1998-02-10AGENDA
MOUND CITY COUNCIL
TUF3DAY, FEBRUARY 10, 1998, 7:30 PM
MOUND CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
*_C~gg_rg..~g~: All items listed under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine by the Council
and will be enacted by a roll call vote. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a
Councilmember or Citizen so requests, in which event the item will be removed from the Consent Agenda
and considered in normal sequence.
1. OPEN MF, ETING- PI,EDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
PAGE
APPROVE AGENDA. At this time items can be added to the Agenda that are
not listed and/or items can be removed from the Consem Agenda and voted upon
after the Consent Agenda has been approved.
3. *CONSENT AGENDA
*A.
APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE JANUARY 27, 1998,
REGULAR MEETING .................................. 237-242
*B. APPOINTMENT OF ASSISTANT WEED INSPECTOR ............. 243-244
*C. RESOLUTION APPROVING A PREMISES PERMIT RENEWAL
APPLICATION FOR THE VFW POST//5113 - MOUND ................. 245-247
*D. BID AWARD:
1998 ONE TON DUMP W/PLOW AND SANDER ...... 248
*E. CASE g98-02:
STEVE & PAM JOHNSON, 6041 RIDGEWOOD
ROAD, LOT 21, BLOCK 6, THE HIGHLANDS,
PID//23-117-24 34 0002.
VARIANCE REQUEST: ADDITION TO HOME ........... 249-256
(PLANNING COMMISSION WILL HEAR THIS MATTER MONDAY,
FEBRUARY 9. MATERIALS WILL BE HANDED OUT TUESDAY EVENING).
*F.
RESOLUTION EXTENDING MORATORIUM REGARDING THE
REGULATING OF TRANSMISSION AND RECEPTION FACILITIF_S
OF COMMERCIAL WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATION SERVICES ...... 257
*G. LICENSE RENEWALS - GARBAGE HAULERS ..................... 258
234
*FI. PAYMENT OF BILLS ..................................
PETITION TO REMOVE STREET LIGHT AT THE INTERSECTION
CAMBRIDGE LANE AND BEDFORD ROAD .......................
PRESENTATION OF 1997 ANNUAL REPORTS:
JIM FACKLER, PARKS DIRECTOR .........................
- GREG SKINNER, PUBLIC WORKS SUPERINTENDENT ............
° STEVE ERICKSON, FORMER FIRE CHIEF ....................
- FRAN CLARK, CITY CLERK .............................
5. COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRESENT.
6. PROPOSED CIGARETTE ORDINANCE ...........................
e
APPROVAL OF ROANOKE LANE MUL~LE DOCK SLIP
& APPROVAL OF DEVON LANE MULTIPLE DOCK SLIP ..............
8. INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS:
259-276
277-286
287-310
311-319
320-325
326-340
341-350
351-373
Co
ao
Department Head monthly reports for January 1998 ................. 374-392
Notice from the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD)
regarding the rescheduling of a Rule B Task Force Meeting.
The meeting was rescheduled to Tuesday, February 10, 1998,
2:30-4:00 p.m. at the Minnetonka Community Center ............... 393-394
Letter from Triax Cablevision regarding rate increases for Basic
and Tier Services ...................................... 395-396
Notice from the City of Minnetrista regarding an open house for
Charlotte Erickson who is retiring as the City Administrator-Clerk
after 22 years with the City and 16 of those years as the Administrator-Clerk.
The open house is scheduled for Sunday, March 8, 1998,
1-4 p.m., at Minnetrista City Hall ..............................
397
LMCD Executive Director Greg Nybeck publishes an occasional
newsletter about LMCD activities. Enclosed is a copy of the recent newsletter 398-399
LMCD mailing regarding an application to the Legislative
Commission on Minnesota Resources (LMCD) for funds for
added or improved car trailer parking facilities on Lake Minnetonka ....... 400-439
Senator Gen Olson invited Dr. Para Myers, Superintendent of Schools and myself
to testify before the Senate K-12 Education Budget Division Committee at
the State Capitol on Wednesday, February 4. The purpose of the hearing
was to present a bill, a copy of which is enclosed, amending Minnesota
Statutes 471.19 relating to restrictions placed upon school districts to issue
bonds for facilities not totally dedicated to education curriculum.
As you know, we discussed this "quirk" during our study sessions with
235
the School Board. Bond counsels for both the School District and the City
had indicated that this section of Minnesota Statutes does not allow the School
District to sell bonds for the renovation of the community center as it is
presently written. Senator Olson introduced an amendment which passed
this committee and now will be incorporated into the Omnibus Tax Bill.
It was an interesting experience to testify before a Senate committee as this
is something Pam and I had not done before. In addition, Senator Olson
invited us to stay to attend the State of the State address given by
Governor Ame Carlson. We were guests of her and Representative
Steve Smith. It was a speech where Carlson reviewed his tenure
as Governor and the accomplishments the State has made under his
leadership. Also, he asked the Legislature to adopt his agenda for
this session, which, surprisingly, did not include anything about the stadium.
Pam and I also had the opportunity to meet Mayor Norm Coleman,
St. Paul; Kathleen Blatz, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and
other legislators in attendance .................................
440
Committee of the Whole meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, February
17, 1998, 7:30 p.m., Mound City Hall. The only item on the agenda
is a discussion with the Westonka School Board regarding the joint
powers agreement on the Westonka Community Center. I will
forward a draft of the proposed agreement to you once it has passed
legal review by the School District's attorney.
REMINDER:
City Council photograph is confirmed for Tuesday, February 24,
1998, 6:30 p.m., Mound City Hall.
HRA Meeting, Tuesday, February 10, 1998, 7 p.m., Mound City
Hall.
236
MINUTES- MOUND CITY COUNCIL - JANUARY 27, 1998
MINUTES - MOUND CITY COUNCIL - JANUARY 27, 1998
The City Council of the City of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, met in regular session
on Tuesday, January 27, 1998, at 7:30 PM, in the Council Chambers at 5341 Maywood Road,
in said City.
Those present were: Acting Mayor Andrea Ahrens, Councilmembers Mark Hanus, and Leah
Weycker. Absent and excused were: Mayor Bob Polston and Councilmember Liz Jensen.
Also in attendance were: City Manager Edward J. Shukle, Jr., City Attorney John Dean, City
Planner Loren Gordon, Secretary/Receptionist Jodi Rahn, and City Clerk Fran Clark and the
following interested citizens: Jesse Husby, Joel Husby, Kevin Seymour, Billy Fuchs, Tmvis
Flynn, Tom Flynn, Dan Thurlo, Mark Thurlo, Eric Dueholm, Kent Parker, Mary Moon, Bill
Jacobwith, Chris Valerius, Leisel Cox, and Frank Weiland.
The Acting Mayor opened the meeting and welcomed the people in attendance which included
Scout Pack 569. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited.
APPROVE AGENDA. At this time items can be added to the Agenda that are not listed and/or
items can be removed from the Consent Agenda and voted upon after the Consent Agenda has
been approved.
Councilmember Hanus noted that Case//98-03 had been tabled at the Planning Commission
Meeting last night and should be removed from this agenda.
*CONSENT AGENDA
MOTION made by Hanus, seconded by Weycker to approve the Consent Agenda
as amended above. A roll call vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
*1.0 APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE JANUARY 13, 1998, REGULAR MEETING.
MOTION
Hanus, Weycker, unanimously.
*1.1 APPROVE THE MINUTF~q OF THE JANUARY 20, 1998, COMMITTEE OF THE
WHOLE MEETING.
MOTION
Hanus, Weycker, unanimously.
'1.2
MINUTES - MOUND CITY COUNCIL - JANUARY 27, 1998
RESOLUTION APPROVING A PREMISF$ PERMIT RENEWAL APPLICATION
FOR THE AMERIC~ LEGION POST #395 - MOUND_.
RESOLUTION g98-14
RESOLUTION APPROVING A PREM[qES PERMIT
RENEWAL APPLICATION FOR THE AMERIC~
LEGION POST #398 - MOUND
Hanus, Weycker, unanimously.
*1.3
SET PUBLIC HEARING FOR 1998 URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) PROGRAM
(SUGGESTED DATE: FEBRUARY 24, 1998).
MOTION
Hanus, Weycker, unanimously.
'1.4
APPROVAL OF BASS TOURNAME~ WEIGH-IN AT MOUND
FOR JUNE 6, 1998, MINNETONKA BASS CLUR.
MOTION
Hanus, Weycker, unanimously.
BAY PARK
'1.5 PAYME~ OF BILLS.
MOTION
Hanus, Weycker, unanimously.
1.6
RECONSIDERATION OF RF-q0LUTION REGARDING DF-qlGNATION OF
HENNEPIN COUNTY AS LOCAL BOARD OF REVIEW.
The City Clerk explained that at the last meeting the City Council passed a motion to try this
for one year. After the meeting, the City Attorney advised that the new legislation requires that
we do this for three years. The City Manager then notified the City Council of this. That is
why it is on the agenda again. She further advised that Councilmember Hanus suggested the
following be added to the proposed resolution of approval:
2
MINUTES- MOUND CITY COUNCIL - JANUARY 27, 1998
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that Hennepin County Assessing staff will
conduct public meetings in the City of Mound, with property owners interested in meeting with
staff regarding individual values. Taxpayers still have the option to appeal their market value
to the Hennepin County Board of Equalization, if they so choose.
BE IT FURTHER RFAqOLVED, that Hennepin County Assessing Staff will
compile the results of the local meeting to include a list of property owners present, and
data resulting from the local meeting.
BE IT FURTHER RFSOLVED, that Hennepin County Assessing Staff will
continue to compile similar data, i.e. sales and market information and other pertinent data
as previously provided to the City of Mound.
The Council agreed to the revised resolution as proposed.
RESOLUTION//98-15
RESOLUTION TRANSFERRING THE FUNCTION OF
LOCAL BOARD OF REVIEW FROM THE MOUND
CITY COUNCIL TO HENNEPIN COUNTY
Hanus, Weycker, unanimously.
COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRESENT.
There were none.
1.7 CONSIDERATION OF AN APPLICATION FOR AN OPERATIONS PERMIT,
CARIBOU COFFEE, TO BE LOCATED IN A PORTION OF THE BALBOA
BUII.DING CURRENTLY OCCUPIED BY TORO COMPANY, 5330 SHORELINE
DRIVE.
City Planner, Loren Gordon, reviewed the application for an Operations Permit for Caribou
Coffee to move their roasting and distribution operations into the Balboa Building. They are
looking to occupy a portion of the space that Toro operations now occupies. Caribou Coffee
is now located in the north area of downtown Minneapolis. Currently their plans include using
approximately 40,000 square feet of the space as follows: 24,000 square feet for warehousing;
14,500 square feet for the roasting process; and
1,500 square feet for office space.
The company is anticipating using 30 people in their operations in Mound. It would be a one
shift basis 8:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M., Monday through Friday. They are hoping their operation
will grow over the next few years and would like to maintain that level of production, but may
MINUTES - MOUND CITY COUNCIL - JANU. dRY 27, 1998
need to change it if there is a need.
Staff has taken a tour of the facility in Minneapolis.
looked at and evaluated were as follows:
1.
Gordon reported that some of the issues
What types of truck traffic would come and go from the facility. Currently there
is about 1 trip per day of semi tractor type of truck with coffee beans or other
types of product that would come into the facility. Then they have 3-6 smaller
delivery vans that would deliver product from the facility to local retail outlets.
They are expecting that this would remain the same level at this time.
One of the larger issues with their operation would be the coffee roasting. Staff
looked at what type of impacts could result on the neighboring residential
properties because of the smell from roasting coffee process. A clear impact or
if there will be one, is not discernable at this point. All EPA requirements will
be met.
Staff recommends approval of the Operations Permit for Caribou Coffee.
The Council asked how many docks were be involved in the operation? Kent Parker, V.P. of
Operations for Caribou, stated he thinks 3 docks will be used. The council also discussed the
effluent which is in the form of clear steam as the moisture is roasted out of the coffee beans.
Mr. Parker stated all their environment control systems meet all EPA and OSHA requirements.
The Council asked if the proposed resolution limits the company to one shift. The City Attorney
stated that it did not. The Council decided to delete the third Whereas in the resolution. The
Council agreed.
RESOLUTION//98-16
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE AN OPERATIONS
PERMIT FOR CARIBOU COFFEE LOCATED AT
5330 SHORELINE DRIVE (BALBOA BUH~G)
Ahrens, Weycker, unanimously.
MARY MOON, 5280 Lynwood Blvd., asked what kind of semi truck traffic would be
generated by a second shift in the early hours of morning or late at night hours?
The Council explained that a second shift is not being proposed at this time so that is unknown.
The applicant stated that dock times would be between 8:00 A.M. and 6:00 P.M. for the one
shift.
4
MINUTES - MOUND CITY COUNCIL - JANUARY 27, 1998
1.8 APPROVAL OF CONSTRUCTION PLANS FOR THE LOST LAKE
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (DREDGING OF LOST LAKE CANAL) FOR
SUBMISSION TO MNDOT
John Cameron, City Engineer, highlighted the proposed construction plans for the Lost lake
Canal Dredge which is scheduled to be started this Summer. As part of the process the Council
needs to approve the plans so that they can be submitted to the State who administers the
program on behalf of the Federal Government. This is the ISTEA Grant that the City received
for the dredge. These plans were reviewed by the City Council at the last Committee of the
Whole Meeting. A pre-submittal meeting is setup for Thursday morning with MNDOT. He
explained that State Aid is the division that handles the review and approval of the plans. The
target date is July 1st.
MOTION made by Hanus, seconded by Weycker to approve the construction plans,
as submitted, for the Lost Lake Improvement Project (dredging of Lost Lake Canal)
for submi~ion to MNDOT. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS:
Preliminary Financial Report for the year ended December 31, 1997, as prepared by
Gino Businaro, Finance Director.
B. Park and Open Space Commission Minutes of January 8, 1998.
Co
Summary of Policy Priorities developed by the Association of Metropolitan
Municipalities (AMM) as the 1998 Legislative Session begins.
De
Invitation from LMCD re:
Annual "Save the Lake" Recognition Banquet to be held
Thursday, February 12, 1998 at Lord Fletcher's. Please let
Fran know if you are interested in attending.
REMINDER: You are invited to attend the Planning Commission Meeting on Monday,
January 26, 1998, 7:30 p.m., City Hall to hear Bruce Nordquist, City of Richfield speak
on the scattered site acquisition program in effect in the City of Richfield.
The City Manager explained that the Planning Commission is planning on putting
together a small sub-committee to pursue this further.
I have been in contact with Dr. Pam Myers, Supt. of Schools regarding the next meeting
of the School Board and City Council pertaining to the joint powers agreement on the
Westonka Community Center. I suggested the dates we discussed at the last City
5
MINUTES- MOUND CITY COUNCIL - JANUARY 27, 1998
Council meeting, January 29 or February 3. Neither of those work for the School
Board. She will be back in touch with me to let me know the School Board's
availability. You can erase January 29 or February 3 from your calendars and as soon
as I know alternative dates, I can let you know.
The City Manager reported that we do have a draft of the Joint Powers Agreement that
was prepared by the City Attorney's office and is ready to be reviewed by both the City
and School District. The School District can meet on February 10th or 12th or the
following week at the Committee of the Whole Meeting, February 17th.
The Council decided they would like the meeting scheduled for the February 17th,
Committee of the Whole Meeting. The draft will be sent to the Council before that
meeting.
Information from Mayor Bob Polston on discussions that have been taking place at the
Task Force meetings of the MCWD re: Rule B. Please review and comment to BOb
regarding the contents of this summary.
Information from Caribou Coffee as to who they are, what they do and how they do it.
As you know, Caribou is interested in moving their manufacturing operations into the
former Toro space at the Balboa Building. Several city councilmembers and EDC
members took a tour of the Caribou facility in Minneapolis and were quite impressed
with what they saw and are enthusiastic about the possibility of Caribou moving to
Mound.
COUNCIL PHOTO
The City Manager stated that the Council photo will be taken here at City Hall on Tuesday,
February 24th at 6:30 P.M.
MOTION made by Weycker, seconded by Hanus to adjourn at 8:05 P.M. The vote
was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
Edward J. Shukle, Jr., City Manager
Attest: City Clerk
6
February 1 O, 1998
RESOLUTION NO. 98-
RESOLUTION TO APPOINT JIM FACKLER AS ASSISTANT WEED
INSPECTOR FOR 1998
BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, does
hereby appoint Park Director, Jim Fackler, as the Assistant Weed Inspector for the City of
Mound in 1998.
January 30, 1998
NOTICE OF APPOINTMENT OF WEED INSPECTOR
Enclosed is a form for the appointment of a weed inspector in your municipality. It is required
that the enclosed form be filled out and returned to the County Agricultural Inspector.
Please do this as soon as possible. We would like all appointments in by March 16, 1998.
t
pector
Enclosure
Department of Public Works
417 North Fifth Street
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401-1397
(612) 348-6509 FAX:(612) 348-8532
Environmental Info Line:(612) 348-6500
Re~cled Patx.
February I0, 1998
RESOL~ON NO. 98-
RESOLUTION APPROVING A PREMISES PERMIT RENEWAL
APPLICATION
FOR ~ VFW POST//5113 - MOUND
BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota,
approves a Premises Permit Renewal Application for VFW Post g5113, 2544/Commerce Blvd.,
Mound, MN. 55364.
Central
STATE OF MZNNESOTA
GAH~LING CONTROL BOARD
PREMISES PERMIT RENEWAL APPLICATZON
LG214PPR PRINTED:
LICENSE NUMBER: A-00469-003 EFFECTIVE DATE: 05/01/96 EXPIRATION DATE: 04/30/98
NAME OF ORGANIZATION: VFW Post 5113 Mound
GAMBLING PREMISES INFORMATION
IFOR BOARD USE ONLY[
IDATE
NAME OF ESTABLISHMENT WHERE GAMBLING WILL BE CONDUCTED
VFW Post 5113
2544 Commerce Blvd
Mound 55364
COUNTY Hennepin
IS THE PREMISES LOCATED WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS?: Y
LESSOR INFORMATION
DOES YOUR ORGANIZATION OWN THIS SITE?: Yes
IF NO, LIST THE LESSOR:
NAME OF PROPERTY OWNER (WHEN NOT LESSOR):
SQUARE FEET PER MONTH:
SQUARE FEET PER OCCASION:
AMOUNT PAID FOR RENT PER MONTH: 0
AMOUNT PAID PER OCCASION: 0
BINGO ACTIVITY
BINGO IS CONDUCTED ON THIS PREMISES: Yes IF YES, REFER TO INSTRUCTIONS FOR REQUIRED ATTAC}D4ENT
2544 Commerce Blvd
Mound MN 55364
STORAGE ADDRESS
Marquette
2220 Commerce Blvd
Mound MN 55364
BANK INFORMATION
GAMBLING BANK ACCOUNT NUMBER: 24315
ON THE LINES PROVIDED BELOW LIST THE NAME, ADDRESS AND TITLE OF AT LEAST TWO PERSONS
AUTHORIZED TO SIGN CHECKS AND MAKE DEPOSITS AND WITHDRAWALS FOR THE GAMBLING ACCOUNT.
THE ORGANIZATION'S TREASURER MAY NOT HANDLE GAMBLING FUNDS.
(BE SURE TO COMPLETE THE REVERSE SIDE OF THIS APPLICATION)
THIS FORM WILL BE MADE AVAILABLE IN ALTERNATIVE FORMAT (I.E. LARGE PRINT, BRAILLE) UPON REQUEST
ACKNOWLEDGT~/qT
GAHBLING PREMISES AUTHORIZATION
I HEREBY GIVE CONSENT TO LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS, THE GAMBLING CONTROL BOARD, OR AGENTS
E BOJa~RD, OR THE COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE OR PUBLIC S/LFET"I, OR AGENTS OF THE COMMISSIONERS,
~ENTER THE PREMISES TO ENFORCE THE LAW.
BANK RECORDS INFORMATION
THE GAMBLING CONTROL BOARD IS AUTHORIZED TO INSPECT THE BANK RECORDS OF THE GAMBLING ACCOUNT
WHENEVER NECESSARY TO FULFILL REQUIREMENTS OF CURRENT GAMBLING RULES AND STATUTES.
I DECLARE THAT:
I HAVE READ THIS APPLICATION AND ALL INFORMATION SUBMITTED TO THE GAMBLING CONTROL BOARD;
ALL INFORMATION IS TRUE, ACCURATE AND COMPLETE;;
ALL OTHER REQUIRED INFORMATION HAS BEEN FULLY DISCLOSED;
I AM THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF THE ORGANIZATION;
· I ASSUME FULL RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE FAIR AND LAWFUL OPERATION OF ALL GAMBLING
ACTIVITIES TO BE CONDUCTED;
· I WILL FAMILIARIZE MYSELF WITH THE LAWS OF MINNESOTA GOVERNING LAWFUL GAMBLING AND RULES
OF THE GAMBLING CONTROL BOARD AND AGREE, IF ISSUED A PREMISES PERMIT, TO ABIDE THOSE LAWS
AND RULES, INCLUDING AMENDMENTS TO THEM;
ANY CHANGES IN APPLICATION INFORMATION WILL BE SUBMITTED TO THE GAMBLING CONTROL BOARD AND
LOCAL UNIT OF GOVERNMENT WITHIN TEN DAYS OF THE CHANGE;
I UNDERSTAND THAT FAILURE TO PROVIDE REQUIRED INFORMATION OR PROVIDING FALSE OR MISLEADING
INFORMJ~TION MAY RESULT IN THE DENIAL OR REVOCATION OF THE PREMISES PERMIT.
SIGNATURE OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
DATE
GOVERNMENT ACKNOWLEDGMENT
THE CITY* MUST SIGN THIS APPLICATI°N IF THE GAMBLING PREMISES IS LOCATED WITHIN CITY
LIMITS. ~
2. THE COUNTY** AND TOWNSHIP** MUST SIGN THIS APPLICATION IF THE GAMBliNG PREMISES IS
LOCATED WITHIN A TOWNSHIP.
3. FOR TOWNSHIPS THAT ARE UNORGANIZED OR UNINCORPORATED, THE COUNTY** IS REQUIRED TO ATTACH
A LETTER TO THIS APPLICATION INDICATING THE TOWNSHIPS STATUS.
4. THE LOCAL UNIT OF GOVER1TMENT (CITY OR COUNTY) MUST PASS A RESOLUTION SPECIFICALLY
APPROVING OR DENYING THIS APPLICATION.
5. A COPY OF THE LOCAL I/NIT OF GOVERNMENT'S RESOLUTION APPROVING THIS APPLICATION MUST BE
ATTACHED TO THIS APPLICATION.
6. IF THIS APPLICATION IS DENIED BY THE LOCAL UNIT OF GOVERNMENT, IT SHOULD NOT BE SUBMITTED
TO THE GAMBLING CONTROL BOARD.
TOWNSHIP:
BY SIGNATURE BELOW, THE TOWNSHIP ACKNOWLEDGES THAT THE ORGANIZATION IS /%PPLYING FOR A
PREMISES PERMIT WITHIN TOWNSHIP LIMITS.
ORCOUNTY** TOWNSHIP**
CITY OR COUNTY NAME
TOWNSHIP NAME
SIGNATURE OF PERSON RECEIVING APPLICATION
SIGNATURE OF PERSON RECEIVING APPLICATION
DATE RECEIVED I TITLE
DATE RECEIVED
REFER TO THE CHECKLIST FOR REQUIRED ATTACHMENTS
MAIL TO: GAMBLING CONTROL BOARD
1711 W COUNTY RD B - SUITE 300 S
ROSEVILLE, MN 55113
BID TABULATION
1 TON DUMP TRUCK WITH SANDER & V-PLOW
DATE FEBRUARY 5, 1998
NAME & ADDRESS BID BID TOTAL DEL.
BOND DATE
RYAN FORD 8' BOX CK 37,514.76
RYAN FORD
ALTERNATE BID 9' BOX CK 44,731.40
SUBURBAN CHEVROLET NO 37,435.00
SUPERIOR FORD YES 38,987.00
STAR WEST CK 36,191.00
THURK BROS. 8' BOX CK 35,713.00
9' BOX 35,981.00
CITY OF MOUND
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
Memorandum
To,'
From:
Date:
Subject:
MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL
GREG SKINNER /~f
February 9, 1998
BID RECOMMENDATION
After review of the bids received for the 1 Ton Dump Truck with Sander and Plow, I am
recommending the bid be awarded to Thurk Bros. in the amount of $35,981.00 for the truck
with the 9 foot box.
printed on recycled paper
January 30, 1998
Edward J. Shukle, Jr.
City Manager
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, Minnesota 55364
Dear Mr. Shukle:
We have requested a variance for our property in order to do an addition to our home.
This request is scheduled to go before the Planning Commission on February 9, 1998.
Because we are expecting our first child in April, we are anxious to begin our addition as
soon as possible. After speaking with the City Planner and Building Inspector, they do
not feel that our request for variance will be a problem and advised us to contact you in
order to expedite the process. Therefore, we are asking for your assistance in putting our
request for variance on the February 10, 1998 City Council agenda.
Thank you for your consideration.
Steve and Pam Johnson
6041 Ridgewood Road
Mound, MN 55364
(612) 472-5367
PLANNING REPORT
Hoisington Koegler Group Inc.
l lll
TO: Mound Council, Planning Commission and Staff
FROM: Loren Gordon, AICP
DATE: February 9, 1998
SUBJECT: Second story addition
OWNER: Steven and Para Johnson - 6041 Ridgewood Road
CASE NUMBER: 98-02
HKG FILE NUMBER: 98-5c
LOCATION: 6041 Ridgewood Road
EXISTING ZONING: Residential District R-1
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Residential
BACKGROUND: The applicant is requesting the garage setback be recognize in order to build a
second story addition to the house. The variance request information is listed below.
Existing/Proposed Required Variance
Garage 12' 20' 8'
The existing home is a 1Va story dwelling with a detached two-stall garage in the front yard. The
home meets all applicable setback requirements. Also on the lot is a 6 feet be 10 feet wood shed
located between the home and lakeshore. The shed encroaches 0.19 feet onto the adjacent parcel.
Hardcover is under the 40 percent requirement for lots of record currently and would remain
unchanged with the building addition.
The proposed building plans are to add a large master bedroom and bath with a lakeside porch to
the second story. The existing bedroom on the second floor would be modified as well. The
exterior would match the existing vinyl lap siding.
COMMENTS: A variance can be granted in Mound only on the basis of a finding of hardship or
practical difficulty. Under the Mound Code, variances may be granted only in the event that the
following circumstances exist (Section 350:530):
A. Exceptional or extraordinary circumstances apply to the property which do not apply
generally to other properties in the same zone or vicinity, and result from lot size or
shape, topography, or other circumstances over which the owners of property since
123 North Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 (612) 338-0800 Fax (612) 338-6838
p. 2
Johnson Variance Request
February 9, 1998
enactment of the ordinance have no control.
Bo
The literal interpretation of the provisions of this Ordinance would deprive the applicant
of fights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of
this Ordinance.
Co
That the special conditions or circumstances do not result from the actions of the
applicant.
That granting of the variance request will not confer on the applicant any special privilege
that is denied by this Ordinance to owners of other lands, structures or buildings in the
same district.
E. The variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship.
F. The variance would not be materially detrimental to the purpose of this Ordinance or to
property in the same zone.
There are two nonconforming structures on the property that should be addressed as a part of the
variance request. The existing garage is setback 12 feet from the property line. In addition, there
is 12 feet of driveway within the right-of-way giving 24 feet of driveway that is used for parking.
This appears to be adequate space for parking two vehicles in front of the garage without
protruding into the street.
The second nonconforming structure is the wood shed. This shed also encroaches into the
adjacent property. Past policy on encroachment issues has been to attempt to resolve it as a part
of the variance process. This is also true of sheds and other accessory buildings located lakeside,
although there have been a few exceptions where variances have been granted. In these cases
additional buffering was required to promote the natural lakeshore environment the shoreland
ordinance seeks to create.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend Council
approval of the variance request as stated with the following condition.
1. The existing wood shed be removed.
123 North Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401
(612) 338-0800 Fax(612) 338-6838
VARIANCEciTY oFAPPLICATIONMouND PAID ~ z~,~.3
5341 Maywood Road, Mound, MN 55364 JAN 6 :t9gtl. ~ ;~{
Phone: 472-0600, Fax: 472-0620
$100.00
(FOR OFFICE USE ONLY)
Planning Commission Date: ~ Case No.
City Council Date:
Distribution: /- ~- ~ City Planner /~F ~ DNR
/- ¢- ~ City Engineer Other
/--¢- ~. Public Works
SUBJECT Address ~/ ~}~o~lxhe~ ~
PROPERTY Lot
LEGAL Block
su ,v,s,o
ZONING DISTRICT ~R-~ R-lA R-2 R-3
B-1
B-2
B-3
PROPERTY N~me ~CO~ ~& P~m
OWNER Address OO~/ R;~~ ~ ~o~J. ~
-- Phone (H)~7~-~3~ (W) 573- ~7~
(M)
APPLICANT Name
(IF OTHER Address
THAN Phone (H) (W) (M)
OWNER)
Has an application ever been made tor zoning, variance, conditional use permit, or other zoning
procedure for this prol~erty? ( ) yes,'~t~ no. If yes, list date(s) of application, action taken, resolution
number{s) and pro¥ide copies of resblutions.
t'
Detailed description of proposed construction or alteration (size, number of stories, type of use, etc.):
'Variance Application, P. 2
o
Do the existing structures comply with all area, height, bulk, and setback regulations for the zoning
district in which it is located? Yes (), No'~. If no, specify each non-conforming use (describe
reason for variance request, i.e. setback, Iot'area, etc.):
SETBACKS: REQUIRED REQUESTED VARIANCE
~ (or existing)
NSEW) ~ ft.
~EW)
NSEW)
Street Frontage: /~ ft. ~ ft. ft.
Lot Size: ~sq ft ~.~ sq ft ~ sq ft
Hardcover: ~ ]~ sq ft ~~%q ft ~ sq ft
Front Yard:
Side Yard:
Side Yard:
Rear Yard:
Lakeside:
:
ft. ,'/ ft. - ft.
ft. (o
ft. ft. ft.
ft. .~/(9_-/- ft. -- ft.
ft. ft. ft.
Does the present use of the property conform to all regulations for the zoning district in which it is
located? Yes (), No ()(. If no, specify each non-conforming use:
o
Which unique physical characteristics of the subject property prevent its reasonable use for any of
the uses permitted in that zoning district?
( ) too narrow
( ) too small
( ) too shallow
Please describe: 3c,,'~L',.,,
O
( ) topography
( ) drainage
( ) shape
( ) soil
' existing situation
other: specify
Variance Application, P. 3
o
Was the hardship described above created by the action of anyone ~aving property interests in the
land after the zoning ordinance was adopted (1982)7 Yes { ), No ~. If yes, explain:
Was the hardship created by any other man-made change, such as the relocation of a road?
Yes (), No ~I~. If yes, explain:
o
affected?
Are the conditions of hardship for which../you request a variance peculiar only to the property
described in this petition? Yes (), No {~). If no, list some other properties which are similarly
9. Comments:
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 j~f the City of Mound for the purpose of inspecting, or of posting,
maintaining and removing su/ch not~,e~ as may be required by law.
?/
Owner s Signa~ ~~ Date
CITY OF MOUND
HARDCOVER CALCULATIONS
(IMPERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE)
PROPERTY ADDRESS:
OWNER'S NAME:
LOT AREA SQ. FT. X 30%
,_(~j ~)~ SQ. FT. X 40%
LOT
AREA
LOT AREA SQ. FT. X 15%
= (for all lots) .............. ] ]
I I
= (for Lots of Record*) ....... ~~[
= (for detached buildings only)
*Existing Lots of Record may have 40 percent coverage provided that techniques are utilized, as
outlined in Zoning Ordinance Section 350:1225,Subd. 6. B. 1. (see back). A plan must be submitted
and approved by the Building Official.
HOUSE
LENGTH WIDTH SQ FT
~,'/ x ~. ~/ = !o~o. 7
X =
DETACHED BLDGS
(GARAGE/SHED)
DRIVEWAY, PARKING
AREAS, SIDEWALKS,
ETC.
DECKS Open decks (1/4" min.
opening between boards) with a
pervious surface under ere
not counted as hardcover
OTHER DOt 0~.
TOTAL HOUSE ......................... [ OC/O. '7
G x Io =
TOTAL DETACHED BLDGS ................. ~3o~, q
x =
TOTAL DRIVEWAY, ETC .................. qO~,. q
TOTAL DECK ..........................
I1,~ x ~o = 115'
TOTAL OTHER .........................
TOTAL HARDCOVER / IMPERVIOUS SURFACE
VER
PREPARED BY
(indicate difference) ............................... I 10'/?, 5 I /~, 5
DATE
N
FO
$¢/1£~':
.,,'.,
SURVEY FOR:
DESCRIPT ION:
BILL THOMFORD
Lot 21, Block 6, "The Highlands."
RECEIVED
.IA, Ii - 6 1998
We hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of a survey
of the boundaries of the land above described and of the location of all buildinig
if any, thereon, and all visible encroachments, if any, from or on said land.
Dated this 20th day of April, 1987.
E G A N, F I E L D & N O W A K, I N C.
Surveyors
CITY OF MOUND - ZONIN(
LOT OF RECORD? ,~'~ I NO
YARD I DIRECTION I
INFORMATION SHEET
ZONING DISTRICT, LOT SIZE/WIDTH:
~1 zo,o~,o/6o) B1 ?,soo/o
R1A 6,000/40 B2 20,000/80
R2 6,000/40 B3 10,000/60
R2 14,000/80
R3 SEE O1~). ZZ 30,000/100
REQUIRED
EXISTING/PROPOSED
&
VARIANCE
HOUSE .........
FRONT N S E W
FRONT N S E W
SIDE
SIDE
PEAR
LAKE
TOP OF BLUFF
GARAGE, SHED .....
N S E W
N S E W
N S E W
N S E W
DETACHED BUILDINGS
10' OR 30'
FRONT
N S E W
FRONT N S E W
SIDE N S E W
SIDE N S E W
REAR N S E W
TOP OF BLUFF
HARDCOVER
CONFORMING? YES /~_~
N S E w
4' Oi~D
4'
10' OR 30'
,o,,D .3
' ' Ia'r: 't<L. ID^TEt': !-/,::2- ~
This Zoning Information Sheet only summarizes a portion of ~he requirements outlincd in thc City of Mound Zoning Ordinance. For further information, con',ct ~e City of Mound
Plannin~ Department at 472-0600.
CITY OF MOUND
/
ORDINANCE NO. ~
AN ORDINANCE EXTENDING-THE MORATORIUM PERIOD FOR TRANSMISSION AND
RECEPTION FACILITIES OF COMMERCIAL XVIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATION
SERVICES
The City of Mound does ordain:
Section 1. Background. Section 5 of Ordinance No. __, entitled "An Interim
Ordinance Regulating Transmission and Reception Facilities of Commercial Wireless
Telecommunications Services; Establishing an Moratorium; and Directing a Study Be Conducted
Thereon," is amended to read as follows:
Sec. 5. Duration. This ordinance shall remain in effect for cm,,,
cf :~tg eff¢ct:.vc d~de until March 31, 1998 or until such earlier time as said ordinance shall
be revoked or otherwise amended.
Sec. 2. The extension of the moratorium period until March 31, 1998 is necessary to
complete the study directed under section 3.01 of Ordinance No. , and to allow adequate
time for adoption of any necessary amendments to the City's code of ordinances.
Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect the day after the date of its
__ day of , 1998.
Sec. 3.
publication.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mound this
DJG138020
MU200-69
RESOLUTION NO. 98-
RESOLUTION EXTENDING INTERIM ORDINANCE g91-1997 TO
MARCH 31, 1998
BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota, does
hereby extend Interim Ordinance g91-1997 entitled, 'AN INTERIM ORDINANCE
REGULATING TRANSMISSION AND RECEPTION OF COMMERCIAL WIRELESS
COMMUNICATION SERVICES; ESTABLISHING A MORATORIUM AND DIRECTING
A STUDY BE CONDUCTED THEREONu until March 31, 1998.
CITY OF MOUND
5341 MAYVVOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
February 3, 1998
TO:
FROM:
SUBEJCT:
MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL
FRAN CLARK, CITY CLERK
LICENSE RENEWALS
The following licenses are up for renewal. The license period is March 1, 1998 through
February 28, 1999. Approval is contingent upon all required forms, insurance, etc. being
submitted.
Best Disposal
Blackowiak & Son
Randy's Sanitation
Westonka Sanitation
BFI of Minnesota (formerly Woodlake Sanitation)
printed on recycled paper
BILLS
February 10, 1998
Batch 7127 $ 40,443.76
Batch 8013 222,059.84
Batch 8014 86,854.49
Total Bills
$349.358.09
0
z
!
o 0
u.J ',..)
0 ! ZZ ,
,..,.., §
L
I
~Z
,< :::>
~?
E?.
:)
e e ·
Z
w
o
wi
: LARRY HEITZ 1-612-498-8005 From: JACK DOHERTY NITROTECH (602) 893-1666 (602) 592-0024 218/98 8:31:08 Pac~e 2 of 2
February 7, 1998
Re: Street light at the comer of Cambridge Lane & Bedford
To Whom it may concern:
My name is Pauline Doherty, I currently live in Phoenix, AZ and I am
the daughter of Eileen Heitz, who resides at 2850 Cambridge Lane, Mound,
MN. I am writing concerning the street light that is situated at the comer of
Cambridge & Bedford. My mother is quite concerned, as I am, about the
petition that has been distributed around the neighborhood for signatures to
remove that street light.
Having grown up in that home, I am well aware of the neighborhood and
how dark that comer was prior to the installation of the light. I recently
returned t?om a visit to my mother's and I personally can't understand the
need for the light to be removed. I know that the light is closer to my
mother's house than any other on that comer, and in fact, while I was
staying there, 1 slept in her front living room that is on that side of the house
and the light in no way disturbed my sleep. Since my father's death in
December of 1991, my mother has resided in that home alone. She feels a
sense of security having that light on the comer, as do other single women
living in that neighborhood.
I work as a claims manager for an insurance company here in Phoenix,
and just last week I testified for the State of Arizona in an aggravated assault
charge, where the defendant had beaten a woman. This victim of violence
survived, but not all are so fortunate. As I live 2000 miles from my mother
and I can't attend your meeting this evening, but I would ask that you
consider the safety of those living alone in that neighborhood over the few
who feel this light is an inconvenience to their lives. I'm sure you all realize
that crime doesn't just happen in the big cities such as Phoenix, it can
happen right there in Mound, MN and we should do all we can to offer
security to those that need it.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
Sincerely,
Pauline Doherty
I~,~RRY HEITZ 1-612-498-8005 From: JACK DOHERTY NITROTECH (602) 893-1666 (602) 592-0024
0i/~/98 10:4~ MC' ~JPPO~T T~AINING ·
Deputy Co~y Atto~ey
Bar ID ~: 016120
$01 w Jefferson St Ste 800
2/8/98 8:30:18 Page 1 of 2
Nh. 333 PZ02
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE O~ ARIZONA
IN AND FO~ T~ COUNTY OF MARICOPA
STATE OF ARIZONA, ) CRIMINAL SUBPOENA
) DUCES T~CUM
Plain~iff,
) NO.
vs. )
A~GRAVATED ASSAULT
)
Defendant, ))
PAULINE DOHERTY
DAN WAGNON & ASSOCIATES
100 wEST CLARENDON AVENUE
PHOENIX, AZ
XOU ~ __~?-~BX ORDZRED ~ APP~ AT 9:00 a.m., January 30, 1998, at the Superior
Court of Arizona for Maricopa County (repot: %o the Honorable Paul A. Katz, Central
Court Building, 201Wsst Jefferson, 8th Floor, 9hoenix, Arizona) and ~emain there
until excused by the judge conducting the p:oceedings or otherwise discharged, to
give testimony on behalf of the Stat~ o~ Arizona. Requests for r~asonable
acconunodation for persons with disabilities must be made to the division assigned
to %he case by parties at l~ast 3 judicial days in advance of a scheduled court
proceeding.
IF ]~0~ FAIL TO APPEA~ AS O~--~D, A ~%RRANT ~LL ~ ZSSLf~D ~)R ~ODI~ ARR~.
DATED at Phoenix, Arizona, January 22, 1998.
Please call Max]¢ at -~ on
Jmnuax~ 29, 1998, between
B:00 p.m. to ~nfizm %rial
RICHARD M. ROMLEY
MARICOPA COUNTY ATTORNEY
Deputy County A%~orney
The u~der~igned swears (or allies) that he%she is qualifled to se==e =~s subpoena and did so by
showing the o~inal =o ~d info~ing =he wi[ness of its con~en~s an~ ~y deliverin~ a copy thereO= To
himkher at __a.m.%p.m. on ....... 19 , a% ..... ~izona.
Person ,erring subpoena
January 30, 1998
I ECEIYED
TO: Ed Shukle, City Manager
From: Violet Sollie, Robbie Flatten, and Wanda Martens
RE: Petition to Remove Street Light - February 10, 1998 City
Council Agenda
Please place this letter and the attached Petition To Remove
Street Light on the Mound City Council agenda for Tuesday,
February 10, 1998. Because Mrs. Sollie is elderly, we
request that you place this matter early on the agenda.
Thank you very much for your assistance.
PETITION
TO
REMOVE THE STREET LIGHT
ON THE CORNER OF C/~MBRIDGE LANE ~ BEDFORD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA
The undersigned petitioners respectfully request that
the Mound City Council pass a resolution requesting that
Northern States Power Company immediately remove the above-
stated light, based on the following facts:
BACKGROUND
1. On July 18, 1997, the City of Mound received a
petition signed by the following persons requesting that a
street light be installed at the corner of Cambridge Lane and
Bedford Road: Eileen Heitz, Jeanette Maas, Wanda Martens,
Marilyn Byrnes, and Robert and Genevieve Carlson.
a. Violet Sollie, a property owner on said corner,
was opposed to the petition but had indicated
to a police officer that she would not fight
the installation. She was not aware that the
street light would be so intrusive.
b. At the time she signed the petition, Wanda
Martens stated, "I will sign the petition as
long as Mrs. Sollie wants the light but I
want my name removed if Mrs. Sollie is opposed
to it." Ms. Marten's name was not removed from
the petition.
c. Robert Carlson, a signor of the petition,
stated to Roberta Flatten that they are not
affected by the light but that they signed the
-1-
petition to support the widows on the street
corner. (The Carlsons live three houses away
from the street corner.)
d. Roberta Flatten and Tom Casey (who also live on
the street corner) were never contacted by any
one to sign the petition. They had no
knowledge that the petition was even being
circulated.
2. On August 26, 1997, the Mound City Council passed
Resolution #97-81, requesting that NSP install a street light
at said corner. Roberta Flatten and Tom Casey were not
notified of the proposed City Council action and were not
aware of the passage of the resolution until after the street
light was installed.
3. On October 17, 1997, Northern States Power installed
the street light, to the shock and surprise of Roberta
Flatten and Tom Casey.
REASONS T__OREMOVE SAID STREET LIGHT
4. NO CRIME PROBLEM. On or about October 22, 1997,
Roberta Flatten contacted the City of Mound Police
Department. Sergeant Truax stated to her that between
January and October, 1997 there were 11 police calls in a
nine square block area. Those calls consisted of barking
dogs, lose dogs, a dog bite, a lost child, disturbing the
peace, and winter parking violations. Sergeant Truax said in
essence that you are fighting perception rather than reality.
Furthermore, in the last 20+ years the undersigned
-2-
petitioners have lived in the neighborhood, we are aware of
only one incident involving juvenile damage to property. In
approximately 1980, two juveniles were caught puncturing and
egging buildings along the length of Cambridge Lane, some of
which was already illuminated by street lights (i.e. the
existing street lights did not stop the crime).
5. NUISANCE TO RESIDENTS. There are six households
that are directly affected by the light. Three of the
affected households (50%) are opposed to the light, finding
it intrusive and a nuisance.
6. UNNECESSARY TAXPAYER EXPENSE. If some neighbors
desire additional lighting security, they have the right to
install lights on their own property at their own expense,
not at the expense of taxpayers. Taxpayers should not have
to pay for a light that allegedly "benefits" only a fraction
(50%) of the property owners.
7. SHIELDING THE LIGHT DOES NOT WORK. Northern States
Power subsequently attempted to shield the street light from
the glare on private property. This has not worked.
8. ORIGINAL PETITION WAS FALSE. The July 18, 1997
petition to install the light was false because Wanda Martens
wanted her name removed and there is no demonstrated safety
need for a street light at the corner of Cambridge Lane and
Bedford Road.
9. ENERGY CONSERVATION, AESTHETICS, AND ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION. Removal of a street light saves electricity,
allows a clearer view of the night sky, and protects
-3-
nocturnal animals.
10. NEIGHBORS ARE WILLING TO INFORMALLY ASSIST EACH
OTHER. At a neighborhood meeting on Sunday, October 26,
1997, neighbors offered to assist in the following:
a. To have monthly meetings to discuss issues that are
occurring in the neighborhood;
b. To install motion lights on homes to light up areas
when there is movement; and
c. To buy less intrusive private lights for those
neighbors who are on fixed incomes.
NOW, THEREFORE, the undersigned petitioners acknowledge
that they have read this 4-page petition and respectfully
request that the Mound City Council adopt a resolution
requesting that Northern States Power Company immediately
remove the street light on the corner of Cambridge Lane and
Bedford Road.
NAME (sign & print) ADDRESS PHONE DATE
-4-
Q_E~
Date: August 17, 1997
To: ChiefHarrell//~
From: Officer Ewa~)
Re: Street Light
In reference to the street light request for the comer of Bedford Road and Cambridge Lane, I
have talked with all those who signed the petition for the installation of a street light.
I have also talked with Kathy and John Nelson, who reside at 4949 Bedford Road, Mark Jenks,
who resides at 4932 Bedford Road, and Kim Edwards, who resides at 4955 Bedford Road.
These residents who were not on the petition stated that they believe the street light is necessary
for that end of the block as it is very dark in that area.
I also talked with Vi Sollie, who resides at 2855 Cambridge Lane, who stated that she didn't
believe a street light would add any security to the area, but that she would not oppose it. Vi
Sollie is 90 years old and lives alone. Marilyn Byrnes, Wanda Martans, Jeanette Maas and
Eileen Heitz also live alone.
I have been in the area several times after dark and the area of Cambridge Lane and Bedford
Road is extremely dark. I would recommend that a street light be placed in the area and suggest
that it be mounted on an existing power pole located on the west side of Cambridge Lane in front
of 2855 Cambridge Lane.
SUPPORT, PROTECTIVE SERVICES
.,qenior~ AnE [.aw En[orcement
5600 Lynwood Boulevard, Mound, Minnesota 55364 · 612-491 -R084
Parks Department
1997 Annual Report
PERSONNEL ROSTER
The Parks Department has only one full-time employee, the Park Director. The
rest of the staff is made up of seasonal employees. During the busy spring, summer, and
early fall, there are as many as seven full-time seasonal employees, between eight and ten
part-time seasonal recreational program leaders, twenty-one lifeguards, and one contracted
cleaning service.
1997 Employees
Date Hired
Park Director
Park Maintenance
Commons Maintenance
Mowing Crew
Mowing Crew
Dock Inspector
Summer Recreation
Cemetery Maintenance
Janitorial Service
Beach Supervisor
Jim Faclder
John Taffe
Brad Jayko
Chris Benz
Steve Erickson Jr.
Tom McCaffrey
Jennifer Garza
Phil Haugen
West Metro Bldg. Mtnc.
Bridget Schultz
July 1, 1985
May 12, 1983
May 14, 1996
June 1, 1994
June 2, 1997
November 1, 1990
May 15, 1997
May, 1990
November 1, 1994
May 15, 1997
1997 Non-Returning Employee
Mark Bigaouette, Mowing Crew.
Jackie Meyer, Summer Beach and Recreation Programs.
GENERAL COMMENTS
During 1997 the Parks Department was involved mainly with maintaining current
playground equipment and lands. In the past few years, we have seen improvements to
the following parks: Pembroke, Philbrook, Langdon, Belmont, Chester, Tyrone, Seton,
Three Points and Dundee. In 1997 no new play structures were installed. I have had
calls requesting the City look into replacing the play structure at Avalon Park which they
came to the Park & Open Space Commission with a request. Since then a new equipment
has been approved in the 1998 budget. A plan has been developed by the City Planner
for Veterans Park to create an open sitting area. We still are looking forward to doing
this plan and other parks that are in need of alterations. They are, Highland, Edgewater,
and Crescent Parks. Of these parks, Crescent and Edgewater have no equipment.
Highland, like Swenson, has equipment reaching need for replacement. Not all parks
require a play structure, Crescent and Doone could be left as open green space in order
to keep the areas natural.
Parks Department 1997 Annual Report
Along with development, maintenance for the parks must be planned. Maintenance
and upkeep of the parks is a major ingredient for their success. Regular mowing, leaf
removal, litter pick up and periodic repairs are unavoidable aspects of these Parks and
generally take up the most hours over the year. These improvements and maintenance
will provide a visual commitment that the City of Mound has a dedication towards
community development.
Having moved into the Island Park Garage in 1989, we began to make
improvements to the building by following the improvements recommended in a 1987
engineering report for remodeling and repairing the garage. In 1990 a new roof was put
on, in 1991 the electrical was updated, new garage doors were added, and the exterior
of the building was painted. The major repairs for 1994, 1995, 1996 were taken out of
the budget due to budget restraints and were not asked for in 1998, but are still needed.
The repairs needed, are: replacing of the concrete driveway in front of the building,
grounds repair around the back side of the building which would include a retaining wall,
and a drain system to keep water out of the building.
SUMMER RECREATION PROGRAM
Currently, the City of Mound is sponsoring a summer recreation program that lasts
seven weeks, from mid-June through mid August. The seven week program schedule
provides more recreational opportunity to youths. During 1997 a Program Supervisor
oversaw a schedule of events at five parks; Belmont, Swenson, Philbrook, Highland, and
Three Points, where there is a Park Leader and an assistant to carry out the daily
program. The 1997 program continued its arts and crafts, games, and special events for
a broad age of children, and saw smaller parks receiving visits from the recreation staff
to provide an opportunity for them to get involved in the program.
This program is accomplished by co-sponsoring a program with Westonka
Community Services. The basic concept is a program, still offered in the neighborhood
park, but utilizing the Community Services special facilities, such as the indoor pool or
gym, and co-offering events or field trips.
This type of approach will offer a great deal of flexibility to a wide variety of age
groups. The programming will represent their special interests and allow for expansion
over the years.
An great attraction has been "Music in the Parks" that was organized in 1993 and
will continue in 1998, and the Parks staff has also assisted in special events, including
Mound City Days, and Winterfest.
Parks Department
1997 Annual Report
PARKS PROGRAM
1995 1996 1997
LABOR
Staff Wages $ 7,389 $ 9,223 $11,661
Community Education Support Staff 2,100 2,100 2,400
EQUIPMENT & SUPPLIES (Softball, Parachutes,
Games, Craft Supplies, Snacks, etc.) 707 548 1,318
MILEAGE 158 133 125
MISCELLANEOUS (Training) 229 230 150
TOTAL
CITY BEACHES
$10,582 $12,235 $15,654
The beaches are operated under a contract with Westonka Community Services,
the costs are as follows:
BEACH PROGRAM
1995 1996 1997
LABOR
Lifeguard Wages $15,921 $15,540 $14,347
Community Education Support Staff 2,100 2,100 2,100
MILEAGE 183 132 ---
EQUIPMENT & SUPPLIES 184 132 719
REGISTRATION
TOTAL $18,387 $17,846 $17,060
These costs cover expenses incurred by Westonka Community Services in
supplying lifeguards. They do not, however, reflect the cost of maintenance, weed
removal, buoys, portable toilets and life saving equipment. These costs come out of the
park fund.
In past years we have seen this budget item under projections due to cool weather.
1997 was a warm summer, because of additional funding we were able to keep the
beaches open and not cut back hours like 1996. In 1998 there has been additional monies
added to allow for keeping the beaches open through Labor day.
Parks Department 1997 Annual Report
MUNICIPAL CEMETERY
The Mound Cemetery was established in 1884 and operated under an association
until 1944, when the cemetery was turned over to the City of Mound. There are three
divisions, A and B are the old sections to the west and the new section C, to the east.
Currently, the grounds are maintained by a seasonal employee. He supplies his
own equipment and is paid for time and machinery. The Park Crew helps when
requested for projects that are larger in nature than the daily upkeep. The fertilization
and weed control is done though a contract with a lawn care company.
At the beginning of 1993, due to the retirement of Geno Hoff, Street
Superintendent, I assumed most of the responsibility for the Cemetery. This has been,
in general, an easy adjustment except for burials in the oldest area, Section A. Some of
the early burials did not have exact placements and one must have extreme caution when
doing any work there.
A 1990 a survey comparing plot fees at the Mound Cemetery with other municipal
and private cemeteries was updated in 1995. A new fee schedule was adopted for 1998
as listed below:
1997 1998
Adult, resident $350 $400
Adult, nonresident $650 $800
Baby, resident $175 $175
Baby, nonresident $325 $325
Ash Burial * *
* No additional charge if plot is purchased as a single grave, $50 charge if ash burial is placed
on top of a casket burial.
A "resident" for the plot fee is defmed as, "An individual to be interred is a
current resident of the City of Mound at the time of his/her death, or at the time of
purchasing his/her grave site."
The operation of the cemetery is at a break even with income from the sale of
plots. The current level of maintenance at the cemetery needs to be upgraded to aid in
providing a more attractive setting. This could be done through irrigation, and additional
planting of trees. In 1996 a large maple tree was lost in the oldest section A. In 1997 we
planted four new trees but it will take many years to replace such a significant tree.
Parks Department
1997 Annual Report
I-IAZAPd3OUS TREE REMOVAL
As of December 31, 1997, the yearly total of hazardous tree removals from City
property were 73 trees removed, 1 stumps chipped, 17 trees trimmed that posed a hazard,
and 8 sites had removed brush. From private property 9 trees were marked for owner
removal due to hazardous conditions.
Diseased and hazardous trees are removed on a complaint basis. When a
complaint is received an inspection of the tree is done to determine the need of removal
and the ownership. City owned trees are removed by a contractor as soon as possible,
while private trees are removed in accordance with City Ordinances. Private trees not
removed in the grace period allowed, are forced removed. The cost of a forced removed
tree is billed to the property owner. If this bill is not paid, it is then attached to their
property taxes.
WEED NOTICES
In 1997, approximately 25 weed notices were issued by the Community Service
Officer for unkept grounds. Of these 25, all owners did comply and a contractor did not
have to be hired to perform the work. The cost of mowing incurred by the City for
private property would be billed to the owner. If the owner does not pay, the cost is
assessed to their taxes.
MUNICIPAL DOCK SITES
The Municipal dock system is made up of approximately 4.5 miles of lake shore,
providing 460 dock sites. The Dock Inspector works under the direction of the Park
Director. His main duties are the processing of dock applications, inspections of the dock
sites, notification of the discrepancies to permit holders, and an informational source for
the general public and City.
In 1997 the dock fund showed a balance of $213,839 on 12-31-97. This balance
will allow for future improvements to the dock program where we have seen cost of
dredging and shoreline repairs increase dramatically over the past years.
In 1997 in working with the Dock and Commons Advisory Community (DCAC)
the City's two multiple slip docks were installed at the Fairview and Amherst Lane
accesses. The concept in general is to allow for current accessibility to non-abutting dock
site holders while allowing for less congestion in front of homes abutting the commons.
Although there are some details that need to be worked through, the multiple slip dock
site is a success. Currently there are funds in the 1998 Dock Fund budget that will allow
for the installation of up to three more multiple slip docks, one at Avalon park has
already been approved by the users and the DCAC.
Parks Department 1997 Annual Report
DEPOT AND ISLAND PARK BUILDINGS
The Depot building had improvements in 1997, work was done to the exterior of
the building, which included new siding, soffits, fascia, windows and doors. This
greatly improves the aesthetics of the building as viewed from the street and park. The
interior is to be updated in 1998.
Currently the facility is being used for meetings of local organizations and for
rental by private individuals for parties. Response from these users has been positive.
The current improvements to the Depot will reinforce the building as an asset to our City.
The Island Park building is not being used and has had the water, heat and
electricity turned off. Vandalism was a problem again last summer, the windows were
broken which lead to boarding up rather then replacing the glass. This facility is
currently being used as a storage area for Police Department supplies, and the main hall
will only be opened during elections for voting. Only minimum maintenance is being
performed on this building. The Park and Open Space Commission is currently looking
into the possibility of different uses to see if there is a need to improve the building.
CITY HALL MAINTENANCE/JANITORIAL
The Parks Department is responsible for some areas concerning city hall
maintenance and janitorial services. The grounds, lawn care and snow removal are
seasonal, while responsibilities for heating/air conditioning are year round. All projects
within the capabilities of the park staff are performed. This has been in the areas of
repairs to plumbing, heating and related equipment.
Major repairs or cleaning services are contracted out through the direction of the
Parks Department. Currently, we have a contract service for janitorial, carpet cleaning
and the heating and air conditioning systems. Other projects have been assigned to the
Parks Department as instructed by the City Manager.
CITY OWNED RETAINING WALLS
The replacement and repairs to retaining walls on street right-of-ways continue to
be a expense that does not seem to have a end. The original walls constructed of flat
stone or wood timber continue to deteriorate faster than the budget will allow
replacement. At this time I have a list of work to do that has a two to three year wait
for replacement walls. The cost of work done in 1995, 1996 and 1997 projected costs
for 1998 is as follows (note Exhibit C):
6
Parks Department
1997 Annual Report
Actual Actual Est.
1996 1997 1998
Repairs 0 400 500
Replacements 8,085 9,551 10,000
Insurance 0 0 0
The walls that have received work are only a reaction to immediate problems, and
generally from a complaint or hazard.
All of the replacement walls have been composed of concrete block. This type of
construction has been done at a comparable cost to that of wood or stone and will last
much longer.
In 1997 the budget for wall replacement was $10,000, as it's been in previous
years, and $9951.00 was spent.
Currently, there are existing walls that should have been replaced in 1997, and
have been delayed to 1998 and beyond. The budget could have easily been $40,000 if
all current work needed would have been addressed in 1998, this does not allow for any
emergency repairs or replacements due to storm damage.
PARK & OPEN SPACE COMMISSION
The Park Commission is made up of nine members and a Council Representative.
The Park and Open Space Commission received one new member in 1996, Bev Botko.
The Commission's activities are:
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Some of the
o
o
0
o
Parks/wetlands and related concerns.
Cemetery.
Island Park Hall and Depot buildings.
Nature Conservation Areas
Swimming beaches and lifeguards.
Hazardous tree removal.
Summer Recreation Program.
Budget preparation.
topics reviewed by the Park Commission in 1997 were:
Distribution of funds allotted for park improvements.
Inventory of City owned property for potential nature areas.
Overseeing summer recreation/lifeguard programs.
Outdoor skating facilities.
Parks Department 1997 Annual Report
DOCK AND COMMONS ADVISORY COMMISSION
The City Council, on February 11, 1997 established the Dock and Common
Advisory Commission. The objective of the Commission is to identify problems and
frustrations that the current dock program has. They have had a very aggressive schedule
of items for discussion at their meetings below is a review of some of the activities are:
o Commons maintenance permits.
o Commons dock fees.
o Dock location map update.
o Review of LMCD rules and regulations.
o Establishing of possible sites for city multiple slip dock.
Some of the topics reviewed by the Dock Commission in 1997 were:
O
O
O
O
Public lands encroachment fees.
Maintenance responsibilities of encroachment owners.
Procedure manual for Public Lands Permits.
Future maintenance needed on Commons shoreline.
EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE AND REPLACEMENT
Preventive, daily, and unplanned maintenance of all related equipment is the
responsibility of the Parks Department. Please note Equipment Inventory on the attached
Exhibit A.
An Equipment Replacement Schedule is maintained to allow for updating of major
capital outlays, see Exhibit A. This schedule when observed, will allow the Parks
Department to operate efficiently and provide safety for the general public and the park
crew. The Equipment Inventory, Exhibit B, allows you to see all of the Park Department
equipment, its projected service years, and replacement costs.
ESTIMATED BUDGET EXPENDITURES AS OF DECEMBER 1997
YTD PERCENT
GENERAL FUND BUDGET EXPENSE VARIANCE EXPENDED
Parks 148,550 141,847 6,702 95.49%
Summer Recreation 36,200 32,714 3,486 90.37%
Cemetery Fund 8,100 8,012 87.49 98.92 %
Docks Fund 68,440 42,647 25,792 62.31%
8
Parks Department
1997 Annual Report
EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT
SCHEDULE
EXHIBIT A
9
REC# YEAR
1 1990
2 1991
3 1992
4 1993
5 1994
6 1995
EQUIPMENT
BRUSH CUTTER
3/4 TON 4X4/PLOW
1 TON DUMP 4X4
CHEMICAL SPRAYER
PUSHMOWER
GROUND AIRATOR
FLAIL MOWER
WATER SPRINKLER
WEEDWHIP (2)
PUSH MOWER
GROUND AIRATOR
WATER SPRINKLER
BOBCAT BUCKET
72" FRONT MOWER
METAL LOCATOR
6000 lb TRAILER
FLAIL MOWER (USED)
1 TON DUMP 4X2
PUSH MOWER (propel)
WEEDWHIP (2)
METAL DETECTOR
POWER WASHER
~EACH BOUYS
3/4 TON 4X4 PLOW
PLAY STRUCTURE
METAL DETECTOR
WEEDWHIP (2)
GRASS CATCHER
(6) PICNIC TABLES
COST
550
14,990
24,000
950
400
2,000
24,000
4,000
600
400
2,900
4,000
1,000
15,000
700
2,000
15,000
24,300
45O
75O
800
1,200
1,950
24,250
19,600
850
775
3,730
1,800
REPLACES
1980 3/4 TON PICKUP
1976 3/4 TON 4X4
PURCHASED
YES
YES
YES
YES
1987 PUSHMOWER
1974 FORD TRACTOR
1987 WEEDWHIP (2)
1989 PUSH MOWER
1987 BOBCAT BUCKET
1984 72" MOWER
1982 TRAILER
1974 FORD SICKLE
1978 1 TON DUMP 4X2
1991 PUSH MOWER
1991 WEEDWHIP (2)
1985 METAL DETECTOR
WORN OUT BOUYS
1982 3/4 TON 4X4 PL.
OLD STRUCTURE
1993 WEEDWHIP (2)
NONE
YES
NO
NO
NO
YES
YES
NO
NO
NO
YES
NO
YES
NO
YES
YES
YES
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
- 1 -
7 1996
8 1997
9 1998
10 1999
11 2000
12 2001
EQUIPMENT
WATER FOUNTAINS (3)
BASKETBALL GOALS
COMPUTOR / LAP TOP
FLAMABLE LOCKER
RESURFACE COURTS
PUSH MOWER / Propel
FLAIL MOWER 72"
BOBCAT TRACKS
BOBCAT GRAPPLE FORKS
DOCK/MOUNDBAY
BASKETBALL GOALS
MULTIP. DOCKS
BACKPACK BLOWER
72" FRONT MOWER
BRUSH CUTTER
PUSH MOWER
WEEDWHIPS (2)
ONE TON 4X4 W/PLOW
BASKETBALL GOALS
OUTBOARD MOTOR
14' ALUMA. BOAT
BRUSH CUTTER
BASKETBALL GOAL
WEEDWHIPS (2)
ONE TON 4X4 DUMP
COST
8,000
1,500
1,400
1,000
10,500
650
30,000
5,000
2,900
2,350
1,700
22,000
450
27,000
750
700
85O
35,000
1,900
1,500
900
900
1,000
1,500
40,000
REPLACES
1987 FOUNTAINS
UNKNOWN
1988 COMPUTOR
NONE
UNKNOWN
1992 PUSH MOWER JD
NONE
NONE
1988 GRAPPLE FORKS
UNKNOWN
UNKNOWN
NONE
1988 BACKPACK BLOWER
1988 72" MOWER J D
1990 STHIL BRUSH CUT
1993 PUSH MOWER JD
1995 WEEDWHIPS (2)
1990 3/4 TON 4X4
THREE POINTS PARK
1961 14' ALUMA BOAT
1961 10 HP JOHONSON
1990 STHIL BRUSH CUT
SETON PARK
1998 WEEDWHIPS (2)
1990 1 TON DUMP 4X4
PURCHASED
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
YES
YES
- 2 -
REC~
13
14
15
16
17
18
YEAR I EQUIPMENT
2002
2003
1 TON 4X2 DUMP
7,000 LB TRAILER
72" FRONT MOWER
WEEDWHIPS (2)
PUSH MOWER
60" BROOM
47" SNOWBLOWER
10,000 LB TRAILER
{IDSTEER LOADER
48" RIDING MOWER
'ORY BROOM
PUSH MOWER
ONE TON 4X4 / PLOW
2004 ETAL DETECTOR
2005 CHEMICAL SPRAYER
2006 WEEDWHIPS (2)
2007 6,000 LB TRAILER
PUSH MOWER
COST
35,000
2,500
19,000
1,500
95O
4,000
5,000
IREPLACES
1993 i TON 4X2 DUMP
1988 7,000 LB TRL.
1992 72" FRONT MOWE
1998 WEEDWHIPS (2)
1997 PUSH MOWER
1988 60" JD BROOM
1988 47" JD BLOWER
3,500
40,000
9,000
80O
900
40,000
1987 10,000 LB TRL.
1987 BOBCAT (ATTACH)
3 48" RIDER
1998 SHINDAIWA
1998 PUSH MOWER JD
1994 3/4 TON 4X4
1,000 1994 METAL DETECTOR
3,500 1990 CHEM. SPRAYER
1,700 2004 WEEDWHIPS (2)
5,000
1,200
1992 6,000 LB TRL.
2002 PUSH MOWER
PURCHASED
- 3 -
2008
EQUIPMENT
PUSH MOWER
BACKPACK BLOWER
72" FRONT MOWER
COST
1,o0o
750
25,000
!REPLACES
2003 PUSH MOWER
1998 BACKPACK BLOWER
1998 72" FRONT MOWER
PURCHASED
- 4 -
Parks Department 1997 Annual Report
EQUIPMENT INVENTORY
EXHIBIT B
10
REC# ICurr_Equi9
1
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
i Ton Chev 4X4 Dump
3/4 Ton 4X4 W/Plow
1 Ton Ford 4x2 Dump
3/4 Ton Chev 4X4
W/Plow
48" Mower John Deere
72" Mower John Deere
& Cab
72" Mower John Deere
& Cab
John Deere 60" Broom
John Deere 47" Snow
Blower
55 HP Mower / Flail
John Deere
Weedwhips (2)
Brush Cutter
Pushmower John Deere
21" self propel
Pushmower John Deere
21" self propel
Metal Detector
Blower Sthil
Backpack
Blower John Deere
Backpack
Model Year
1990
1994
1993
1990
1993
1992
1998
1988
1988
1997
1998
1990
1998
1997
1994
1998
1988
Replace_Year
1999
2003
2002
1999
2003
2002
2008
20O2
2002
2017
2O00
2000
2003
2002
2004
2008
Service Years~
9
9
9
9
10
10
10
14
14
20
10
10
SPARE ONLY
10
Replace_Cost
$ 35,000
40,000
37,000
35,000
9,000
19,000
25,000
4,000
5,000
42,000
1,500
825
1,000
950
1,000
1,000
- 1 -
REC#
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Curr_Equip
Rotory Broom
Shindaiwa
Skidsteer Bobcat 843
Planer, P.Forks,
G.Forks, Bucket
Utility Trailer
10,000 LB
Utility Trailer
7,000 LB
Utility Trailer
6,000 LB
Outboard 10 HP
Johnson
Boat 14' Aluma Craft
Chemical Sprayer
Model Year
1998
1987
1987
1988
1992
1961
1970
1990
Replace_Year
2003
2003
2003
2002
2007
2000
2OOO
Service Years!
5
16
16
14
15
39
3O
2005
15
Replace_Cost
800
40,000
3,500
2,500
2,500
1,500
3,500
3,500
- 2 -
Parks Department
1997 Annual Report
RETAINING WALL REPLACEMENT
SCHEDULE
EXHIBIT C
11
REC~
1
2
DATE
1/7/93
2/4/93
3 3-11-93
4 4-21-93
5 4-21-93
6 5-5-93
7 5-5-93
8
5-20-93
LOCATION
1590 Eagle Lane
2216 Fairview Road
4686 Island View Dr.
4610 Tuxedo Blvd.
Corner of Stratford
and Dorchester
5132 Waterbury Rd.
Claire & Cavan
3062 Brighton Blvd
8-21-97
TYPE
Stone!
Wood
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Drain
Stone
Wood
REPLACE TYPE
Stone repair
Block
Not a City
Wall
Stone repair
Stone repair
Stone repair
Stone repair
Block
COST
100.00
3697.00
0
150.00
Insur
Claim
250.00
100.00
250.00
4336.50
REPAIR DATE
8/5/93
8/5/93
0
8/5/93
8/5/93
8/5/93
8/5/93
8/5/93
CONTR
Bjork
Bjork
Bj~--k
Bjork
Bjork
Bjork
- 1 -
9
10
11
12
14
15
16
5-25-93
5-25-93
5-27-93
5-27-93
5-27-93
6-24-93
6-24-93
6-25-93
LOCATION
4976 Monmouth Rd
4968 Afton Rd
1632 Eagle Lane
1638 Eagle Lane
4983 Afton Road
5005 Edgewater Dr
3988 Alexander Ln
2717 Shannon Ln
8-21-97
Stone
Wood
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone
Stone repair
Replace With
Block
Stone repair
Stone repair
Stone repair
Missing
Stone
Stone repair
Stone repair
COST
250.00
2131.37
100.00
100.00
100.00
REPAIR DATE
8/5/93
7/12/94
8/5/93
8/5/93
8/5/93
50.00 7/12/94
Insur
Claim
460.00
8/5/93
8/5/93
81.74
CONTR
Bjork
Bjork
Bjork
Bjork
Bjork
Bjork
Bjork
Bjork
- 2 -
REC#
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
DATE
6-25-93
7-6-93
7-7-93
7-22-93
3-18-94
3-18-94
4-4-94
4-15-94
LOCATION
2637 Clare Ln
2850 Cambridge Ln
(Wall on Brighton)
4704 Island View Dr
4518 Stirling Rd.
4944 Crestview Rd
4920 Crestview Rd
1590 Eagle Ln
3043 Island View Dr
8-21-97
ITYPE IREPLACE_TYPE
Stone
Stone
Stone repair
Replace With
Block
Replace With
Block
Stone
Block
Repair
Repair
Replace With
COST
150.00
2728.16
8085.80
REPAIR DATE
8/5/93
7/12/94
6/15/96
5998.78 7/12/94
600.00
600.0O
7/12/94
7/12/94
8-11-97
Block
Repair,
School bus
hit wall
4987.00
Barb Dahlke
with Dist.
notified
50.00
CONTR
Bju-&
Bjork
Bjork
Bjork
Bjork
Conce
Land.
Bjork
- 3 -
5 6-14-94
26
27
28
30
31
32
6-14-94
6-14-94
7-27-94
8-1-94
11-2-94
12-12-94
3-24-95
LOCATION
2136 Overland Lane
2137 Centerview Ln
4754 Manchester Rd
4872 Leslie Rd
3225 Devon Ln
4434 Dorchester Rd
3213 Amhurst Ln
4855 Lanark Rd
8-21-97
TYPE
Stone
Stone
Stone
Wood
Wood
Wood
Stone
Wood
IREPLACE TYPE
Repair
Repair
Repair,
COST
100.00
100.00
300.00
Remove small
trees, shed
moved by the
owner.
Replace
200 in ft
Block
Repair(will
need replace
soon)
Repair only
by driveway
(future work
needed)
Repair right
side of
driveway
Replace with
Block
5580.00
60.00
50.00
100.00
2460.00
REPAIR DATE
7--95
7-95
5-7-97
estimate
4/97
9-8-94
7-95
5-21-97
5-21-97
CONTR
Bjork
Bjork
Conce
Land.
Bjork
Bjork
Conce
Land.
Conce
Land.
- 4 -
REC~
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
DATE
4-12-95
7-31-95
12-27-95
4-10-96
4-22-96
5-3-96
5-8-96
5-20-96
8-21-97
LOCATION
2861 2873 Essex Lane
5960 Sunset Road
4814 Northern Road
TYPE
4864 Monmouth Road
4738 Galway Road
4705 Bedford Road
4958 Leslie Road
1610 Finch Lane
Wood
Wood
Wood
Stone
Rock
Rock
REPLACE TYPE
Replace with
Block
Replace with
Block
Remove and
grade
Repair Drive
way Corners
Repair rock
Repair rock
next to step
Rock Repair
Wood
Replace curb
side only
COST
2104.00
4350.00
1800.00
250.00
200.00
200.00
1530.00
2750.00
REPAIR DATE
6-24-97
estimate
4/97
estimate
4/97
estimate
4/97
estimate
4/97
estimate
4/97
estimate
4/97
estimate
4/97
CON~R
Conue
Land.
- 5 -
1
42
43
44
46
47
48
8-8-96
11-22-96
3-20-97
3-26-97
4-28-97
5-19-97
6-10-97
7-31-97
LOCATION
3051 Long Fellow Ln
3340 Warner Ln
4704 Islandview Dr
6279 Linden Lane
4701 Aberdeen Road
4660 Bedford Road
3152 Alexander Ln.
3072 Dundee Ln.
8-21-97
ITYPE
Rock
Rock
Block
Wood
REPLACE TYPE
Repair next
to driveway
and street
Repair on
the corner
Repair on
the corner
Replace with
Block
Repair
Repair
Corner by
drivrway
Repair where
buldging
Buldging
? if repair
COST
400.00
400.00
400.00
3410.00
REPAIR DATE
estimate
4/97
estimate
4/97
estimate
4/97
estimate
4/97
CONTR
- 6 -
REC#
49
50
DATE
10-7-97
8-21-97
LOCATION
4613 Hanover Road
TYPE
Wood
~EPLACE TYPE
Replace with
block
COST
REPAIR DATE
CON~R
- 7 -
CITY OF MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
To:
From:
Date:
Subject:
MEMORANDUM
Ed Shukle, City Manager & Mound City Council
Greg Skinner
Public Works
February 5, 1998
1997 Annual Report
STREET DEPARTMENT
The street departments primary function is to maintain and repair the Cities streets
and storm sewers. The city has four full time employee's in the street department.
have listed the names of the personnel below.
NAME TITLE STARTING DATE
Don Heitz Equipment Operator 5-1-73
Tim Johnson Equipment Operator 6-17-83
Dan Grady Equipment Operator 2-13-96
Frank Heitz Equipment Operator 5-20-96
printed on recycled paper
The Street Maintenance Supervision is handled mostly by myself. I delegate certain
projects or task to each employee. Examples would be, sealcoating, sign repair,
maintenance, etc. I handle all of the complaints and questions and try to resolve
them. Some of my other duties include reports, monthly and annual, budget
preparations, supervising personnel, evaluation report, emergency call out,
construction meetings, monthly meetings, project inspections, purchasing of road
material and etc.
Here is a list of the duties for the department. Keep in mind that this covers repair
and maintenance for 50 miles of streets, 12 parking lots and 27 cul-de-sacs.
Plowing and Sanding
Curb & Sidewalks
Sweeping
Street lights
Cleadng street dght of
brush and trees and guardrail
Retaining walls
Bituminous street patching
Maintenance of Equipment
Preparing streets for sealcoating
Christmas Decorations
Repair & Maintenance of storm sewer
Street sign repairing and installation
of new ones
GENERAL
Let me go through the schedule of the Street Department for one year just touching
on the main duties starting with Winter.
SNOW & ICE CONTROL
It's my job to determine when the snow equipment is called out. I depend on the
National Weather Service for information concerning any weather systems moving in
our direction, also the Police Department. Most of the time I'm out and about to
determine what has to be done. When it's icy we sand as soon as possible but when
it snows we like to wait until it's over if at all possible. When we plow everyone is out,
four from the Street Department, four from the Water & Sewer Department. Jim from
3)3.,
the Parks and myself. The equipment used is five 2. '1/2. ton dump trucks equipped
with plow, wing and sanders, four 4x4 pickup trucks equipped with B' plows, one 4x4
Blazer with a 6'6" plow to do the sidewalks. We have 11 miles of sidewalks that we
haul the snow away. We use the snow blower, two dump trucks and two 4x4 for the
job.
The beginning of the year was no different than the end of 1996. January saw plenty
of snow. Our salt and sand amounts were well over our average. Overtime and
equipment repairs were up also. We were unable to do some summer projects again
this year because of cost overruns. On the bright side November and December
were great. There was very little snow. But, along comes summer. In July we had
two major storms. The first storm did some minor damage and the power was out for
a short pedod of time. The second storm caused some major damage. We had over
300 trees down about 50 were on city property. Randy's Tree was brought in to
handle all the cities trees. Many of the streets were impassable due to trees or wires
that fell. Power was out throughout the city. The wells and lift stations we inoperable
for some time. The lost lake site was open to allow the residents to bring down the
trees and brush that had fallen on their property.
SPRING WORK
The early part of Spring is when we do our street right-of-way work, that means we
cut brush and trim trees that are hanging in the street.
The Spring clean-up is a big job, two street sweepers, one sidewalk broom, two
trucks and one tanker. We sweep everything in town, 50 miles of streets, 12 parking
lots, 11 miles of sidewalks and 26 cul-de-sacs. You're looking at three to four weeks
of work.
From the spring clean-up work we move into our street patching. There were no big
repairs this year. There were two new road projects this year. One was the new
concrete curb and asphalt overlay on Sherwood Ddve. The seconded was the new
development of Maple Manors. As I mentioned at the beginning, Spdng is patching
and water main break repair time. We patch all of our main breaks unless it is so big
that a paver is needed.
STORM SEWER SYSTEM
We have a very large storm sewer system to maintain. I don't know how may miles
of pipe we have. I know we have 370 catch basins and 81 sump catch basins. The
370 catch basins are cleaned after every heavy rain and the sumps are cleaned in the
Spring and Fall.
The City crew maintains and repairs the catch basins, but when it comes to repairing
the pipe itself we had a contractor come in for the work. We don't have the
equipment or people to do it.
We did have one major repair for storm sewers this year. We replaced 100 feet of
concrete pipe and added one manhole on Maywood Road. We are still looking at
two major projects that need to be taken care of. One is at the south end of Cotton
Lane and the other at Swenson Park.
SEALCOATING
This year Allied was the Iow bidder. We did all of the Three Points area. Allied did a
good job and the fighting over the final payment was minimal..Next year we will be
sealing in the Shirley Hills area and Tuxedo Blvd.
SIGN DEPARTMENT
In 1996 we installed some 3M reflective crosswalk tape on all of our sites. Some ares
did well and some not so well. I have received some new tape from 3M that we will
use on the crosswalks that failed. Listed below are the signs that were replaced or
installed for 1997.
15 - Stop
48 - No Parking
67 - Street sign names
6 - 4 Ton Axle
9 - No Parking Here to Corner
7 - Slow Children
5 - Two Hour Parking
5 - Farmers Market
2 - School Zone
3 - Dead End
8 - Crime Watch
2 - No Motorized Vehicles
3 - No Dumping
5 - Public Parking
We straightened 49 posts, installed 60 complete tops and bottoms. The street crew
also puts up the Mound City Days Banners and puts up and takes down the Flags
through out the year. This year there were enough summer banners for every other
pole and we were short 17 holiday banners.
BITUMINOUS ROAD WORK
There was no major repairs this year. We did put down some extra in some trouble
spots.
CEMENT WORK
We repaired nine sections of sidewalks on Commerce Blvd. We had to replace fifty
feet of curb this year.
MISC.
In the fall we started to haul some of our own street materials. This includes class 5
sand fill, 3/4 rock, wash sand, etc. The new jet-vac has been working well for us. We
have cleaned over half of our catch basins last year.
STREET BUDGET
The Street Department had a budget of $405,270.00. We were $29,957.00 over
budget for 1997.
PUBLIC UTILITIES/WATER AND SEWER
Public Utilities for the City of Mound consists of two departments. One being Water
distribution and the other being Sanitary Sewer. First I would like to start with the
Water Distribution system. The Water department has 2 1/2 full time employees,
5
which consists of a supervisor and 2 maintenance employees. We sell water to
approximately 3250 customers within the city from four city owned wells, one booster
station, a combined storage of 575,000 gallons in three water towers and
approximately 45 miles of watermain. We are also interconnected with the City of
Spring Park and Minnetrista for emergencies if needed.
EMPLOYEES
I have been with the City of Mound since 1977. I started out in the Water Department
as a maintenance worker. In 1982, I became the Utilities Superintendent. I am
responsible for maintaining the annual budget of approximately $429,300.00 for 1997,
purchases, scheduling work loads, complaints, employee evaluations, water
inspections for new construction, sight plan review for new construction and
development watermain and shut off location, monthly report to State agencies and
safety. In addition to my administration responsibilities, I also have the same duties
as the maintenance personal do in the Water & Sewer Department.
Bob Shanley works full time in maintenance. Bob has been with the City sense 1967.
Bob's job consists of repairs, water testing and meter reading. In addition, he
handles service calls that consists of turn-ons, turn-offs, final readings, valve
maintenance and repair, watermain breads and snow plowing.
Jerry Henke has been with the City for over thirty years. Jerry does all the meter
installations, meter repair, helps with locates and inspections.
PUBLIC UTILITIES
The Public utilities are operated as a business. Revenues are generated from the
sale of water, meter sales and service charges. Salaries and benefits are paid out of
the revenue we receive. The Utility Departments works closely with the Building
inspector and the City Engineer on new construction, new development, utility
upgrades or new installation. This includes site and plan review and inspections
along with discussions with developers.
There are two budgets prepared for Public Utilities, one for Water and one for Sewer.
The Water Department had a budget of approximately $429,300,oo for 1997. The
percent of increase from year to year is small in both budgets as far as day to day,
operations are concerned. History has shown that Workman's Compensation,
General Liability Insurance and MCWS have been the big reason for budget
increases. Budgets are prepared by the Utility Superintendent. The budget then
goes to the City Manager for review and approval. Each budget is then presented to
the City Council by the Superintendent, so the Council may ask any questions regard
to certain expenditures.
The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency requires that the City of Mound have a least
one full time employee with a Class C certificate in Water Supply System Operations.
The City is required by the PCA to have one person with a Class D certificate in
Wastewater Treatment. Each person in the Water & Sewer department has a
certificate in either water or sewer or in both. Tech certificates have to be renewed
every three years. Each employee is sent to school at least every three years, in
addition they are sent to various one day schools, conferences and conventions. The
purpose of this is to learn new up to date methods of maintenance and safety
procedures.
WATER DEPT. WATERMAIN BREAKS
This year we had 12 main breaks.
WATER TOWER MAINTENANCE
We had our annual inspection and there were a couple of anodes replaced that were
damaged from the ice that builds up in the tanks though the winter.
PUMPHOUSE MAINTENANCE
This year was a good year. We had no major problems with the wells. We have
finished our upgrading of our four pumphouses.
WATER METERS
The new system is working well.
HYDRANT MAINTENANCE
This year we use the same approach as last year for our hydrant flushing program.
Instead of flushing during normal work hours I rearranged the shift times, so two
maintenance workers would work form 9:00 p.m. to 5:30 a.m. for one week in May
and on week in October. This worked very well, with very few complaints from the
employee's or the customers.
GENERAL INFORMATION
We pumped 267,959,000 gallons of water in 1997. The water Department budget
was $18,446.00 over the budget for 1997.
SEWER DEPARTMENT
The Sewer Department has 2 1/2 full time employees.
Damon Hardina has been with the City Sewer Department since 1974. Scott Kivisto
has been with the City since 1985.
Their duties consist of maintaining 28 lift stations and approximately 60 miles of
sanitary sewer lines throughout the city. Stations are checked at least two times a
week. It takes four hours per day to perform these checks. We perform minor
maintenance, such as pump removal, seal replacement and electrical repairs. Any
major pump repair is sent out. The Sewer Department has a truck with a crane so we
can pull the pumps. We also clean the sewer lines in the summer. We have one
water tanker with a jet cleaner and one sewer rodder to perform this cleaning. The
men also help on watermain breaks and with snow plowing.
My responsibilities for the Sewer Oepartment are pretty much the same as for the
Water Department, except the budget was approximately $1,020,460.00 for 1997.
SEWER LINE MAINTENANCE
We cleaned 30,000 feet of sewer line in 1997. We have finished all of our major
projects so we will be putting more time in cleaning and preventive maintenance of
our sewer lines. With the new jet-vac we will be able to clean quite a bit more lines
than we used to. We had a outside contractor come in an televise and repair some
sewer lines that were found to have son I/I. The new technology for making these
repairs with out digging is great. We should be ready to do our sump pump
inspection in 1997.
This year we had two sewer force main breaks.
The Sewer Department budget was 34,920,00 under for 1997.
2415 Wilshire Blvd. Mound, Minnesota 55364
February 5, 1998
TO:
Mayor Bob Polston
Mound City Council
City Manager Ed Shukle
FROM: Steve Erickson, Retired Fire Chief
1997 MOUND FIRE DEPARTMENT ANNUAL REPORT
Total Fire Calls were down slightly to 727. This is down 47 calls from 1996 representing
a 6% decrease in calls.
Total Fire Hours were 8,482, total emergency hours were 6,661 for a total of 15,143
hours. The Drill hours were 2,040 and Maintenance hours where 15,745. This represents
a total of 18,757 ~A hours spent in house. This does not reflect the many hours spent on
outside training and volunteer hours given to the Community during the year.
A break down for each City we serve is:
MOUND ..........................209 Fire Calls, up 12%
212 Rescue Calls, down 22%
Valuation Loss - $ 326,500.
MINNETONKA BEACH ...... 20 Fire Calls, up 100%
3 Rescue calls, down 22%
Valuation Loss $ 0
MINNETRISTA ................ -45 Fire Calls, down 13%
39 Rescue Calls, up 2%
Valuation Loss - $ 20,000.
ORONO ..........................57 Fire Calls, up 50%
33 Rescue Calls, down 27%
Valuation Loss - $ 330,000.
SHOREWOOD ................. 5 Fire Calls, up 500%
3 Rescue Calls - even
Valuation Loss - $ 0
SPRING PARK ................. 21 Fire Calls, down 57%
64 Rescue Calls, down 10%
Valuation Loss of $11,000.
MUTUAL AID .................. Gave 15 Times
Received 7 Times
Our annual election was held in December. Election results are as follows:
CHIEF - Greg Pederson, ASST. FIRE CHIEF - David Boyd,
SECRETARY - Greg Palm, TREASURER - Kevin Grady
BOARD MEMBERS- Jeff Andersen, Bret Niccum and Tim Palm
Our Firefighter of the year was Mike Savage. This is an award that was started by Chief
Bob Cheney and is highly respected in the department.
As always, training requires a tremendous amount of time. Mound Fire Department sent
1 to International Chiefs, 2 to State Chiefs, 7 to State Fire Conference, 3 to State Fire
School, and 11 to Regional Schools. We also had 10 attend a local school where they
achieved their Fire Fighter I designations. There were also several members attending
classes to maintain First Responders and their EMT classifications.
This year the stations major project involved renovating the kitchen. Our members
performed all work and the end result is outstanding. Each year the Department has been
doing at least one or two projects to improve the quality of the station. The project for
1998 is already underway and involves remodeling the front offices.
With many hours of hard work, the S.O.G. Committee completed its work on the written
Standard Operating Guidelines for the Mound Fire Department. This is a project that was
started nearly 4 years ago and is now in effect.
During the year we worked on bettering our working relationship with neighbor
depamnents. On one drill night we staged a large incident involving Maple Plain, Long
Lake, St. Bonifacius, Wayzata and ourselves. A great deal of quality training occurred
and working relationships between departments was enhanced. On several other
occasions we joined together with these departments to train jointly.
Mound Fire Fighters continue to operate in only the highest level of quality. I am
extremely proud to have been affiliated with the department for the past 22 years. I
would also like to thank the Mayor, Council, and City Manager for their support. Your
support is imperative to maintain the tradition of quality the Mound Fire Department is
always striving to improve.
Respectfully Submitted,
Steve Erickson
Mound Fire Chief 1994 -1997
NAME
2415 Wilshire Blvd. Mound, Minnesota 55364
ADDRESS PHONE DOB
JEFF ANDERSEN
GREG ANDERSON
PAUL BABB
DAVID BOYD
SCOTT BRYCE
J~! CASEY
STEVE COLLINS
BOB CRAW-FORD
RANDY ENGELHART
DAN GRADY
KEVIN GRADY
BRUCE GUSTAFSON
CRAIG KENDERSON
PAUL HENRY
MATT HENTGES
MATT JAKUBIK
ROGER KRYCK
JOHN LARSON
JASON Mu~AS
JOHN NAFUS
JAMES NELSON
BRET NICCUM
GREG PALM
MIKE PALM
TIM PALM
GREG PEDERSON
CHRIS POUNDER
RICHARD ROGERS
MIKE SAVAGE
KEVIN SIPPRELL
RON STAT,T,MAN
BRUCE SVOBODA
ED VANECEK
RICK WILLIAMS
TIM WILLIAMS
DENNIS WOY~CKE
2221SOU]]-IVIE~I.&T. MOUND 55364 472-7564 07/10/57
4924 PLYMOUTH RD. MOUND 55364 11/18/60
5259 EDEN ROAD MOUND 55364 472-1/68 03/30/6~
5460 BARTLETT BLVD. MOUND 55364 472-4515 01/30/52
5955 IDLEWOOD RD. MOUND 55364 472-3622 01/09/57
4968 AFTON ROAD MOUND 55364 472-1750 09/25/55
2121 GRANDVIEWBLVD.MOUND 55364 472-5267 09/08/50
5093 BARTLETT BLVD MOUND 55364 472-2955 11/29/66
3415 WARNER LANE )DUND 55364 472-7615 03/15/61
2535 MON~LAIR RD. MOUND 55364 472-3410 05/07/56
760 APPLEGARDENRD MOUND 55364 472-4058 07/30/61
1743 SHORE]4OOD LN ~UND 55364 472-6392 11/30/54
4435 DORCHESTER RD. MOUND 55364 472-3361 09/18/57
5056 SUI~OVE RD. MOUND 55364 472-5306 11/24/53
5941HA~FIHORNE RD. MOUND 55364 472-2769 04/23/62
4379 WILSHIRE #C204 MOIJ-ND 55364 472-6726 08/10/70
2350 KINGS RD. SP PK 55384 471-7568 09/21/70
4397 WILSHIRE e204 MOUND 55364 472-8021 07/19/71
4609 SHORELINE #309 AP PK 55384 471-8021 11/22/69
2580 DUNWOODYLN WAY. 55391 471-7432 05/10/54
2185 FAIRVIEWLN. ~DUND 55364 472-0449 01/21/71
2449 0AKIAWNLANE MOUND 55364 472-1983 12/09/65
1160 MARINA DRIVE MOUND 55364 472-1233 04/17/61
2695 WESTEDGE BLVD. MOUND 55364 472-1972 07/14/59
5942 HAW'J]-IORNE RD MOUND 55364 472-7140 07/16/65
6087 ASPENRD. MOUND 55364 472-5785 02/22/53
2042 GRANDVIEW BLVD MOUND 55364 472-6644 03/15/63
6023 LYNWOOD BLVD MOUND 55364 472-6377 11/16/65
3125 HIGHLAND BLVD MOUND 55364 472-3591 03/08/50
5551 SPRUCE RD MOUND 55364 472-1014 08/31/65
2201 CEN~RVIEWLN MOUND 55364 472-7904 03/18/64
4994 BARTLETT BLVD. MOUND 55364 472-2712 06/20/62
2345 FAIRVIEWLANE ,MOUND 55364 472-3178 12/08/66
5940 HILLCREST LN. MOUND 55364 472-7170 07/08/60
3135 AYRLANE MOUND 55364 472-6716 02/03/62
4842 DALE ROAD MOUND 55364 472-7906 06/01/71
09/22/80
12/03/79
09/13/93
02/03/75
01/09/78
09/12/88
02/06/78
03/21/94
04/02/90
12/03/90
06/06/88
02/05/96
11/01/76
05/01/89
05/06/96
11/17/97
12/04/f
03/06/95
05/02/95
06/02/80
12/03/90
07/10/89
02/06/84
06/04/79
05/01/89
02/03/75
09/13/93
10/16/95
09/15/80
03/05/90
01/05/87
05/02/94
11/04/91
11/07/~
11/07/83
03/02/92
2415 Wilshire Blvd. Mound, Minnesota 55364
,
Chain of Command
Chief 1
Chief 2
Captain 11
Captain 12
Captain 14
Captain 15
Training Officer
Lieutenant 1 1
Lieutenant 12
Lieutenant 14
Oreg Pederson
David Boyd
Jeff Andersen
Craig Henderson
Greg Palm
Greg Anderson
Rick Williams
John Nafus
. Kevin Grady
Kevin Sipprell
Lieutenant 15 Dan Grady
Highest ranking Firefighter
Fire Marshall 1
Fire Marshall 2/
Asst. Training Officer
Mike Palm
Tim Palm
Officers & Companies
Engine Co. 1
Capt. 12 Craig Henderson
LT. 11 John Nafus
Engine Co. 2
Capt. 15 Greg Anderson
LT. 15 Dan Grady
Scott Bryce
Jim Casey
Steve Collins
Paul Henry
Ron Stallman
Mike Savage
Bruce Svoboda
Randy Engelhart
Bret Niccum
Mike Palm
Chris Pounder
Tim Williams
Dennis Woytcke
James Nelson
Rescue Co. 1
Capt. 11 deffAndersen
LT. 14 Kevin Sipprell
Ladder Co. 1
Capt. 14 Greg Paim
LT. 12 KevLn Grady
Paul Babb
Tim Palm
Rich Rogers
Ed Vanecek
Jason Maas
Matt Jakubik
Bob Crawford
Matt Hentges
Bruce Gustafson
Roger Kryck
John Larson
Chief 1: Oreg Pederson
Chief 2: David Boyd
Training Officer: Rick Williams
1/1/98
2415 Wilshire Blvd.. Mound, Minnesota 55364
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11~
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
37.'
ACTIVE SENIORITY ROSTER
DAVID BOYD
GREG PEDERSON
CRAIG HENDERSON
SCOTT BRYCE
STEVE COLLINS
MIKE. PALM
GREG ANDERSON
JOHN ANFUS
MIKE SAVAGE
RIG~K WILLIAMS
TIM WILLIAMS
GREG PAlM
RON STALLMAN
KEVIN GRADY
JIM CASEY
PAUL HENRY
TIM '. PALM
BRET NICCUM.
KEVIN SIPPRELL
RANDY ENGELHART:
DAN GRADY
J~,S. NELSON
~tq VANECEK
DENNIS WOYTCKE
PAUL BABB
CHRIS POUNDER
BOB CRAWFORD
JASON MAAS
BRUCE SVOBODA
JOHN I~SON
RICHARD ROGERS
ROGER KRYCK
BRUCE GUSTAFSON
02/03/75
02/03/75
11/01/76
01/09/78
02/06/78
06/04/79
12/03/79
06/03/80
09/15/80
09/22/80
11/07/83
11/07/83
02/06/84
01/05/87
06/06/88
09/12/88
05/01./89
05/01/98
07/01/89
03/05/90
04/02~90
12/03/90.
12/03/90
11/04/91
03/02/92
09/13/'93
09/13/93
03/21/93
05/02/94
05/02/94
03/06/96
10/16/95
12/04/95
02/05/96
q /o6/96
11/17/97
1997 FIRE MARSHALS REPORT
We had some big residential fires this year. Again we were lucky not to have any major
injuries or deaths.
With the lack of time to do inspections, in our area, we are very lucky not to have major
commercials fires.
Tim and I did what we could do with the inspections this year. The main inspections
were of course the fire calls, Mound Free Church and St. John's Church. A lot of plans
were looked at and suggestions were made. Many phone calls were made during the
night or weekends. There could have been more, but some do not want to be called after
working hours, which is when we can do the calling back.
Inspections which are conducted as part of code enforcement help
Provide and ensure satisfactory life safety conditions within a
Structure. They include inspection of the condition of exits and
Interior finish, the operation of exit doors, emergency lighting,
Exit lights and signs, and all fire doors. Inspection of exiting
Facilities should include the inspection of exit discharge area.
Inspections are intended to prevent fires from occurring because the
Inspector identifies fire hazards which could cause a fire, allow a
fire to develop, or allow a fire to spread once ignited. In addition to
locating and correcting accumulation of combustible trash and debris
storage practices, proper maintenance, and the safer operations of
building utilities.
During the inspection process, technical information on the building
and the processes should be collected. When used in pre-fire planning
this kind of information can be used in pre-fire planning and is a valuable
source for handing a fire at any property. Inspections provide an oppommity
to educate the owners or occupants of a building about the need for adequate
fire and LIFE safety conditions.
Again Fire Prevention was taken care of by Chief Erickson, we did schedule other tours
other than fire prevention week, so we could accommodate all our classes and pre-school
CITY OF MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
January 29, 1998
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
MAYOR
CITY COUNCIL
CITY MANAGER
CITY CLERK
1997 ANNUAL REPORT
Personnel Roster:
Francene C. Clark/Leisinger, City Clerk - 8-10-81
Linda Strong, Secretary/Receptionist - 8-5-85 to 10-1-97
Jodi Rahn, Secretarty/Receptionist- 10-8-97
Jodi and I report directly to the City Manager. The City Manager and I share Jodi's time. She
is the receptionist first. Ed has her doing secretarial duties and I have her helping me in various
areas. As you know, Linda left the City of Mound in October of 1997. Jodi Rahn has taken
her place and is doing a fine job.
I was out on leave of absence for 20 months due to illness. I started back to work January 2,
1997, and it is good to be back.
printed on recycled paper
RECORDING OF COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS
There were 23 regular City Council Meetings in 1994. In addition there was the Local Board
of Review and Budget Hearing. That totals 25 meetings. From these meetings 610 pages of
minutes were generated for Council review and approval. Agendas are prepared by the City
Manager. The Agenda material is then put in order, attached, and numbered. Jodi then runs
the packets on the Xerox and directs the packets to the proper people. We send agendas to all
people who have items on the agenda, highlighting the item pertaining to them.
After the Council Meetings there are items that need to be followed up, such as contracts signed
and sent to the proper people, directives from the Council that need to be attended to and routine
items that need to be resolved. These items many times are 4 to 6 hours of work after a
meeting. That does not include preparation of the minutes and the resolutions.
I input all the Council Meetings into the Clerk's Index Program. I have all of years from 1989
to 1997 on the computer. This has eliminated the need to index all the City Council actions on
3 x 5 cards manually. It sure is handy when someone is looking for something in the past.
MAINTENANCE OF ORDINANCE BOOK
An ordinance is a law of local application, enacted by the City Council, which prescribes a
general and permanent rule for persons or things within the City. This is distinguished from
other types of regulations or actions which are undertaken by resolution or motion. Resolutions
or motions generally regulate administrative or temporary actions as opposed to a permanent
law.
An ordinance becomes effective upon its adoption by the City Council and publication in the
official newspaper. Therefore, as soon after a Council meeting as possible, ordinances are
published. After publishing, the new ordinance has to be integrated into the ordinance book in
the correct area.
There were 11 ordinances adopted in 1997.
83-1997
An Ordinance Rezoning Certain Lands as Described from R-1 Single
Family Residential to R-lA Single Family Residential.
84-1997
An Ordinance Amending Sections 255:05 of the City Code Relating to
Park and Open Space Advisory Commission; and Adding a New Section
256 to the City Code Establishing a Dock and Commons Advisory
Commission.
85-1997
An Ordinance Amending Section 810:30, Subd. 3, of the City Code
Relating to Beer Licenses, by Repealing Subsection (b).
2
86-1997 An Ordinance Amending Section 456:50 Relating to Dog Quarantine.
87-1997
An Ordinance Amending Section 350:640 of the Mound Zoning Code by
Adding "School Administrative Offices: as a Conditional Use in the R-1
Residential Zoning District.
88-1997
An Ordinance Amending Section 600:25 of the City Code Relating to
Prohibiting Discharges into the Sanitary Sewer System.
89-1997
An Ordinance Amending Section 437 of the City Code Relating to Docks
by Adding Section 437:16, Exceptions.
90-1997
An Ordinance Amending Section 235 and 920 of the City Code Pertaining
to Recreational Fires.
91-1997
An Interim Ordinance Regulating Transmission and reception of
Commercial Wireless Communication Services; Establishing a Moratorium
and Directing a Study be Conducted Thereon.
92-1997
An Ordinance Amending Section 437:05, Subd. 7 of the City Code by
Adding Subsection BB Thereto Relating to Shared Dock, Commons Dock
Program.
93-1997
An Ordinance Amending Sections 510, 520 and 540 of the City Code
Relating to Fees.
As Chapters in the City Code are amended, I put these on the computer, a disk for each
Chapter. This makes revisions much faster than typing whole pages. This project was
completed in 1994 so the entire City Code in in the computer.
In 1992, I started and completed a project that I have wanted to do for a long time. I took all
the ordinances and amendments that have ever been adopted by the City of Mound since its
incorporation and cross referenced them to the current code where possible. This was all done
on my Rapid File Program. Now we have a history for each section of the Code. This will
help when someone wants to know when a particular part of an ordinance was adopted. I have
continued to update this project with new ordinances as they are adopted or amended.
MAINTENANCE OF RESOLUTION BOOK
A resolution is somewhere between a motion and an ordinance. A resolution deals with matters
of a special, administrative or temporary nature and is put in resolution form because of its
importance or length. In 1997, the City Council adopted 129 resolutions. These are all
composed, typed, signed and kept in resolution books. Each resolution is then categorized and
indexed by subject and number in order to make them easier to find at a later date. This
catagorizing is now done with the Clerk's Index. Copies of the resolutions are given to the
various departments when they pertain to their area. I also certify resolutions to be recorded
at Hennepin County if required.
PUBLIC NOTICES
This office arranges for the publication of official and legal notices for such things as public
hearings, changes in meeting dates for the City Council, ordinances, and any other items that
are required by State Statutes or that the Council or City Manager feel should be in the official
newspaper.
Some public notices (vacating of streets, etc.) must also be posted in 3 public places. The Park
Dept. handles the posting and fills out the posting affidavit.
Some bids come through my office and are advertised according to State Statute. Some of the
specifications for bids for equipment are laid out and prepared by me with input from the
specific department head requesting the item.
LICENSES & PERlVHTS
The City of Mound issued 67 licenses or permits for different purposes in 1997. This accounted
for approximately $4,393 in revenues. This process changed in 1992, with one less person in
the Finance Dept., I took over all licensing duties. I spent a considerable amount of time in the
administration of the licenses and permits, i.e. notices and renewal forms are sent before they
expire; when the renewal application is received it and the insurance papers must be gone over
to be sure they are correct; the payment receipt is made out; the names submitted to the Council
for review and approval; the license issued and sent to the applicant. Then there are always the
applicants who wait until the last minute or have to be coaxed to get their applications and fees
in before expiration. I have inputted alot of the license information into the computer. I am
also generating the licenses on the computer which saves money for the forms and time by not
having to redo all of them every year, just changing dates, license numbers, etc.
PUBLIC INFORMATION
I have found being City Clerk that people expect me to be the local expert in everything from
utility costs to the legality of the latest zoning fracas. In attending State and International
conferences I find that most city clerks are used as an information source by local citizens. I
try to stay informed as to what is going on in all aspects and departments of the City so that if
I cannot answer a question for a citizen at least I can direct them to the proper person for an
4
What comes along with public information is research into various
concerns about.
items that people have
RECORDS MANAGEME~
Records Management is a function concerned with the creation, processing, maintenance,
protection, retrieval, retention, preservation and disposition of records required in the operation
and continuance of city operations. The objective is to save space, money and time.
TAX FORFEIT PROPERTY
In 1997, I dealt with no tax forfeit parcels of land. When we do have parcels the following is
the procedure we use.
Hennepin County notifies us of property within the City that has gone tax forfeit because of
nonpayment of real estate taxes. They also periodically ask about property we have taken for
a public purpose to insure that we are using it for that public purpose. The County asks that we
inform them of what we would like done with the property i.e., allow the parcels to the sold at
public auction; require that they be sold only to adjoining property owners if they are undersized
or do not meet the zoning and building codes; or retain them for some public purpose. There
is a considerable amount of research that must be done to determine what should be done with
the property.
The first step is to go to the tax books and get a property description. Then the property jacket
is pulled and its contents examined to see if the property was taken for a public purpose or is
a new tax forfeit parcel.
The next step is to figure the square footage of the property and look at the current zoning
district to determine if it is a buildable lot or not. After all this information is determined, it
is all put on a sheet, a plat map showing the property is made and sent to the City Engineer,
Park Director, Public Works Superintendent, Building Inspection and Finance Director for their
comments and recommendations. Occasion~y, an easement is needed for utility purposes; a
survey may be needed to determine if part of the property is in the wetlands; or there may be
reasons for the City to retain the property.
The Special Assessment Clerk in the Finance Dept. determines if there are any assessments from
before forfeiture or since forfeiture that need to be put back on the property. The reason we
need to know assessments before and since forfeiture is that the City gets 90% of the purchase
price to apply to assessments from before forfeiture. The assessments since forfeiture are added
in their entirety to the appraised value (determined by the Hennepin County Assessor) of the
property. In 1984, the City Council adopted a resolution (//84-94, copy attached) setting a
policy on assessments placed on undersized tax forfeit property before forfeiture. This has
helped to encourage adjoining property owners to purchase undersized parcels and combine them
with their property.
In 1987 1 completed a card index by Property Identification Number for the following:
City owned property;
Tax forfeit property that has been retained by the City for a public purpose;
Tax forfeit property that falls into the following categories:
a. Property released for public sale;
b. Property for sale only to and combined with adjoining property.
Each card has a PID (property identification number), plat and parcel, legal description, status
(what it is, park, wetlands, tax forfeit, etc.), whose name it is in (State Land Dept. or City of
Mound or both), any resolutions dealing with the parcel (resolution number and disposition).
I have now completed coordinating the Certificates of Titles, State Deeds, easements, etc. and
recorded that type of information on each card also. This card file, is now complete and is
being kept up-to-date. It has already proved to be a very valuable tool when someone calls in
to check on a parcel of land.
Since we started dealing with tax forfeit property in 1982:
39 parcels have been put up to public auction;
37 parcels were retained for a public purpose; and
83 parcels have been authorized to be sold to and combined
with adjoining properties;
5 temporary construction easements were reconveyed.
Of the above, 34 parcels of the 39 have been sold at public auction and 48 of the 79 parcels
have been sold to adjoining property owners to be combine with their property. I think this
shows how this process is working to the city's advantage to get parcels back on the tax rolls
and increase conformance to the zoning ordinance.
We now have a computer program called Rapid File and all the information on the cards has
been inputted into the computer.
OTHER DUTIES~F~qPONSIBILITIF~q
CEMETERY
In 1988, I officially took over the Mound Union Cemetery records. In 1997, there were 17
casket burials, 8 ash burials. 6 groves were sold. In 1989, I used the Rapid File program in
6
my computer and inputted all the information from each division of the cemetery. All the
information came off the cemetery cards which were checked and cross-checked. This now
allows us to instantly locate people by name, owner of the grave, or lot and grave number.
There are three divisions and each is separate on the computer. I have a book that I update
every few months. It took a considerable amount of time to do this but I feel it has really cut
down on the paper work.
We had new cemetery maps made up at the end of 1997 to include all new information for the
FIRE CONTRACTS
The Fire Department keeps track of all fire reports for each contracting city. The f'u'e reports
are all listed according to the City and the number of fire/rescue hours. In 1997, there were
438 mutual aid hours which are divided equally between the contracting cities. The Fire
Contract Material is figured on a combination percentage of assessed value and a 3 year average
of fire/rescue hours for each contracting city. That percentage is then used on:
Ao
B.
C.
D.
Operating Costs
Capital Outlay
Fireman's Relief Fund
Fire Track Payments
In 1997, the fire hours breakdown is as follows:
ACTUAL
CONTRACTING FIRE/RESCUE
.CITY HOURS +
EQUAL
MUTUAL AID
HOURS =
TOTAL
P~RCE~AGE
Minnetonka
Beach 489 + 73 = 562 3.71%
Minnetrista 1891 + 73 = 1964 12.97 %
Orono 1941 + 73 = 2014 13.30%
Shorewood 146 + 73 = 219 1.45 %
Spring Park 1588 + 73 = 1661 10.97%
Mound 8651 + 73 = 8724 57.61%
TOTAL 15144 + 438 = 12637 100.00%
These hours will be integrated into the 3 year average when the 1999 contract material is
figured.
7
Part of the formula for figuring the fn'e contracts was to use the tota/assessed value of the fire
area in a community. This changed a few years ago from assessed value to market value, which
did not change the percentages much but required some language change in the original fire
contracts and at the same time this was done some other changes were made to update the
contract for each fire contracting city.
EMPLOYEE SUPERVISION
The City Manager and I supervise the Secretary/Receptionist, Jodi Rahn. As I stated in the
beginning of this report, Ed and I share Jodi's time. Jodi is first and foremost the receptionist
who answers the phone anywhere from 60 to 80 times a day, fielding calls to the proper people,
taking messages when people are out of the office and directing people when they come into City
Hall. She is sometimes the only contact a citizen has with City Hall and she is excellent in
giving people a positive and helpful image of the City of Mound.
She does a lot of typing for departments who do not have secretarial help, i.e. Finance, Liquor,
and the Dock Inspector. She is also in charge of handling all incoming and outgoing mail;
copying for various departments; office supply ordering; as well as the duties that were
mentioned before. We are lucky to have someone who is versatile, talented and friendly.
ELECTIONS
The City Clerk must administer all elections for national, state and county as well as city offices
and special city elections. The State Statutes governing the election process are Chapter 200
through 210 and Chapter 412. On the surface these statutes describe the procedural steps,
however, they do not describe the election process in logical step sequence. Election laws are
constantly being revised by the state legislature and through court rulings so it is necessary to
stay on top of all changes.
I am one of 11 City Clerks chosen to serve on the Hennepin County Elections and Voter
Registration Coordinating Committee. It is comprised of clerks giving good city representation
of the county based on experience, the size of the municipalities and the types of election system
used. This Committee deals with new legislation affecting elections and voter registration.
The City did not have an election in 1997, but the School District held a bond referendum for
authority to issue bonds to renovate the old high school building and pods. Because the City
was involved in this issue, the city cooperated with the school district and allowed the district
to use our voting equipment. Therefore, I was in charge on election day and doing the things
that needed to be done using the optical scan voting equipment. Because this was a school
district election, it involved 11,000 registerred voters in 6 cities of which only 1,434 voted. The
breakdown by city was as follows:
8
333
Independence 8
Minnetrista 258
Mound 946
Orono 124
Shorewood 20
Spring Park 77
We had 84 new registered voters in this election.
Pre-planning is the key to holding a properly organized and well conducted election.
The following is a synopsis of some of the procedures that were done for the December 4th
election.
Preparation of an election calendar is essential giving actual dates when duties
must be performed to meet legal requirements. Since this was a school district
election, they were in charge of some of this. I just made sure any of the legal
requirements for using optical scan equipment was followed.
e
Making sure there are absentee voting materials, voter registration supplies,
election day supplies, ballots, and ascertaining whether election day equipment,
such as voting booths and ballot boxes are in a good state of repair.
3. We used the school district polling place.
Election judges have to be located. I took care of this because my judges are
familar with the optical scan equipment and the school district judges are only
familar with paper ballot elections. The nice thing is that we did not need to have
There must be a judge for each of the following procedures:
One judge to act as a greeter (determine if the voter is registered or not
and directs to the proper line).
b. Judges to handle the computer print-out of registered voters.
c. A demonstration judge.
d. A judge to hand out the ballots.
A judge to be near the vote tabulator to watch for error messages and
assist voters.
7
f. One or two judges to be in charge of new voter registrations.
The law requires that election judges for all elections be trained by a City Clerk,
this also includes school elections. We have a basic course, a review course and
an emergency course. The judges have to be trained to have some worldng
knowledge of the vote tabulators, problems that might arise, error messages given
by the tabulator, and ways to correct problems.
Hennepin County does the programming for the prom pack (memory pack) that
is inserted in the machine. The prom pack was tested in both machines with a
test deck of official ballots marked so that it appears there were different
situations in voting, i.e. overvotes and blank ballots. A master sheet showing
the variations in votes must be done. The results are then compared with the
machine count to determine if the machine is counting accurately.
Applications for Absentee Ballots were taken care of by the school district. The
voter casts his/her ballot and returns the sealed envelope either in person or by
mailing it. These ballots are then held unopened until election day.
0
11.
The day before the election we set up the precinct (all voting booths and
miscellaneous supplies). The locked ballot box with the vote tabulator (the
memory pack is sealed in the tabulator to insure they have not been tampered
with) and blank ballots inside (these are also sealed in boxes) were delivered to
the precinct.
Election day arrived for me and I started at 6:00 A.M.
All absentee ballots are counted on the equipment in the precinct. During this
election there were 51 absentee ballots. We had a team of judges trained to
review the applications and ballot envelopes to determine if the ballot was
rejected or accepted based on the completeness of the required information. After
that process was complete, the ballots in the ballot envelopes were given to the
precinct to be opened and run thru the machine at the close of the polls.
After the polls close, the judges check and verify the seal numbers on the
memory pack to be sure it is the same as it was opening the polls. They then
take the "A" (answer key) key, insert it in the vote tabulator and turn it. The
vote tabulator will not accept any more ballots. A printout of the vote totals then
begins. This is the Official Results Tape. It contains the zero tape from the
beginning of the day, any messages, and the total votes for the question.
There are many more clerical tasks than mentioned above that have to be done for an election,
lo
but as you can see it is a very time consuming job that requires accuracy and efficiency to run
properly. By the time election day is over, I usually have put in 16-20 hours.
MI~qCELLANEOUS
POSC & DCAC MEETING AGENDAS AND PACKETS
When Peggy James left the City, it left the Park Director without anyone to cover the POSC and
DCAC meetings, agendas, packets, et,. We have a person to do the minutes of these meetings.
I have been working with Jim on the Agendas and handling the packets. Jodi is being trained
to handle the agendas and packets.
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
In September assessment hearing notices were prepared, the tax books checked to verify names
and addresses and notices were written, published and sent to ail parties concerned regarding the
following:
CBD (Central Business District) Parking Maintenance
Delinquent Water & Sewer Charges
Unpaid Mowing Charges
Unpaid Tree Removai Charges
The CBD Assessment Roll is a very involved procedure. The expenses are figured from June
1 of a given year until May 31 of the year being assessed. This figure includes expenses for
railroad lease, special assessments, maintenance materiais, crosswaiks striping, blacktopping of
lots, Christmas decorations, lighting of lots, parking lot leases, salaries for maintenance. This
figure is sent to each business in the CBD District. There is a very complicated formula for
spreading these expenses between the businesses in the Central Business District. The formula
is based on the following:
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Customer parking spaces required (this is determined by the CBD Parking
Committee based on the business).
Employee parking spaces required.
The number of spaces provided by the business.
The first 2 items are added together and the third is subtracted.
A percentage of the total is then figured on item//4.
The business front footage is then taken.
A percentage of the total is then figured on item//6.
The present market vaiue is then taken.
A percentage of the total is then figured on item//8.
Next the total costs (expenses) are multiplied by the factor .7 and that result is
11
11.
12.
13.
multiplied by item//5.
Next the total costs (expenses) are multiplied by the factor. 15 and that result is
multiplied by item//7.
Next the total costs (expenses) are multiplied by factor . 15 and that result is
multiplied by item//9.
Items 10, 11 and 12 are then added together and that is what is proposed to be
assessed to each business in the CBD.
At the end of August we are taking all delinquent sewer and water bills and preparing them for
certification and assessment against the benefiting property. With the initial list, we sent out
213 notices. We actually certified 143 for collection with 1998 taxes.
Resolutions were prepared for all the above assessments. Levy sheets were prepared for
Hennepin County, resolutions certified and all sent to the County to appear on the 1998 tax
statements.
OTHER MEETINGS ATTENDED
MCFOA (Minnesota Clerks' & Finance Officers' Association) Annoa! Mcctin?
I have been a member of this organization since 1982. I was Regional Vice President for
Region IV in 1984; Treasurer in 1985; Secretary in 1986; Vice President in 1987; became the
President in 1988; and a Director at Large (Immediate Past President) 1989 and 1990. This
state organization has one annual conference in March which is put on by Government Training
Services and the University of Minnesota Department of Professional Development and
Conference Services. It is designed to meet the needs of Minnesota clerks from large, small and
medium size cities, with different responsibilities, and with varying years of experience. The
technical sessions provide practical information and an opportunity for discussion with other
clerks.
I received the title of MCMC (Minnesota Certified Municipal Clerk) in March 1985 after
completing the required courses and extra seminars offered by the University of Minnesota
Continuing Education.
Out of the 855 cities in Minnesota there are over 550 members in MCFOA.
IIMC (International lnqtitute of Municipal Clerks) Conference
I have been a (CMC) Certified Municipal Clerk since November 1985. The State of Minnesota
presently has over 326 member cities in the IIMC. We are 8th out of 77 (including the 50
states, 12 Canadian provinces, and 15 other countries such as Australia, Bosnia, New Zealand,
Israel, United Kingdom, South Africa in membership to IIMC. Total IIMC membership is
12
9,582.
I attended the annual IIMC Conference in May. There are a variety of topics covered in the
educational sessions, presentations and the extensive exhibits. This was a very interesting and
beneficial conference with over 40 different workshops in topics such as, records management,
local government productivity, elections, professional development, personnel management,
communications, supervising, to name a few.
The following is the mission statement that was developed during my last year on the Board,
~The International Institute of Municipal Clerks prepares its membership to meet the challenge
of the diverse roles of the municipal clerk by providing services and continuing professional
development opportunities to benefit members and the government entities they serve. ~
IIMC (INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF MUNICIPAL CLERKS) REGION VI
MEETINGS AND OTI:IER MEETINGS OR COMMITTEE~
In January 1997, I attended the Region VI Meeting of the three states (Iowa, Wisconsin and
Minnesota) in our region. This gives me a chance get information obtained at the IIMC
Mid-Year Board Meeting.
Some of the other meetings attended were:
League of Minnesota Cities Elections & Ethics Committee.
Advisory Committee on Voter Registration.
I have tried to highlight some of the activities in 1997. In summation, the City Clerk's position
encompasses many areas that require time, effort and knowledge beyond that of a clerk in a
larger city with a full staff to do the elementary tasks. I find the work very challenging and
personally rewarding and I am happy I can contribute to Mound and its citizens. I feel
continuing education, working on various committees with affiliated organizations, receiving and
sharing information with other dries makes me more effective in my position and I want to thank
the Council for their support.
13
132
June 12, 1984
RESOLUTION NO. 84-94
RESOLUTION SETTING A POLICY ON ASSESSMENTS
PLACED ON TAX FORFEIT PROPERTY BEFORE FORFEITURE
WHEREAS, Hennepin County has begun to notify adjacent
property owners that they will be conducting "private sales" on
undersized or unbuildable lots; and
WHEREAS, some of these properties had assessments
against them before forfeiture which were cancelled at the time
of forefeiture; and
WHEREAS, when the City releases these parcels for
private sale, it certifies these assessments from before
forfeiture to Hennepin County because the City receives 80% of
the value of the property (selling price) to apply to the old
assessments; and
WHEREAS, the assessments since forfeiture are added to
the appraised value so the City receives all the funds for those
assessments; and
WHEREAS, some of the assessments from before forfeiture
are higher than the property is valued at and thus does not make
the property very attractive to adjoining property owners unless
we make a committment to them that we will not reassess the
remaining balance of the assessments after they purchase the
property; and.
WHEREAS, the goal is to get the property back on the tax
role and help a number of people make their property conforming.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Mound, Minnesota, does hereby adopt the following
policy which will apply only to undersized tax forfeit lots which
are sold thru Hennepin County and combined with adjoining
property:
On undersized tax forfeit lots which had assessments
before forfeiture, the City will certify these
assessments to Hennepin County when the lots are
released for private sale to adjoining property
owners. This will be done only so that the City
will receive 80% of the value of the lot to be
applied against these before forfeiture assessments.
After certain undersized tax forfeit lots are sold
and combined with adjoining property, the owner may
petition the City Council to pass a resolution
stating that the balance of the assessments from
before forfeiture will not be recertified to
133
June 12, 1984
Hennepin County for collection.
The foregoing resolution was moved by Councilmember
Charon and seconded by Councilmember Paulsen.
The following Councilmembers voted in the affirmative:
Charon, Jessen, Paulsen and Polston.
The following Councilmembers voted in the negative:
none.
Coun¢ilmember Peterson was absent and excused.
Mayor /
Attest: City Clerk
CITY OF MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
February 9, 1998
TO:
FROM:
RE:
MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL
FRAN CLARK, CITY CLERK
AMENDMENT TO CIGARETFE ORDINANCE
Attached are two pages of this ordinance that have been revised.
Page 1 of the ordinance where the title shows that we are also amending the fee
section, Section 510:10, Subd. 2.
Page 9 is the last page of the ordinance with the amendment to the fee section.
printed on recycled paper
PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 440:00 OF THE CITY CODE
RELATING TO TOBACCO SALE, POSSESSION, AND USE
OF TOBACCO, TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND TOBACCO
RELATED DEVICES IN THE CITY OF MOUND AND TO REDUCE
THE ILLEGAL SALE, POSSESSION AND USE OF SUCH ITEMS
TO AND BY MINORS
AND AME~ING SECTION 510:10, SUBD. 2. OF THE CITY CODE
RELATING TO FEES FOR CIGARETTE LICENSES
The City of Mound Does Ordain:
Section 440:00. ~. Because the City recognizes that many persons under the age
of 18 years purchase or otherwise obtain, possess, and use tobacco, tobacco products, and
related devices, and such sales, possession, and use are violations of both State and Federal
laws; and because studies have shown that most smokers begin smoking before they have
reached the age of 18 years and that those persons who reach the age of 18 years without
having started smoking are significantly less likely to begin smoking; and because smoking
has been shown to be the cause of several serious health problems which subsequently place
a financial burden on all levels of government; this ordinance shall be intended to regulate
the sale, possession, and use of tobacco, tobacco products, and tobacco related devices for
the purpose of enforcing and furthering existing laws, to protect minors against the serious
effects associated with the illegal use of tobacco, tobacco products, and tobacco related
devices, and to further the official public policy of the State of Minnesota in regard to
preventing young people from starting to smoke as stated in Minn. Stat. 144.391.
Section 440:05. ~Def'mitions and Imerpretation:_:. Except as may otherwise be provided
or clearly implied by context, all terms shall be given their commonly accepted definitions.
The singular shall include the plural and the plural shall include the singular. The masculine
shall include the feminine and neuter, and vice-versa. The term "shall" means mandatory
and the terms "may" means permissive. The following terms have the definitions given to
them:
Subd. 1. Tobacco or Tobacco Products "Tobacco" or "Tobacco products"
shall mean any substance or item containing t~bacco leaf, including, but not limited
to, cigarettes; cigars, pipe tobacco, snuff; fine cut or other chewing tobacco;
cheroots; stogies; perique; granulated, plug cut, crimp cut, ready-rubbed, and other
smoking tobacco; snuff flowers; cavendish; shorts; plug and twist tobaccos; dipping
tobaccos, refuse scraps, clippings, cuttings, and sweepings of tobacco; and other
kinds and forms of tobacco leaf prepared in such manner as to be suitable for
chewing, sniffing, or smoking.
Subd. 440:75.
publication.
This ordinance shall take affect the day after its
Section 510:10, Subd. 2. is amended to read as follows:
Subd. Related Code
2 440:10
~ of Licen~
Cigarette Sales
Conditions
Annual
$200.00
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Adopted by the City Council February 10, 1998
Publish in The Laker Newspaper February 14, 1998
1-10-98
CITY OF MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD I
MOUN D, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
February 3, 1998
TO:
FROM:
MAYOR
CITY COUNCIL
CITY MANAGER
FRAN CLARK, CITY CLERK
PROPOSED CIGARETTE ORDINANCE
Attached is the letter that was sent to all persons or establishments currently holding a
Cigarette License. The following is a list:
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
American Legion Post//398, 2333 Wilshire Blvd.
Steve Bedell (dba By The Way Snack Shop), 4801 Shoreline Drive
John's Variety & Pets, 2281 Commerce Blvd.
Jubilee Foods, 5229 Shoreline Dr.
Mainstreet Market, 2242 Commerce Blvd.
Mound Municipal Liquor, 2324 Wilshire Blvd.
PDQ Food Store 1/0292, 5550 - 3 Pts. Blvd.
R & R Bait, 2630 Commerce Blvd.
SuperAmerica//4194, 5337 Shoreline Drive
VFW Post//5113, 2544 Commerce Blvd.
So far the only question has been from the VFW who would like to be able to keep their
vending machine, and have it controlled by the bartender with a remote.
The Legion complied with this ordinance this Fall by eliminating their vending machine and
putting cigarette sales behind the bar.
printecl on recycled paper
CITY OF MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
January 28, 1998
Dear License Holder:
Your Cigarette License expires on February 28, 1998.
In 1997, the Minnesota Legislature passed a new state law designed to reduce illegal youth
access to tobacco products. The City of Mound must now implement and enforce this new law.
In order to do that we have revised our Cigarette Ordinance (copy enclosed). Please note there
will be compliance checks and there is an administrative penalty system. The fee for a Cigarette
License will increase with the renewal of this license, to $200.00/per year to cover the cost of
administering and enforcing the above provisions. There will be no vending machine sales
unless minors are prohibited at ALL times from entering the licensed establishment. Self service
sales are also prohibited.
The City Council will be acting on the enclosed proposed ordinance on Tuesday, February 10,
1998, at 7:30 P.M. If you have comments, please attend this meeting. If the Council approves
this ordinance and new fee, it will become effective February 14, 1998.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Sincerely,
Fran Clark
City Clerk
enc.
printed on recycled paper
LEN HARRELL
Chief of Police
TO:
FROM:
Ed Shukle
Len Harrell
MOUND POLICE
5341 Maywood Road Telephone 472-0621
Mound, MN 55364 Dispatch 525-6210
Fax 472-0656
EMERGENCY 911
Recruiting:
TOBACCO ENFORCEMENT COST ESTIMATES
1998
18 hours per year $630
Need to identify willing and reliable 16 or 17 year olds to use in sting operation.
3-5 individuals per year for one sting per year
4-6 hours at $35/hr
Documentation w/th parents and meetings to explain process
2 hours per juvenile candidate
6-10 hours
Training of juveniles
2 hour training course
Operation: 30 hours for 1 check/year
$1050
9 locations, 1 compliance check per year
Preparation
"Bugging" set up and officer monitoring
2 officers, average 1-2 hours per location
Violation will slow process and may require additional personnel or times to
resume operation.
One compliance check per year would cost approximately $1,700.
Two compliance checks per year would cost approximately $2,700.
PROPOSED ORDINANCE
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 440:00 OF THE CITY CODE
RELATING TO TOBACCO SALE, POSSESSION, AND USE
OF TOBACCO, TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND TOBACCO
RELATED DEVICES IN THE CITY OF MOUND AND TO REDUCE
THE ILLEGAL SALE, POSSESSION AND USE OF SUCH ITEMS
TO AND BY MINORS
The City of Mound Does Ordain:
Section 440:00. ~. Because the City recognizes that many persons under the age
of 18 years purchase or otherwise obtain, possess, and use tobacco, tobacco products, and
related devices, and such sales, possession, and use are violations of both State and Federal
laws; and because studies have shown that most smokers begin smoking before they have
reached the age of 18 years and that those persons who reach the age of 18 years without
having started smoking are significantly less likely to begin smoking; and because smoking
has been shown to be the cause of several serious health problems which subsequently place
a financial burden on all levels of government; this ordinance shall be intended to regulate
the sale, possession, and use of tobacco, tobacco products, and tobacco related devices for
the purpose of enforcing and furthering existing laws, to protect minors against the serious
effects associated with the illegal use of tobacco, tobacco Products, and tobacco related
devices, and to further the official public policy of the State of Minnesota in regard to
preventing young people from starting to smoke as stated in Minn. Stat. 144.391.
Section 440:05. _Def'mitions and lnterpretation,~. Except as may otherwise be provided
or c/early implied by context, all terms shall be given their commonly accepted definitions.
The singular shall include the plura/and the plural sba/1 include the singular. The masculine
shall include the feminine and neuter, and vice-versa. The term "shall" means mandatory
and the terms "may" means permissive. The following terms have the definitions given to
them:
Subd. 1. _Tobacco or Tobacco Products ,, .
_ Tobacco or "Tobacco Products"
shall mean any substance or item containing tobacco leaf, including, but not limited
to, cigarettes; cigars, pipe tobacco, snuff; fine cut or other chewing tobacco;
cheroots; stogies; perique; granulated, plug cut, crimp cut, ready-rubbed, and other
smoking tobacco; snuff flowers; cavendish; shorts; plug and twist tobaccos; dipping
tobaccos, refuse scraps, clippings, cuttings, and sweepings of tobacco; and other
kinds and forms of tobacco leaf prepared in such manner as to be suitable for
chewing, sniffing, or smoking.
Subd. 2. T_~obacco Related Devic~ "Tobacco related devices" shall mean any
tobacco product as well as a pipe, rolling papers, or other device intentionally
designed or intended to be used in a manner which enables the chewing, sniff'rog, or
smoking of tobacco or tobacco products.
Subd. 3. ~elf-Service Mercl~andlSln_~. 'Self-Service Merchandising' shall mean
open displays of tobacco, tobacco products, or tobacco related devices in any manner
where any person shall have access to the tobacco, tobacco products, or tobacco
related devices, without the assistance or intervention of the licensee or the licensee's
employee. The assistance or intervention shall entail the physical exchange of the
tobacco, tobacco product, or tobacco related device between the customer and the
licensee or employee. Self-service merchandising shall not include vending machines.
Subd. 4. _Vend_~n~, Machine. 'Vending Machine' shall mean any mechanical,
electric or electronic, or other type of device which dispenses tobacco, tobacco
products, or tobacco related devices upon the insertion of money, tokens, or other
form of payment directly into the machine by the person seeking to purchase the
tobacco, tobacco product, or tobacco related device.
_ l~ac. ka~ed. ,,Individually packaged" shall mean the
Subd. 5. lndivid~all_v
practice of selling anY tobacco or tobacco product wrapped individually for sale.
Individually wrapped tobacco and tobacco products shall include, but not be limited
to, single cigarette packs, single bags or cans of loose tobacco in any form, and single
cans or other packaging of snuff or chewing tobacco. Cartons or other packaging
containing more than a single pack or other container as described in this subdivision
shall not be considered individually packaged.
Subd. 6. ~ "Loosies" shall mean the common term used to refer to a
single or individually packaged cigarette.
Subd. 7. Minor. "Minor' shall mean any natural person who has not yet
reached the age of eighteen (18) years.
Subd. 8. Re!sil Estsblishment. "Retail Establishment' shall mean any place of
business where tobacco, tobacco products, or tobacco related devices are available for
sale to the general public. Retail establishments shall include, but not be limited to,
grocery stores, convenience stores, and restaurants.
Subd. 9. Move_~hle Place of Business. 'Moveable Place of Business' shall
refer to any form of business operated out of a truck, van, automobile, or other type
of vehicle or transportable shelter and not a fixed address store front or other
permanent type of structure authorized for sales transactions.
Subd. 10. ~ A "sale" shall mean any transfer of goods for money, wade,
barter, or other consideration.
2
Subd. II.Compliance Checks. "C '
omphance Checks" shall mean the system the City
uses to investigate and ensure ~at those authorized to sell tobacco, tobacco products,
and tobacco related devices are following and complying with the requirements of this
ordinance. Compliance checks shall involve the use of minors as authorized by this
ordinance. Compliance Checks shall also mean the use of minors who attempt to
purchase tobacco, tobacco products, or tobacco related devices for educational,
research and training purposes as authorized by State and Federal laws. Compliance
checks may also be conducted by other units of government for the purpose of
enforcing appropriate Federal, State, or local laws and regulations relating to tobacco,
tobacco products and tobacco related devices.
Section 440:10. License. No person shall sell or offer to sell any tobacco, tobacco
product, or tobacco related device without first having obtained a license to do so from the
City of Mound.
Subd. 1. ~ An application for a license to sell tobacco, tobacco
products, or tobacco related devices shall be made on a form provided by the City of
Mound. The application shall contain the full name of the applicant, the applicant's
residential and business addresses and telephone numbers, the name of the business
for which the license is sought, and any additional information the City deems
necessary. Upon receipt of a completed application, the City Clerk shall forward the
application to the City Council for action at its next regularly scheduled Council
Meeting. If the City Clerk shall determine that an application is incomplete, he or
she shall return the application to the applicant with notice of the information
necessary to make the application complete.
Subd. 2. Action. The City Council may either approve or deny the license, or it
may delay action for such reasonable period of time as necessary to complete any
investigation of the application or applicant it deems necessary. The application and
investigation results shall then be forwarded to the City Council for official action. If
the City Council denies the license, notice of the denial shall be given to the applicant
along with notice of the applicant's right to appeal the decision.
Subd. 3. Term. All licenses issued under this ordinance shall be valid for one
calendar year from the date of issue. Every such license shall expire on the last day
of February next after its issuance.
Subd. 4. Revocation or Suspension Any license issued under this ordinance
may be revoked or suspended as provider{ in the Violations and Penalties section of
this ordinance. '
Subd. 5. Transfers. All licenses issued under this ordinance shall be valid only
on the premises for which the license was issued and only for the person to whom the
3
license was issued. No transfer of any license to another location or person shall be
valid without the prior approval of the City Council.
Subd. 6. Moveable Place of Business~_ No license shall be issued to a moveable
place of business. Only fixed location businesses shall be eligible to be licensed
under this ordinance.
Subd. 7. ~ All licenses shall be posted and displayed in plain view of the
general public on the licensed premise.
Subd. 8 ~ The renewal of a license issued under this section shall be
handled in the same manner as the original application. The request for a renewal
shall be made at least thirty days but no more than sixty days before the expiration of
the current license. The issuance of a license under this ordinance shall be considered
a privilege and not an absolute right of the applicant and shall not entire the holder to
an automatic renewal of the license.
Section 440:15. ~ No license shall be issued under this ordinance until the
appropriate license fee shall be paid in full. The fee for a license under this ordinance shall
be set by the City Council in Section 510:10.
Section 440:20. Basis for Denial of License. The following shall be grounds for
denying the issuance or renewal of a license under this ordinance; however, except as may
otherwise be provided by law, the existence of any particular ground for denial does not
mean that the City must deny the license. If a license is mistakenly issued or renewed to a
person, it shall be revoked upon the discovery that the person is ineligible for the license
under this Section.
A. The applicant is under the age of 18 years.
B. The applicant has been convicted within the past five years of any
violation of a Federal, State, or local law, ordinance provision, or other
regulation relating to tobacco or tobacco products, or tobacco related
devices.
C. The applicant has had a license to sell tobacco, tobacco products, or
tobacco related devices revoked within the twelve months preceding the
date of application.
D. The applicant fails to provide any information required on the
application, or provides false or misleading information.
4
The applicant is prohibited by Federal, State, or other local law,
ordinance, or other regulation from holding such a license.
Section 440:25. Prohibited Sales. It shall be a violation of this ordinance for any
person to sell or offer to sell any tobacco, tobacco product, or tobacco related device:
A. To any person under the age of eighteen (18) years.
Bo
By means of self-service methods whereby the customer does not need to made
a verbal or written request to an employee of the licensed premise in order to
receive the tobacco, tobacco product, or tobacco related device and whereby
there is not a physical exchange of the tobacco, tobacco product, or tobacco
related device between the licensee or the licensee's employee, and the
customer.
C. By means of Loosies as defined in Section 440:05, Subd. 6 of this ordinance.
De
Containing opium, morphine, jimson weed, bella donna, strychnos, cocaine,
marijuana, or other deleterious, hallucinogenic, toxic, or controlled substances
except nicotine and other substances found naturally in tobacco, or added as
part of otherwise lawful manufacturing process.
By any means to any other person, or in any other manner or form prohibited
by Federal, State, or other local law, ordinance provision, or other regulation.
Section 440:30..Vending Machines. It shall be unlawful for any person licensed under
this ordinance to allow the sale of tobacco, tobacco products or tobacco related devices by
the means of a vending machine unless minors are at all times prohibited from entering the
licensed establishment.
Section 440:35. Self-Service Sales. It shall be unlawful for a licensee under this
ordinance to allow the sale of tobacco, tobacco products, or tobacco related devices by any
means where by the customer may have access to such items without having to request the
item from the licensee or the licensee's employee and whereby there is not physical exchange
of the tobacco, tobacco product, or the tobacco related device between the licensee or his or
her clerk and the customer. All tobacco, tobacco products, and tobacco related devices shall
either be stored behind a counter or other area not freely accessible to customers, or in a
case or other storage unit not left open and accessible to the general public. Any retailer
selling tobacco, tobacco products, or tobacco related devices at the time this ordinance is
adopted shall comply with this Section within 30 days.
Section 440:40. ~ All licensees under this ordinance shall be responsible
for the actions of their employees in regard to the sale of tobacco, tobacco products, or
tobacco related devices on the licensed premises, and the sale of such an item by an
employee shall be considered a sale by the license holder. Nothing in this section shall be
construed as prohibiting the City from also subjecting the clerk to whatever penalties are
appropriate under this Ordinance, State or Federal law, or other applicable law or regulation.
Section 440:45. Compliance Checks and Inspections... All licensed premises shall be
open to inspection by the Mound Police Department or other authorized City Official during
regular business hours. From time to time, but at least once per year, the City shall conduct
compliance checks by engaging, with the written consent of their parents or guardians,
minors over the age of fifteen (15) years but less than eighteen (18) years, to enter the
licensed premise to attempt to purchase tobacco, tobacco products, or tobacco related
devices. Minors used for the purpose of compliance checks shall be supervised by
designated law enforcement officers or other designated City or County personnel. Minors
used for compliance checks shall not be guilty of the unlawful purchase or attempted
purchase, nor unlawful possession of tobacco, tobacco products, or tobacco related devices
when such items are obtained or attempted to be obtained as a part of the compliance check.
No minor used in compliance checks shall attempt to use a false identification
misrepresenting the minor's age, and all minors lawfully engaged in a compliance check shall
answer all questions about the minor's age asked by the licensee or his or her employee and
produce any identification, if any exists, for which he or she is asked. Nothing in this
Section shall prohibit compliance checks authorized by State or Federal laws for educational,
research, or training purposes, or required for the enforcement of a particular State of
Federal law.
Section 440:50. Other Illegal Acts. Unless otherwise provided, the following acts shall
be a violation of this ordinance.
Subd. 1. ~ l__~e&9_l.l.l.l.l~ It shall be a violation of this ordinance for any person to
sell or otherwise provide any tobacco, tobacco product, or tobacco related device to
any minor.
Subd. 2. Ilegal Possession. It shall be a violation of this ordinance for any
minor to have in his or her possession any tobacco, tobacco product, or tobacco
related device. This subdivision shall not apply to minors lawfully involved in a
compliance check.
Subd. 3. ~ It shall be a violation of this ordinance for any minor to
smoke, sniff, or otherwise use any tobacco, tobacco product, or tobacco related
device.
6
SuM. 4. l]leeal Procurement. It shall be a violation of this ordinance for any
minor to purchase or attempt to purchase or otherwise obtain any tobacco, tobacco
product, or tobacco related device, and it shall be a violation of this ordinance for any
person to purchase or otherwise obtain such items on behalf of a minor. It shall
further be a violation for any person to coerce or attempt to coerce a minor to
illegally purchase or otherwise obtain or use any tobacco, tobacco product, or tobacco
related device. This subdivision shall not apply to minors lawfully involved in a
compliance check.
Subd. 5. _.Use of False Identification. It shah be a violation of this ordinance
for any minor to attempt to disguise his or her true age by the use of a false form of
identification, whether the identification is that of another person or one on which the
age of the person has been modified or tampered with to represent an age older that
the actual age of the person.
Section 440:55. Violations_.
Subd. 1. Notice. Upon discovery of a suspected violation, the alleged violator
shah be issued, either personally or by mail, a citation that sets forth the alleged
violation and which shah inform the alleged violator of his or her right to be heard on
the accusation.
Subd. 2.
a hearing
provided
~ If a person accused of violating this ordinance so requests,
shall be scheduled, the time and place of which shall be published and
to the accused violator.
Subd. 3.
Hearim, Officer. The City Council shall serve as the hearing officer.
Subd. 4. Decision. If the Hearing Officer determines that a violation of this
ordinance did occur, that decision, along with the hearing officer's reasons for finding
a violation and the penalty to be imposed under Section 440:60 of this ordinance,
shall be recorded in writing, a copy of which shah be provided to the accused
violator. Likewise, if the hearing officer finds that no violation occurred or finds
ground for not imposing any penalty, such findings shah be recorded and a copy
provided to the acquitted accused violator.
Subd. 5. ~ Appeals of any decision made by the hearing officer shall be
filed in the district court for the jurisdiction of the City in which the alleged violation
occurred.
Subd. 6. .Misdemeanor Prosecution. Nothing in this Section shall prohibit the
City from seeking prosecution as a misdemeanor for any alleged violation of this
7
ordinance. If the City elects to seek misdemeanor prosecution, no administrative
penalty shall be imposed.
Sub& 7. Continued Violation.. Each violation, and every day in which a
violation occurs or continues, shall constitute a separate offense.
Section 440:60.
Subd. 1. Licensees. Any licensee found to have violated this ordinance, or
whose employee shall have violated this ordinance, shall be charged an administrative
fine of $75 for the first violation of this ordinance; $200 for a second offense at the
same licensed premises within a twenty-four month period; and $250 for a third or
subsequent offense at the same location within a twenty-four month period. In
addition, after the third and subsequent offenses, the license shall be suspended for
not less than seven days after each such offense.
Subd. 2. Other Individuals. Other individuals, other than minors regulated by
subdivision 3 of this Subsection, found to be in violation of this ordinance shall be
charged an administrative penalty of $50.
Subd. 3. Minors. Minors found in unlawful possession of, or who unlawfully
purchase or attempt to purchase, tobacco, tobacco products, or tobacco related
devices, shall be cited ,.
Subd. 4. Misdemeanor. Nothing in this Section shall prohibit the City from
seeking prosecution as a misdemeanor for any violation of this ordinance.
Section 440:65. Exceptions and Defenses. Nothing in this ordinance shall prevent the
providing of tobacco, tobacco products, or tobacco related devices to a minor as part of a
lawfully recognized religious, spiritual, or cultural ceremony. It shall be an affirmative
defense to the violation of this ordinance for a person to have reasonably relied on proof of
age as described by State Law.
Section 440:70. Severabilit¥ and Savin~ Clause. If any section of this ordinance
shall be found unconstitutional or otherwise invalid or unenforceable by a court of competent
jurisdiction, that finding shall not serve as an invalidation or effect the validity and
enforceability of any other section or provision of this ordinance.
Subd. 440:75.
publication.
Effective Date.
This ordinance shall take affect the day after its
8
r~oi-h ~', p
Memo
T~
City of Mound Dock Inspector
Todd Stead
February 10, 1998
Roanoke Multi-Dock Proposal
Tom McCaffrey has discussed with me the multi-dock proposal for the Roanoke
area. I currently have a 17 foot boat and would definitely be in favor of His proposal,
The convenience of not having to put up and take down my dock every year would
be great.
I will not be able to attend the City Coundl meeting tonight so if you could pass along
these comments I would appreciate it,
Thank you.
Todd M. Stead
· Page 1
T~/T~'~ 0290~£~60l ~60£ ~6 ~9 A3NB~W NOZI~OH ~ S~:0~ 86, OT
Bob Schmidt
4708 Island view Dr.
Mound, MN 55364
1-2%98
To.'
Jim Faclder
Park Director
City of Mound
5341 Maywood rd
Mound, MN 55364
cc
Tom Mc Caffery
Dock Inspector
Jim,
After reading your letter of Jan 21, 1998, I have several concerns about the plan.
First you're only providing 3 non-abutting dock slips at Roenoke Ln commons. There is currently 4 sites
available there and I feel this number must be maintained. It's true that only 3 are currently used, but I
understand that is due to a conflict with the abutting land owner. When I bought my house in Mound it
was primarily due to the commons program. I feel a reduction in the number of slips available, and one
boat per house, directly effects the salability (property value) of my house. I also am afraid that if non
abutters do not renew their dock permits, the slip will be removed from the commons program, further
phasing out non abutters from the commons program
Secondly, I have an inboard boat. This means I cannot steer in reverse and it pulls to the left when in
reverse. Because of this only slip "A", as noted on the plan, would be acceptable for my use.
Finally, the concept that two boats can occupy one side of the dock will not work at this location. If there
were 43 feet between dock centers(there is less than that now, and the docks converge because of shoreline
curvature) only 9 feet would remain for boat travel (allowing for two 14 foot boat lifts and 6 feet of dock ).
Last year there was about 6 feet between my boat and the boat lift at site g42000. Also the water depth
increased rapidly in this area. I have a 48 foot dock now at this location and at the end of my dock it is 4
feet deep in the spring. Extending the dock another 30 feet to accommodate a second boat would make the
depth about 10 feet deep which I believe exceeds the maximum allowed by the LMCD. I believe two
straight docks for the non abutters at this commons site would be the best solution.
I was told at the First meeting that no one would be forced to give up their current dock site. If these
concerns are not addressed to my satisfaction I will not relinquish my spot.
Please respond to this letter before the city counsel vote on Feb 10~.
CITY OF MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
MEMORANDUM
JANUARY 26, 1998
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: JIM FACKLER, PARKS DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: ROANOKE LANE & DEVON LANE MULTIPLE SLIP DOCKS
There has been some question about the exact location of the
proposed city dock at the Roanoke access. The Dock
Inspector, Tom McCaffery and myself went to the site and
measured it. At this time we can only approximate the
locations due to the snow and not being able to find the lot
corner stake located 369 LnFt from this area, or as noted on
the Dock location Map as #41631 (Note attached portion of
the Dock Location Map).
From the attached drawing of the Roanoke area, and with the
belief that dock site #41956 (Casey) is on the center of
their space, (Note; A dock does not have to be on center as
long they have their dock and boat inside assigned area.) it
appears that with using the on site measurements or the Dock
Location assigned lineal footage number the proposed
installation of a straight city dock will fit.
The Devon Lane proposed dock will fit as designed in my
letter dated January 21, 1998 to all abutting and
non-abutting dock site holders.
printed on recycled paper
MINUTES - MOUND CITY COUNCIL- FEBRUARY 10, 1998
The City Council of the City of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, met in r~gular session
on Tuesday, February 10, 1998, at 7:30 PM, in the Council Chambers at 5341 Maywood Road,
in said City.
Those present were: Mayor Bob Polston, Councilmembers Andrea Ahrens, Mark Hanus, and
Leah Weycker. Absent and excused was Councilmember Liz Jensen. Also in attendance were:
City Manager Edward J. Shukle, Jr., City Attorney John Dean, City Planner Loren Gordon,
and City Clerk Fran Clark and the following interested citizens:
The Mayor opened the meeting and welcomed the people in attendance. The Pledge of
Allegiance was recited.
*F~C~,-~q~: All items listed under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine by
the Council and will be enacted by a roll call vote. There will be no separate discussion of these
items unless a Councilmember or Citizen so requests, in which event the item will be removed
from the Consent Agenda and considered in normal sequence.
APPROVE AGENDA. At this time items can be added to the Agenda that are
not listed and/or items can be removed from the Consent Agenda and voted upon
after the Consent Agenda has been approved.
*CONSENT AGENDA
*1.0 APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE JANUARY 27, 1998, REGULAR MEETING.
237-242
, *1.1 APPOINTMENT OF ASSISTANT WEED INSPECTOR.
243-244
* 1.2 RESOLUTION APPROVING A PREMISES PERMIT RENEWAL APPLICATION FOR
THE VFW POST//5113 - MOUND.
245 -247
'1.3
248
BID AWARD:
1998 ONE TON DUMP W/PLOW AND SANDER.
· 1.4 CASE//98-02:
249-256
STEVE & PAM JOHNSON, 6041 RIDGEWOOD ROAD, LOT
21, BLOCK 6, THE HIGHLANDS, PID //23-117-24 34 0002 -
VARIANCE REQUEST: ADDITION TO HOME.
(PLANNING COMMISSION WILL HEAR THIS MATrER MONDAY,
FEBRUARY 9. MATERIALS WILL BE HANDED OUT TUESDAY
EVENING).
2
· * 1.5 RESOLUTION EXTENDING MORATORIUM REGARDING THE REGULATING OF
TRANSMISSION AND RECEPTION FACILITIES OF COMMERCIAL WIRELESS
TELECOMMUNICATION SERVICES.
*1.6 LICENSE RENEWALS - GARBAGE HAULERS
258
'1.7 PAYMENT OF BILLS
259-276
· 3. PETITION TO REMOVE STREET LIGHT AT THE INTERSECTION
CAMBRIDGE LANE AND BEDFORD ROAD
~t~,~-'°-~ .... ~.~~~'~' ~.~'~
4. PRESENTATION OF 1997 ANNUAL REPORTS:
- JIM FACKLER, PARKS DIRECTOR
287-310
GREG SKINNER, PUBLIC WORKS SUPERINTENDENT
311-319
- STEVE ERICKSON, FORMER FIRE CHIEF
320-325
- FRAN CLARK, C1TY CLERK
326-340
4
5. COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRESENT.
e
341-350
PROPOSED CIGARETrE ORDINANCE
7. APPROVAL OF ROANOKE LANE MULTIPLE DOCK SLIP
& APPROVAL OF DEVON LANE MULTIPLE DOCK SLIP
8. INFORMATION/MISCELLANFA)US:
ho
374-392
Department Head monthly reports for January 1998
5
393-394
C.
395 -396
D.
397
E.
398-399
F.
400-439
Notice from the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District 0VlCWD)
regarding the rescheduling of a Rule B Task Force Meeting.
The meeting was rescheduled to Tuesday, February 10, 1998,
2:30-4:00 p.m. at the Minnetonka Community Center
Letter from Triax Cablevision regarding rate increases for Basic
and Tier Services
Notice from the City of Minnetrista regarding an open house for
Charlotte Erickson who is retiring as the City Administrator-Clerk
after 22 years with the City and 16 of those years as the Administrator-Clerk.
The open house is scheduled for Sunday, March 8, 1998,
1-4 p.m., at Minnetrista City Hall
LMCD Executive Director Greg Nybeck publishes an occasional
newsletter about LMCD activities. Enclosed is a copy of the recent newsletter
LMCD mailing regarding an application to the Legislative .~.C, ~ R~
Commission on Minnesota Resources funds for
added or improved car trailer parl ng facilities on Minneton a
440
Senator Gen Olson invited Dr. Pam Myers, Superintendent of Schools and myself
to testify before the Senate K-12 Education Budget Division Committee at
the State Capitol on Wednesday, February 4. The purpose of the hearing
was to present a bill, a copy of which is enclosed, amending Minnesota
Statutes 471.19 relating to restrictions placed upon school districts to issue
bonds for facilities not totally dedicated to education curriculum.
As you know, we discussed this "quirk" during our study sessions with
the School Board. Bond counsels for both the School District and the City
had indicated that this section of Minnesota Statutes does not allow the School
District to sell bonds for the renovation of the community center as it is
presently written. Senator Olson introduced an amendment which passed
this committee and now will be incorporated into the Omnibus Tax Bill.
It was an interesting experience to testify before a Senate committee as this
is something Pam and I had not done before. In addition, Senator Olson
invited us to stay to attend the State of the State address given by
Governor Arne Carlson. We were guests of her and Representative
Steve Smith. It was a speech where Carlson reviewed his tenure
as Governor and the accomplishments the State has made under his
leadership. Also, he asked the Legislature to adopt his agenda for
this session, which, surprisingly, did not include anything about the stadium.
Pam and I also had the opportunity to meet Mayor Norm Coleman,
St. Paul; Kathleen Blatz, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and
other legislators in attendance
6
Committee of the Whole meeting is scheduled for
Tuesday, February 17, 1998, 7:30 p.m., Mound City Hall.
The only item on the agenda is a discussion with the
Westonka School Board regarding the joint powers
agreement on the Westonka Community Center. I will
forward a draft of the proposed agreement to you once it
has passed legal review by the School District's attorney.
I. REMINDER: City Council photograph is confirmed for Tuesday,
February 24, 1998, 6:30 p.m., Mound City Hall.
J. REMINDER; HRA Meeting, Tuesday, February
Mound City Hall.
10, 1998, 7 p.m.,
7
I
I
I
~-r---~
I
Ol
~NV7 ~nSXOU
.......... J~ .................
11 I
I/ I
L_--.J L_._J
I I 'h I ~1 I I
II [I !1 ~
.... J L___J u ....~ L ___J
.... -I F--¥~-o-~-a r---]
80~'
· mm mm
~0
LETYER SENT TO DOCK SITE HOLDERS
CITY OF MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
January 21, 1998
TO: city Of Mound Dock Site User
FROM: Jim Fackler, Park Director
SUBJECT: City Council hearing On Implementation Of
Multiple Slip Docks On Devon Common Located At
Devon Lane And Roanoke Lane Accesses.
Dear Dock Site User,
From my letter, dated January 6, 1998, you were advised of a
discussion to be held at the January 15, 1998 regular
scheduled monthly meeting of the Dock and Commons Advisory
Commission (DCAC). As my letter pointed out your boat
dockage could be changed from a single city dock site to
mooring of your boat at the same general location but on a
city owned multiple slip dock.
From that meeting the DCAC has recommended approval of one
city owned multiple slip to be placed at each of the
accesses, Devon Lane and Roanoke Lane, the design of each
dock will be different, see enclosure . The city multiple
slip dock at Devon Lane will provide for nine boats while
leaving one individual dock site with its location at Devon
Lane but with a yet to be determined location for Paul
Jereczek. All the remaining five non-abbutting dock sites
with four shares on the Devon access will be eliminated and
both the site holder and share person will be placed on the
city dock. The multiple slip dock at Roanoke will provide
dockage for three boats on a straight dock not to e~ceed 100
feet in length. The four non-abutting dock sites at Roanoke
access, with no current shares, will be eliminated and the
site holders placed on the city dock.
This recommendation from the DCAC is scheduled to go before
the Mound City Council on February 10, 1998. The location is
the council chambers at, Mound City Hall, 5341 Maywood Road.
The meeting will begin at 7:30 pm and will be a agenda item
to be discussed that evening, a exact time for this item can
not be determined.
1 printed on recycled paper
This is your opportunity to discuss with the City Council
the concerns you may have. If you can not attend please feel
free to write a response and it will be presented at the
meeting. Please address your correspondence to; Jim Fackler,
Park Director, City of Mound, 5341 Maywood Road, Mound,
Minnesota 55364.
cc: DCAC
Ed Shukle, City Manager
Tom Mc Caffery, Dock Inspector
enclousures
I.S'--) ~ 21.5
t
6
:Si-l-e_--~ qa,
DCAC MINUTES RECOMMENDING APPROVAL
DEVON & ROANOKE
CITY OF MOUND
MOUND DOCK & COMMONS ADVISORY COMMISSION
January lf, 1995
Members present: Mark Goldberg, Dennis Hopkins, Frank Ahrens, and
Mayor Bob Polston. Members absent and excused: Jim Funk and Gordy
Tulberg. Others present: Parks Director Jim Fackler, Dock
Inspector Jim McCaffrey, and Secretary Clare T. Link. The
following interested ccitizens were also present: Michael Kane,
Dillon Kraavenbrink, John Gabos, Keith Forester, Wes Lafortune,
Mark & Gina Smith, Dave Osmek, Phil Keintz, Thomas Carlson, Linnea
Manske, Greg Knutson, Becky Cherne, Jim Kudin, and Ron Nordstrom.
APPROVAL OF DECEMBER 18,1997 DCAC MINUTE~
Motion by Ahrens, seconded by Hopkins to approve the minutes
of the December 18, 1997 meeting as written. Motion carried
unanimously.
AGENDA CHANGES
Goldberg suggested the election of officers be moved to following
dock discussion.
MULTIPLE SLIP DOCKS
Goldberg discussed the dock task force decisions on areas of
improvement. He explained the dock site program. He stated Devon
Lane and Roanoke Lane are the next two locations under
consideration for review.
DEVON LANE ACCESS
Devon Lane residents identified themselves. Goldberg noted 1/3 of
those affected are present. He stated there is room for ten boats
on the slip including a canoe. There are six dock sites and four
shared dock sites. Fackler noted the length is approximate based
on what is there now. He noted sites G through I would be for
smaller boats. Goldberg suggested G or H be elimated with J
remaining for a canoe. .
Residents commented on the proposed configuration. Mike Kane
stated he liked the configuration and believed it would clean up
the area. John Grane stated it is a great advantage to have the
dock provided.
1
DOCK & COMMONS ADVISORY COMMISSION MINUTES - JANUARY 15, 1998
Paul Jereczak stated he was concerned about not being able to have
more than one boat. He would have a problem with relocating. He
asked what this would cost. Goldberg stated all costs would be
defrayed by the annual dock fee. Jereczek stated he likes the dock
proposal in spite of his concerns.
Phil Kinds stated he has a 28' pontoon this year. Goldberg stated
it can be accommodated. Kinds stated he is in favor of the
proposal.
Ron Nordstrom asked if the City is adding more docks
program. Goldberg stated, no, the number of boats
maintained while cutting the congestion.
to the
will be
Goldberg stated there needs to be more input from the other 11
participants. Polston suggested that the other participants be
sent another letter indicating that the City Council will consider
finalizing the action recommended by the DCAC so they will have an
additional opportunity to comment. Goldberg stated he would rather
have this figured out before it goes to the City Council. Polston
stated that he believes the DCAC has responsibly addressed the
situation and tried to solicit input. His suggestion was that this
now be forwarded to the City Council. Polston then suggested that
letters be sent to everyone advising that this will be addressed at
the City Council.
Commissioners discussed a situation where a dock owner would have
two boats and choose not to move to the new dock. Fackler stated
in this case, the individual dock site would be moved. Ahrens
stated he would not be in favor of having a multiple dock and
individual docks.
Ahrens stated boat density on the lake is a concern, and this is a
favorable way to manage density.
In response to a question from the audience, Fackler stated the
City has liability insurance.
Polston noted this would be forwarded to the City Council to
recommend approval, and letters will be sent to all residents in
the area. Paul Jereczek will be left off the multiple slip.
ROANOKE L,%NE ACCESS
Roanoke Lane residents were identified. Goldberg noted 50% of the
residents were present. Fackler stated the configuration will be
determined by measuring it with the two adjacent property owners to
see where the docks are now. He noted there are four sites now and
no shared sites. There is a site without a boat.
Ahrens suggested since there are only two boats down there now, the
dock configuration should be reconsidered. He suggested a straight
dock be used instead.
DOCK & COMMONS/IDVISORY COMMISSION MINUTES - JANUARY 15, 1998
McCaffrey stated there is still a potential for a third boat.
Ahrens believed a third boat could be put on a straight deck.
Polston stated there aren't any non-abutters present tonight, and
we don't know if they are interested in participating.
Goldberg asked why some non-abutters put docks in and don't put
boats at them. McCaffrey stated he was unsure. Ahrens noted one
of the sites was not even used. McCaffrey stated there are four
dock sites with three assigned and one of the three not used.
Polston suggested the maximum number be authorized contingent on
that number applying. Ahrens believed there would never be more
than three boats at the site.
Motion by Polston, seconded by Hopkins to recommend to the
City Council that a straight dock up to 100, be authorized to
accommodate three boats provided the non-abutters become a
part of the multiple dock program at the Roanoke access on
Devon. Motion carried unanimously.
Commissioners and members of the audience discussed docks being
left in year round.
Commissioners and members of the audience discussed the intent of
the motion to reduce the number of dock spaces from four to three.
They also discussed whether another site or sites could ever be
added.
Fackler discussed how dock sites are identified and assigned in
response to a question from the audience. He explained if someone
on the multiple dock moves, the site becomes available for anyone
who lives within that area.
John Gabos stated it would be a real advantage to cut the dock down
for two boats rather than three and limit it to a 75' dock, because
the area is too tight. Fackler stated even though one individual
didn't use his dock last year, he has the right by ordinance to
apply for his site this year.
Polston stated non-abutters will be notified this item will go to
the City Council, and up to three sites have been recommended.
Commission took a break at 9:05 p.m. and reconvened at 9:15 p.m.
TEAL POINT DOCK REQUEST
Fackler reviewed the request for docks at Teal Point, a new housing
development. There are several unanswered questions at this point
which need to be researched. He stated the area is considered part
of Lake Minnetonka. A member of the audience stated he is
interested in having a dock and small fishing boat. Fackler
explained where the City's property is located. He stated the plat
DOCK & COMMONSAD~$ORYCOMMISSlONMINUTE$-JANUARYI5,1998
needs to be reviewed and a determination made if permits will be
needed.
Polston believed there may be a condition on the plat dockage could
not be applied for. There needs to be an opinion rendered on the
original platting. Andrea Ahrens recalled there would not be any
dock access to the lake.
Polston stated whether or not there is public dockage would be
contingent on review of the plat.
A member of the audience noted the association by-laws state docks
are not allowed.
Polston stated this item will be referred back to staff.
Motion by &hrens, seconded by Hopkins to make Goldberg
temporary chairperson until the next meeting when elections
will be held. Motion carried unanimously.
ELECTION OF OFFICERS FOR 1998
This item was postponed to the next meeting.
ENCROACHMENT FEE FOR PUBLIC IdtlCD8
This item was postponed to the next meeting.
DCAC WORK RULES
This item was postponed to the next meeting.
1998 AGENDA CALENDAR
REPORTS
Motion by Polston, seconded by Ahrens to adjourn the meeting
at 9:30 p.m. Motion carried unanimously.
TATION TO DCAC MEETING
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
CITY OF MOUND
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
January 6, 1998
TO: City Of Mound Dock Site User
FROM: Jim Fackler, Park Director
SUBJECT: Discussion Of Possible Implementation Of A Multiple
Slip Dock.
Dear Dock Site User,
At this time the Dock and Commons Advisory Commission (DCAC)
has scheduled a meeting for all individuals who had a 1997
dock site, or shared one, and the abutting property owners
on Devon Common at the access points of Devon Lane and
Roanoke Lane. The discussion will relate to the possibility
of combining the non-abutting dock users onto two city owned
and maintained docks at their respective current locations.
This meeting will be on Thursday January 15, 1998 at 7:30
pm, Mound City Hall Council Chambers, 5341 Maywood Road.
This will be your opportunity to discuss with the DCAC the
concerns you may have and to hear the DCAC explanation of
what a multiple slip dock has to offer. Please be advised
that this is only a look at a plan that would retain the
1997 dock users and may lead to further discussions.
If you can not attend please feel free to write a response
and it will be presented at the.meeting. Please address your
correspondence to; Jim Fackler, Park Director, City of
Mound, 5341 Maywood Road, Mound, Minnesota 55364.
~/Jim Ba~kler, Park Director
cc: DCAC
CITY OF MOUND
MEMORANDUM
5341 MAY%NOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612} 472-0620
OCTOBER 2, 1997 (Revised 1-5-98)
TO: DCAC /--~~
FROM: JIM FACKLER, PARKS DIRECTOR '--it V
SUBJECT: DEVON LANE ACCESS MULTIPLE SLIP DOCK
DEVON ACCESS DOCK SITE BREAK DOWN;
NOT A FACTOR
TOTAL LN.FT. OF PARK ..........................
# OF CURRENT DOCK SITES ......................... (orig.5). 6
# OF SHARED DOCK SITES .......................... (orig.3). 4
# OF TOTAL BOATS ............................... (orig.7). 10
** one of 10 is canoe **
A) TWENTY FEET OR LESS ............. (orig.3).. 5
** one of 5 is canoe
B) 20' THRU 24' .................... (orig.3)..
C) 24' THRU 32' ..............................
0
D) 32' THRU 40' ..............................
# OF TWO BOATS WITH ONE OWNER .., ................ (orig. O).. 1
** one is canoe **
# OF INDIVIDUALS WITH NO BOAT AT THIS TIME ............... 1
51 5'
WIDTH OF PROPOSED DOCK ................................
LENGTH OF PROPOSED DOCK .............................. 72.0'
NONE
SET REQUIRED FROM PRIVATE PROPERTY ....................
07/82/1Bc]7 0c]: 43 61247c]6445 ~REP~AU DOCKS PAGE 84
o
0 0 0
o ~
OC C C C ~ C C C
CITY OF MOUND
MEMORANDUM
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
OCTOBER 2, 1997
TO: DCAC ~
FROM: JIM FACKLER, PARKS DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: ROANOKE LANE ACCESS MULT~ E SLIP DOCK
ROANOKE ACCESS DOCK SITE BREAK DOWN;
TOTAL LN.FT. OF PARK .......................... NOT A FACTOR
# OF CURRENT DOCK SITES .................................. 4
# OF SF~ARED DOCK SITES ................................ NONE
# OF TOTAL BOATS ........................................ · 2
A) TWENTY FEET OR LESS ............. 1
B) 20' THRU 24' .................... 1
C) 24' THRU 32' .................... 0
D) 32' THRU 40' 0
# OF TWO BOATS WITH ONE OWNER ......................... NONE
# OF INDIVIDUALS WITH NO BOAT AT THIS TIME ............... ~%
WIDTH OF PROPOSED DOCK ............................... 35.0'
LENGTH OF DOCK .................................... %'' 72.0'
SET REQUIRED FROM PRIVATE PROPERTY .................... NONE
18/82/1997 89:45 6124796445 CREPEAU DOCKS PAGE 82
q
C
0
.C
0
.C
I
,-- 0 0 0 0 0
Cd ~ s- s-- ,,z'" .r
C C C C C
CITY OF MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
MEMO,~AIV~)I,/M
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Februarv 5, 1998
City Manager, Members of the Citv Council and Staff
Jon Sutherland, Building Official
JANUARY 1998 MONTHLY REPORT
CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY
There were 11 building permits issued in January for a construction value
of $ 96,094. we issued 18 plumbing, mechanical, and miscellaneous
permits for a total of 29 permits this month, and 29 permits year-to-date.
Total valuation now stands at $ 96,094.
PLANNING & ZONING
The Planning Commission reviewed one case which was tabled to a future
date.
kl
printed on recycled paper
City of Mound
BUILDING ACTIVITY REPORT
Month: JANUARY Year: 1998
THIS MONTH YEAR TO DATE
RESIDENTIALNEW CONSTRUCTION I[ #PERMITS I # UNITS I VALUATION ]] #UNITS I VALUATION
SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED 0 0 0 0
SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED (CONDOS) 0 0 0 0
TWO FAMILY / DUPLEX 0 0 0 0
MULTIPLE FAMILY (3 OR MORE UNITS) 0 0 0 0
TRANSIENT HSG. (HOTELS / MOTELS) 0 (~ 0 0
SUBTOTAL 0 0 0 0
NEwNON'RESIDENTIALcoNSTRUCTION Il# PERMITS] I VALUATION I #PERMITS [ VALUATION
COMMERCIAL (RETAIL/RESTAURANT) 0 0 0 0
OFFICE / PROFESSIONAL 0 0 0 0
INDUSTRIAL 0 0 0 0
PUBLIC / SCHOOLS 0 0 0 0
SUBTOTAL 0 0 0 0
ADDITIONS/ALTERATIONS
ADDITIONS TO PRINCIPAL BUILDING 2 /18,067 ;2 /18,067
DETACHED ACCESSORY BUILDINGS 0 0 0 0
DECKS ]- i t 280 1 1 t 280
SWIMMING POOLS 0 0 0 0
REMODEL- MISC RESIDENTIAL 7 26,7/17 7 26,747
REMODEL * MULTIPLE DWELLINGS 0 0 0 0
SUBTOTAL lO 76 ~ 094 10 76 ~ 094
COMMERCIAL (RETAIL/RESTAURANT) 1 20,000 1 20 ~ 000
OFFICE I PROFESSIONAL 0 0 0 0
INDUSTRIAL 0 0 0 0
PUBLIC / SCHOOLS 0 0 0 0
DETACHED ACCESSORY BUILDINGS 0 0 0 0
SUBTOTAL i 20 ~ 000 1 20 1000
DEMO',T,O.S II #PERM'TS I # UN,TS I VALUAT,ON Il #PE"M'TS I VALUAT,ON
RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS 0 0 0 0
NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS 0 0 0 0
TOTAL DEMOLITIONS 0 0 0 0
# PERMITS # UNITS VALUATION # UNITS VALUATION
# PERMITS
0
TOTAL .
11 96,094 11 96~094
· BUILDING 11 11
FENCES & RETAINING WALLS 0 0
mGNS 0 0
PLUMBING 8 8
MECHANICAL 10 10
GRADING 0 0
S&W. STREET EXCAV., FIRE, ETC. 0 0
TOTAL [ 29 [ 29
375'
BUILDING PERMIT REPORT FOR MONTH OF JANUARY 1998
MONT YEA DAY PERMIT # ADDRESS
OWNER
CONTRACTOR TYPE OF CONST.
JAN 98 6 12109 5959 IDLEWOOD RD GLENN ISAACSON SELF DECK 16X8
JAN 98 2 12264 1927 SHOREWOOD LN JAY WESTLUND J BENSON CONST FIRE DAMAGE REPAIR
JAN 98 8 12268 5125 DRUMMOND RD CRAIG HEINSCH SELF 32X28 ATTACHED GARAGE
JAN 98 12 12269 5337 SHORELINE DR SUPER AMERICA COTTONWOODCONST REMODEL DRINK CENTER
JAN 98 13 12270 4994 MANCHESTER RD THOMAS ALEXANDER THE DANBERRY CO ADDITION;LOFT; REROOF
JAN 98 22 12271 1730 AVOCET LN BOB GOODFELLOW WF SMITH REROOF
JAN 98 26 12272 4549 WILSHIRE BLVD PAUL PAINE SELF R/R FOUNDATION WALLS
JAN 98 27 12274 6041 RIDGEWOOD RD STEVE JOHNSON SELF DECK GR; SCREEN PORCH
JAN 98 28 12275 5501 SHERWOOD LN MICHELLE HANSON STATEWIDE GAS SERV FIREPLACE INSERT
JAN 98 28 12276 4744 HAMPTON RD KENNETH ENGLERT THE FIREPLACE CENTE DIRECT VENT FIREPLACE
JAN 98 29 12277 4918 LESLIE RD TAMI MESENBOURG SELF REMODEL GAR TO REC ROOM
VALUATION SAC UNIT
1,280
5,000
16,5~7
2o,ooo~.*
31,500 J~)
2,400
8,000//./.
800
3,547
1,000
6,ooo
MONTH
GENERAL PERMIT REPORT FOR MONTH OF JANUARY 1998
YEAR DAY PERMIT# ADDRESS
JAN 98 5 3897
JAN 98 6 3898
JAN 98 6 3899
JAN 98 9 3900
JAN 98 9 3901
JAN 98 9 3902
JAN 98 12 3903
JAN 98 14 3904
JAN 98 15 3905
JAN 98 16 3906
JAN 98 20 3907
JAN 98 20 3908
JAN 98 21 3909
JAN 98 26 3910
JAN 98 26 3911
JAN 98 26 3912
JAN 98 28 3913
JAN 98 28 3914
CONTRACTOR PERMIT TYPE
5211 EDEN ROAD
5749 GRANDVlEW BLVD
4909 ISLAND VIEW DR
4518 WlLSHIRE BLVD
2642 COMMERCE BLVD
3202 WESTEDGE BLVD
5429 SPRUCE RD
2415 WlLSHIRE BLVD
2600 WlLSHIRE BLVD
5984 SUNSET RD
5201 PIPER RD
3098 ALEXANDER LN
1927 SHOREWOOD LN
4608 MANCHESTER RD
6045 BARTLETT BLVD
4909 ISLAND VIEW DR
4345 WlLSHIRE BLVD
5501 SHERWOOD DR
WELD & SON'S PLUMBIN PLUMB
DOUG'S PLUMBING PLUMB
WENCL SERVICES MECH
KATHLEEN MARIE PLUMB
AWD COOLERS OF MN PLUMB
COUNTRYSIDE HEATINGMECH
DITTER INC
VOGT HEATING & AC
KALMES MECH
NORBLOM PLUMBING
PRACTICAL SYSTEMS
NORBLOM PLUMBING
LEGEND PLUMBING
BARBARA DILL
CULLIGAN WATER
SYMINGTON PLUMB
A-ABC APPL & HTG
STATEWlDE GAS SERV
MECH
MECH
MECH
PLUMB
MECH
PL'UMB
MECH
PLUMB
PLUMB
MECH
MECH
MECH
TO: MAYOR, CI~ COUNCIL AND Cl~ MANAGER
FROM: GINO BUSINARO, FINANCE :DIRECTOR
RE:
JANUARY FINANCE DEPARTMENT REPORT
Investment Activity
Balance:
January 1, 1998
$4,498,786
Bought:
MOney Market
Money Market
Money Market
CD
CP
4M Plus
Norwest Bank
First Bank
Crow River Bank
Smith Barney
5~58°/o
5.58%
2,880
86
125,231
95,000
344,262
Matured:
Money Market First Bank
Money Market Smith Barney
CP Smith Barney 5.75%
CP Smith Barney 5.73%
(30,000)
(262)
(441,090)
(339,263)
BalaPce: = ,,.~ :_~.~ January 31~ 1998
Closing of the Year 1997
January was, as usual, a very busy month for the Finance Department.
The new year cycle and the closing of the past year cycle are falling
in place as we move along.
With the issuance of the W-2 and the 1099 forms, numerous reports
were submitted to Federal and State departments. Other reports were
submitted to the independent auditor, the insurance agent, and Hennepin
county.
Recycling
Joyce has submitted to Hennepin County the 1997 Municipal Recycling
Final Report. The total expenditures for the program were $110,227
and the revenues from the sale of recyclable were $9,792. The county
entitlement for the year was $30,802. The city collected $58,629 in household
charges. As an example of participation for the month of October, out of 13,444
households 6,250 had their recyclable set out. That is a 47% participation.
The total of materials collected for the year was 1,199 tons.
City of Mound
Monthly Report
Utilities
Month of: January 1998
Residential
Commercial
02/03/98
Utility-98
Total
No. of Customers:
Water 1,107 123 1,230
Sewer 1,113 123 1,236
Water Used:
(in 1,000 gallons) 18,029 3,210 21,239
Billing:
Water
Sewer
Recycle
Payments:
Water
Sewer
Recycle
Total
$30,480 $6,765 $37,245
$71,388 $18,241 $89,629
$5,996 $124 $6,120i
$107,864 $25,130 $132,994
Total
$24,826 $5,487 $30,313
$51,155 $14,752 $65,907
$4,542 $87 $4,629
$80,523 $20,326 $100,849
CITY OF MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687
(612) 472-0600
FAX (612) 472-0620
TO:
From:
Date:
Re:
Mayor, City Council and City Manager
Joel Krumm, Liquor Store Manager
February 4, 1998
January 1998 Monthly Report
Gross sales for January were $121,006.00. In 1997 January's gross sales were $113,375.00.
By all appearances you may think we had a great month. But in reality it was merely average.
Here is why. Last year in January we had four weekend days of sales. This year in January
we had five. It is almost eerie when you look at the last day of sales for the month, (which was
the extra Saturday), we did $8,000.00 in sales which is exactly how much we were up!
Even though things have slowed considerably around here, Julie and I had our work cut out for
us. We took the year end physical inventory on January first. I had one other person in to
assist us. It took us about eleven hours to complete. We were glad it was over because by the
time we finished we were seeing numbers in our mind even when we closed our eyes. Then the
business of reconciling our perpetual inventory ledgers with that of the actual count, plus
extending some of those numbers takes us about three weeks because we have to sandwich it
between that of our daily duties. We are done now and everything has been turned over to Gino
for his final analysis.
printed on recycled paper
LEN HARRELL
Chief of Police
MOUND POLICE
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, MN 55364
Telephone 472-0621
Dispatch 525-6210
Fax 472-0656
EMERGENCY 911
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Ed Shukle
Chief Len Harrell
Monthly Report for January, 1998
STATISTICS
The police department responded to 1,094 calls for service during the
month of January. There were 14 Part I offenses reported. Those offenses
included 1 criminal sexual conduct, 11 larcenies, and 2 vehicle thefts.
There were 41 Part II offenses reported. Those offenses included 1 child
abuse/neglect, 1 forgery/NSF checks, 4 narcotics, 1 weapon, 4 damage to
property, 2 liquor law violation, 2 DUI's, 6 simple assaults, 7 domestics (4
with an assaults), 3 harassment's, 4 juvenile status, and 6 other offenses.
The patrol division issued 94 adult citations and 3 juvenile citations.
Parking violations accounted for an additional 39 tickets. Warnings were
issued to 69 individuals for a variety of violations.
There was one juvenile arrested for a felony. There were 17 adults and 4
juveniles arrested for misdemeanors. There were an additional 8 warrant
arrests.
The department assisted in 15 vehicle accidents, 3 with injuries. There
were 31 medical emergencies and 35 animal complaints. Mound assisted
other agencies on 18 occasions in January and requested assistance 5
times.
Property valued at $6,045 was stolen and $4,210 was recovered in
January.
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
MONTHLY REPORT - JANUARY, 1998
II.
INVESTIGATIONS
The investigators worked on 5 child protection issues and one criminal
sexual conduct case accounting for 60 hours of investigative time. Other
cases included continued follow-up on the robbery, as well as cases
involving assault, terroristic threats, damage to property, forgery, death
investigation, missing person, NSF checks, counterfeit currency, theft,
harassment, and absenting.
Formal complaints were issued for stolen license plates, underage
consumption, domestic assault, possession of marijuana, gross
misdemeanor driving after cancellation, gross misdemeanor DWI and
child endangerment, DWI, and no insurance.
III.
Personnel/Staff'm~
The department used approximately 23 hours of overtime during the
month of January. Officers used 26hours of comp-time, 46 hours of
vacation, 55 hours of sick time, and 25 holidays. Officers earned 55 hours
of comp time.
There were 9 shifts at double time for holidays worked
IV.
Officers attended training in firearms during the month of January as well
as training in the investigation of internal affairs incidents, labor relations,
and administration of orders for protection.
Vo
COMMUNITY SERVICES OFFICERS
Officer's Packard and Piper addressed 22 animal complaints, 19 ordinance
violations, and 390 miscellaneous calls for services.
6 citations were issued in January.
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
JANUARY 1998
OFFENSES CLEARED EXCEPT- CLEARED BY ARRESTED
REPORTED UNFOUNDED CLEARED ARREST ADULT JUV
Homicide 0 0 0 0 0
Criminal Sexual Conduct I 1 0 0 0
Robbery 0 0 0 0 0
Aggravated Assault 0 0 0 0 0
Burglary 0 0 0 0 0
Larceny 11 1 0 I 0
Vehicle Theft 2 0 0 0 0
Arson 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL
PART II CRIMES
14 2 0 i
Child Abuse/Neglect 1 0 0 1 1
Forgery/NSF Checks 1 0 0 0 0
Criminal Damage to Property 4 0 0 1 1
Weapons 1 0 0 0 0
Narcotic Laws 4 0 0 4 4
Liquor Laws 2 0 0 1 2
DWI 2 0 0 2 2
Simple Assault 6 0 2 2 2
Domestic Assault 4 0 1 3 3
Domestic (No Assault) 3 0 0 0 0
Harassment 3 0 0 0 0
Juvenile Status Offenses 4 0 0 3 0
Public Peace I i 0 0 0
Trespassing 0 0 0 0 0
Ail Other Offenses 5 1 0 2 2
TOTAL
41 2 3 19
17 4
PART II & PART IV
Property Damage Accidents
Personal Injury Accidents
Fatal Accidents
Medicals
Animal Complaints
Mutual Aid
Other General Investigations
TOTAL
12
3
0
31
35
18
920
1,019
HCCP
Inspections
4
12
TOTAL
1,094
2O
17 5
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
CRIME ACTIVITY REPORT JANUARY 1998
GENERAL ACTIVITY SU~Y
Hazardous Citations
Non-Hazardous Citations
Hazardous Warnings
Non-Hazardous Warnings
Verbal Warnings
Parking Citations
DWI
Over .10
Property Damage Accidents
Personal Injury Accidents
Fatal Accidents
Adult Felony Arrests
Adult Misdemeanor Arrests
Juvenile Felony Arrests
Juvenile Misdemeanor Arrests
Part I Offenses
Part II Offenses
Medicals
Animal Complaints
Ordinance Violations
Other Public Contacts
THIS YEAR TO LAST YF2%R
MONTH DATE TO DATE
33 33 64
61 61 85
14 14 13
53 53 99
51 51 82
39 39 86
2 2 14
1 1 10
12 12 10
3 3 4
0 0 0
0 0 1
24 24 37
1 1 0
5 5 2
14 14 7
41 41 44
31 31 23
35 35 55
12 12 0
920 920 512
TOTAL
1,352 1,352 1,148
Assists 60 60 55
Follow-Ups 82 82 33
HCCP 4 4 0
Mutual Aid Given 18 18 8
Mural Aid Requested 5 5 2
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
JANUARY 1998
DWI
More Than .10% BAC
Careless/Reckless Driving
Driving After Susp. or Rev.
Open Bottle
Speeding
No DL or Expired DL
Restriction on DL
Improper, Expired or No Plates
Stop Arm Violations
Stop Sign Violations
Failure to Yield
Equipment Violations
H&R Leaving the Scene
No Insurance
Illegal or Unsafe Turn
Over the Centerline
Parking Violations
Crosswalk
Dog Ordinances
Code Enforcement
Seat Belt
Overweight Vehicles
Miscellaneous Tags
TOTAL
2
1
1
6
0
26
5
0
23
1
1
0
8
0
7
2
0
39
0
4
1
2
0
133
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
JANUARY 1997
WARNINGS
Insurance
Traffic
Equipment
Crosswalk
Animals
Trash/Derelict Autos
Seat Belt
Trespassing
Window Tint
Miscellaneous
TOTAL
WARRANT ARRESTS
Felony
Misdemeanor
23
12
17
0
0
1
0
0
0
5
58
6
2
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
11
Run: 29-Jan-98 14:57 PR003
Primary ISN's only: No
Date Reported range: 01/01/98 - 01/25/98
ctivity codes: All
Status: All
Property Types: All
Property Descs: All
Brands: All
Models: All
Officers/Badges: All
Prop Prop Inc no ISN Pr Prop Date Rptd Stolen
Tp Desc SN Stat Stolen Value
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Enfors Property Report
STOLEN/RECOVERED BY DATE REPORTED
Date Recov'd
Recov'd Value
Page
Prop type Totals: 170 0
Prop type Totals: 5,000 4,200
Prop type Totals: 250 0
Prop type Totals: 45 0
Prop type Totals: 160 0
Prop type Totals: 410 0
Prop type Totals: 10 10
Totals: 6,045 4,210
Quantity Act Brand Model Off-1 Off-2
Code Assnd Assnd
1.000
3.000
1.000
1.000
2.000
2.000
6.000
16.000
Run: 2-Feb-98 14:47 CFS08
Primary ISN's only: NO
Date Reported range: 01/01/98 - 01/25/98
Time range each day: 00:00 - 23:59
How Received: All
Activity Resulted: All
Dispositions: All
Officers/Badges: All
Grids: All
Patrol Areas: All
Days of the week: All
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Enfors Calls For Service
INCIDENT ANALYSIS BY ACTIVITY CODE
ACTIVITY CODE NUMBER OF
DESCRIPTION INCIDENTS
9000 SPEEDING 26
9002 NO D/L, EXPIRED D/L 5
9014 STOP SIGN 1
9018 EQUIPMENT VIOLATION 8
9019 J-EQIPMENT VIOLATION 1
9021 J-CARELESS/RECF~LESS 1
9022 EXHIBITION DRIVING 1
9024 ILLEGAL/UNSAFE /~JRNS 2
9034 STOP ~J{M VIOLATION 1
9038 ALL OTHER TRAFFIC 2
9040 NO SEATBELT 2
9100 PARKING/ALL OTHER 3
9140 NO PARKING/WINTER HOURS 36
9200 DAS/DAR/DAC 6
9210 PLATES/NO-IMPROPER~EXPIP~ED 23
9220 NO INSURAJQCE/PROOF OF 7
9221 J-NO INSUI{ANC~/PROOF OF 2
9252 WARNING TAGS 1
9301 LOST PERSONS 3
9430 PERSONAL INJURY ACCIDENTS 3
9450 PROPERTY D;kMAGE ACCIDENTS 8
9451 H/R PROPER~ DAMAGE ACC. 4
Page
Run: 2-Feb-98 14:47 CFS08
Primary ISN's only:
Da~e Reported range:
range each day:
How Received:
Activity Resulted:
Dispositions:
Officers/Badges:
Grids:
Patrol Areas:
Days of the week:
No
01/01/98 - 01/25/98
O0:OO - 23:59
Ail
All
All
All
All
All
All
MOU~ POLICE DEPARlT~ENT
Enfors Calls For Service
INCIDF~ AN~JuYSIS BY ACTIVI'fY CODE
ACTIVITY CODE NL~ER OF
DESCRIPTION INCIDENTS
9561 DOG BITE
9564 DOG BAP. KING
9565 DOG LICENSE
9566 ANI~UtL ENFORCEMERFr TICKETS
9700 MEDICJ%L/SU
9710 MEDICAL/ASU
MEDICAL/DOA
9730
9735
9740
9800
9801
9802
9900
9904
9920
9921
9930
9944
MEDICALS
IOD INJlrRY
MENTAL CASES
ALL OTHER/UNCLASSIFIED
DOMESTIC/NO ASSAULT
PD-BLIC ASSIST
ALL HCCP CASES
OPEN DOOR/A~S
INSPECTIONS DEPARlT~ENT
INSPECTIONS CITATION
H~UN APPLICATION
bqgWANTED GUEST
INFO/INT
WARRANTS
MISC. VIOLATIONS
1
1
1
4
1
2
1
27
1
2
1
3
2
4
6
1
1
7
1
6
8
1
9980
9990
Page 2
Run: 2-Feb-98 14:47 CFS08
Primary ISN's only: No
Date Reported range: 01/01/98 - 01/25/98
Time range each day: 00:00 - 23:59
How Received: All
Activity Resulted: All
Dispositions: All
Officers/Badges: All
Grids: All
Patrol Areas: All
Days of the week: All
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Enfors Calls For Service
INCIDENT ANALYSIS BY ACTIVITY CODE
ACTIVITY CODE NUMBER OF
DESCRIPTION INCIDENTS
9992
9993
9994
A5352
A5502
AL351
AL352
AL551
AL554
C3312
DA540
DC500
J3501
J3E01
J3T01
L7052
M3005
M4102
M4140
M5313
M5350
N3030
MUTUAL AID/8100 8
MUTUAL AID/6500 6
MU/73AL AID/ ALL OTHER 4
ASLT 5-MS-INFLICT BD HRM-HANDS-ASLT-AC
ASLT 5-THRT BODILY HARM-NO WEAP-ADLT-ACQ
DOM ASLT-MS-INFLT BODILY H/%RM-F~NDS-AD-FAM
ASLT-DOMESTIC-MS-INFLT BODLY HRM-H~DS-ADLT-AC
DOM ASLT-MS-FEAR BODILY FIARM-HANDS-AD-FAM
DOM ASLT-MS-FEAR BODILY HARM-HANDS-CH-FAM
FORGERY-MS-USES-CHECK-BUSINESS
DRUGS-SM AMT IN MOT VEH-POSS-MARIJ-UN-K
DRUGS-DRUG PARAPH-POSSESS-UNK-UNK
TRAFF-ACCID-MS-DRIVE UNqDER INFLUENCE
TRAF-ACC-MS-AL 10 MORE-UNK INJ-MV
TRAF-ACC-MS-UND AGE DRINK DRIVE-UN-K-MOTOR VEH
CSC 4-UNK ACT-POS AUTH-b-NDER 13-M
JUVENILE-USE OF TOBACCO
LIQUOR - SELLING
LIQUOR-UNDERAGE CONSUMPTION 18-21
JI/VENILE-CURFEW
JUVENILE-RUNAWAY
DISTURB PEACE-MS-DISORDERLY CONDUCT
Page
Run: 2-Feb-98 14:47 CFS08
Primary ISN's only: NO
Date Reported range: 01/01/98 - 01/25/98
range each day: 00:00 - 23:59
How Received: All
Activity Resulted: All
Dispositions: All
Officers/Badges: All
Grids: All
Patrol Areas: All
Days of the week: All
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Enfors Calls For Service
INCIDENT ANALYSIS BY ACTIVITY CODE
ACTIVITY CODE N73MBER OF
DESCRIPTION INCIDENTS
DISTURB PEACE-MS-HARRASSING COM~K3NICATIONS
PROP DAMAGE-MS-PRIVATE-UNK INTENT
PROP DAMAGE-MS-PUBLIC-UNK INTENT
THEFT-201-500-GM-BUILDING-MONEY
N3190
P3110
P3120
TF021
TF159 THEFT-201-500-GM-MOTOR VEH-OTH PROP
TG059 THEFT-LESS 200-MS-YARDS-OTHR PROP
THEFT-LESS 200-MS-MAILS-OTHER PROP
THEFT-LESS 200-MS-POSTAL-MONEY
FRALTD-FE-FIN-TP~AN-CARD-NO CONSENT 501-2500
THEFT-MS-SHOPLIFTING-200 OR LESS
VEH-MORE THAN 2500-FE-THEFT-SNOW
VEH-201-500-GM-PARTS-MOTOR VEH-SNOWMOBILE
WEAPONS-MS-POINTS-OTHER TYPE-NO CHAR
CRIM AGNST ADMN JUST-MS-VIOL ORD PROTECTION
CRIM AGNST ADM JUST-MS-VIOL ~IARRASS REST ORDER
TG171
U1553
U3288
VA024
VDll4
W3390
X3250
X3360
**** Report Totals:
297
Page
Run~ 2-Feb~98 14:51 OFF01
Primary ISN's only: NO
Da%e Reported range: 01/01/98 - 01/25/98
Time range each day: 00:00 - 23:59
Dispositions: All
Activity codes: All
Officers/Badges: All
Grids: All
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Enfors Offense Report
OFFENSE ACTIVITY DISPOSITIONS
Page 1
ACT ACTIVITY OFFENSES UN- ACTUAL
CODE DESCRIPTION REPORTED FOUNDED OFFENSES PENDING
..... OFFENSES CLEARED - - -
ADULT JI~;ENILE BY EX- PERCENT
ARREST ARREST CEPTION TOTAL CLEARED
A5352 ASLT 5-MS-INFLICT BD HRM-PL~NDS-ASLT-AC 3 0 3 1 1 0 1 2 66.6
A55C2 ASLT 5-THRT BODILY F. ARM-NO WEAP-ADLT-ACQ 3 0 3 1 1 0 1 2 66.6
AL351 DOM ASLT-MS-INFLT BODILY HARM-HA/gDS-AD-FAM 2 0 2 0 2 0 0 2 100.0
AL352 ASLT-DOMESTIC-MS-INFLT BODLY HRM-H/qDS-ADLT-AC 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 100.0
AL551 DOM ASLT-MS-FEAR BODILY H~.RM-HANDS-AD-FAM 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 100.0
AL554 DOM ASLT-MS-FEAR BODILY HARM-H3%NDS-CH-FAM 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 100.0
C3312 FORGERY-MS-USES-CHECK-BUSINESS 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0
DA540 DRUGS-SM AMT IN MOT VEH-POSS-MARIJ-UNK 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 10~
DC500 DRUGS-DRUG PARAPH-POSSESS-UNK-UNK 3 0 3 0 3 0 0 3 100.0
J3501 TRAFF-ACCID-MS-DRIVE UNDER INFLUENCE 2 0 2 0 2 0 0 2 100.0
J3E01 TRAF-ACC-MS-AL 10 MORE-UNK INJ-MV 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 100.0
L7052 CSC 4-UNK ACT-POS AUTH-UNDER 13-M 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0
M3005 JUVENILE-USE OF TOBACCO 2 0 2 0 0 2 0 2 100.0
M4102 LIQUOR - SELLING 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0
M4140 LIQUOR-UNDERAGE CONSUMPTION 18-21 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 100.0
M5313 JUVENILE-CURFEW 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 100.0
M5350 JUVENILE-RUNAWAY 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0
N0310 DISTURBING PEACE-UNK-STALKING-UNKNOWN 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0
N3030 DISTURB PEACE-MS-DISORDERLY CONDUCT 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0
N3190 DISTURB PEACE-MS-HARRASSING COF~4UNICATIONS 2 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0.0
P3110 PROP DAMAGE-MS-PRIVATE-UNK INTENT 3 0 3 3 0 0 0 0 0
P3120 PROP DAM~GE-MS-PUBLIC-UNK INTENT 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 100.0
TF021 THEFT-201-500~GM-BUILDING-MONEY 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0
Run: 2-Feb~98 14:51 OFF01
Primary ISN's only:
Date Reported range:
~ange each day:
Dispositions:
Activity codes:
Officers/Badges:
Grids:
NO
01/01/98 - 01/25/98
00:O0 - 23:59
All
All
All
All
MOUND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Enfors Offense Report
OFFENSE ACTIVITY DISPOSITIONS
Page 2
..... OFFENSES CLEARED ....
ACT ACTIVITY OFFENSES UN- ACTUAL ADULT JUVENILE BY EX- PERCENT
CODE DESCRIPTION REPORTED FOUNDED OFFENSES PENDING ARREST ARREST CEPTION TOTAL CLEARED
TF159
TG059
TG069
TG171
U1553
U3288
VA024
X3250
X3360
THEFT-201-500-GM-MOTOR VEH-OTH PROP 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0
THEFT-LESS 200-MS-YARDS-OTHR PROP 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0
THEFT-LESS 200-MS-MAILS-OTHER PROP 5 0 5 5 0 0 0 0 0.0
THEFT-LESS 200-MS-POSTAL-MONEY 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0
FRAUD-FE-FIN-TRAN-C3LRD-NO CONSENT 501-2500 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.0
THEFT-MS-SHOPLIFTING-200 OR LESS 1 0 1 0 0 i 0 1 100.0
VEH-MORE ~ 2500-FE-THEFT-SNOW I 0 1 i 0 0 0 0 0.0
VEH-201-500-GM-PARTS-MOTOR VEH-SNOWMOBILE i 0 i I 0 0 0 0 0.0
CRIM AGNST ADMN JUST-MS-VIOL ORD PROTECTION I 0 i 0 i 0 0 1 100.0
CRIM AGNST ADM JUST-MS-VIOL HARP. ASS REST ORDER 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0
Report Totals: 49 4 45 22 16 4 3 23 51.1
,
JAN-30-1998 P.02/02'
14:29 MI NNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED 6124710682
,Minnehaha Creek Watershed District
ImFoving Quality of Water, Quality
Gray Freshwater Center
H~s. 15 & 19. Navarre
Mail:
2500 $hadywood Road
ExceLsior, MN 55331-9578
Phone: (612) 471-0590
Fax: (612) 471-0682
Email:
admln@minnehahecreek.org
Wet) Site:
www.mLnnehahacreek.org
Board of Managers:
D E. Thomas
esident
C. Woodrow Love
Vice President
Pamela G. Blixt
Treasurer
Monica Gross
Secretary
Thomas W, ~Bounty
Thomas Maple, Jr.
Malcolm Reid
District Office:
Diane P. Lynch
District Administrator
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
RE:
MEMORANDUM
January 30, 1998
Stormwater Task Force . .~
Managers, MCWD
Diane Lynch, District Administrator
MEETING CANCI=LED & RESCHEDULED
Please cancel the meeting previously scheduled for Tuesday,
February 3 from 2:30-4:00 p.m..
It has been rescheduled for Tuesday, February 10_ from 2:30-4:00
p.m. at the Minnetonka Community Center.
We will be getting out a new draft of the changes discussed early next
week.
I apologize for any inconvenience this may cause.
Thank you.
TOTAL P, 82
JRN-30-1998 14:29 6124710682 P.01/02
MI NNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED
STORMWATER TASK FORCE
FAX LIST
Annis, Daryl
Charbonneau, .Rick
Durgunoglu, Ali
Eastling, Mike
Elk/n, Philip
Oappa, Greg
Ooff, Bill
Griffin, Tim
Gross, Moniea
Oustafson, Lee
Haertel, Jim
Hafner, Jun
Houle, Wayne
Knaeble, Peter
Larsen, Jan
Larson, Bob
Lee, Jeff
Love, Woody
Lynch, Diane
Maple, Tom
Middleton, Amy
Oliver, Jeff
Panzer, lVEke
Polston, Bob
Poizin, Jodi
Rardin, Mike
Schw~lbe, Terry
Smith, Louis
Soderbeck, Gene
Stadler, Steve
Strauss, Ceil
Young, Scott
Laketown Township
Siena Club
'HCD
City of Richfield
City of Chanhassen
City of Orono
City of Victoria
Biko Assodates, ~c.
MCWD
City of Minnetonka
BWSR
MCWD
City of Edina
Terra Engineering
Met Council
City of Deephaven
MCWD
MCWD
MCWD
CBE
City of C-olden Valley
Wenck Associates, Inc,
City of Mound
City oflVfinneapolis
City of St. Louis Park
City of Wayzata
Smith Parker/MCWD
MPCA
City of Hopkins
DN'R
Kust Envir. & Infi'astructure
Phone#
442-5282
722-4942
544-8572
861-9792
937-1900 X105
473-7357
443-2363
529-8170
922-5356
939-8239
296-3767
471-0590
826-0443
593-9325
602-1159
474-4755
37O-4900
470-2552
471-0590
471-0590
824-8637
593-8034
4794207
472-0600
673-3000
924-2500
404-5312
344-].400
296-6300
939-1338
772-7914
551-2426
Fmx#
.442-6465
379-3855
544-9437
861-9749
93%5739
473-0510
443-2110
928-8488
922-6652
939-8244
297-5615
471-0682
826-0390
593-9325
602-1130
474-1274
370-4831
474-9583
471-0682
471-0682
824-0506
593-3988
479-4242
472-5754
673-2048
924-2663
404-5318
344-1550
282-6247
939-1381
772-7977
551-2499
2/01197
TRI X
CABLEVISION
1504 2nd St. S.E., P.O. Box 110, Waseca, MN 56093
5071835-5975 FAX 507-835-4567
Januaw 29,1998
Mayor Bob Polston
City of Mound
5341 Maywood Rd
Mound MN 55364
Dear Mayor Polston:
Effective March 1, 1998, Triax Cablevision is adjusting rates for Basic and Tier Service
as outlined on the attached notification letter which has been mailed to all customers.
During the past year, we have made several changes to our operations designed to
improve the quality of service we provide our customers. These changes have included
the installation of new telephone technology, the expansion of our staff, and the
dedication and commitment to the improvement of our technical field services.
While no rate adjustment is ever received favorably, these changes are necessary in
order for us to continue to improve the level of service our customers deserve. As with
any business, this change also reflects an adjustment for inflation, increases in
programming expenses and other operating costs such as; insurance, vehicle
maintenance, leases, and other regulatory requirements.
Mayor Polston, on behalf of the entire Triax Cablevision team of employees we
appreciate the opportunity to provide service to the City of Mound. Should you have
any questions regarding this information, please feel free to contact me at any time at
(507) 835-5992.
Sincerely,
Paul R. Pecora
Regional Manager
CABLEVISION
1504 2nd St. S.E., P.O. Box 110, Waseca, MN 560'
Sales and Billing: 1-800-332-024b
Repair: 1-800-422-1473
January29.1998
Dear Valued Customer:
During the past year, we have worked diligently to provide you with quality service and programming
options. In addition, we have focused on our operations, adding new features to enhance our telephone
system, as well as increasing the size of our customer service staff. We also recognize the need to continue
these efforts during 1998 as part of our continuing commitment to provide you more efficient service and
improved service quality. During the next ~2~ree months, we will be introducing new billing periods, which
will increase our operational efficiency. Those customers affected by this change will receive additional
information in their billing statements.
Effective March l. 1998. we are restructuring our rates. The new monthly rote for Basic Service will be
adjusted to $11.87 from $11.60, an increase of $.27. The rate for Tier Service will be adjusted to $15.09
from $14.28. an increase of $.81. While we realize no rate increase is ever favorable, this change reflects
an inflationary adjustment, increases in programming expenses and other operating costs such as;
insurance, vehicle maintenance, leases, and other regulatory requirements. These new rates will allow us to
continue to improve the quality of service and programming we provide to you, as well as remain
co~npetitive in an ever-changing telecommunications induslry.
In an effort to provide our customers with increased value, we have created and revised our discounted
premium packages which offer cost saving options to many of our popular premium services such as:
Encore/Starz 6.95/month
Cinemax/Encore/Starz 11.95/month
ShowtimefI'MC/Cinemax 18.95/month
HBO/Cinemax/Encore/Starz 24.90/month
Showtimerrhe Movie Channel
H]30/Cinemax
Showtime/TMC/Encore/Starz
13.95/month
17.95/month
17.95/month
In closing, we would like to thank you for choosing us to be your entertainment provider, and we look
fom'ard to meeting your needs in the future. If you have any suggestions on how we can serve you better,
please send your comments to my attention at Triax Cablevision, P.O. Box 110, Waseca, MN, 56093. You
ma3' also make comments to the City of Mound, 5341 Maywood Road, Mound, MN, 55364-1687.
Sincerely,
Paul R. Pecora
Regional Manager
Feb-02-98 14:01
City of Minnetrista
612 446 1311
P.O1
...ATTENTION...
Charlotte Erickson has decided to leave
the mess on the desk behind. Char has
been with the City of Minnetrista for 22
years, and the Administrator/Clerk for
16 years. She will be retiring on
February 27.
~n honor of this new chapter in Char's
life, City staff and friends are planning
an informal Open House on March 8, at
Minnetrista City Hall, 1:00 to 4:00 p.m.
]~nvitations are not being sent, so please
pass along this message to anyone you
think may be interested. Call 446-1660
if any questions.
Feb-03-98 12:25A P.02
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
2500 Shadywood Road, Suite 19
Excelsior, MN 55331
471-9588
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S NEWSLETTER
Gregory S. Nybeck
January 23, 1998
Special Events: With the adoption of LMCD Ordinance 153 by the Board of Directors on
12/10/97, all special events on Lake Minnetonka, effective immediately, need to be
permitted by the LMCD in addition to the Hennepin County Sheriff's Water Patrol, the
MN DNR, and the municipalities affected by the event. A focal point for the LMCD
getting involved again in the special permitting process on Lake Minnetonka is to ensure
compliance with LMCD Ordinance 145. This ordinance is a further attempt, beyond
Minnesota Statutes 84D.05 and 84D.09, to prevent the introduction of zebra mussels and
other undesirable exotic species into Lake Minnetonka.
· Management Plan Review: Starting in September of 1997, the LMCD Board and staff
has meet on the first Wednesday of each month to review the Management Plan for Lake
Minnetonka which was adopted in December, 1991. The purpose of these Workshop/
Planning Sessions is to review the Management Plan and decide where updates need to be
made. The next scheduled Workshop/Planning Session is at 6 p.m. in the LMCD office on
2/4/98.
· On-going Licenses: LMCD staff is currently processing all new and renewal without
change applications for licensed multiple docks on Lake Minnetonka. New and renewal
applications for charter boats and associated liquor, wine, and beer licenses have been sent
out and are due in the LMCD office in the near future. Related correspondence to these
on-going licenses will be forward to the member cities at our earliest convenience.
Deicing ln.~tailations Update: Because of the unseasonable warm temperatures this
winter, LMCD staff has been more active with this activity this winter. A letter was sent
out to all licensed deicing installations in December reminding them of LMCD Code
requirements, specifically fencing and signage, and encouraging them not to deice until the
installation is in compliance with Code. Staff inspected all licensed installations with
related correspondence forwarded to the licensees and the affected municipality. Please
call the office if you have questions or concerns.
Bil Hawks Boathouse: The civil lawsuits filed by Mr. Hawks against the LMCD
challenging LMCD Code Section 2.12, Subd. 2, and the countersuit by the LMCD seeking
an injunction requiring the storage boat to be removed from Lake Minnetonka, are still
pending. Further details will be provided when available.
Feb-03-98 12:26A
P .03
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S NEWSLETTER, 1123197, PAGE
"Save the Lake" Recognition Banquet: The 31'~ anniversary "Save the Lake"
Recognition Banquet is scheduled for Thursday, February 12, 1998 at Lord Fletcher's of
the Lake. The program includes a featured presentation by State Senator Gen Olson,
recognition to the co-recipients of the Special Deputy Award, a salute to four retired
LMCD Board of Directors, and 1998 LMCD Program Priorities. For those interested in
attending, reservations need to be received in the office by 2/5/98 (471-9588).
WebPage: The LMCD has established a WebPage for use by the public.
assortment of information is provided. Our WebPage address is:
http://www, winternet, cow./'lmccl/
A wide
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
2500 SHADYWOOD ROAD, SUITE 19 · EXCELSIOR, MINNESOTA 55331 · TELEPHONE 612,'471-9588 · FAX 612/471-0632
Gregory S. Nybeck, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
BOARD MEMBERS February 4,
Douglas E. Babcock
Chair, Tonka Bay
Bert Foster TO:
Vice Chair, Deephaven
Eugene Partyka
Secretary, Minnetrista
Craig Nelson
Treasurer, Spring Park
Andrea Ahrens
Mound
Bob Ambrose FROM:
Wayzata
Kent Dahlen
Uinnetonka Beach S'U]~--,CT:
Tom Gilman
Excelsior
LJli McMillan
Orono
Robert Rascop
Shorewood
Herb J. Suerth
Woodland
Sheldon Wert
Greenwood
1998
RECEIVED
LMCD Mayors
LMCD City Councils
LlVICD City Administrators
Interested Parties
Ben Foster, Vice Chairman
Access/Car Trailer Parking on Lake Minnetonka and LCMR Funding
Application
At our last Board meeting (1-14-98), LMCD Chair Doug Babcock was out of town
and I was privileged to chair the meeting. I received several phone calls from
Mayors before the meeting and we were honored to have three mayors in
attendance at thc meeting.
Minnetonka
Victoria
There was concern expressed about the LMCD's intention to make application to
thc Legislative Commission on Minnesota Resources (LCMR) for 5 million dollars
in funds for added or improved car trailer parking facilities on the Lake. The
LCMR funds come from the lottery and are available for capital improvement
projects that will help the environment. Biannually, there are about $500 million in
requests for $30 million in funds.
Some of the concerns noted by the mayors were: a cities land use plan may differ
from the LMCD lake use plan, was the LMCD going to own and operate launch
ramps (NO), would the cities have any say in what was going on (they would have
veto power), would the cities be informed early in the process (within 5 working
days of the DNR obtaining an option on a piece of property), where were these
new or improved launch ramps going to be located (see the task force report),
would they add too many boats and crowd the lake (see below), and would
property be taken off the city's tax rolls (see below).
60% Recyclerl Content
30% Post Consumer Waste
Concluding in 1993 after more than 25 meetings spanning a year and a half, the
LMCD wrote the 1992 Lake Minnetonka Lake Access Task Force Report that was
agreed to by all panics interested in the Lake. That report is enclosed for your
review. That report confirmed the need for 700 quality, car trailer spaces near
existing or new launch ramps. There were approximately 250 car trailer spaces in
existence in 1992 that could be certified by the LMCD to meet the physical
standards defined in the Task force report.
Web Page Address: http://www.winternet.com/-Imcd/
E-mail Address: Imcd@winternet.com
LCMR Funding Application Memo, 1/4/98, Page 2
Thc DNR, who in the past had simply bought property and installed launch ramps,
agreed to work more closely with the cities and the LMCD to make sure that all
parties are in agreement with any new launch ramp development. The DNR
agreed to inform the LMCD and the Cities within 5 working days of taking an
option on a piece of property and to hold as many public meetings as needed in
order to fully inform all parties and to gain agreement from all parties before a
property is purchased or developed.
We had a good discussion of all items at the 1-14-98 LMCD Board meeting and I
believe came away with a general agreement of the mayors in attendance, the
DNR, and the LMCD Board; that the LMCD would go forward with the LCMR
grant application to try and obtain funding while the DNR was trying to find
willing sellers from thc list of possible sites in the task force report. The LMCD
does not want to own or operate the launch ramps. It wants to get the process
started and to help move it along. The ramps could be owned by the city, the
DNR, thc County, or Hennepin Parks, depending on what the city wants.
Does a new quality car trailer parking lot and launch ramp increase the boats on the
lake? Under the task force plan the answer is "NO", because the plan calls for all
on street parking to be signed "no car trailer parking" after a new ramp is
developed. In the meeting, the Mayor of Orono noted that there has been an
overall net reduction in boat density on Maxwell Bay during peak hours since the
new launch ramp was built. This overall net reduction was achieved at Maxwell
Bay by replacing a commercial marina facility with a smaller launching facility and
by eliminating a significant amount of on street parking.
The Maxwell Bay launch ramp property was taken off the tax roll and the city
didn't receive any direct compensation. The task force report calls for all cities to
share in providing launch ramps and if a particular city can't or doesn't want to
host a launch ramp it might be asked to help other cities that are willing to do so.
At the 1/28/98 meeting, the LMCD Board tabled consideration of the draft LCMR
application to allow staff to consider adding some diversification of projects on the
application, to allow staff to draft a memorandum of understanding with the DNR
and the cities, and to allow staff to make some editorial changes to the application.
It is expected that the LMCD board will approve the final application at its 2-11-98
meeting, in time for it to be filed by the deadline of 2-13-98. If the LCMR grants
funds to the LMCD, they would become available in July, 1999.
Feel free to call me at home at night, 473-2240, or call the LMCD office, 471-
9588, if you have questions or concerns regarding this matter. LMCD Chair
Babcock is also available at 474-2370 or 896-0047.
REPORT OF THE 1992
LAKE MINNETONKA
LAKE ACCESS TASK FORCE
To The
Lake Minnetonka Conservation District
July 27, 1994
1992 I~CD Lake ~ ~__~__ Ta~k F~ce ~
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Summary and Conclusions
History and Background ........................................................................................ 3
Introduction
Task Force Goals
Existing Access
Goal of 700 Car/Trailer Parking Spaces ................................................................. 6
Elimination of Street Car/Trailer Parking ............................................................... 7
Parking Standards for Car/Trailer Parking ............................................................. 7
Parking Invemory .................................................................................................. 8
Parking Agreements and DNR Cost Sharing .......................................................... 9
New Access Sites
.................................................................................................. 10
Equitable Distribution
Marina Potential for Lake Access ......................................................................... .' 10
Proceedings Summary .......................................................................................... 11
Acknowl~dgrnents ...............
Appendix:
1 Roster of'Members ..........
2 Map of'Access Sites, Commercial Marinas ..................................... 13
3 Parking Standards
................................................... , ...................... 14
4 Current and Potential car/trailer parking inventory ......................... '.' 16
$ Lake access rnodd parking agreernem ............................................ 17
6 h~mnesota DNR Landowners Bill of Rights .................................... 20
7 Lake l~finnetonka DNK Acquisition Process ................................... 23
$ Access site evaluation criteria ......................................................... 25
9 Lake Zone Map .............................................................................. 26
10 Proceedings Summary ................................................................... 27
" 199~ LMCD ~ ~ A~ Taxk Fore ~
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
l. Access to Lake Minnetonka via riparian homeowners, commercial marinas, yacht clubs, out lot
docks, and municipal docks primarily for non-riparian property owners is significant in quantity
and per~nt of overall access and generally of high quality.
2. There is a lack of quality, free, reliable car/trailer parking for boats wanting to access Lake
M/unetonka via boat launch ramps. There is not a lack of poor quality free car/trailer parking.
Currently, there are over 700 spaces used on the busiest days.
3. Poor quality parking results in residents complaining about boater's intrusive behavior and
excessive traffic congestion. It r~ults in extreme frustration by boaters over the lack ora decent
place to park to go boating on Lake lVfumetonka This generates tension between the local
community interest and the car/trailer boater interest.
o
Ii'the car/trailers currently parked near the lake could be put in well orgsnized places with
adequate, safe parking conditions with car/trailer mmarounds, the local communities would
benefit from reduced congestion and less intrusion on their neighborhoods.
The task force reaffirmed the conclusions of two prior studies that 700 high quality, free, -
reliable car/trailer parking spaces are fair and reasonable for Lake l~nnetonka'and are
achievable.
The Task Force concluded that when quality .free reliable car/trailer parking spaces are provided
in a zone, all other street car/trailer parking ought to be dosed in that zone with enforced "no
car trailer parking signs"
Because over 700 car/trailer spots are used today, providing 700 quality free, reliable, car/trailer
spaces will not increase the number of boats on the lake but actually create a modest
reduction.
Every other year, the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD) is to certify Coy
count) and publish on a map showing the locations and the number of free, reliable, car/trailer
parking spaces that meet the standards established by this task force.
Car/trailer parking meeting the physical standards noted elsewhere in this report will be certifiable
by the LMCD as counting toward the 700 goal on the following basis.
a. 100% of the street or remote lot parking spaces will count if: · There is a parking agreement OR
· The street or remote parking is posted "car/trailer only"
b. 80% of the street or remote lot parking space~ will count if: · There are signs at the launch ramp showing where to park.
· There are street signs pointing out the direction to the launch ramp
· The ramp and parking location can be put on an access map.
c. 60% of the street or remote lot parking spaces will count if:
· none of the above conditions are md
Page 1
lf~2 LMCD ! ~.~,- ~ ~ T~k F~ ~
d. The LMCD will work coopera~ely with the cities, Hennepin Couaty, and the Depnm~ent
of Natural Resources (DNR) to replace spaces should they be lost for car trailer parkiag.
10. Existing ramps without tumarounds that require backing car/trailers offbusy county roads or
city meets should be dosed only after a quality facility meeting the standards has been completed
to replace it.
] l. To neb[eve the goal of 700 ear/trailer parking spaces cooperation is needed
a. Additional parking agreements are needed for as many existing sites as possible. This may
include payments by the Dh'P. under cooperative agreements.
b. Some street and remote lots need "car/trailer only" signs.
c. Signs need to be placed at launch ramps showing where to park.
d. Street signs need to be installed showing direction to the ramps.
e. The LMCD and the DN'R need to negotiate with some commercial marinas to provide free
car/trailer parking for the public that can be certified. Negotiations may include payments
by the DN'R and/or other incentives by the LMCD.
f. Make ready docks need to be installed at ramps where remote car/trailer parking is used.
g. New access sites (launch ramps) need to be developed with the cooperation of the local
cities, the LMCD, the DNR, and with other agencies of government. The majority of
funding ought to come fi.om regional and/or state sources. Cities are not usually expected
to pay a significant portion of improved car~er parking even though their local
community may benefit
The 1993 LMCD Car/Trailer Parkir Inver to
Total In Use
thnt_ Meet Total
1992 Total inthe Additional Total In
~ and Total in Use thatReliability Futur~ Use
Potential Use or Meet theStanda~ & Planned Planned
Parking Space Car/Traile~ AvailablePhysicalLMCD to be LMCD
Categories inventory T~_~y Stn-dn_rcl C_-~tif~ Certi~ed
In Access Lots 36O 259 239 239 124 363
In Remote lots 93 93 70 43 2'/ 70
On the Street 282! 215 114 97 17 (1) 83
G~ TOTAL 735i ~67 423 3?9 16~ S16
(1) 31 ,.~;~;t-~ ?~.~_ will he elimi~n~d ~ ,~..~._...~.~.r~'
13. For the new public access at Maxwell Bay successful cooperation with Orono and additional
regional or state funding will be required.
14. Car/trailer access must be distributed equitably around the lake. When a community can not
provide access, that community needs to help fund accesses in neighboring communities.
Communities without access may be asked to pay an equitable share for maintenance to
communities with car/trailer parking.
Page 2
" 1992 LMCD !al~ Mmnetcuka Access Task F~v.e Reimrt
HISTORY AND BACKGROUND
Launch ramps and car-uailer parking at Lake ]V[innetonka have been under disod~iOI1 for many years.
The Minnesota State Constitution states that the waters of the state will be free and open to the public.
The Department of Nantral Resources (DN'R.) in response to the Outdoor Recreation Act 1975
(lVlinnesota Statue $6A.01-11) established a policy to "provide free and adequate public access to all of
lVfmnesota's lakes consistent with demand and resource capabilities". This policy has been carried out
throughout the state, usually with the cooperation of the local community which usually sees a launch
ramp with free car/nailer parking as a benefit. To obtain this free access, the DNR. set policies for what
constitutes reliable, flee car/wailer parking. The DNK attempts to utilize the following guidelines:
1. One car/trailer parking space for every 20 acres of lake surface Lake Minnetonka's 14,000 acres
requires a minimum of' 700 spaces.
2. Ramps with remote lots must have signs showing where to park the car/trailer.
3. There must be street si~gns on major roads near the ramp showing the direction to the ramp.
4. Car/trailer parking spaces must be in sight and less than 1500 feet from the launch ramp.
5. Street or remote lot parking doesnt count.
6. Car/trailer parking spaces must be available 24 hours per day, 7 days per week.
7. Car only spots for car-top boats don't count.
8. Parking must be free except in parks where the same fee is charged all park users.
Because the DNR did not recognize existing car/trailer parking spaces that did not meet their standards
they determined that there were only 143 car/trailer parking spaces on Lake lYfmnetonka. They published
information and testified before various bodies that there were only 143 car/trailer parking spaces for
Lake 1W_mnetonka when there should be 700 minimum according to their standard of one per twenty
acres. People outside the lake area communities got the impression that the Lake area was trying to keep
people off "their lake" so they could keep it for themselves. The DN-R continued to pursue a policy of
trying to obtain launch ramps and car/trailer parking on Lake 1Vfmnetonka.
On the other hand, the local lake area communities believed counts showing 1,000 to 1,200 empty trailers
attached to ears parked around the lake on the busiest days. They claimed there were substantially more
than the 700 ear/trailer parking spaces and the lake didnk need any more ear/trailer parking. In fact, they
claimed that the boats off.the trailers were the major cause of the increased crowding, on the lake. What
followed was more than a decade of struggles between the DNR. and the local Lake liKmnetonka
communities over launch ramps and free car/trailer parking.
In 1982, the DN-R announced plans to purchase property at King's Point to develop a launch ramp with
free car/trailer parking that met their standards. The local communities claimed 1,200 ear/trailer spaces
existed and vigorously objected to the DNR plan. In 1983, an appeal to the governor resulted in the
launch ramp project being canceled and a Governor's Access Study Commission being appointed to study
access on Lake lVfmnetonka. (The King's Point launch ramp was built in 1987).
The commission issued a report that: 1. Public parking availability is a crucial component of adequate boat launch facilities.
2. 700 car/trailer parking spaces is fair and reasonable for Lake lVtinnetonka.
3. Equitable dism'bution of ear/trailer parking around the lake is desirable.
4. Parking standards for Lake l~nnetonka may need to be adjusted.
Page 3
1992 LMCD D,~,- ~ Access T~k F~a'~e Report
After the report was issued, there was no rush to build the 700 car/trailer parldng places by any body or
agency. The lake area communities believed there were more than the 700 car/irailer parking spaces
called for in the report a~d the lake d/dn~ need another 700. They quest/oned why the local communities
should pay to build car/trailer parking for people oukside their area, even though community residents
were also users.
Because of the lack of action in providing for the needed car/uailer parking, the Metropolitan Council did
another lake access study in 1985. It confirmed the 700 car/trailer parking space amount as being a fair
and reasonable number.
In 1987, as a result of no action in providing car/trailer parking spaces and no plans to build them, the
Metropolitan Council told the LMCD that they would seek state legislative action for a regional or state
agency to take over governing of Lake 1VCannetonka to be assured the car/trailer parking was provided,
unless the LMCD prepared a formal plan showing how the car/trailer parking would be accomplished.
The LMCD believed the car/trailer parking could not'be considered without developing an overall long
range management plan for the lake that would include adequate free car/trailer parking. The LMCD
Management Plan was published at the end of 1990 and approved in December 1991.
The LMCD Management Plan which the DNR, the Metropolitan Council, the dries and many others
helped develop, rea/finned the 700 car/trailer parking space goal as being fair and reasonable. Three
additional fundamental points were discussed:
1. For Lake lVfmnetonit,_ 700 parking spaces would be both the mln~mum and the maximul~
2. Once the 700 car/trailer spaces are established, other meet car/trailer parking ought to be
eliminated. The dries and the county will be encouraged to erect and enforce 'no car/trailer
parking' signs as long as the 700 goal continues to be met.
3. The LMCD, with assistance from the DNK, should review the existing parking quality standards
to determine if some adjustments could be made for the special situation on Lake ~mnetonka.
In the fall of 1991, the DNR took an option on property on Maxwen Bay with the intent of developing a
launch ramp with free car/trailer parking. Objections surfaced in the city of Orono. Orono tried to
persuade the DNR not to exercise its option on the property until a plan for the entire lake was developed
according to the IA/CD management plan. At this time, the LMCD was just beginning to organize its
Access Committee. ~rhen the DN'R purchased the Maxwell Bay property, the DNR commissioner wrote
a letter to both the LMCD and the city of Orono. The letter stated that the DN-R would postpone
development of the Maxwell Bay property until a task force appointed by the LMCD developed a
detailed plan for car/trailer parking for ail of Lake lVfmnetonka.
Page 4
" 1992 LMCD Lak~ Minnem~ka Rcce~ Task Force Report
INTRODUCTION '
The Lake Access Task Force was recommended by the com~i~!oner of the DNR, and convened by a
LMCD resolution in January, 1992. The purpose of this tad~ force was to develop a detailed plan to
mee~ the lake access objectives in the LMCD Manag~nent Plan for Lake IVfinnetonka. The LMCD
invited representatives from .-
1. Its member cities
2. Government agencies sharing respons~ility for the management ofLake l~annetonka, including;
the DNR, Melropolitan Council, Hennepin County, Hennepin Parks, the lVFmuehaha Creek
Watershed District 0vtCWD), and others.
3. Interested citizen's groups such as the Minnesota Sportfi~hlng Congress (MSC), Fisherman
Advocating Intelligent Regulation (FAIR), the Lake Ef~nnetonka Lakeshore Owners Association
(LMLOA), and others
For a roster, see APPENDIX l, page 12.
Subcommittees of this group conducted detailed studies and submitted their reports to the task force.
Meetings began in March of 1992 and continued through May of 1993. Stafffrom the LMCD and the
DNR assisted. Participants gave generously of their time and support. The LMCD Lake Access
Committee drained this final report.
Appendices to this report contain information to document:
1. Task Force spokespersons (ORIGINAL DESIGNEES)
2. Exis~ng public access sites and commercial marinas (map 1)
3. Standards for car/trailer parking;
4. 1992 Current and Potential Car/Trailer Parking Inventory
5. Model Parking Agreement
6. DNR Landowner's Bill of Rights
7. DNR Acquisition Procedure
8. Access site criteria for evaluation
9. Lake Zone Map 2
10. Proceedings summary
The
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
TASK FORCE GOALS
goals adopted by the 1992 Task Force were to:
Review all types of existing boater access to Lake l~mnetonk~*
Affu~ the prior goal of 700 certifiable car/trailer parking spaces for reliable free public access to
Lake Minnetonka.
Affu-m the Management Plan goal of closing street parking to car/trailers as the 700 car/trailer
parking goal is reached.
Establish s~andards for certifying car/trailer parking that meet the special needs of Lake
Minnetonka and the boating public.
Conduct a reliable, detailed inventory of existing car/~iler parking spaces. Count potential
car/trailer parking spaces.
Develop a model car/trailer parking agreement and obtain agreements where posm'ble.
Explore prospective access sites and develop a list of sites for potential development.
Review the principle and define equitable dism~ution.
Examine the posm~ility for commercial ~ tO provide some free public car/tr~er par~o
Page
1992 LMCD l.aK,. ~ Access Task Fm~e Report
* The focus of this Task Force was on the free public access to the lake via car/trailer parki~ at boat
launch ramps. In the process of this study, a review was made ofmany other kinds of access, see
APPENDIX 2, page 13.
EXISTING ACCESS
The Task Force reviewed the studies done by the LMCD, DNR, earlier task forces, 1991 and 1992
LMCD boat count, the 1992 LMLOA car/trailer count study, and the 1993 Jabbour aerial car/u'ailer
survey. The following table categorizes access to Lake l~nn~ollka.
Boat Storage Count and Nice Weekend In Use Boat Count by Origination
1992 Max Ave Percent
Boats Percent of Boats Peak Peak of
Stored Stored that are Count Use Boats
at docks Active on the Water Count On the
& Racks Water
Where Boats Originate (4)
(1) Max?_ U_Avg?_ c__(2)(5) (3)(5)($)
Riparian Residents & Out Lots 5,973 9°,4 6% 530 379 29
Comm~ Marinas & Yacht Clubs1,862 29% 21% 549 392 30
Municipal docks 1,012 33% 23% 329 235 18
Car/trailer launch ramp 421 300 23%
TOTAL 8,847 1,829 1,306 100
]~r~m 1 OOO T ~g~r~ ~__A ,~_ ,. . .
1. Boat Counl adjusted by estimating empty racks & unremed slips at
Commercial Marinas, Yacht Clubs, and Municipal docks
2.Single Weekend Day Peak Use Study: 1984=1836, 1986=2142, 1987=2252, 1992=1829
3.Average Weekend PeakUseStudy: 1984=1318, 1986=1453, 1987--1370, 1992=1306
4. Active maximum peak use count uses estimate assuming the average peak use proportions remain
constant for the maximum peak use.
5.1992 LMCD/DNR aerial count of boats in use on nice Saturday and Sunday afternoons.
GOAL OF 700 CAR/TRAILER PARKING SPACES
The task force confirmed the goal of 700 reliable flee car/trailer parking spaces (meeting the standards of
appendix 3) and agreed with the goal of closing street parking to car/trailers as the 700 car/trailer parking
goal becomes established. This agrees with the 1991 LMCD Management Plan. It is compau'ole with the
policy of one parking place for every 20 acres of water surface, h is the minimum number of spaces
required under the DNR public water access program in the metropolitan area.
The goal of 700 was first established by the task forces of 1983 and confirmed in the study of 1986. h is
conservative, considering that the demand for boating recreation exceeds 1 parking space per 20 acres of
water on most of the metropolitan area lakes. Compared to standards in other parts of the country, it is
also .conservative. Some states provide 1 parking space per 10 acres of water surface.
Page 6
1 ~2 LIVICD I ..~. IVlinue~ Access Task
The Task Force considered lowering the goal. The Lake Minnetonlrs Lake Shore Owners Association
(LMLOA) believes that ?00 parking spaces would increase boat density and reduce the enjoyment of the
lake by lakeshore users. Talcing into consideration that there are over ?00 car/trailer spaces used to
access the lake now, and street parking will be elimlns~;ed when the ?00 goal is reached, the net effect
be fewer boats on the lake and no increases in density. Thus, the 700 goal was r~ed.
ELIMINATION OF STREET CAR/TRAILER PARKING
There was consideration in the I2VICD Management Plan whereby other street car/trailer parking would
be eliminated as the goal of ?00 was being established, and when the ?00 goal was complete, all other
street parking ought to be removed as a way of limiting crowding on the lake. Task Force data made
clear that currently, on a good day many more than ?00 car/trailers are parked around the lake.
Therefore, when the 700 goal is met and other street parking is abolished there will be a net decrease in
boats on the lake from car/wailers.
PARKING STANDARDS FOR CAR/TRAILER PARKING
Earlier task force parking standards for quality, reliable flee car/trailer parking for Lake 1Vfmnetonka were
reviewed. Access design, location of parking, security of personal property, and safety ofboaters
maneuvering their car/trailers, were among considerations discussed in reaching agreement on the
physical standards. After much discussion the Task Force adopted the following physical standards: see
APPENDIX 3, pages 14 and 15:
1. 700 is a fair and reasonable munber without increases in the future.
2. Car/waller parking must be within 2000 feet of the ramp.
3. Street or remote lot car/trailer parking over 1500 feet from a ramp must have a make ready dock..
4. 350 of the 700 spaces must be available 7 days per week, 24 hours per day. 700 must be available
on weekends, of which 350 m~y have ]inlited hours.
5. Up to 10% of the spaces at any one ramp may be spaces for cars only (assumes ca'top boats).
6. Parking must be free except in parks where the same fee is charged all park users.
7. Ramps offbusy highways or streets must have a turnaround to prevent car/trailers from backing
down fi.om busy roads.
The Task Force agreed that every other year the LMCD should take a physical inventory of the actual
car/trailer parking around the lake and certify the number that meet the above physical standards as well
as reliability standards listed below..
Car/trailer parking space meeting the physical standards listed in APPENDIX 3 will be certifiable by ~e
LMCD as counting toward the 700 goal on the following basis:
a. 100% of the street or remote lot parking spaces will count if: · There is a parking agreement OR
· The street or remote parking is signed "ear/trailer only"
b. 80% of the street or remote lot parking spaces will count if:
· There are signs at the launch ramp showing where to park.
· There are street signs pointing out the direction to the !.~-nch ramp.
· The ramp and parking locations can be put on an access map
c. 60% of the street or remote lot parking spaces will count if none of the above are met.
Reliable parlclng meets the standards of appendix 3. The Task Force recommends upgrading all parking
to reduce undesirable parlcl.g. The changes from prior standards allow the Task Force greater flexibiliw
Page 7
IgC2 LMCD L~c ~~. Access Te.sk Foa:~ Report
in ce~g more carArdl~- parking spaces. As can 1~ seen in ~ repo~ the number increased from
143 to 516. -
- PARKING INVENTORY
To detem~e the numbe~ of ex/sting and potential car/tr~er parking spaces capable of being certi~ed to
the newly adopted standards, data was gathered from a variety of sources and in a number of ways. Site
lists were provid~ by LMCD member cities. Site visits were made and aerial photographs were used.
Spaces inventoried included:
1. Parking in on-site lots at existing lake access points
2. Available on-street parking within 2,000 feet
3. Off-site lots, public and private
4. Future additional committed spaces
5. Car/wailer parking spaces potentially available
The total potential car/tra/ler parking spaces certifiable to the new physical standards was 735. The
or/g/md inventory is in APPENDIX 4, page 16. Substantially higher numbers of car/wailers are being
parked free at peak times in good weather than the inventory has identified.
The 1993 LMCD Car/Trailer Parking
1992 Total In Use Total
Curm~ ~na Total in that Meet the Additional Total in
Potential Total Use that Reliability Futura Use
Parking Space Car/Trailer In Use or Meet the S~-~i & P~-~ed Phnned
Categories Inventory Avnil~hl¢ Physical LMCD lo be LMCD
.... (I) Today ~..a.~ ~ _P~n~/_ed C~--H,~_
in Access Lots
North Arm 65 i0 80 80 0 80
Grays Bay Csway 37 37 17 17 0 17
Grays Bay Dam 20 20 20 20 01 20
Spring Park 148 86 86 86 01 86
Kings Point 0 32 32 32 0 32
Phelps Bay 10 4 4 41 0 4
Henn. Reg. Park 80 0 0 0 48 48
Maxwell Bay N/A 0 - 0 0 76 76
SUBTOTAL 360 259 239 239, ]24 363
In Ret. ore lots
Carsons Bay 93 93 70 43 27~ 70
On the Street -
North Ann 31 31 31 31 0 (2) 0
W'diiams St. 40 40 40 40 0 40
Cooks Bay 110 43 43 26 17 43
Wayzata Bay 101 101 0 0 0 0
SUBTOTAL 282 215 ! 14 97 17 83
GRAND TOTAL 735' 567 423 379 168 516
Page 8
q Il
19~2 LMC:D lake Mianetaah Access Ta.~: F~a~,e Relx~
(1) Includes credit for spaces reserved in lots for car top carried watercTa~ 7 at North Arm Access, and
3 at G~ays Bay Dam.
(2) 31 car/trailer spaces will be eliminated in the vicinity of North Arm and Maxwell Bay as pan of an
agreemem with Orono when the DNR access at Maxw~ Bay is in operation.
The Task Force reco~ there is additional car/trailer parking beyond 2000 feet that is available today
and not pan of the above count. It, also, recognizes there are additional small launch ramps in use and
available today that are not in the above count.
This report adopts a new and lower inventory in an effort to be very conservative after consultation with
Hermepin County and the cities. The revised total inventory of $16 car trailer spaces represents parking
that is available now, or that can reasonably be made available on a stable long-term basis. There are
approximately 379 car/trailer parking spaces currently available and that are being certified by the LMCD.
Of'these, approximately 282 spaces are in public access lots. An additional 97 spaces are in on-street
parking sites. ApproximAtely 168 future spaces are either committed or negotiable. Note that when
Maxwell Bay is completed, 31 on street spaces will be eliminated. This results in a total of 516 potential
car/trailer parking spaces that are now believed to be available or planned and which meet the new
parking standards and that can be certified by the LMCD. Parking agreements need to be reached with
communities, counties, agencies and private commercial m~rinas to convert some existing parking fi.om
uncertified to certified.
PARKING AGREEMENTS AND DNR COST SHARING
One result of the 1986 task force was the improvement in the process that secures parking spaces at or
near existing public access sites that can be considered to be "reliable". To make new or existing parking
reliable over the years a parking agreement can be secured with the property owner that requires the
car/trailer parking to remain available in place unless canceled under the agreement. Ii'the parking spaces
are lost, a good faith effort will be made to replace them with other parking spaces somewhere else. The
LMCD and the DNR will assist communities to relocate them. The Task Force continued this
recommendation and developed a current model agreement. The Lake Access Parking Agreement form
for evaluating public access parking agreements are provided in APPENDIX 5, pages 1%19.
These agreements should be between the LMCD and the local unit of government or property owner.
The DNR. will assist with these agreements by providing funding where appropriate. The DN-R. can share
cost with cities and/or agencies on access and parking facilities improvement, including land acquisition.
The DNR by cooperative agreement can reimburse cities for dedicated free car/trailer parking.
The DNR Landowner's Bill of Rights describes the procedure used by the DlqR in the purchase of
potential access sites. The Lake l~_mnetonka acquisition process is the DNR commitment to work
cooperatively in this area. see APPENDDC 6 and 7 pages 20-24.
The first agreement was signed in May of 1993 with the City oflVlinnetrista. The agreement with that
city was for a total of 44 parking spaces at the following sites:
l. W'flliams Street in Halsteds Bay: 40 car/trailer parking spaces
2. Tuxedo Boulevard in Phelps Bay: 4 car/trailer parking spaces
Page 9
1992 LMCD Lake Mi-,~,m:mka Acce~ Task Force
Other sites ~ have a high potential for adding to rdiable paring by ~r~nent,
1. Orono:
a. Hennepin County North Arm ramp and on-site lot (80 spaces)
b. County Road 51, serving Hennepin County North Arm ramp O 1 spaces)
2. Spring Park, Spring Park Bay, with accompanying county maint~,nce yard nearby in Orono (86
spaces)
3. Deephaven:
a. Carsons Bay, lV~nnetonka Blvd. ramp with city maintenance lot (30 spaces)
b. Carsons Bay, lM~nnetonks Blvd. ramp with school lot on V'mehil! Road (40 spaces)
4. Wayzata: Wayzata Bay County Road 16 ramp, County Road 16 (40 spaces)
5. Mound: Mound Park Bay ramp, Cooks Bay (43 spaces)
NEW ACCESS SITES
The Task Force recommends the following sites as having the potential for becoming lake access sites.
The SiTe Evaluation Criteria are provided in APPENDIX 8, page 25.
Potential Sites
1. Tonka Bay City Dock, channel to Gideoas Bay
2. Timber Lane, Gideons Bay, Shorewood
3. Mai-Tai Restaurant Site, Excelsior Bay, Excelsior (property was sold)
4. 456 Arlington Ave., Wayzata Bay (private residence), Wayzata
5. Pelican Point, Spring Park Bay, Mound
6. Lost Lake, Cooks Bay, Mound
7. Advance Machine, West Arm, Spring Park
Grays Bay Causeway
The unimproved substandard public access on Trunk I-~ghway 101 will not be redeveloped as pl~ned.
This represents a setback for public access development. The 32 spaces planned for the causeway had
been considered committed. The 1~umesota Department of Transportation has abandoned plans to
improve the site. However, Wayzata and ~fumetonka are continuing discussions about imProvements at
the site.
Max'well Bay
Up to 76 additional car/trailer parking spaces may be provided when the launch ramp is in place at ·
Maxwell Bay, Orono. This site continues to be examined. DNR Trails & Waterways and the City of
Orono are negotiating to purchase alternate properties.
EQUITABLE DISTRIBUTION
Subcommittees discussed equitable distribution of car/trailer parking at Lake l~'m~o~ The principle
adopted in earlier task force reports of dividing the lake into zones with equitable distn'bution was
endorsed, see APPENDIX 9, page 26. Each city is encouraged to contribute to the overall goal. If it
cannot contribute it may be asked to make voluntary payments for msi~en,nce to those cities who do
provide car/trailer access.
Page 10
Cl'l 3
' ' 1~92 LMCD I,~ke Mimmumka Acce~ T~k Fcr~e Rep~
MARINA POTENTIAL FOR LAKE ACCESS'
During the summer months most m,,irm~ have relatively empty boat storage lots that have the potential
for parking car/trailers if the marina has a launch ramp. Many now provide some fee based boat
launching service. These marinas could poss~ly provide some free car/u'ailer parking and ramp use to
the public. The operators or owners might expect some type of reimbursement. The DNR could possibly
provide funding and the LMCD will cooperate.
The Task Force identified six conditions and issues to be considered in determining the potential free
public access use of marinas:
1. Ability to extend existing capadty.
2. Extent to which a m-~u~ already serves the public through fee paid ~:z:ess. (Fee paid public
access does not meet the definition of free and open public access.)
3. Attitude of nearby homeowners toward public access use.
4. Duration of public use, considered for a trial basis only until proven fea.m'ble.
5. Management issues, such as reserving parking for public use, and compensation to the marina
owner consistent with public access operations and public policy.
6. Possible DNR funding constraints from annual operations budgets and overall cost effectiveness.
PROCEEDINGS SUMMARY
The Lake Access Task Force study is documented in a proceedings summary. This chronology highlights
the various subcommittee, committee, and Task Force meetings which took place among city, agency,
and community org~iT~tions. These groups participated in the research, deh'berations and consensus
findings. See APPENDIX 10, pages 27-35.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This study depended upon collaboration of community representatives, municipal, regional' and state
officials. Task Force meetings provided a public platform for full discussion of access to Lake
1Wmnetonka. Subcommittee members invested extensive volunteer hours. All participants deserve
recognition. The Task force thanks every individual and organization for thdr conm'bufions.
P~e 11
1992 LAKE ACCESS TASK FORCE
DESIGNATED SPOKESPEKSON
(Original Appointe~s by Organizations)
POSITION/TITLE
:Appendix 1
ORGANIZATION
James N. Grathwol
(Task Force Chair)
Richard Engebretson
Lucille Crow
Alan M. AlbreCht
Ann Perry
Tom Markle
Wally Clevenger
Skip Johnson
Gabriel Jabbour
Kristy Stover
Jerry Rockvam
Vern Haug
Jerry Schmieg
Barry Petit
Nick Duff
Tad Jude
Douglas Bryant
Don Germanson
Thomas S. Maple
Gary Larson
John F. Schneider
Beverly Blomberg
Board Member
Mayor
Mayor
Mayor
Planning Director
City Council
Mayor
Mayor
City Council
City Council
Mayor
Mayor
Mayor
City Counc~
Mayor
Commissioner
Superintendent
President
Manager
Co-Chair
President
Orono Resident
LMCD, City of Excelsior
City of Deephaven
City of Excelsior
City of Greenwood
City of Minnetonka
City of Minnetonka B~ch
City of Minnetrista
City of Mound
City of Orono
City of Shorewood
City of Spring Park
City of Tonka Bay
City of Victoria
City of Wayzata
City of Woodland
Hennepin County
Hennepin Parks
Lake Minnetonka
Lakeshore Owners Association
Minnehaha Creek
Watershed District
Fish¢,man Advocating
Intelligent Regulation
MN Sportfishing Congress
Maxwell Bay Residents
Dennis Asmussen
Mike Markell
Gordon Kimball
Martha Reger
Larry Killien
Donald W. Buckhout
Eugene IL Strommen
Rachel Thibault
AGENCY STAFF
Director
Water Recreation
Supervisor
Regional Supervisor
Area Supervisor
Regional Supervisor
ADP. Coordinator
Executive Dinx~or
Adminis. T~chnician
Page
MN D1VR Trails & Waterways
MN DNK Trails & Waterways
MN DNR Trails & Waterways
MN DN-R Trails & Waterways
MN DNR Trails & Waterways
State Office of Planning
LMCD
LMCD
rtl
m
Z
X
rtl
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
Existing Public Access Sites and Commercial Marinas
1
2
2A
3
4
5
6
6A
7
8
9
10
11
12
12A
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
20A
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
Beans Greenwood Marina*
Causeway - Hwy. 101
Chapman Place Marina
Cochrane Boat Yards*
Crystal Bay Service*
Curlys Mirmetonka Marina
Deephaven, City of
Dennis Boats*
Gayle Marina
Grays Bay Access (by Dam)
Grays Bay Resort & Marina
Halsted Drive Access
Hendrickson Bridge Access
Howards Point Marina
Kreslins*
Kings Point Access - DN-R
Lakeside Marina
Minnetonka Boat Rental*
Minnetonka Boat Works (W) & (O)*
Mound, City of
North Shore Drive Marina
Rockvam Boatyards
Sailors World Marina
Schmitts Marina*
Shorewood Yacht Club & Marina*
Spring Park Access
Excel Marina
Tonka Bay Marina
Wayzata, City of
Windward Marine*
Tuxedo Road Access
*No launching facilities
11/17/93
St Albans Bay
Grays Bay
Cooks Bay
St Albans & Excelsior
Crystal Bay
Lower Lake South
Carsons Bay
Lower Lake South
Maxwell Bay
Grays Bay
Grays Bay
Halsted Bay
North Arm
South Upper Lake
St Albans Bay
Halsted Bay
Maxwell Bay
Harrisons Bay
Wayzata,Tanager,Browns Bay
Cooks Bay
Maxwell Bay
Coffee Cove
Smiths Bay
Excelsior Bay
Gideons Bay
Spring Park Bay
St Albans Bay
Lower Lake South
Wayzata Bay
Browns Bay
Phelps Bay
Page 13 A
q17
PARKING STANDARDS
LAKE MINNL~ONKA PUBLIC ACCESSES
· Appendix 3
Thc 1992 Lake Minnctonka Lake Access Task Force has adopted thc goal of 700 long-term reliable spaces
for car/trailer parking in thc vicinity of present and future access sites at Lake Minnctonka. Thc Task Force
further agrees that thc Lake Minnctonka Conservation District (LMCD) implement these standards for
identifying and counting of car/trailer parking spaces and monitor progress toward thc ?00 goal on a
continuing basis.
The following set of standards has been adopted by the Task Force for application to Lake Mirmetonka:
All spaces must be within 2,000' of a public access point. For car/trailers parked between 1,500' and
2,000', a temporary boat mooring facility at the ramp site for a number of boats equal to 10% of the
parking spaces must be provided.
All parking locations away from the access site should be provided with a long-term agreement, three
year minimum, with five years more desirable, on file with the LMCD. Within that time availability,
if any designated spaces need to be rcmovcd, they must be replaced with comparable spaces.
w
The location of parking spaces, either off-street or on-street away from the access site, must be
identified by dear, aesthetically attractive, consolidated, capable of being inexpensively updated,
signage.
All off-street spaces must be illustrated on a plan on file with the LMCD. The plan shall dearly
indicate each car/trailer space and adequate ingress, egress and maneuvering space. Parking space
minimum size standards (in feet):
Vehicle only
9 X 19 (Handicapped 12 x 19)
Car/trailer 10 X 40
Off-street designated trailer parking on grass is acceptable if vehicle is parked on graded/paved
surface. '
o
dl spa. ecs must be available on an unrestricted, first-come-first-served basis, 700 reliable spaces will
· available from Memorial Day to Labor Day from 5 pm on Fridays until midnight Sundays, and on
holidays. Fifty per cent of reliable spaces will be available weekdays. Hours of availability va'll be
determined by LMCD in cooperation with the DN1L
Vehicle-only spaces (no trailer) on public access parking lots can be counted toward the total goal of
700 car/trailer spaces provided that thc number of such spaces counted for any given lot does not
exceed 10% of thc total number of spaces on that lot. (Example: Out of 50 total parking spaces on
a lot, seven are for vehicle only. Only fivc of thc seven may bc counted toward thc goal of 700 [i.e.,
10% of 50=5].)
Page 14
LMCD PARKING STANDARDS FOP. LAKE MINNETONKA PUBLIC ACCESSES'
o
All on-street spaces should mcct thc following additional standards:
6.1
6.2
6.3
6.4
Minimum length of 50 feet per space.
Adequate shoulder width to preclude door opening into a traffic lane and to provide a safe
route to the access point.
Of the total non-designated (non-signed) on-street parking spaces, only 80% are considered to
be reliable in order to account for non-access related public parking.
Designated and signed on-sireet car/trailer parking spaces will be counted 100% for car/trailer
llSe.
On-street car/trailer parking spaces must be illustrated on a plan by strect name on file with
the LMCD.
Page 15
f--
7
~2,.0
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
Lake Access Model Parking Agreement
Appendix
This Agreement is made between the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District
(LMCD) and the ( ) both public corporations organized and existing
under the laws of the State of Minnesota.
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS the LMCD and ( ) are jointly concerned w/th
providing public boating access to Lake Minnetonka, meeting the Parking Standards for
Lake Minnetonka, and
WHEREAS the LMCD and ( ) recognize that a goal of 700
car/trailer spaces will be provided in the vicinity of present and future access sites
around the lake on as equitable a basis as possible,
NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed by the LMCD and (
) that the conditions for car/trailer parking for the public access
identified on the checklist identified as Exhibit 'A' and Parking Site Plan identified as
Exhibit
"B" meet Parking Standards on the checklist as indicated.
IN W1TN-ESS WHEREOF, the LMCD and (
agreement to be duly executed this
~day of
) have caused this
· 19~.
LAKE MINNETONKA
CONSERVATION DISTRICT:
AGENCY/CITY:
By
By¸
Page 17
LI .I
EXHIBIT A
Checklist for Evaluating Lake Minnetonka
Public Access Car/Trailer Parking Agreements
Access Name
Access City
Lake Zone No ....
Car/Trm'ler (C/I~ Parking by Location:
a. Off-street, on access site .................
(On-site designated trailer parking on
grass is acceptable if vehicle is parked on
graded or paved surface.)
b. Off-street, remote from access site
* Distance in feet from access site
c..On-meet, less than 1,500 feet:
* Designated signed C/T only, count 100% of
C/T parking spaces available ............
* Not signed, count 75% of spaces available
d. On-meet, 1,501 feet to 2,000 feet:
* Designated signed C/T only, count 100% of
C/T parking spaces available ............
* Not signed, count 75% of spaces available
# of spaces
Vehicle Only Parking Spaces - these count up to
10% of total number of C/T spaces on lot:
# of standard vehicles spaces 9' x 19' ...
# of handicapped vehicle spaces 12' x 19' -
Total # of vehicle only spaces
Count total vehicle only spaces or 10% of
total Cai' parking spaces in lots whichev~- is less
5. Total, ear/trailer parking spaces at site ............
COOPERATING PROVISIONS: Initial as accepted:
I. Access site plan illustrating each CdT space
with adequate ingress, egress, and maneuvering
space is kept on file and current with LMCD.
Signage provided at access site is clear, aesthetically
attractive, consolidated for easy updating. ..
All spaces are available on unrestricted, first-
come, first-served basis, from Memorial Day to
Labor Day, 5:00 pm Friday until midnight Sunday.
Fifty percent (50%) of spaces meeting Parking
Standards arc available weekdays.
Page 18
EXHIBIT A
Checklist for Evaluating Lake Minnetonka
Public Access Carfrrm'ler Parking Agreement
All on-street parking spaces meet the following
standards:
a. Minimum length of 50 feet per space.
b. Adequate shoulder width to preclude door
opening into traffic lane.
e. Safe pedestrian route to access point
provided.
d. On-street car/trailer parking spaces are
illustrated and kept current on a plan by
street name on file with the LMCD.
A temporary boat mooring facility is provided
at the ramp site for a number of boats equal to
10% of the C/T parking spaces at the site for
C/T parking spaces between 1,S01 feet and
2,000 feet. New facilities must meet Federal
A.D.A. requirements for handicapped persons.
6. Agency/city reserves the right to make changes
in access site plan off-street parking or on-street
designated or non-designated parking as public
policy priorities may require, with a
good faith effort to replace lost C/T spaces
at the earliest possible date, notifying the
LMCD of anticipated changes. LMCD and M]q
DNR agree to cooperate with city/agency in
relocation of lost slips, including locations
elsewhere in the lake, and at other access.
o
City retains approval privilege on any actions
of an agency regulating parking allowances or
restrictions on county or state highways affecting
C/T parking in the vicinity of an access site.
8. Agency/city agrees to enter into this agreement
for a period of~ years (five years desired)
in recognition of the valuable recreational
opportunities offered on Lake Minnetonka.
Appendix 6
MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
LANDOWNER'S BILL OF RIGHTS
State parks, water access sites, wildlife management areas, state forest, fisheries projects,
recreational trails, canoe and boating routes, wild and scenic rivers, scientific and natural areas
and thc State water bank program all provide recreational opportunities for the general public
or protection of the State' natural resources. Each of these programs authorizes either the
purchase of the fee title to land or the purchase of a lesser interest in land, such as an
easement.
Selling land to the Department of Natural Resources is in many ways similar to selling it to a
private party, but in other ways is different from standard real estate transactions. Because of ·
the many Federal and State laws that govern land acquisition, it often takes eight months to a
year and a half to sell land to the Department of Natural Resources. These laws were
designed both to protect private landowners' rights and to assure that public money is well
spent to serve the public interest. This letter describes the Department of Natural Resources'
land acquisition procedure. Please keep it for future reference.
Land Identification
The management programs select the tracts of land which they feel would most help'them to
carry out their programs. Once your land has been identified for purchase, you will be
contacted by a Department of Natural R. esour~s repre~ntative who will explain what your
land would be us~cl for if it is purchased and will also explain the land acquisition to you.
You are free to decide whether or not to sell your land to the State. If you are willing to
consider selling it, the State will have your land appraised and you will then decide if you
want to sell it at the appraised value. If you do not want to sell your land to the State, you
are under no obligation to do so. However, you may be contacted again in the future to ~ if
you might have changed your mind.
Appraisal Process
The State will hire a qualified appraiser to determine the fair market value of your property.
You will be invited to accompany the appraiser during his or her inspection of the property, if
you so desire.
You also have the right to hire and appraiser to provide an independent opinion of value for
your property. You will be notified of the deadline for your appraisal to be submitted if you
would like it to be reviewed along with the State's appraisal. After the appraisals are
reviewed, a fair market value will be established as just compensation for your property. If
your land is purchased by the State, you may be reimbursed up to $500 for the cost of your
appraisal providing you submit a copy of that report and a paid receipt for it. It is not
necessary for you to submit your appraisal for review in order to be reimbursed for it.
Page 20
Landowners Bill of Rights
Neggt{ation Proce,~-~
The State is not allowed to discuss the price until after the appraisal is completed and will not
discuss the price with anyone but the landowner or his agent. Documents regarding the
purchase of your property will be public records once the purchase is completed. At the
~ginning of the negotiation period, you will be given a summary of the approved appraisal.
This summary will include the final conclusion of value, the total number of acres and types
of land appraised, the valuation of all buildings and improvements being purchased, and any
special elements of value. The same person who appraised your property for the State will
not act as a negotiator for its purchase.
Purchase Procedure
The Department of Natural Resources will acquire your property by means of an option,
which is an offer from the landowner to sell. The option, including all special provisions,
legal descriptions and elements of execution, must be reviewed by the State as to its legality
and acceptability. The State shall have 15 days after receiving an option to notify the
landowner in writing if the option is not approved and the reasons therefore. If you are not
notified of an option's disapproval, you should assume it is approved.
Unless you request otherwise in writing, the option period shall be no more than two months
if no survey is required. If a survey is required, the option period shall be no more than nine
months. These time limits do not apply to wildlife management areas that require county
board approval. The option period begins on the last date on which the option is signed by a
landowner. Before the end of the option period, the State shall decide whether or not to
purchase the land and shall notify the landowner of its decision by either a Notice of Election
to Purchase or a letter explaining the reasons for not purchasing the property. If the State
does not elect to purchase property on which it has approved and accepted an option, it will
pay the landowner $500.00 after the option period expires. "
After signing the option, you have one month to mail or deliver an Abstract of Title to the
Department of Natural Resources. If your land title is registered, you should submit your
Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title plus a Registered Property Abstract instead of an
Abstract of Title. The State will have the abstract brought up to date at its own expense.
Within one month from the Notice of Election to Purchase or delivery of the
Abstract,whichever is later, the Attorney General will provide a title opinion which will
identify any defects in your title to be cleared up before the purchase can be completed. You
will then have 120 days to make your title marketable.
The landowner is required to pay all taxes that are due in the year in which the deed or
easement is signed, including Green Acres deferred taxes. Once the taxes are paid and all
title defects are cured, the Attorney General will send you a Warranty Deed or other
conveyance document to sign and return.
Page 21
Landowners Bill of Rights
The State pays thc abstracting and recording fees related to thc sale. If your property is held
as security for a loan or advance of credit that requires or permits the imposition of a pre-
payment penalty, this penalty shall also be reimbursed by thc State. The costs of clea~ing title
defects, payment of taxes and related attorney's fees arc not reimbursable.
Method of Pa_'vm~nt
Payment for the land is mailed to the landowner after the signed deed or other conveyance
document has been recorded and the abstract brought up to date. Depending on the County
Recorder's workload, this may take anywhere from two to four weeks. Assuming your title is
marketable and you act expeditiously to complete the transaction, payment must be made no
later than 90 days after the Notice of Election to Purchase.
You may choose to be paid in either a lump sum or in up to four separate payments. The
State does not pay interest on monies held during an installment agreement.
_Vacating Your Property_
You have the right to continue occupancy of your property until 90 days after the date of the
deed. You may stay an addition 90 days by paying a fair m:~rkct rent to thc State, with thc
prior written approval of the management program for which your property is being
purchased. If you do not vacate your property within 180 days of the date of thc deed, you
will automatically waivc your right to any relocation benefits to which you may otherwise be
entitled.
Relocation Benefit~
The State is obligated to pay relocation expense any time they displace owners or tenants
from their residences, displace a business or cause a business to cease operating. Moving
expenses are the most common relocation benefit. A relocation advisor is assigned io work
with anyone who might be displaced by State land acquisition to guide them in locating a new
home or business.
You have the right to accept or reject the State's offer for your property. If you accept the
offer, you may receive or waive any relocation assistance, services, paymmts and benefits.
You also have the right to accept the State's offer for the property and to contest the
relocation benefits.
You have the right to seek the advice of any attorney regarding any aspect of your land sale.
You also have the right to have the State acquire your land by condemnation at your written
request and with the agreement of the Commissioner of the Depa,~,,,ent of Natural Resources.
The primary laws governing Department of Natural Resources land acquisition procedures
are, Public Law 91-646 and Minnesota Statutes Section g4.0274.
For further information, contact: Department of Natural Resources
Bureau of Land Acquisition and Exchange Section
500 Lafayeue Road, Box 30
St. Paul, Minnesota 55155-4030
(612) 296-409'/
Page 22
Appendix 7
LAKE MINNErONKA ACQUISITION PROCESS
This document will dcscn'be the process the DNR will usc to acquire land on Lake
Minnctonka.
BACKGROUND
t~ P.roccss to provide Public Water Access (PWA) in the metropolitan ar~a was developed by
e naetropolitan Council, The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MNDNR), and
the State Planning Agency under the direction of the Legislative Commission on Minnesota
Resources (LClVI~).
These agencies produced a document that outlined a Site Selection Criteria, a Lake Ranking
system and an Access Priority List. The MNDNR and other public agencies use these
procedures to develop accesses in the metropolitan area. This document is available from the
Metropolitan Council.
PROCESS
On a priority bay or lake area, public property is investigated for access suitability. If none is
available or useable, a search for suitable sites is begun. Often on heavily developed lakes or
bays, the actual acquisition process begins with a parcel of land becoming available that meets
the criteria. Thc MNDNK purchases only from willing sellers and thc owner must be willing
to sell the parcel for a public water access.
When the landowner indicates a willingness to sell, the acquisition process and timeline are
explained. If thc landowner agrees to proceed, the Landowner Bill of Rights Letter is signed.
This letter verifies that thc landowner understands the process and has agreed to work with
the MNDNR..
If the site meets the criteria and the landowner agrees to' proceed, the MNDNR will have the
property appraised to determine its fair market value. After thc appraisal has been approved,
an offer to purchase can be made.
If the lando~mer agrees with the value, then the lvl]qD~ may take an option on the property.
The option will indentify such things as, the land to be purchased, the price, the length of
time required to complete thc negotiations.
After the option is signed by the landowner, the MNDNR, within 5 working days, will notify
the city and the LMCD, in writing, of its actions. Notification can not I~ made prior to the
signing of the option due to confidentiality requirements.
Page 23
Lake Minnetonka Acquisition Process
PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
The proposal will be discussed with the city, (citizens, council members, etc) and other
interested members of the public. Assuming there are no valid reasons for rejecting the
property or the project, the MI~-DNR will work and cooperate with the city and the LMCD to
complete the acquisition and development..
The MNDNR will use various methods to inform and involve the public. The processes used
will include: Formal Public Meetings, Informal Public Meetings, Open Houses, Question and
Answer Sessions at City Council Meetings and Meetings with neighbors and concerned
individuals.
The MNDNR will continue to keep the city and the LMCD informed and involved in the
design of the acces from the initial concept stage through final design. Examples of items
that will be discussed are: traffic flow, parking lot layout, drainage and runoff, landscaping,
signage. .
This cooperative process does not end with the construction of the access. After the access is
developed the MNDNR will continue to work with the city and the residents on access
maintenance and operations procedures.
Page 24
LAKE ACCESS TASK FORCE
ACCESS SITE EVALUATION CRITERIA
Appendix
These evaluation criteria should be used in selecting potential new access sites for fishing craft and
small recreation boats. Thc st2ndard arc not expected In bc perfectly achieved. Each should bc
seriously considered and graded. Other evaluation criteria may bc considered on a site-specific basis.
Relationship to residential areas - Positive and negative impacts of the site on adjacent
residential areas, such as distance between a site and nearby homes, screening the site from
homes, noise, traffic, etc.
Accessibility to primary highways - Potential sites near major highways (State Highways 7 and
101, County Roads 19 and 15 are examples) to reduce traffic impact on residential streets.
Safety on site, on water and egress to both.
Public use precedent - Sites which are already in public ownership or in commercial or
industrial use, or isolated from other residential areas, and where public facilities or services
have been provided and accepted, have the least neighborhood impact.
Intensity of boating use near a potential access site - Sections of the lake where there is intense
boating, or crowding in channels, should be downg~ded.
Cost - Property acquisition, development and maintenance costs.
Physical development constraints - positive and negative features on land and in the water and
changes possible to make the potential site usable.
Visual impacts - Positive and negative visual impressions as seen from land and water.
Multiple use opportunities for the site - Sites that provide shore fishing, pier fishing, picnic
areas, toilets, etc., along with boat access are preferred.
9. Site size - Larger sites with off-street parking are prcfen'ed.
10. Environmental considerations - dredging, fill, nm-off control, wetlands preservation, etc.
Footnotes:
1. Sites shall not be excluded because there is limited access for large boats.
2. Sites will be preferred that provide ecluit2ble distribution.
3. Sellers must be willing, city must cooperate and other agencies must approve.
Adopted: March 18, 1993
Page 25
LLI ~
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
0
m
N
c
Apendix 10
PROCEEDINGS SUMMARY
1992 LAKE ACCESS TASK FORCE STUDY
FOR LAKE MINNETOHKA
TASK FORCE CHRONOLOGY
The initial Task Force meeting was held 3/11/92. Its purpose goal and objectives were
introduced as follows:
PURPOSE - to establish a plan to meet the Management Plan lake access policies
developed in the 1983 and 1986 Lake Minnetonka Task Force studies.
GOAL - coordination of an immediate inter-agency inventory, study and assessment
of the car/trailer (edt) parking spaces at public access ramps to meet the 700 reliable edt
objective.
OBJECTIVES:
Establish criteria in the LMCD Code for acceptable year-round lake access, including
access ramps, lakeside and remote edt parking, handicapped access and signage.
b. Conduct a joint study of all access ramps and associated cdt parking, identifying all
existing ramps and associated lake parking.
c. Develop a plan for and provide LMCD-approved boat access ramps with 700 reliable
edt parking spaces.
do
Widen or otherwise improve efficiency of existing ramps for use by more than one edt
at a time.
Resolve DN'R's Maxwell Bay access proposal in accord with Management Plan
policies and objectives and in accord with the 1983 and 1986 Task Force Study
recommendations by:
1) Activating the Lake Access Task Force, appointing
representatives of affected communities, DNIL LMLOA and citizens to
implement the public access siting process.
2) Facilitate a cooperative effort to address land use issues that are the basis for
objections raised by the City of Orono.
3) Conduct a feasibility study of land purchase between Gayle's Marina and the
DNR property.
4) City of Orono, LMCD and DNR cooperate in securing funding for the Maxwell
Bay access properties.
NOTE:After cooperation on obtaining funding through thc Legislative Commission
on Minnesota Resources (LCMR), the Task Force and LMCD were asked by Orono
officials to not further participate in Maxwell Bay negotiations between thc DNR and
the City of Orono.
Page 27
PROCEEDINGS SUMMARY, 1992 LAKE ACCESS TASK FORCE STUDY
The Task Force formed three subcommittees, namely:.
Data Gathering
Standards
Steering
DATA GATHERING SUBCObIMrITEE C./T PARKING INVENTORY
DEVELOPMENT
A 4/15/92 inventory of existing or planned cdt parking spaces was conducted by LMCD and
DNR staff from contacts made among city and county staff.
That inventory was compared to the 1983 Task Force inventory for the five zones of the lake.
The comparison of cdt parking spaces by zones was as follows:
Zone Goal 1983 Total 1992 Total
1 North Arm 139 60 63
Grays Bay Hwy 101 24 37
Grays Bay Dam 19 19
Wayzata Bay Hwy 16 . ~t 25.
Sub Total 144 46 81
3 Carsons Bay 155 0 40
4
Spring Park Bay 79 93
Phelps Bay o _4.
Sub Total 126 79 97
5
Halstect, Wms. St. 0 30
Halsted, Kings Point 0 32
Henn. Regional Park 0 100
Cooks Bay, Mount Park 0
Sub Total 136 0 192
Grand Total 700 185 473
These counts were later revised based upon a more detailed inventory conducted in June by
LMCD staff of cdt street parking potentially available to 2,000' from the access, identified
later in this report.
Criteria were needed to identify reliable cdt parking spaces. The Standards Committee was
asked to develop such criteria.
Page 28
PROCEEDINGS SUM:MARY, 1992 LAKE ACCESS TASK FORCE STUDY
STANDARDS SUBCOMMITrEE ACTIONS
FACILITATOR ENGAGED. The LMCD engaged a state facilitator to meet the diverse
interests involved in the proceedings:
1. Decisions would result from a consensus.
2. Persons participating would only be those holding designated membership in
thc Task Force.
3. The Task Force would work in good faith.
TASK
ASSIGNMENTS:
I. MN DNR staff examined c/t parking spaces in public access ramp lots.
2. LMCD staff counted street parking utilizing 1985 c/t parking criteria, adjusting
criteria by extending distance from access site from 1,500' to 2,000'.
3. Aerial photographs of public access sites taken.
4. DNR/LMCD staff drafted parking space standards from thc 1986 standards
previously considered.
TASK ASSIGNMENT RESULTS:
C/T PARKING INVENTORY OF 7/15/93. A street inventory of actual and potential c/t
parking spaces up to 2,000' from accesses was conducted. Potential spaces included future
public access sites, one private lot, public lots in other agency jurisdictions (school districts)
and street locations subject to city/county approval.
A surveyor wheel measurement device was used to calculate an accurate 50' c/t parking space
and for determining accurate distance from the launch ramp. Results of the inventory count
of 7/15/92 were:
C/T Parking Spaces at present or planned access ramps:
North Arm
Grays Bay 101 Causeway
Grays Bay Dam
Kings Point, DNK
Spring Park Ramp
Spring Park/Orono County Lot
Hennepin Regional Park
Sub Total
63
37
19
32
19
70
340
Potential C/T Parking Space Additions:
Streets, city & county
Off street, private & city
Sub Total
82
168
Existing Street Availability:
City/county
(99 of the 337 at Williams
Street, Halsted Bay access)
337
GRAND TOTAL
845
Page 29
PROCEEDINGS SUMMARY, 1992 LAKE ACCESS TASK FORCE STUDY
DNR ANALYSIS OF C/T PARKING SPACES AT ACCESS LOTS:
The cdt parking space count at access on-site lots differ only slightly from 1983 and 1986
counts. Some ear-only parking spaces could be converted to cdt parking spaces.
AERIAL SURVEY OF PUBLIC ACCESS SITES
Aerial photos of cdt parking conditions at public access sites on a high-use day illustrated
crowded conditions. Opportunities for improvements or expansion of parking capacity either
on or off-site were noted.
RELIABLE c/r PARKING SPACE STANDARDS
Seven criteria and three supplemental recommendations applying to Parking Standards were
prepared 7/15/92 for Task Force approval.
GRANT RECOMMENDATION FOR MAXWELL BAY LAND ACQUISITION
A Legislative Commission on Minnesota Resources (LCMR) grant recommendation for
$944,000 for land acquisition to develop a public access site on Maxwell bay, subject to
Legislative approval, was announced.
JOINT DATA GATHERING/STANDARDS SUBCOMMITTEE ACTIONS
Cfi' PAR.KING INVENTORY REVIEW
Subcommittee action of 8/12/92 amended the 7/15/92 cdt Parking Inventory from 845 to 755 cdt
parking spaces. A reduction of 59 spaces from 99 to a net of 40 spaces at the Williams St.
Halsted Bay access, and a reduction of 32 spaces from 100 to 68 spaces at the Hennepin
Regional Park resulted in a 755 adjusted count.
PARKING STANDARDS RECOMMENDATION:
Starting with the seven criteria and three supplemental recommendations of 7/15/92, the joint
subcommittee review recommended Parking Standards for Task Force consideration and
adoption.
EQUITABLE DISTRIBUTION OF ACCESS SITES:
Equitable distribution of parking sites throughout the five lake zones was identified as a
priority.
PARKING INVENTORY:
With minor foomote adjustments, the Parking Inventory of 755 current and potential c./t
parking spaces was finalized and recommended for presentation to the Task Force.
Page 30
PROCEEDINGS SUlVtMARY, 1992 LAKE ACCESS TASK. FORCE STUDY
STEERING COWIMITI~E RECOM]VtENDATIONS
The recommendations of the Data Gathering and Standards Subeommlttee meeting of 9/9/92
was confirmed. Additional issues were recommended for Task Force consideration: I. Coordinate site acquisition for Maxwell Bay
2. Coordinate access development of Grays Bay Hwy. 101 Causeway and
subsequent dosing of Grays Bay Dam access
3. Coordinate access development of Hermepin Regional Park
LAKE ACCESS TASK FORCE ACTIONS
Lake Access Task Force actions taken 10/21/93:
1. Parking Standards were adopted.
The Lake Minnetonka Lakeshore Owners Assn. (LlVI~0A)
presented their board position calling for a reduction of the 700 eat parking
·paces goal.
DN1K, LMCD and sport fishing representatives supported the 700 cdt parking
spaces goal. This goal originated in the 1983 Task Force Study. It is based
upon Lake Mirmetonka's 14,000 acre capacity to accommodate one boat per 20
acres of water surface. No consensus was reached on changing the goal.
Consensus required substantially unanimous agreement.
The LMCD Lake Access Committee, appointed January,
to:
1992, was activated
Coordinate related lake access objectives and policies with the Task
Force.
Carry out lake access objectives and policies in the Management Plan
which will not be addressed by the Task Force.
LMCD BOARD ACTION ON TASK FORCE POSITIONS
Upon recommendation by the LMCD Lake Access Committee, the LMCD board on 10/28/92
approved Task Force positions on:
1. Parking Standards for Lake Minnetonka Public Accesses
2. Parking Inventory of 755 current and potential eat parking spaces
3. A draft model Parking Agreement for cities or agencies identifying eat parking
epaees which meet the Parking Standards.
4. Parking Agreements to be secured by LMCD with dries or agencies.
Page 31
PROCEEDINGS SUMMARY, 1992 LAKE ACCESS TASK FORCE STUDY
TASK FORCE ACTIONS
Lake Access Task Force actions taken on 12/9/92:
I.
Approved Current and Potential CdT Parking Inventory total adjusted to 735 cdt
parking spaces, subject to meeting adopted Parking Standards, and subject to
agreements with cities or agencies within which the existing public accesses are
located. (The 8/12/92 Parking Inventory was adjusted from 755 to 735 as a result
of the Hennepin Regional Park planned access count being adjusted to 80 upon
agreement with the City of Minnetrista and Suburban Hennepin Regional Park
District.)
o
Goal of 700 cdt parking spaces on which Task Force consensus was not reached
was referred to the LMCD board for a final decision.
All cities encouraged to make a concerted effort to provide their share of lake
access c/t parking spaces. Cities were further encouraged to coordinate and
cooperate to meet zone goals.
LMCD LAKE ACCESS COMMITTEE REPORT
The Lake Access Committee actions taken on 3/16/93:
Committee chair outlined a policy to persuade cities or agoncies to make decisions
on public accesses in the best interest of thc most public usc of thc lake.
Existing public access sites proposed for evaluation against a grading scale as to
safety, quality, size.
LAKE ACCESS TASK FORCE ACTIONS
Lake Access Task Force Actions taken 3/18/93:
I. Model Public Access C/T Parking Agreement approved incorporating adopted
Parking Standards.
Access Site Evaluation Criteria ten point outline approved with recommended
footnotes approved.
Aerial slide photo documentation of existing and potential access sites presented.
Sites suggested from this aerial survey are to serve as a future guide for access
site inquiries and proposals.
Page 32
PROCEEDINGS SUlVlMARY, 1992 LAKE ACCESS TASK FORCE STUDY
ACCESS SITING SUBCO~E ACTIONS
Access Siting Subcommittee Actions taken 4/6/93:
!. MN DNR Landowner Bill of Rights was reviewed. The Bill of Rights was
accepted for recommendation to the Task Force. The procedures detailed in the
Bill of Rights would remain in effect after the Task Force completes this study.
Public review of a future access site negotiation brought forward by the DNR was
concluded to be the affected city's responsibility.
2. A list of some 40 potential access sites taken from the March aerial survey and a
list developed by the 1983 Task Force Study was edited to review properties no
longer available due to development or other current uses making the property
unavailable.
STEERING COMMITTEE ACTIONS
Steering Committee actions taken 4/6/93:
MN DOT position on its reduced Hwy. 101 causeway bridge and road rebuilding,
excluding the causeway public access upgrading, was received.
ACCESS SITING SUBCOMMITTEE ACTIONS
Access Siting Subcommittee actions taken 4/14/93: '
1. Potential public access sites were presented for review against the 1993 ten point
Access Site Evaluation Criteria. All marina ~ites were removed for separate
consideration. Eight other sites were removed as no longer available.
ACCESS SITING SUBCOMMITTEE ACTIONS
Access Siting Subcommittee actions taken 5/4/93:
1. Potential access sites reviewed per Access Site Evaluation Criteria, with added
conditions: '-
a. All sites must have willing sellers.
b. City cooperation must be secured in advancing the access site.
e. Agency cooperation must be ~ecured in advance of a site being ~elected.
Potential access sites remaining on the list as a result of comparison to the review
criteria were:
* Tonka Bay City Dock, channd to Gideons Bay
* Timber Lane, Gideons Bay, Shorewood
* Mai Tai, Excelsior Bay
* 456 Arlington Ave, Wayzata Bay (private residence)
* Pelican Point, Spring Park Bay, Mound
* Lost Lake, Cooks Bay, Mound
* Advance Machine, West Arm, Spring Park
Page 33
PROCEEDINGS SUMMARY, 1992 LAKE ACCESS TASK FORCE STUDY
Marinas as potential access sites were recommended tO be examined for public
access use under the following conditions:
a. Potential use of extending existing capacity.
b. Extent to which the marina already serves the public for fee paid access.
c. Attitude of nearby homeowners for public access use.
d. Considering any public access use as a temporary trial.
e. Management issues to be addressed such as how public parking/launch
space would be reserved and accounted for in a mix of fee paid launch
service
f. MN DNR budget constraints in funding leased space
LMCD LAKE ACCESS COlVLMITrEE ACTION
Lake Access Committee action taken 5/'//93:
1. The Lake Access Parking Agreement with the City of Minnetrista was accepted
and r~ommended to the LMCD board for acccp~nce.
LAKE ACCESS TASK FORCE MEETING ACTIONS
Lake Access Task Force actions taken 5/12/93:
1. The seven potential access sites were accepted as identified by the Access
Siting Subcommittee 5/4/93.
Marina sites having potential to accommodate public access through agreement
with the DNR will be considered separately from the seven potential access
sites accepted 5/4/93. The six conditions under which marina sites would bc
evaluated for public access as detailed by the Access Siting Committee 5/4/93
were also accepted.
Thc Maxwell Bay access site is recognized as in negotiations between thc City
of Orono and MN DNR.
LMCD LAKE ACCESS CObiMI'ITEE ACTIONS
Lake Access Committee action of 6/15/93 approved tasks which the LMCD committee intends
to continue processing:
1. Determine the equitable distribution of public access among existing and
potential new access sites.
Evaluate and negotiate with commercial marinas for their potential in providing
cYt parking and launch service:
a. Apply equitable distribution criteria.
b. DNR to negotiate agreements for space/service provided.
Page 34
PROCEEDINGS SUMMARY, 1992 LAKE ACCESS TASK FORCE STUDY
e
Assess means by which existing public accesses may be upgraded for safety and
greater user satisfaction.
Board members to work with LMCD and DNR staff in finalizing c/t parking
agreements with cities and agencies having existing public accesses...
Access signage to be developed per agreement provisions, cities and agencies
asked to assist.
Page 35
Senator Olson introduced-
S. F. No. 2397 Referred to the Committee on Children, Families and Learning
1 A bill for an act
2 relating to public administration; amending Minnesota
3 Statutes 1996, section 471.19.
4 BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA:
5 Section 1. Minnesota Statutes 1996, section 471.19, is
6 amended to read:
7 471.19 [RECREATION PROGRAM Te-B~-~eR-~B~SAT~eN PURPOSES.]
8 The facilities of any school district, operating a
9 recreation program pursuant to the provisions of sections 471.15
10 to 471.19 shall be used p~ma~y for the purpose of conducting
11 the regular school curriculum and related activities and the-use
12 o~-scho~-~a~~es for recreational purposes authorized by
13 those sections
3~N.-28'98{~ED) 14:58
Gray Freshwater Center
Hwys. 15 & 19, Navarre
Mail:
2500 Shadywood Road
Excelsior, MN 55331-9578
Phone: (612) 471-0590
Fax; (612) 471-0682
Ema]h
admin@minnehahacreek-org
Wet) Site:
wv~.minnehahacreek, org
John E. Thomas
President
C, Woodrow Love
Vice President
Pamela G. Blixt
Treasurer
Monica Gross
Secretary
Thomas W. LaBounty
Thomas Maple, Jr.
Malcolm Reid
District Office:
Diane P. Lynch
District Administrator
SHAND~IGK/CERES GRP TEL:612 855 0054
Minneh a Watershed District
Improving Qualii7 of W'ater, Quality of Life
P. 002
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Diane Lynch, MCWD
471-0590
or Marcy Lehfinen, Shandwick
831-9080
Watershed District Gets Clean Bill of Health;
Considers Recommendations Very Helpful
EXCELSIOR (Jan. 28, 1998) -The Minnehaha Creel( Watershed District (MCWD) was
given a clean bill of regulatory and financial health and generally.praised as 'showing
significant leadership in comprehensive water management" in a report by the Minnesota
Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR) to the Hennepin County Board. in its report,
dated Jan. 26, BWSR made several admini=[~ative and operational recommendations but
also said it 'recognizes and commends the district for the dedication and commitment of
its board of managers, staff and consulting engineers and attorneys. The district is highly
professional and is justifiably proud of its accomplishments."
District Administrator Diane Lynch says MCWD is pleased the several-month
study is completed, and will use the report as a foundation for improvements in several
areas. 'Because we are proud of our record of improving the district's quality of water
and quality of life, as well as our stewardship of public funds, we welcomed this review,"
she says. "We will carefully consider the recommendations in their entirety.'
Lynch points out that many changes already have been made that will address
BWSR's specific recommendations, including:
o Aggressively expanding communication efforts with cities and other constituents
through one-on-one meetings, circulating planning documents to wider audiences,
and conducting more preliminary meetings with stakeholders to anticipate and resolve
conflicts. We also are broadening distribution of general watershed information
regarding consumer education and watershed activities.
· Expanding a bidding policy to solicit proposals for managing specific construction
projects.
-28'98(WED) 14:58 SHANDWICK/CERES GRP TEL:612 835 0034
P. 003
Watershed District Gets Clean Bill of Health/2
Reviewing construction project plans with the Hennepin and Carver County. Boards
and seeking their approval before implementation. This is in addition to conducting
extensive public hearings prior to county review.
Reassigning staffjob responsibilities to manage a higher workload resulting from less
reliance on board managers and consultants. This includes hiring a part-time
bookkeeper and interviewing candidates for one administrative staffer and one project
manager.
During the past year, MCWD hired Lynch, a professional with extensive public
policy, conflict management and environmental issues management credentials, following
the retirement of former director Gene Strommen; revised the District's per-diem policy to
eliminate duplication of efforts by staff and the board of managers; worked with citizen
advisoq/committees on major water quality projects; and established a task force to
improve implementation of the District's controversial stormwater management rule.
During the past two years, the District's budget has declined. An average
property owner contributes to MCWD an amount equivalent to the cost of taking a family
of four to a movie.
MCWD was established to improve water quality and control flooding, using a
regional approach that no individual city or county can take. MCWD has generated
measurable results in water quality, received the "Watershed of the Year" award in 1996
from the Department of Natural Resources, and was praised last summer for its role in
helping to minimize flooding along Minnehaha Creek.
'We invite you to contact our office with questions, or to check out our web site
(www. minnehahacreek, org) for more information," Lynch says.
jan zo %8'" J.o.ud" r. uz,,uz
News Release
For immediate release: .-
~oil 'Tuesday, Janum'y 27, 1995 rRECEIVED :3 § 1§98
~ ........ For further information call:
Jim Haerte1612/297-2906
Mitmesota Board of Water anti Soil ResoUrces, One West Waf~- St., Suite 200, ~. Paul, MN 55107
BWSR ISSUES REPORT ON M1NIqEHAHA CREEK WD
A report issued today by the. Minnesota Board of Watea and Soil ,Resour~s (BWSR) on
the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District 0VICgvrI))' makes sere!al recommendations but
indicates that the BWSR uncovered no district w~. ongdoing.
Among the BWSR's recommelidatiom are:
· The MCWD board of mariage~ ~ould,,shift its nmnagem, eat style aWay from "micro
managemer~t;"
*The MCWD should rely more o~x. smffand possibly hire additional.
.The MCWD should improve communications with cities;
.The MCWD should hold an ,.annual meeting with member cities and counties to discuss
upcoming capital improvement projects; ~md
.The MCWD should c~nsid'er us'rog.more than one engineering firm.
"Essentially, our investigation'revealed .fl~t the district is-doing a good job," said Ron
Hamack, executive director of the BWs'R-. "Of cberse, there are always improvements that can
be made, and we highlighted those in our recommerutafions-"
The Slate Auditor also reviewed the districts's financial slaternent-s from 1994, 1995 and
1996 and found them "clean."
(more)
~o. o~ water/$o~! Kes. ~aX:blW-WW~-Sbl5 Jan 28 '98 15:06 P. 02/02
The Hennepin County Board lriggered the BWSR's investigation last fall when it
approved a resolution (resolution no. 97-9-624R3) citing concerns regarding the cost-
effectiveness of MCWD projects a~ district accoun, tability. More than imff of the cities and
townships within the MCWD suppon,'e,d the resolution.
H:~ewa'el~n~'wd I
Bd. of Water/Soil Res. Fax:6t2-297-5615
Jan 26 '98
13:22 P.O~/17
Report to the
RECEIVEB ;:-C39 1998
Henn~pin County Board.of Commissioners _ _
o~ the
Minnehaha Creek Watershed Distr,/'ct
J. anuary 26; 1998
INTRODUCTION
The Minnesota Board of Water. and s0i~ Resources. provides tkis report in resP0,nse to a
request, passed on September 23, I997,..in the' folm of Resolution No. 97-9-624R3, by
the Hermepin County Board of Commissioners.
The resolution requested the Board of Water and Soil Resources to:
(A) determine if the activities o.f the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (district)
are in compliance with. statutes, rules, and regulations;
(t5) facilitate dialogue betWeen:the distric~ and affected municipalities;
(C) determine if '.the cost effectiveness of capital projects proposed by
the district is. in Compliance with statutes, rules, 'and regulations; and
(D) request the State Auditor to audit ihe district to address issue (A) or (C), if
necessary.
In addition to addressing these concerns, this report will alSO. present various guidelines and
perspectives on the roles and responsibilities involved in watershed district management.
Although reports of this type inevitably focus on recommended improvements, the Board of
Water and Soil Resources recognizes and commends the district for the dedication and
commitment of its board of managers, staff and consulting engineers and attomeys. The district
is highly professional and is justifiably proud of its accomplishments. District staff and managers
were cooperative and accommodating throughout this study.
The Board of Water and Soil Resources gathered information several different ways for this
report. Interviews were conducted with various staff members from several cities in the district.
Bd. of Water/Soil Res. Fax:612-297-$615 Jan 26 '98 13:23 P. 05/17
Past and present district staff were also interviewed. Interviews were conducted with citizen and
environmental groups, non-district consulting engineers and attorneys, other metro watershed
district managers-and-staff, and'select state-agency:staff. In addition; many alisa'itt records were
reviewed, including an exhaustive review of~e Long Lake project and reviews of the Gray's
Bay Dam Outlet, Gleason Lake, Painter Creek, and Langdon. Lake projects. Staff from the Board
of Water and Soil Resources also. reviewed the 1994 Management Study and the 1997 Draft
Strategic Plan, both of which the district commissioned. Lastly, the State Auditor reviewed the
audited financial statements of the district for fiscal years 1994, 1995,.and 1996.
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
Based on all the information gathered, the Board~°f Water and S~l Resources concludes that the
district has not violated any ,applicable statutes, rules and regulations. In addition, the district has
shown significant leadership in comprehensive wa~er management.
However, a number of concerns.did aris.e during our research for this report, primarily in two
areas: n~cm management by the Board of Managers and lack of District communication with
stakeholders or constituents, esPeciaBy cities. Addi~onally, the issue of accountability for
expenditure of public funds was raised as a, concem by some interviewees.
Although some of these concerns are already being addressed through recent administrative
changes, including hiring a new adm. inistrator~ our review suggests improvements focused on
district management; district operational procedures~ district outreach, communication and
coordination; and financial accountability.
DISTRICT MANAGEMENT
The board of managers, tbr the district had a history of being dedicated and running the
operations "hands-on" during the first 25 years. The district had no staff, choosing instead to use
engineering and legal consultants. In 1992, two staff positions were estabtished~ a full time
administrator and a half-time clerical.
Since then, the board of managers has not.completely shifted' its focus and priorities i¥om day-to-
day management of operations to that of being a poli, cy.and Qversight body. Too many and
lengthy meetings result. Too often managers function individually, and gi,ve administrative
direction to staff, or opinions to constituents, w~thout full board awareness and approval. Further,
the district administrator and staff should be working directly with the constituents without
excessive oversight fi-om individual managers.
Oftentimes constituents are uncertain who to contact at the d/strict level. Members of the district
staff are generally seen as not empowered to make decisions, except the most simple or basic
Bd. of [daten/Soil Res. Fax:612-29?-5615 Jan 26 '98 13:23 P. 06/l?
types, so district consult.~nts or managers are contacted directly. District stMf have been pulled in
many different directions by individual contact ~om managers,, resulting in conflicting direction
~ud overworked situa~ons. Certain~y the pracfi~ und~mincsemployec m~al~, turnover rate of
district st~t' has been hiBh,
Two recent management studies the district commissioned corroborate ,this finding and point to
the need for correcting micro management by the board Of managers. In fact, the 1997 draft
strategic plan shows six o£the seven managers spoke of micro management and the problems it
created. This also underscores the need for strong leadership by county boards in choosing
mag. agers that will cooperate together and work as a team.
COMMUNICATION, OUTREACH~ CooRDINATION
District communications wit& stakeho.lders, especially the member cities, needs to be improved.
Communication would likely improve if the boad O[ ,managers will step back and allow district
staff to conduct routine communications with corfstituents. The district WOuld speak with a more
'uniform voice, reduce the likelihood of sending mixed messages, and reduce false expectations
among constituents.
Nevertheless, it takes two panics openly c, ommunic.ating to make the situation work.
Constituents, such as cities, oftentimes do not put enough effort into the process. This was very
evident when the district.actively solicited comments from member cities during the
development of the second generation watershed m.armgement plan. Most substantial comments
from cities only arose during the very final stages o£ plan review by the state agencies, resulting
in a reactive, rather than proacfi, ve, approach. It is also evident there are some situations where
cities attempt to downplay water resources management concerns such as erosion control
measures or on-site water detention. This may occur in commercial projects as the result of
pressure from developers or in cities' o,wn public works projects as they try to complete them in
a timely and cost-effective manner. In those cases,,,the district is unfairly criticized for
monitoring non-compliance and refusing to relax its standards.
The Board of Water and Soil Resources,has proposed u~ng, the, services of a state mediator to
help facilitate a dialogue among the cities and the d~strict. This option will continue to be
explored and assessed along with the adoption and implementation of these recommendations.
We understand that the district administrator and a manager are in the process of meeting
individually with staff of all cities in the district. While.generally viewed by constituents as a
step in the right direction, there is. some concern about the need for, or desirability of, having a
manager present. Again, city staff do not see district .staff as bein~ empowered by the board of
managers to carry out their assigned duties, or what most would agree shoed be a staff duty.
Bd. of Water/Soil Res. Fax:612-297-5615 5an 26 '98 13:24 P. 07/17
CAPITAL IlVIPROVEMENT PROJECTS
Another area of-concern revolves around.cap!tal ~npro, vement projects and taxation-to cover the
planning and implementation of the project. Comments fro.m all people interviewed varied
regarding the taxation issue, but the need for the projects, or similar projects, goes largely
unchallenged. The Board of Water and Soil l~esourCes .found no evidence that the cost
effectiveness of capital improvement, projects is not in compliaace with statutes, rules, and
regulations.
The issue of who should, pay for. the projects, or where rexes sh~tld be levied and to what extent,
is thc subject of considerable debate and a,primary focus of co~cem for some cit/es. Op/nions on
solutions span a vast range and incl~tde: (a) fund,all projects,by an ad ~a~orem district-wide tax as
is presently the case; (b) fund major projects'of.re~/on~l importance by an ad valorem district-
wide tax and fund smaller projects on a subwatershed .district basis; (c) divide the dislrict into
two tax d~stricts divided at Gray's Bay dam; (d) continue as is present~ the case but spread the
projects around so many cities have a. project in. Weir area; and (e) fund projects by a combir~tion
of an ad valorem district-wide tax a~d create, a subwat~rshed district or stormwater utility district
for the area directly benefitting or contribUting~ e, g4 70 percent of the project cost levied over the
area directly benefi~ng or con.tributing mad 3.0 percent ad valorem over the remainder of the
Defaming the appropriate ~unding Option. isa di$~'ct responsibility and a matter ofpolicT. Greater
proactive part/cipation by city and county policy n'/~ers and s~in the plan develbpment
process would create greater awareness and understanding of the options.
FINANCIAL ACCOUNTABILITY
The cost of capital improvement project~, is an a~ca of concern, specifically the cost of
engineering and, to a lesser extent;legal services'for the projects. The expense of engineering
consultants and legal consultants for other district activities is also an area of concern raised by
several people interviewed.
It does appear that the district could reduce net operating expenses by hi.ring some professional
staff. A staff engineer and a staff attorney or parategal could reduce expenses in the areas of
permits and planning and a staff engineer would be :helpfal in monitoring engineering consultant
costs. In addition, since the district does not have a staff attorney or engineer, individual
managers are assigned to implementation of individua,~ capital improvement projects, furthering
the problem of board members performing tasks that should be done by staff.
Several interviewees also reconmaended using differem engineering firms to design capital
improvement projects. Under this scenario, the district would still maintain a single consulting
engineering firm for district activities, but wo...utd~vary the engi.neering firms used for capital
4
Bd. of Water/$oit Res. Fax:612-297-5615 Jan 26 '98 13:25 P. 08/17
improvement projects, either through a bid process or by. rotation within a pool of firms. Other
suggestions include relying more on the Hennepm Conservation'District; and using the city
engineer as the. project manager, instead of an .ngineering consultant. This~latter suggestion
would also address the cities' perception of a lack of coordination and information dissemination
at the project implementation stage, While we don't kr~ow if these suggestions would decrease
costs, they would definitely decrease the risk of communication breakdowns.
The 1994 management study stated thc need for' the .district administrator. to monitor consultant
costs. This has been implemented oVer.the past few months.
Reviews of the District's 1994,"1995, an. d'1996 financial statements by the State Auditor
essentially yielded the same i~bnuation as the'audit reports by the CPA firms, namely, an
unqualified "clean" opinion.
RECOMMENDATIONS
In summary, the Board of Water and Soil Resources recommends thc following:
A. The board of managers should shift their management style from being involved in
many details of district operations:towards being a poBcy and over. sight body, as
presented in the "District Management'.' section on pages 2 and 3.
B. The board of managers sho,uld assign district staff and empower district staff to carry
out most of the operational i~anctions and adininistrative serVices, as presented in thc
"District Management" section on pages 2 and 3.
C. The district should rely more on staffin thc areas, of permits and plarming, which may
require additional staff, as presented in the "Financial Accountability" section on pages 4
andS.
II.
A. The district should improve communications with constituents, especially cities, as
presented in the "Communication; Outreach, Coordination" section on page 3.
B, The district ~ould hold an annual, meeting with the cities and. coUnties to discuss
capital improvement projects on line for the coming year and try ~o achieve, broad
agreement among the parties on sources of'funding for the projects.
Bd. of Water/Soil Res. Fax:612-297-5615 Jan 26 '98 15:25 P. 09/17
The district should consider using additional engineering rums or the Hennepin
Conservation District on capital improvement project design, as presented under the
"Financial Accountability" segion og p_ages .4.an_d ~.. ............
IV.
The district should consider using kit7 engineers as project managers, as presented in the
"Financial Accountability" sectionon pages 4 and 5.
Hennepin County should establish "guiding principles and standards" for,selecting
managers and judging P'~fformmace.
VI.
Cities that have not a,l~eady done so shoed designate a' tee ~,h~ical and policy
representative to ac~; as liaison'witti the distri,ct..
CONCLUSION
Managing water resources in a. re.sponsible and effective manner is extremely challenging. In
today's urban setting this challenge is made even more complex by the many political boundaries
that are crossed. The large population center of'the Minneapolis area, the wealth o.f water
resources, including such regionally significant ones as, the Chain of Lakes,,Minnehaha Creek,
and Lake Mimaetonka, coupled with the'primarily agricultural nature of file upper reaches of the
watershed combine to make. the district's job very complicated and yet extremely important. The
district has shown innovative leadership. While .the Board of Water and Soft Resources has made
some recommended changes, the overall job the Mirmehaha Creek Watershed District has done
in the management of such important waters has been, for all'purposes, qui~.e satisfactory.
In conclusion, the Board of Water and'Soi) Reso.,~.ces offers assistance to work with Hennepin
County, the district, and the cities, towards establ!si~ing a strong framework for watershed
management within the Minnehaha.Creek Watershed District.
Bd. of Water/Soil Res. Fax:612-297-S615
3an 26 '98 13:21 P. O1/17
Date: January 26, 1998
To:
DianeLynch
471-0682
Louis Smith
344-1550
From: Jim Haenel
Ph: 297-2906
Board of Water m~d Soft Resources
Metro Region
One- West WaterS~eet
Suite 250
St. Paul, Milmesota 55107
Phone: 282-9969
Fax: 297-5617
Page I of 17
If you have any transmission problems~ please contact Joan Anderson at 296-3767.
Bd. of Water/Soil Res. Fax:612-29?-5615 3an 26 '98 13:22 P. 02/17
One west Water Sb'eet
Suite 200
St. Paul. MN 55107
(612) 296-3767
Fax (612.) 2.97-5615
Field Offices
Northern Region:
394 S. Lake Avenue
Room 403
Duluth. MN 55602
(218) 72,3-4752
Fax (218) 723-4794
3217 Bemicljl Avenue N.
Bemidji, MN 56601
(216) 755-4235
Fax (218) 755-4201
217 S. 7th Street
Suite 202
Brainerd, MN 56401-3660
(218) 625-2383
Fax (218) 828-6036
Southern Region:
261 Highway 15 S,
New UIm, MN 56073-8915
(,507) 359-6074
Fax (507) 359-6018
40--16th Street SE.
Suite A
Roc~hester, MN 55904
(507) 285-74,58
Fax (507) 280-2875
Box 2.67
1400 E. Lyon Street
Marshall, MN 56258
(507) 537-6060
Fax (507) 537-6368
Metro Region:
One West Water Street.
Suite 250
St. Peul, MN 55107
(612) 282-9969
Fax (612) 297-5615
An equal opportunity employer
Printed on recycled paper
January 26, 1998
Board of Hennepin County Commissioners
A-2400 Governme/~t Center
Minneapolis, MN 55487-0240
Dear Commissioners:
The Board ~/f Water and SOil Resources has completed the enclosed report on the
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District as requested by resolution no. 97-9-624R3.
which wa,, adopted by the County Board on' September 23, 1997. Also enclosed
isa memorandum from the office of the state auditor.
Although no violatiOn of applicable statutes, rules anti regulations was found, the
report offers several recommendations. The Board c>f Water and Soil Resources
will continue to. work with the District, and cities, to implement these
recommendations.
It is evident .that the .District has made some significant changes over the past
several months..We are also aware that the District il presently in the process of
imptementir}g some o£ the recommendati.0ns brought f~orth in the report. Cities
have been generally satisfied with the progres., made by the stormwater task force
dealing with Rule B.
It is our intent, to keep the, momentum.going and foster better working
relationships wi'th the Distri, ct. ¢iiies and the county.
Please feel free to co.ntact Jim Haertel o.f my staff at 297-2906 should you wish
to discuss this matter further,
Executive Director
Enclosures
cc's on attached page
Bd. of Water/Soit Res. Fax:612-297-5615 .]an 26 '98 13:22
P. 03/l?
cc: Cities and Townships in District District Board of Managers
Diane Lynch; District-Administrator
Louis Smith, District Counsel
Mike Panzer, District Engineer
Vern Genzlinger, Hennepin County Public'.,Works Director
Janet Leick, Hennepin County Environmental,Services Manager
Roger Williams, Office of Dispute Resolution
Kathleen Docter, Office of the State Auditor
BWSR Staff: Birkholz, Thomas, Hae~tel, Sandstrom
· Bd. of ~ater/Soil Res. Fax:612-297-5615
gan 26 '98
13:26
, ,8
P. 10/17
interoffice
MEMORANDUM
~CEtvEo
OEO 2 2 1~?
To: Jim H~crtcl
RECEtV~.3. ,:3 9 1998
From: Tom Karlson
Subject: Mirmebaha Creek'Watershed
Date:
December 19, 1997
Finally, I have completed, some notes on my review of the 1994, t995, and t996'audited financial
statements for the Minnehaha Creek WatezshecI District. I did some comparison of revenues,
expenditures, and fund balances over the y. ears.. Attached are my observations from reviewing the
reports and some schedules comparing the' years..
The notes are not arranged in any particular order. Please.call i£yo.u have any questions.
Bd. of Water/Soil Res. Fax:S12-29?-5615 3an 26 '98 15:26 F. 11/1/
Review of Minnehaha Watershed District
Financial Statements for I994,1995 and 1996
Annual Audit:
The District wu audited by CPA ~ns.for each year reviewed In 1994 the finn was Larson Allen
Weishair & Co. In 1995 and t 996 the. firm was Babcock, Langbe'm and ComPany. My personal
experience has been that I hay6' been more impressed by the quality of reports issued by Larson
Allen Weishair & Co. than the latter finn.
Independent Auditor's Report:
In all three years the District received an .unqualified"clean". opinion on their financial statement~,
In other words it was the auditors' opi~on their the financial statements were fairly presented in all
material respects. There were a couple minor errors'in the wording for the 1995 and 1996 opinions.
Other Auditor Reports:
The audits were conducted under Government Auditing $iartdart~, issued, by the Comptroller
General of the US. These standards require reports, on internal control and compliance to, be issued.
For all three years these re-ports were issued. These ,eports.indic. aie that the auditor's had no issues
of noncompliance that were required to be. issued and no material reportable conditions. In the 1996
Babcock, Langbein actually erred by stating they noted no reportable conditions. Thi,~cmally a
violation of auditing standards. (Codification of Statements on Auditing Standards AU § 326.17).
What all the above means is that the firms reported no findings or recommendations related to their
audits of the District. In some cases CPA finns issue separate management leuers directly to
mangement. There is.no indication that they have done this, but you may want tO ask the D/strict
if they have received separate Ierters.
Financial Statements:
A few minor presentation errors, noted in the 1995 ano 1996 financial statements. However, nothing ,
too critical. The one curious item is that the Gehera} (Administrative) Fund .in 1995 had a
.$3,000,000 certificate of deposit that it did not have in ,1994.. The revenues of the General Fund were
only $265,000 so they were not the source ofthi, s investment. It came. from the. Special Revenue
Funds, in particular the tax revenues of the Management Planning Fund. The General Fund does
have a liability to the Special Revenue Funds, but the interest earned on the project revenues are
being used to eliminate the General Fund's deficit.
Bd. of [dater/Soil Res. Fax:612-29?-5615 .]an 26 '98 15:26 P. 12/17
Fund Balances:
From the schedule of fund balances you can sec that the financial condition kit a low in 1994. At
that time the'Dislrict-had an overall deficit' of $,115,494. The overall deficit was duc to thc large.,
$324,004 in the General Fund. The condition 0fthe Genial Fund has improved over the last two
years. Two other funds also had deficits at the end of 1996. The project revenues of the
Management Planning Fund are rcspomible for the heal, thier lookSng total fund balance. The deficits
result fi-om expending funds without current revenue sources.
Revenues:
No major observations on revenues. Property taxes are. their primary somce of revenue. Total
revenues of course increased due to the large proje'~s started in i 995.
Expenditures:
As was the case with revenues,, expenditures have increased in the last r~.o years {tue to the large
projects. The largest expenditure has be'~ for engineering, which is probably understandable due
to the nature of their purpose. 'Possibly morp, unusual is the large amount of legal expenditures,
which, have ranged from about 10% oftota} expenditures to ahgh of 26% in 1.994. On the issue of
managers' per diem, they have incre~ed each year from $22,436 in 1993. to $60,423 in 1996.. On
the flip side coordinator's expense has dropped from $79,62.0 in 1993 to. $11,201 in 1996. An
unusual item was a negative expenditure in 1995 labeled "Retu~ed Wayzata Check" for $175,540.
Generally should not have negative revenue or exPenditure amounts. ~
Summary:
Reviewing financial statements will not necessarily address the concerns raised about the Distr/ct.
Based on no findings and clean opinions on the financial statements there are no major red flags that
were noted from our review of the financial .statement reports. There are just some areas identified
above that may require additional information to determine if there is anything to be concerned
about.
Bd. of Water/Soil Res. Fax:612-29?-5615 Jan 26 '98 13:27 P.i$/I?
Minneheha Creek Watemhed District
Review of Financial Statements
Fund Balances 1993 to 1996
Fund Balance - December 31 Total
1996 3,526,703
1995
1994
1993
1992
L
· 3.042.164~.
236,8041
192,3461.
O~
· - 0t
General
Administrative
· :Fund'
Management Water Survey Gleaeon
Planning, Maintenance anc~ Data Creek.:
Fund and Repair AcqUisition Fund
(192,57~) 3,845.383 84;913 (1,420) (207.5.75
(261,242) 3427.604 79.503 3.875 (207.578
(324.Q04) 106,504 70,970, 24,200 6,836
(277,5~7) 459.385 73,626 41.594 (60,204)
(239,530) 441,515 112.790 881 (123,310)
Jan 26 '98 13:27 P. 14/17
Bd. of Water/$oit Res.
Fax:612-297-5615
Bd. of Watec/$oii Res. Fax:$12-29?-ttlb
5an 2b '~¥
o]
Bd. of Bater/So~! Res. Fax:612-29?-5615
&, ,, JJ~ ,
Jan 26 '98
13:28
P. 16/17
J, dl~ J,
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
AGENDA
7:00 PM, Wednesday, February 11, 1998
Tonka Bay City Hall
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
RECEIVED
CHAIR ANNOUNCEMENTS, Chair Babcock
Reminder - Save the Lake Recognition Dinner, February 12, 1998, Lord
Fletchers of the Lake.
READING OF MINUTES - 1128198 Regular Board Meeting
1/4/98 Workshop/Planning Session (handout)
PUBLIC COMMENTS - Persons in attendance, subjects not on agenda (5 min.)
CONSENT AGENDA - Consent Agenda items identified by "*" will be approved in one
motion unless a Board member requests a discussion of any item, in which case the item
will be removed from the consent agenda.
LAKE USE & RECREATION
A. Hennepin Parks, 1997 Water Quality of Lake Minnetonka (previously sent out in
1128/98 Board packet);
B. Review and approval of draft LCMR application for blanket funding for future
public access on Lake Minnetonka/LMCD-DNR Memorandum of Understanding;
C. Proposed Personal Watercraft Legislation Changes;
D. Additional Business;
e
WATER STRUCTURES
A. 1998 Multiple Dock/District Mooring Licenses, approval of 1997 multiple
dock/district mooring license applications, w/o change, as outlined in 2~5~98 staff
memo;
B. Additional Business;
3. EWM/EXOTICS TASK FORCE
4. SAVE THE LAKE
5. FINANCIAL
A. Audit of vouchers for payment;
· 211198-2115198
B, Update on Spring Park's past levy payment issue;
C, Additional Business;
6, ADMINISTRATION
A. Records Retention Plan update;
B, Discussion on Board meeting attendance;
C, Additional Business;
7. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT
8.~ OLD BUSINESS
9. NEW BUSINESS
10. ADJOURNMENT
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
REGULAR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
7:00 P.M., Wednesday, lanuary 28, 1998
Tonka Bay City Hall
PUBUC HEARING
Dr. Glen Nelson, Stubbs Bay, Orono, Consideration of a new multiple dock license
application to reduce the number of Boat Storage Units (BSU's) from 9 to 8 and to reconfigure
the structure on 1,242' of continuous shoreline.
Vice-Chair Foster opened the public heating at 7:01 p.m. He asked staff to provide
background on the proposed application.
Randall stated the applicant has submitted a new multiple dock license application to reduce
the number of BSU's from nine to eight and to relocate the BSU's within their authorized dock
use area. She noted the existing structure is a conforming multiple dock and three families
who have combined their dock use areas share it. She added staff has requested the applicant to
apply for the new multiple dock license, with public hearing, because there is a substantial
change in the type of watercraft to be stored at the dock. She noted three water bikes to be
stored would be converted to two boats in the proposed application.
There were no comments from persons in the audience on this issue.
All parties being heard, Vice-Chair Foster closed the public heating at 7:05 p.m.
CALL TO ORDER
Vice-Chair Foster called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Members present: Andrea Ahrens, Mound; Bob Ambrose, Wayzata; Kent Dahlen,
Minnetonka Beach; Bert Foster, Deephaven; Tom Gilman, Excelsior; Lili McMillan, Orono;
Gene Partyka, Minnetrista, Bob Rascop, Shorewood; Herb Suerth, Woodland. Also present
Charles LeFevere, LMCD Counsel; Gregory Nybeck, Executive Director; Nancy Randall,
Administrative Technician.
Members Absent: Douglas Babcock, Tonka Bay; Craig Nelson, Spring Park; Sheldon Wert,
Greenwood; Victoria and Minnetonka have no appointed members.
CHAIR ANNOUNCEMENTS
* Foster reminded the Board of the "Save the Lake" Recognition Dinner scheduled for
February 12, 1998 at Lord Fletchers of the Lake.
READING OF THE MINUTES
Partyka moved, McMillan seconded to approve the minutes of the January 14, 1998 Regular
Board meeting as submitted. Ayes (5), Abstain (2, Dahlen, Foster); Motion carried.
PUBLIC COlVlMENT$
There were no public comments from persons in attendance on subjects not on the agenda.
Ambrose and Gilman arrived at this time.
Lake Minnetonka Conservation District
Regular Board Meeting
January 28, 1998
-2-
Foster recommended due to the number of people in the audience interested in the discussion
of the draft LCMR application, that agenda item 2A be moved ahead of agenda item lA.
MOTION: Rascop moved, Ambrose seconded to move to agenda item 2A ahead of agenda
item lA.
VOTE:
Motion carried unanimously.
2. LAKE USE AND RECREATION
A. Review of draft LCMR application for blanket funding for future public access on Lake
Minnetonka.
Foster introduced this agenda item by providing a background on why staff has been
directed to prepare the draft LCMR application for Board review. He noted:.
· The LMCD Management Plan calls for the improvement of the car/trailer parking on
Lake Minnetonka.
· A Task Force some years ago confu'med the number of 700 car/trailer spaces for the
Lake.
· A Lake Minnetonka Lake Access Task Force Report was assembled.
· At the same time this Report was being completed, the MN DNR and the City of
Orono were assembling a program to install the recently completed public access in
Maxwell Bay. He added for the first time, to the best of his knowledge, on Lake
Minnetonka, this was a city cooperating with the MN DNR in a win-win situation
involving a new public access.
· To some extent, the MN DNR has the power of eminent domain to purchase property,
to set aside all local ordinances, and to put in a lake access pretty much where they
please. He added the MN DNR has backed off on that approach and has agreed not to
pursue future public access on Lake Minnetonka without full local involvement, not to
pursue the purchase of property without contacting the LMCD and the affected city,
and to do it in an open process.
· This was included in the Lake Access Task Force Report in that future public access
will be done in cooperation with the local cities, within the community, with plenty of
open meetings, and that it has got to be a win-win situation for all parties for it to
happen.
The LMCD has been assigned to report to the public on a bi-annual basis the number
of certified car/trailer spaces on Lake Minnetonka. He added currently there are about
400 that are certified. He indicated the quality of car/trailer spaces is the issue rather
than the number available.
The LMCD was recently approached by a consultant who is working with the MN
DNR on how to increase the number of quality car/trailer spaces available to the
public. He added the Report recommends the funding be made available from state
and regional sources rather than locally.
The MN DNR suggested the LMCD make application for LCMR funds for blanket
funding of future public access without a specific site in mind. He added it appears as
Lake Minnetonka Conservation District
Regular Board Meeting - 3 -
January 28, 1998
though the application will be stronger with a specific site in mind; however, one has
not been determined yet. If a site were determined in the near future, it would be the
LMCD's intention to amend the LCMR application to have it be for site specific and
potentially include the affected city as a co-applicant. He noted there is a deadline for
LCMR applications of 2l 13/98.
He asked for comments from the Board or the public.
Ambrose asked if a blanket site application is submitted and a site becomes available,
would the LCMR allow the application to be amended?
Foster stated he believed it could be amended and that the local city or the MN DNR want
to be joint applications.
Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor of Orono, stated the Orono had some initial concerns with the
speed of the LCMR application, the fact that original discussion was not on the Board
agenda, and the fact that the DNR has asked the LMCD to spearhead the funding request.
He noted for the public access on Maxwell Bay, funding was a combination of LCMR and
state bonding. He stated a concern he had is that it is imperative the cities are on the
ground level of the process. He noted the MN DIqR has to get site-specific eminent
domain authority from the legislature. He added he is all in favor of what the LMCD is
trying to accomplish, but there is a need to negotiate some issues with the DNR. These
issues include how the city is to be reimbursed for loss of taxes, how the city and the DNR
are involved in the direct negotiation, and that a specific model of negotiation be
established. He recommended the role of the LMCD to be a vehicle in the funding
mechanism and to establish a mechanism similar to that outlined in the letter from the city
administrator from Minnetonka. He added the LMCD may want to consider diversifying
the projects be applied for in the LCMR application. He concluded the LMCD should
include the input from the Lake Minnetonka Association to balance the interests of all
parties.
Bob Beutler, President of the Lake Minnetonka Association, questioned why the LMCR
application was not scheduled on the last agenda and commented there is a need to
establish a plan before trying to secure funding.
Foster stated that the 1992 Lake Access Task Force Report lays out a plan for obtaining a
site for access. He noted the LMCD would not move forward on a project unless it is a
win-win situation for all the stakeholders.
Nybeck clarified the LCMR application discussion was not placed on the 1/14/98 Board
agenda because staff was not contacted by the DNR until after the agenda packets were
sent out.
Gordon Kimball, Recreation Professionals, Inc., stated that the DNR is using the Lake
Task Force Report as a guide for future public access on Lake Minnetonka. He noted the
DNR has learned from prior experiences to work with the cities. He stated now is the time
Lake 1Wmnetonka Conservation District
Regular Board Meeting
January 28, 1998
to pursue a LCMR funding application because it is in its funding cycle.
memorandum of understanding could be drawn up.
-4-
He concluded a
Howard Bennis, Mayor of Deephaven, stated he believed there is a need to talk to
communities up front before negotiating with a property owner.
Foster informed everyone that the DNR is now looking for sites that are already outlined in
the task force report. He added they are talking to see if it is possible to obtain an option
to purchase, then the site will be made public according to the Report. He asked for
clarification from Mayor Sabbour on how lost taxes were reimbursed for the Maxwell Bay
access.
Sabbour stated that the original idea was to have the DNR pay the taxes to the City of
Orono; however, the legislature passed a new law that did not allow this to occur.
Don Germanson, past President of the Lake Minnetonka Association, stated he was quite
involved in the preparation of the Report and encouraged proceeding with the LCMR
application.
Bruce Palmer, Mayor of Minnetonka Beach, questioned who would build the public access
ramp, who would manage it, and why the DNR is not making application for LCMR
funding.
Nybeek stated staff could prepare a memo clarifying the LMCD's position in regards to the
questions raised by Mayor Palmer.
MOTION: Foster moved, Ambrose seconded to table further discussion of the LCMR
application to the 2/11/98 Board meeting, to direct staff to work with the MN
DNR on establishing a memorandum of understanding, to direct staff to
consider diversifying the projects on the LCMR application, and to consider
editorial changes to the application.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
1. WATER STRUCTURES
A. Glen Nelson, Discussion on Public Hearing for new multiple dock license
application.
MOTION: Rascop moved, Partyka seconded to approve the new 1998 multiple dock
.. license application for Dr. Glen Nelson, subject to the applicant securing
approval from the DNR, the City of Orono, and any other governmental
jurisdictions.
VOTE:
Motion carried unanimously.
Lake Minnetonka Conservation District
Regular Board Meeting
January 28, 1998
-5-
B. Ed Yaeger, consideration of request for full refund of 1997-98 deicing application fee
and deposit.
Nybeck clarified the letter from Mrs. Yaeger who requested a full refund of 1997-98
deicing application fee and deposit. He stated staff had conducted inspections recently
and that deicing is not being done this winter. He noted the refund should be for
$225.00 rather than the $125.00 requested in the letter.
MOTION: Rascop moved, Gilman second to approve the request from Marjorie
Yaeger for a full refund of $225.00 for 1997-98 deicing application fee
and deposit.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
C. Additional Business
There was no additional business.
LAKE USE AND RECREATION
B. Hennepin Parks, 1997 Water Quality of Lake Minnetonka (to be reviewed at 2/11/98
Board meeting).
Nybeck stated that this report would be discussed at the 2/11/98 Board meeting. No
action was taken at this time.
C. Additional Business
There was no additional business.
3. EWM/EXOTICS TASK FORCE
Suerth stated he believed that information regarding zebra mussels and the boat spraydown
program could be communicated better to the public. He suggested the LMCD should
consider an informational booth at future Boat and Sports Shows.
Foster noted that establishing a booth at these shows is a lot of work; however, it may be a
good idea if volunteers are willing.
4. SAVE ~ LAKE
There was no discussion.
FINANCIAL
A. Audit of vouchers for payment
· 1/15/98 - 1/31/98
Lake Minnetonka Conservation District
Regular Board Meeting
January 28, 1998
-6-
Nybeck reviewed the audit of vouchers for payment for the period of 1/15/98 -
1/31/98.
MOTION: Gilman moved, Rascop seconded to approve the audit of
vouchers for the period of 1/15/98 - 1/31/98 as submitted.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
B. December Financial summary & balance sheet.
Nybeck reviewed the financial summary and balance sheet.
MOTION: Rascop moved, Gilman seconded to accept the December financial
summary and balance sheet as submitted.
VOTE:
Motion carried unanimously.
C. Additional Business
There was no additional business
6. ADMINISTRATION
A. Review of draft position announcement and position description for Planning/Special
Projects intern.
Nybeck reviewed the draft position announcement and position description noting the
main emphasis of the position will be to assist staff on implementation of management
plan projects. He noted it will be approximately a three month internship at a
compensation rate of $8-$10 per hour depending on the candidates qualifications. It
will be posted at selected universities and will be advertised with the League of
Minnesota Cities and the Minnesota American Planning Association.
Rascop recommended the position description should be expanded to include
educational tasks. An educational task he recommended was to establish a boater
educational program with the local schools.
Gilman questioned whether this is a job responsibility you want an intern to perform.
He added if this is a task you want done, current staff should do it with the intern
relieving some of the workload of the full-time staff.
MOTION:
Gilman moved, Ambrose seconded to approve the position announcement
and description for a Planning/Special Projects intern this summer, and
to
authorize staff to begin the search for qualified candidates.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
Lake Minnetonka Conservation District
Regular Board Meeting
January 28, 1998
-7-
B. Consideration of compensation adjustment for Executive Director.
MOTION: Partyka moved, Ambrose seconded to approve a compensation adjustment
for Gregory Nybeck to the amount of $42,000 annually, with pay
adjustment retroactive to August 18, 1997, and to establish an annual
review date of October 1.
VOTE: Motion carried unanimously.
C. Ordinance Amendment, 1st reading of an ordinance relating to public hearings before
the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Board of Directors; amending LMCD Code
Section 1.05, Subd, 3.
MOTION:
Ahrens moved, Partyka seconded to approve 1'~ reading of the ordinance
amendment, to waive 2nd and 3rd readings, and to adopt the ordinance
amendment.
VOTE:
Motion carried unanimously.
D. Additional Business.
There was no additional business.
7. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT
Nybeck reported on the following:
· A copy of the Executive Director Newsletter is enclosed for your review.
· Staff has located the Financial Management and Investment policy and has enclosed
a copy of it for your review.
Partyka suggested staff check and verify that this was the final copy approved by
the Board.
Nybeck said that he would review the minutes to see if this was the draft adopted
by the Board.
· A copy of the February Calendar is enclosed for your convenience.
OLD BUSINESS
There was no old business.
9. NEW BUSINESS
Lake Minnetonka Conservation District
Regular Board Meeting
January 28, 1998
-8-
There was no new business.
10. ADJO~~r
There being no further business, Vice Chair Foster adjourned the meeting at 8:40 p.m.
Bert Foster, Vice-Chair
Eugene Partyka, Secretary
\kDime\win955My Documents~Minutm~Jmwy28.&~