beyond repair. Sgt. Hudson complained to me about
back pain he thought was brought on by the poor seat he had to sit on in his car.
The rust finally ate a hole in the right front fender. Additionally,' the driver's
door does not operate properly because the hinges are about to rust away. Other
parts of the car are also eaten away by rust.
Our origial discussion centered on purchasing a used car for approximately $2500.
The reasoning behind the purchase was to provide a quality used car that the City
would sell every one to 1½ years. This would allow the City to turn over the car
fore it depreciated too much, before rust consumed it, and before any major
repairs became necessary. A side benefit to this' type of. policy is the inability
of persons familiar with Sgt. Hudson to predict the make of car he will be driving.
I spent two weeks looking at various makes and models of cars trying to find a
quality car for the price. Unfortunately, the used car market is very tight and
quality used cars have risen in price. Quality used cars four to five years old
with 50,000 to 60,000 miles are priced near'S3400. Although this price is not high
when considering the price of a new car, I would prefer to keep the price down.
Two months ago, Sgt. Hudson purchased a 1978 Ford Thunderbird. He paid $2500 for
the car and has spent an additional $200 on tune-ups and licensing. Sgt. Hudson
is willing to sell the car to the City for $2600. The average book value for this
is $2900.
I have seen the car and I feel the car would be a good buy for the City. The
integrity of the body is good, the car has ample room, the mechanical parts and
tires seem to be good, the brown color makes .the car inconspicuous, and the style
of the car is the antithesis of the unmarked police car.
Please consider the purchase of this car and let me know your feelings.
CITY of MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
· MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364
(612) 472-1155
December 2, 1983
TO:
FROM:
CITY COUNCIL
CITY MANAGER
Enclosed is the one quotation I have been able to secure for painting the
interior of the City Hall. I have asked three other painters, but none
submitted a quotation.
Minnetonka Painting did a top notch j~on the exterior of the City Hall
and I think they will do an equally good job on the interior. I
recommend accepting their quotation.
The only remaining work to be done is the replacement of the til.e floors
in the bathrooms, which I will try and do later this winter.
JE:fc
eno .
A. T~O~A~ WORST,
JOSEPH E. HAHILTON, ~. A.
,.JAMES D. [ARSON, ~A.
THOMAS ~ UNDERWOOD, ~A.
LAW OFFICES
WURST, PEARSON, HAMILTON, LARSON & UNDERWOOD
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 5540;>
November 30, 1983
Mayor, City Councilmembers, City Manager
and John Lichter, Engineer, Eugene A.
Hickok and Associates
Re: City of Mound v.' Tonka Corporation
Ladies and Gentlemen:
On October 18, a meeting was held with Tonka officials and officials of the City
of Mound regarding the delinquent sewer charges. Later at an executive session of the
City Council, I reported to the Council on what had transpired at that meeting and my
impressions as to the Company's position. No specific direction was given, but I did
obtain a feeling that there were three members of the Council who would be amenable
towards a settlement at 40% which would be approximately $210,000. There. were other
members of the Council who wanted a 50% figure for the period that the billing was not
made, and that would have resulted in a payment of around $260,000.
Subject to those, discussions, I met with Steve Shank, President of Tonka
Corporation, on November 1, 1983. We had a long discussion concerning the problem and
eventually got to the point where we were both talking of recommending to our parties a
settlement at the 40% figure. It was at that point that I made it clear that the Council had
instructed me that any settlement would not provide for any refund or rebate of the monies
which had been paid at the 70% rate during calendar year 1983. That created a
substantial problem for Mr. Shank as he indicated they were counting on that to reduce the
amount of cash necessary to arrive at a settlement with the City.
Since the meeting of November 1, I have had a couple of telephone calls with
Steve Shank and I asked Sharon Legg to work up some figures for me. I am enclosing
herewith copies of Steve Shank's letter to me under date of November 22, 1983, and a copy
of a letter addressed to me from Joe Joyce under date of November 22, 1983, wherein they
are offering the City of Mound a 40% figure on the water meter number 4 from March of
1978 to October 27, 1983. They calculate the numbers to result in a total of $284,901.42
and they claim to have paid $139,207.56. They are therefore willing at this time to pay to
the City of Mound $145,693.86 to resolve this dispute. They propose to do that by making
two equal payments, one on January 15, 1984, and the second on November 15, 1984,
without interest. They have indicated that if this is not acceptable to the City, the offer
will be withdrawn on December 22.
I am enclosing copies of Tonka Corporation's Exhibit A and a document which I
have labeled Exhibit B which are the numbers prepared for me by Sharon Legg. I am
suggesting at this time that the Council review these numbers and the facts and that we
discuss them in an executive session at the Council meeting on December 6. I am also
sending a copy of all this correspondence to John Lichter who is the consulting engineer
and asking that he review this data along with Sharon and Jon and see what additional input
WURST, PEARSON, HAMILTON, LARSON & UNDERWOOD
they might have for the Council. At this point in time, I would like it clear that I am not
making a recommendation that the Council settle or not settle the matter. I think it
should be fully discussed by the Council, and I will try to respond to any questions raised in
the Executive Session on December 6.
If any of you have any questions or wish to discuss this before the meeting, please
feel free to contact me. We are talking about a substantial amount of money and a very
important decision which will have to be made by the Council.
CAP: lh
Enclosures
Very truly yours,
/ /
Curtis A. Pearson,
City Attorney
Stephen (D. Shank
President
Tonka Corporation
4144 Shoreline Boulevard
P.O. Box 445
Spring Park, Minnesota 55384
Telephone: 612/475-9500
November 22, 1983
Curtis A. Pearson, Esq.
Wurst, Pearson, Hamilton, Larson-& Underwood
1100 First Bank Place West
Minneapolis, MN 55402
Dear Curt:
I am enclosing a letter which sets forth our offer to reach a settlement with
the City of Mound. I trust you will present this offer for consideration by
the City Council.
The offer to settle on the basis of a 40% utilization factor represents the
maximum extent Tonka can stretch to resolve the controversy based on the facts
known to us, including correspondence and conversations between Tonka
personnel and the City of Mound personnel and Tonka engineering estimates,
which we believe are supportable of our actual sewage usage during the period.
When I Offered at our lunch meeting to agree to settle this matter on the
basis a 40% utilization factor applicable to the entire period from March,
1978 on, I ~as stretching quite a bit beyond the point which all of our
advisors have advised would constitute a reasonable settlement from Tonka's
point of view. That is why the payment terms are structured as they are. I
made this offer because I was under the impression that we were close to being
able to reach an agreement.
Your suggestion that an agreed settlement factor would not apply to bills
which we paid with full reservations of our rights during the period
September, 1982 to the present came as a complete surprise to us. Frankly, it
is inconsistent with the approach to a settlement we had been discussing.
I believe that the settlement we are offering represents a very fair effort by
Tonka to compromise the matter between us and the City of Mound. Our offer
would result in a substantial payment to the City of Mound and would avoid
both the cost and inconvenience of litigation. I trust that the City Council
will give our proposal serious consideration.
I apologize that I was not able to get the enclosed letter to you last
Tuesday. After we talked, we discovered our Controller was out of town for
the week.
SGS:ls
Sincerely,
Tonka Corporation
4144 Shoreline Boulevard
P.O. Box 445
Spring Park, Minnesota 55384
Telephone: 612/475-9500
November 22, 1983
Curtis Pearson, Esquire
Wurst, Pearson, Hamilton, Larson
& Underwood
1100 First Bank Place West
Minneapolis, MN 55402
Dear Mr. Pearson:
The purpose of this letter is to set forth Tonka Corporation's
proposal to settle our dispute with respect to Tonka's sewer
utilization during the time period commencing March, 1978.
In order to settle this matter without resorting to litigation,
Tonka is prepared to agree to pay for past, present and future
sewer usage with respect to water meter no. 42-404-5302-91 at a
utilization factor of 40%. We would agree to make the payments
with respect to amounts for sewer usage from March, 1978 to
October 27, ~983 as specified below.
The following table presents a summary of the financial impact of
settling this dispute assuming a 40% sewer utilization factor:
Total sewer charges through
October 27, 1983 assuming 40%
utilization factor
$ 284,901.42
Less: total payments made since
September, 1982
139,207.56
Net amount to City of Mound
$ 145,693.86
Attached as Exhibit A is a worksheet which sets forth financial
details from which the above summary was prepared.
Tonka's offer to pay the total amount of $145,693.86 is in two
equal installments, without interest, of $72,846.93 each payable
on January 15, 1984 and November 15, 1984.
This offer is made without prejudice and will be automatically
withdrawn unless accepted on or prior to December 22, 1983.
Sincerely,
~Counsel
JMJ/cp
Enclosures
I I I I
I I I I
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
CITY' of MOUND
(612) 472-1155
TO: JON ELAM
FROM: SHARON LEGG
RE: TONKA TOYS OFFER
DATE: DECEMBER 5, 1983
I did a couple of calculations that might help in deciding to take or not to
take Tonka's offer of 40%.
I have made the following assumptions:
1. Settlement on November 15, 1986.
2. Court and legal costs of $20,000 paid at the time of settlement.
3. That the City of Mound keep the 70% payments already received
until settlement date.
4. Interest compounded annually at 10%.
Percent of
Settlement
Net Cash Including
cash already received
10 $ 97,577.19
20 168,772.58
30 239,967.97
40 - · ~ 311,163.36
50 382.358.75
60 453,554.14
70 524.749.53
80 635.944.92
90 667,140.31
1OO 738,335.70
If we were to accept Tonka's offer of 40%, the balance of $145,693,86 to be
paid to us on January 15, 1984 and November 15, 1984, investing this at 10%
and investing the $139,236.72 already received at 10%, compounding annually,
we would have $369,]96.28 on November 15, 1986. Thus, the court would have
to award us abOut 4~% of the total billings f-or meter #4 since March '78,
for us t,) ~eet their present offer. '
COMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC.
CONSULTING IFNGINE[RS ~ lAND SURVEYORS [ PLANNERS
Reply To:
12800 Industrial Park Boulevard
Plymouth, Minnesota 55441
(612) 559-3700
December 6, 1983
Mr. & Mrs. Steve Fredrickson
3063 Devon Lane
Mound, Minnesota 55364
Subject: City of Mound
1979 Street Improvements
Easement
#4536
:
Dear Mr. & Mrs. Fredrickson:
The City of Mound has been unable to record the perpetual easement which
you signed for the street improvement project in your area. Hennepin County
requires your copy of the "Owners Duplicate Certificate of Title" before they
will accept the easement for filing. Ne have attempted to contact you numerous
times with no success.
We are again requesting that you obtain your "Owners Duplicate Certificate
of Title" and call either myself at 559-3700 or the Mound City Manager, Oon
Elam at 472-1155 and arrangements can be made to pick it up. You wiii be given
a receipt for your certificate for the time it is in our possession and once
the easement is recorded, your certificate will be returned to you. The number
on your certificate is 552752.
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
Sincerely,
McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, Inc.
JC:j
aon Elam, City Nanager/'
John Cameron