79-05-15 CITY OF MOUND
Mound~ Minnesota
AGENDA
Mound City Council
May 15, 1979
City Hall
7:30 P.M.
CM 79-163
CM 79-162
BOARD OF REVIEW
Council Meeting
Pg, 1312-1315
1. Public Hearing Continued - A1 and Alma's - Special Use Permit
2. Police Consultant Pg, 1311
3. Comments and Suggestions by Citizens Present (2 Minute Limit)
4. Information Memorandums/Misc. Pg. 1294-1310
Pg. 1316
CITY OF MOUND
Mound, Minnesota
May 9, 1979
COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO, 79-163
SUBJECT: Board of Review
The Board of Review meeting is schedule for May 15th at 7:30 p,m,
Attached is a copy of a Department of Revenue Bulletin outlining
the duties of the Board of Review.
HINNESOTA
D E
R TM E N T OF REV'
UE
BULLETIN
PROPEFfFf F/!I. ALI?JITION DIVISION
APRIL, 1975'
Section 274.01 provides tJ~t tko._ tc,m board, the council, or other, qove~rcnent body
of each city shall ]>a a bo:ard of review4. 55-:n cb~rt, er of cc,..r+~in ~'' '
c.. cmos provj.das
for tFo es'bnblis}',ment of a board of ecualization. The_ provisions of F~ection 274.01
and this regla!ation apply to all lx~ards of revi~ or hDards of oqua!ization.
TIiE TItlE OF M]?~ OF Tt~ ~ OF
~ti~ 274.0]. s~tes t~ co~nt~ assessor s~l! fix a da~ for each ~ of ~eview
or ]~d o'f ~%lizatJon to ~r~et for ~e nu~ of revic~ing ~e asses~ent of
pr~rt7; in its res. D,_~ctive_ ~..m or .ci~... The ~tV assessor is r~~ to s~e
%~itt~ notio~ to the clar~ of each of such ~es ~ or ~mfore April 1 ~f each ye~.
~se m~tLncs are r~mJ~d to ~ held ~tw~n ~.~y. 1 arid June 30 ~d ~ c].~k .of'"
~a }~'d of revi~.~ or t}~ ~rd of c~]ization is r~mir~ ~ qive p~lish~ ~d
~stcd notice at leauzt tchn days. before ~a date set for the first ].~-~.~'..
5~%c ~-d of revi~.; and GM hDard of ~malization of any city, unless a lonu~
c~& .... zon~ of revenue, must c~ailete its x.,Drk and ~jo~ wi~
20 days. frca the ~me of convaniug s~cific~ h~ t~ no~.~n of t~ cl~k. ~b action
~k~ s~~t to such da~ shall ~ valid.
A request for additional tjIne in ord~- to coca, late the v.~rk of the_ boar~ of revi~
must ~ ad~esse~ ~ ~e c~issione~ of revenue in v~i~no. The ~~ion~'s
appr~l is necessary, to !~alize ~y pro~'e ~s~uant ~ t~ ~~on of ~e.
t,..~Ly day ~'i~. 5~ ~:~'~ssJ. one~ of revco]ua will not, h~..~ev~,, e~:t~t tb~ ~e
for l~nl k~-ds of review to meet ~st Juu~e 30 ~cause ~un~ ~ds of '~aliza-
~ ~nv~le on July 1.
~ ~' ~]cl nm~]~] ye~ ~e 1~1 ~d of revi~.9 or ~lization ~s ~e authori~
to ~nsid~ all asses~ents for ~t ~- of ~ r~l and personal Dr~r~.
asses~nts of each des~;intJ.on of real 'Dr'oD~; ~sist$~ of ].and, b~ldi~ls,
s~ctures m~d Lmprovemen~ re,nv h~ revicwec] )~ t~ ~d. ~e assessors of ~r-
sonal prq~rty are likewise within t~m ]~rd's j~isdiction. The ~ nmv qive
~nsidcra~on to ):~th w~luaLion ~d classificaticn of };otb real and. ~onal
In the even ntr~r~l veer t3%e loc~l bonrd nu-tv revi~.; all ass.:es~nents of '~rsonal
pr~.r~ in ~e san'~ mannnz as in ~le ~]d nuwh2r~ veer. The ~Icl ~$ lJmit~ jur-
i~tiction, hc..zeve~, ove~ (-J%e a~sas~ppnts of real pr~ty and nuv revi~ only such
asses~nants ~nt ~;e within t)we au~rJ.ty of ~ assessor in t~ even ~. ~se
~e tho asses~nk2nts of ~t~sc-/ioLions t~t ]~ve }~t~ t~%xab].e since the pr~linq
year, the adehti~ or rc~val of s'~lcturc~ value w~re Dhvsi~]l civies ~ve ~~
an~ the ch~qes in ]~(n~w~tead c].ar, mifi~tJcn.
........................................... ....................... i3/9
'~e autJ~oritv o[ t}m kc~ard ~<tcnds over the indiw asses?~.mts of.- real
~md personal pr .operky. }x~ard doesn't }~ave the prj...~Tr. ~o increase or decrease
bf F~-rc~tac. tc all of t .be.. asses.~nents in t]~. district of a qiven cl~s Of Dr ,0pert~;,
Chan~es in aggrc~afm asses.~nts ~ classes are made by, the county, tx~hrd ~f ec~ali-
zation.
Although thc lcc~l b~nr.d of review or ecmalization has t]]e. authority to increase or
reduce individ~m~l assessr,~n~, the ~ohal of ~uch adjus~m~_p, ts must not reduce the
aggr~ate assesmTant nnde ~ the county assessor ~; ~ore than one percent of said
aq.qr.e~ate as.qcs.qr~mt. If the totnl of such ad~ustme, nl~ doc..~ ]o~,~ar t~e a~reqate
assesmT,~_nt made }'~/ the cotu~tv assessor by more tim one ~-cent, none of the
just~ats will ]m allc,.~ed. This limit~ntion dcesn't a~p]v, }~..~ever, to tim correction
of clerical errors or to the re, moral of du~.'licate assessnents.
The local }×~_-~rd of fcvi¢~.~ or e~].ization d.~o. sn't have l-J',e au~ritv in '~nv ye~ to
rc~n for~- asses~ants on w]~ch ~:es ~e due ~ pavabie. Tt%~ ~d considers
only ~e assessn'e~nts t~t ~e hi proces~ in ~he ~-rent year.
In re~ew~q t. he individual assess~-~s, ~e ~-d ]nnv find instances of unde~lu-
a~on. ~fore ~e )~d raises ~e ~ket v~lue of pro~-ty, it ~{~]st notify ~he
o?.mer. ~ne law d~sn't urescrLbe ~v m~i~ fo~ of notice ~<ceDt ~t
person w]~se prcr~y is to }~e increas~ in assessor ~3st-be notified of
tent of ~a ~rd to m_n~e the J.n~'ease. The losal fr~-~d of revic{~ nineties ass~e
a pr~/. ~..~n~ ~ o~)~mitv to ~ntest the valmntion tbnt ]~s
prc~7 or to contest or to protest ~y o~ner ~%tte~ relating to the ~3~&bi].i~ of.
]~s pro~'t~;. %~ ~x-t is r~ir~ to revi~5.z ~e ]~%tter ~d m~e ~v ~rre~ions
that it de~%~-; just.
],rDi1%: If the five perc{-~nt lj~nit is still in effect, it is a~.plied to th,'~ authoritq,
of the loc-mi ]33}~-d of :.-.~:view, the c~cun~3; b^orrd of c~a,,al, iza'?ion ~nds· L-~'-' ....... '~c~rd of
co3mtization so ,~_he cur. relative effect of increa.~;:s bv aut)'orJ, ties in ex:"ess of
five ! -~>ar. ce~nt lheitation is invalid. Ix~cal boards of revie,.: ]lucy, h~,..~eva'._', increase
or d~creas~ the market value of individual assessm~_nts.
~nen a local '.bc~-~rd of review or' eca:alization convenes, it is ne~s~eg7 t~t a
~.~jori~ of t]~ n~rs ]~ in att~dan~ in' ord~ t~t ~y ~lid action m~y ~
?'b2 lcd! assessor is r~ire~ ]~ law to ~ present wi~ his asses~ent ~ks ~d
[~-s. He is re~Lr~ also to ~ke p~t in th~ pro~edi~qs but ~s no vote.
ad~'~on to the 1~1 as~:essor, t]~ ce'~- assessor or one of ~.s assis~nts is re-
quircd to attend. The }k%~rd should ~.}rcce~ J3~]iatelv to revi~ ~e asses~ents
of proudly. 'l~ne ~rd ~-:hould ask ~.e l~al assessor and county assessor ~ preset
any. ~-bles ~%%t have teen prep~c~, m~hg c~isons of ~e c~'ent asses~ents in
~ dis~ict. ~ comnty assessor is r~uirod to ~.ve ;~,%}}s ~d ~31es relat~q ~-
~larly to l~d values for ~e (mid~ of ~F~ls of revi~. C~r,~'i~ns
~ present~] of assesum}nts of t?,q}es of pr~ with previous ~s and wi~% ot~r
asses~t distich3 hi the s~e com%t7.
It is. t3m prhmnry dut~ of each }x~ard of revic,.~ to examine i-]~e asses?~ent recoil to
s~ ~t all t~u.:ab].e pr~;y~2rty in ~ asses~m~nt dis~-ict ba~: .bec~] Drc~r].v ]~laccd
umnn ~e list ar~3 valued }>v tim asnegsor. In ~ase anv mro~>nrtv, eiO~cr real or l~-
sonal, ~s b~n cnitt~], Om t~-d Ins ~ du~, of ~m~i~ the assessor.
'i~ coop, laints and ob-]actions of r~rsons, who feel aq .~rievc.m] witJ] any assess~]ts for
the c~u~-cmt year should Im considerc~t very. c,~x-efully }'.~ tl',e l~x-md. Such asse. sarants
must b2. revi~,.;cd Ln detail emd the hmnrd h,.nS t~n autt~ritY to ~nke corrections it
d..~<~m to }~ just, 7~e ]'o.a~d m.~v adjourn from dnv to day until ali. cases b~ve
hoard. If .c~,~].ahnts are reoe..ivcc] aftc=r t]-~. a.-]journ~nnt of the }x~rd or.-revie~.~,
rinse shall ~ hoard a~] detemnincd by Se county }'~ard of c<malizatJ, on.
.A non-resident Irony file vzritten objections to hi~ asses.~?~nt with t},~., county asses--
sot prior to the meetinq of the )x~ard of revic.,;. Such objections must ]:e presented
c~..~.~].a_~,~t~oa while it is Jn session,
Since at least cnn' mag~-~r of each local ~p~'d of re'~.~.~ ].s rcnuir~] to attend the
J.ns~ctiona! mpetinq at t.be ~untv
s~:~, tho tw~rd snou].a discuss any s~ific in-
sl-~lctJ.o~s par't~.ining to the %,,~rk of revic~,.~.
Before adjou]ming, ~]e )~-d of revic{,~ or c~m~olization should Dre~u~e gal official
list of '~ ......... ?]'n law renu~res t]Llt the cn~qe~: on a
c~ ......... ' -~- - ]-~e listed separate folm
be listc~ Jn detail end all assestn~ntq ~at hnve ]~cn increased or decregs~ should
re~rd s]~u!d t.~ sinn{~] a%':d dated by ~ ~,,z~hc33s of t~ ]-oard of review or e~aliza-
by t~m cotmty
5-15-79
CITY OF MOUND
Mound, Minnesota
May 9, 1979
COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO. 79-162
SUBJECT: Police Consultant
Mr. Helser will be at the May 15 meeting to discuss the Police
study.
1311
5-15-79
CITY OF MOUND
Mound, Minnesota
May 8, 1979
INFORMATION MEMORANDUM NO. 79-52
SUBJECT: Sewer Main TV Report
Attached is a copy of a letter from the Engineer showing that we ~ad
only 21 broken, cracked or collapsed pipes in the more than 8 miles of
sewer line televised.
McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS · LAND SURVEYORS ~1 SITE PLANNERS
Reply To:
12805 Ol$on Memorial Highway
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55441
(612) 559-3700
May 3, 1979
Mr. Leonard Kopp
City Manager
City of Mound
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, MN 55364
Subject:
City of Mound
Sewer Repairs
1979 Street Improvements
Dear Mr. Kopp:
Clearwater Research has completed the television inspection
of the sewers on the 1979 Street Improvement Project. The
inspection revealed 21 broken, cracked or collapsed pipe, which
should be repaired prior to the street construction.
We estimate the cost of this work at $17,500.00. If you
wish to proceed on this, the next step is to prepare plans and
specifications for the repairs.
Very truly yours,
McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, iNC.
Swanson, P.E.
LS: sj
#4741
Minneapolis- Hutchinson - Alexandria - Granite Falls
printed on recycled paper
13o?
of MOUiND
May 7, 1979
53~tl MAYWOOD ROAD
MOU,~',ID, MINNESOTA ,55364
(612) 472-1155
Mr. Richard J. Dougherty ~
Chief Administrator
Metropolitan Waste Control Commission
350 Metro Square Building
7th & Robert Streets
St. Paul, MN. 55101
Dear Mr. Dougherty:
We have recently been corresponding relative'to supposedly high
sewerage flows in the Mound sewer lines. AS reported to you, we
have an inspection program underway.
For 1979, we have just c~mpleted televising more than 8 miles of
sanitary sewer lines and only 21 places were found in need of
repair (see report attached). The Engineer advised me that only
two of the 21 were in serious condition. However, all 21 will be
repaired. ~
I hope this will be helpful to you in determining why the meters
have been showing such high volumes'.
Sincerely,
Cit~--Manager
LLK/ms
Encl.
cc: M. Dorton
R. Hustad
City Council
5-15-79
CITY OF MOUND
Mound! Minnesota
May 8, 1979
INFORMATION MEMORANDUM NO, 79-53
SUBJECT: Legion Gambling Report
Attached is a copy of the Gambling Report from the Legion, This shows
their profit to be $286.03 for 5 days, April 25th to April 30th.
13o7
H9¥0
D HSVO
q¥£oz
qv£o~
IO3U
H~VO
5-15-79
CITY OF MOUND
Mound ~ Minnesota
May 8, 1979
INFORMATION MEMORANDUM NO. 79-54
SUBJECT: Board of Review
Attached is a booklet furnished by the County showing what homes sold
in the past year and at what price, This should give the Council an
indication of the market value of homes,
/3
5-15-79
CITY OF MOUND
Mound,Minnesota
May 9, 1979
INFORMATION MEMORANDUM NO, 79-55
SUBJECT: Rosewood Lane
The residents of Langdon Heights have asked if Rosewood Lane between
Evergreen and Beachwood could be closed for an afternoon while the
neighbors have a block party.
If the Council has no objection~ we will tell ~hem to go ahead and make
plans. As yet, no date has been set,.
cc:
Police Chief
Public Works Director
Mrs. Derner
BRANCH OFFICES:
La]olla. California 92037
1200 Prospecl SIreel, Suile ]50
[?14J 459-2§61
Norlhbrook. Illinois 60062
899 Skokie Blvd.. Suite 540
13~2J 564-4010
San Francisco. Cali[ornJa 94104
220 Sansome Slreet. Suite 1200
(4~5~ 981-2648
Miller & Schroeder Municipals, Inc.
NORTHWESTERN FINANCIAL CENTER, 7900 XERXES AVENUE 'SOUTH, MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55431
TOLL FREE MINNESOTA 800-862-6002 TEL. 612-831-1500 TOLL FREE OTHER STATES 000.328-612g
?
CITY OF MOUND, MINNESOTA
PROPOSED 1979 IMPROVEMENT BOND ISSUE
Street Improvements and Storm Sewer (15 yr)
(May 17th Construction Bids)
Sidewalk, Construction and Replacement (10 yr)
Storm Sewer Repairs (15 yr) SUB TOTAL
Capitalized Interest (two years estimated)
Discount
Issuing Costs TOTAL
ROUNDED OFF BOND ISSUE TOTAL
$2,298,000
22,300*
17,900'*
$2,338,200
262~000
25,000
15,000
$2,640,200
$2,640,000
*Has been bid--wOrk is done
**Has been bi'd--is partially in.
NOTE: The large street improvement and storm sewers will not be
completed and assessed until 1980. First collections will not
be received until August and December of 1981.
Ernest L. Clark
/303
]2~ Prospect S/reeL ~uJte
Norlhbrook. Illinois 60062
BEg ~kokie ~]vd.. ~uJle 540
San Frencisco. California
220 ~ansome ~treel. ~uJle 12~
Miller & Schroeder Municipals, Inc.
NORTHWESTERN FINANCIAL CENTER, 7900 XERXES AVENUE SOUTH, MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55431
TOLL FREE MINNESOTA 800-862-6002 TEL. 612-831-1500 TOLL FREE OTHER STATES 800-328-6122
SALE MEMO
May 7, 1979
TO:
FROM:
ISSUE;
INITIAL
RESOLUTION;
SALE DATE:
DATED:
DUE
MATURITIES:
FIRST COUPON:
DISCOUNT:
CALL FEATURE:
Mr'. Curtis A. Pearson
LeFevere, Lefler, Pearson, O'Brien and Drawz
1100 First National-Bank Building
Minneapolis, Minnesota
Ernest L. Clark
$2,640,000 City of Mound, Minnesota, General
Obligation Improvement Bonds
May' 22, Regular Meeting
June 20, 1979, received bids until 2:30 o'clock P.M.,
CDT, award at 7:00 o'clock P.M., CDT.
July 1, 1979
April 1
$140,000 - 1982
$150,000 - 1983 through 1984
$175,000 - 1985 through 1992
$200,000 - 1993 through ~996
APril.~ t" 1980
$25,000
April 1, 1992 bonds maturing 1993/96 @ par
RATES:
RATING:
GOOD FAITH:
DENOMINATION:
PAYMENT:
DELIVERY:
PAYING AGENT:
Seven (7) rates allowed, ascending order in
multiples of 5/100 of 1%.
Moody's Investors Service, Inc.
$52,800 Bank Draft, Cashier's or Certified Check.
$5,000
Funds must be in immediately available funds,
not Clearing House Funds.
Free within Continental U. S. within .40 days from
date of sale.
Designated by successful bidder, within 48 hours
of sale, to be ratified by the City. 'City will pay
reasonable fees.
/3o I
CITY of MOUND
May 9 ~ 1979
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD'
MOUND. MINNESOTA 55364
(612) 472-1155
Mr. Bernard A. Duhachek
1957 Lakeside Lane
Mound, MN. 55364
Dear Mr, Duhachek:
Last night, the Council denied a request for a variance to con-
struct an addition to a home. on Lot 7} Block 7, Shadywood.Point.
DUring the discussion, 'it was stated that you owned a vacant under-
sized lot next to Lot 7.
The Council asked me to write you to see if some way you and your
neighbor could get together and satisfy the needs both of you have
for the empty lot you own and at the same time, straighten out
problems the City faces with the non-conformance of this area.
The City would appreciate anything you can do and suggests that
you might want to discuSs possibilities with the Building Inspector.
Thanks for your cooperation.
Sincerely,
nard L. Kopp
City Manager.
cc: Building Inspector
~City Council
Attorney.
/3oo
CITY of MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55354
{612) 472-1155
May 10, 1979
Mr. Ken Newkircher, President
Mohawk Jaycees
4997 Tuxedo Boulevard
Mound, Mn. 55364
Dear Mr. Newkircher,
The Public Works Department reported that the Island Park Halt was
left in a "shambles" after your Thursday night meeting.
We are happy to have your group use the hall, but one of the stip-
· ulations is that the hall be cleaned after you use it. Future clean
up will be billed to your group if this happens again.
We also have learned that the Jay. cees have lost another key. That
iS' four lost keys since your group has used the building in the last
two years. Our policy is to change the locks after two keys are
lost, so the locks will have to be changed. Since only the Jaycees
have lost keys we feel the cost of the lock replacement should be
borne by your club, not the taxpayers. '
Also, the key for the building must be picked up before 4:30 p.m. The
City offices close at 4:30 and employees must be paid overtime after
that hour. This we feel Should not have to be borne by the taxpayer
either,
Sincerely,
nary M~ narsKe'
City ~lerk/Treasurer
CITY OF MOUND
· MHM/gb ~
cc: Council
The case of the Carpentersville eight Roseto court for violation of the loc~
' ordinance and he was fined. In 1973
Eight officials of the northeastern This complicated story goes back to according to village manager Georg
i Illinois village of Carpentersville got a the early 1970s when developer Phillip Shaw, Rose was convicted of bribing a:
~ firsthand view of Chicago's architec- Rose added about 90 houses to a sub- FHA official. Finally, in 1975, the de:
turally unique Mctr0politan Coerce- division, then called Rivers End, along vclopcr declared bankruptcy. The vil
tional Center last January. the Fox River on the western edge of lage, which originally had agreed to ar
The eight--the village manager, exurban Carpentersville--population unusually low $20,000 pefformanc
village president, and six village trust~ 25,000. The village--charging Rose bond, was left with an incomplete sub
ees--had been held in contempt of with shoddy and incomplete construe- division that, officials now say, need
court and ordered jailed by a U.S. dis- don of such public improvements as about $700,000 worth of improve
trier court judge for refusing to issue streets, sidewalks, water mains, and ments.
building and occupancy permits to a sewers--refused to issue the required Ordered by the bankruptcy court t,
developer. They were released three oc~Pancy per.nits, issue the required permits to the buye
days later when all except the president When Rose allowed buyers to move of the subdivison's remaining nm
agreed to issue the permits after all. in without the permits, the village took houses and two vacant lots, the villag,
~ ,,~ _ refused. It took the position that th.
Village president Orville Brettman leads where they were taken Into custody on a buyer, developer Wayne Callahan
seven other Carpentersville officials into contempt of court charge. They spent should complete and repair the publi
, the Dirksen Federal Building in Chicago, three days in jail. improvements that had been begun b;
Rose.
*' ?:: AlthOugh the village won a reversa
of the bankruptcy court order in the
circuit court, the decision in its faro
was later overturned by a federal ap
peals court. Early in January, thc U.S
Supreme Court refused to hear the vil
lage's case. When village officials con-
tinued to refuse to i:;sue the permits tc
Callahan, the bankruptcy court re-
quested the district court to find then-.
in contempt.
"We went to jail to make our point,"
says Shaw, who has been village man-
t agcr for over 10 yeats. "We don't think
the bankruptcy court has a right to place]
the interest of creditors over the interest
"' of a community. We have demonstrated
what can happen when it does," hc
..- adds.
"We did have a nice jail to go to,
though," says Shaw, referring to Hart3'
i Weese's triangular, slit-windowed
~ high-rise federal detention center in
downtown Chicago.
The Carpentersville cause has been
i taken up by Republican Congressman
· Robert McClory from nearby Lake Bluff'
who planned to introduce in the House
a bill that would prevent federal judges
t~;, from jailing state or local officials over
local matters. A local citizens group
~,.~ intends to file a lawsuit to force the new
'~ developer to complete the improve-
:; ~'. ments.
¢ '~" According to Shaw, occupancy of 11
~ ,..y
~ more houses represents a serious pol!u-
~ tion danger to the Fox River. And, al-
~ ~ though almost 200 houses in ~he sub-
division, renamed Linco!nwood Manor
8 Planning
are occupied already, Shaw says that
adding even a few more houses could
cause sewer backups. The high water
table in thc area, he explains, increases
the likelihood of groundwater infiltra-
tion of the sewer system, thus reducing
capacity. As yet, however, there have
been no overflow complaints.
On the other hand, U.S. EPA re-
gional admLqistrator John McGuire
says there is L~.de likelihood of environ-
mental damage from 11 additional
sewer conllectio~s.
Since the mid-1970s, at least $3 mil-
lion in federal funds has been spent to
upgrade Carpentersville's sewage sys-
tem, McGuire points out. The system,
designed for the year 2000, has a five-
million-gallon-a-day capacity. It handles
about three million gallons a day at
present, says McGuire.
The extra 4,000 gallons of sewage
from 11 more homes would be insignif-
icant, agrcesJ. A. Smedile, chief engi-
neer of the Northeastern Illinois Plan-
ning Commission, which studied the
Carpentersville situation in preparing
it~ recently adopted 208 plan.
There are continuing leakage and
runoff problems in the village sewer
system, however. The community is on
the Illinois EPA's "restricted list,"
which means that no additional sewer
connections are permitted. Presumably,
solutions to these problems will be
offered in an engineering consultant's
report, commissioned by the village
with federal funds and expected to be
completed in May. Shaw says this report
will support the village's contention
that there is a danger of raw sewage
backing up into neighboring homes
and thc Fox River if the 11 homes in
question are occupied.
Although village officials insist that
they are-acting on environmental
grounds, McGuire and others suggest
that this controversy is primarily an
emotionally tinged legal and political
issue. Some have suggested that the
eight officials stirred up a ~empest aa a
publicity ploy before next month's local
ejection. In addition, there has been
speculation that village president Orville
Brcttman, the one holdout in thc ulti-
mate decision to issue the permits, in-
tends to seek a seat in the Illinois Gen-
eral Assembly. Carpcntersvilte, notes
one planner in the area, is "a very poli-
tical town."
ichigan law council calls it quits
O~cials of the East Central Michigan Also facing cutbacks are pro/ams
Plann~g and Development Region Providing aid for rape victims, r,flnaway
commi~ion have been working franti- youths, juvenile probation andfiehabili-
cally to r~organize its law enforcement tafion programs, crime prevention units,
section to Xa¥oid a total cutoff of federal mobile crime laboratori~, college
money for pblice services, courses for police officers, ~/special pro-
In early D~c~ember, the 125-member gram for training policf(vomen, and
Law Enforcement Council, angered at legal aid offices. A profiram for tribal
what it called b~eaucratic interference law en, forcement among Saginaw
in police plannifi~, voted to abolish 2ounty s Chippewa/Indian tribe is
itself. This is believed to be the fn'st hreatened as well. /
time that a rcgiona~l~ law enforcement The disbanding/o,f,the regional law
council has taken such~n action. :nforcement council forces the parent
\ tgcncy, the Eas,t/Ccntral regional plan-
The 8,000-square~/nil% Central
region is the largest plan_.o~ng region in
the ~tate. About 750,00,0 people live in
the 14 counties surrounding Saginaw
Bay on Lake Huron. Most Of the popu-
lation is centered in the Saginaw-Bay
City area. y
Surprisingly, this primarily rural re-
gion is one of the nation's most crime-
ridden. Since .1972 it has received nearly
$9 million for innovative programs to
fight crime and make the criminal jus-
tice system work.
One of the progra~ns facing a cut-
back this year is Saginaw County's
Metro Narcotics Unit, which was or-
ganized to battle the county's multi-
million-dollar heroin traffic. Saginaw
County is ~'ecognized as one of thc'larg-
est distribution centers for Mexican
. heroin in the U.S.
ting commissifin, to attempt to find
)olicc and 56urt officials willing to
~erve on a nqfit council. The region must
t)ave a council if it is to be eligible for
fu n'~ling. '
h r ·
If t ei-move falls, by the end of the
all federal money for police
will have to come through the
Office of Criminal Justice Plan-
However, that office tends to favor
':les at the expense of the
iral agencies.
"Part of the problem is that the law
council existed before the
commission came into being,"
inaw County circuit judge Gary
R:, M~:Donald. McDonald, recently a
ca~ndidhte for the Michigan Supreme:
C~urt, 1~¥ been a driving force behind
die law c~xncil's efforts to gain more
fe~era aid~flor police and courts in
Michigan, an~ he headed the law coun-
cil during the ~Ot year.
}Governor Wi~ham Mdhken s~gned
ad executive ordk.r in 1972 placing all
Michigan law e~forcement groups
udder the umbre, lbk of the regional
pl}nning comm~ss~q~ns. McDonald
stresses that this arraqgement is not
tyOical of other states.
IAt first, the mergcr~aused little
trouble, he says. The region was just
beginning to seek money\.for more
ambitious programs, and thei¢ seemed
to>be plenty of money to go a?ound to
th~ county agencies.
~hc trouble started when the requests
for'money exceeded the funds received
from the federal government and
"t6ugh decisions" had to be mad&
Some of thc larger counties had to take
a back seat to the smaller, rural coun-
uts where the crime rate was soaring.
McDonald charged that the regional
March
: 12. q7
12, q~
David H. Cochran, Pres. · H. Dale Palmatier · Albert L. Lehman * James S. Russell · Jean Williams
May 2, 1979
DEAR INTERESTED CITIZEN:
Enclosed for your information is a copy of the
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Annual Report for 1978.
Please feel free to contact any member of the watershed
district's Board of Managers ~should you have any questions
or comments about the district's activities.
Very trul~ yours,
David H. Cochran, President
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District
DHC/ccj
Enclo sure
MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT
ANNUAL REPORT FOR 19'78
APP, I L, 1979
. I N TRODU CT I ON
The names, addresses and terms of the managers are:
David H. Cochran
4640 Linwood Circle
Excelsior, MN 55331
Term expires
March 8, 1981
James S. Russell
5124 Thomas Avenue S.
Minneapolis, MN 55410
Term expires
March 8, 1979
Albert L. Lehman
3604 West Sunrise Drive
Minnetonka, MN 55343
Term expires
March 8, 1979
H. Dale Palmatier
6135 Smithtown Road
Victoria, Minnesota
P.O. Excelsior, MN 55331
Term expires
March 8, 1980
Jean Williams
2709 Jersey Avenue S.
St. Louis Park, MN 55426
Term expires
March 8, 1980
The present officers are:
David H. Cochran
Albert L. Lehman
H. Dale Palmatier
Jan]es S. Russell
President
Vice President
Secretary
Treasurer
During 1978, twelve regular meetings were held by the
managers on the third Thursday of each month at 7:30 p.m. at the
Wayzata City Hall. In addition, the n]anagers attended meetings
with representatives of the Department of Natural Resources and
the Army Corps of Engineers regarding various elen.ents of peti-
tioned projects, and meetings with Lake Minnetonka Conservation
District officers to discuss matters of mutual concern. Repre-
sentatives of the Board of Managers attended n'~eetings of the
Minnesota Association of Watershed Districts.
As in previous years, the managers supplied copies of
minutes of all meetings and reports to interested citizens and
to public officials throughout the district. Copies of the 1977
Annual Report were also filed with the Minnesota Water Resources
Board, the Boards of County Colamissioners of Hennepin and Carver
Counties, and with State Senators and Representatives from the
watershed district area.
The managers noted, with deep regret, the death of
former manager Robert B. Carroll, %;ho served on the Board of
Managers from the establishment of the Board in 1967 until his
retirement in 1976. The managers express their deep appreci-
ation of Mr. Carroll's long and dedicated service on the Board.
PERMIT APPLICATIONS AND GENERAL ACTIVITIES.
The watershed district received 156 per]air applications
during 1978. In each instance, the proposed project was revieued
in detail by the managers for environmental soundness and for com-
pliance with the district's rules and regulations. Applications
were received for projects such as dredging, shoreline rip-rapping,
highway and utility crossings, setback variances, filling, prelim-
inary plat review and drainage--~nd grading for site development.
As in previous years, a large majority of the applications
received were from the Lake Minnetonka portion of the watershed
district, reflecting the continuing u~banization of that area.
The watershed district continued its permit application
referral procedure during 1978. In accordance with this referral
procedure, prior to the presentation of an application to the
Board of Managers, the planning commission of the affected munici-
pality makes a preliminary determination that the proposed work
conforms with local ordinances and regulations. The matter is
then referred to the managers, whose recommendation goes to the
City Council for the affected municipality prior to the Council's
final action on the application.
All permits granted by the watershed district specifi-
cally require compliance with applicable municipal ordinances and,
if the permit involves Lake Minnetonka, the applicable ordinances
or regulations of the Lake r.linnetonka Conservation District. In
addition, permits issued by the watershed district require compli-
ance with any applicable regulations of the Minnesota Dep~rtment
of ~;atural Resources.
The managers continued to receive from the engineer for
the district a written preliminary review of each permit applica-
tion in advance of the meeting at which the application was to be
considered. The district engineer includes a recomniendation to
the managers with respect to each permit application. This
procedure is intended to allo%; the managers to more effectively
allocate ti]ae at the regular meetings to perniit matters warranting
detailed review. The final assessment of each per~,]it application
is then provided by the engineer at the regular meeting at which
the permit application is considered by the mana~3ers.
DATA COLLECTION.
The hydrologic data collection program was continued
during 1978. The data for 1977 is published in the annual Hydro-
logic Data Report dated March, 1978. Copies of these reports
were made available to the Minnesota Water Resources Board, the
Metropolitan Council, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency,
the Department of Natural Resources, and local governlnent offi-
cials and citizens advisory groups.
MINNEHAHA CREEK IMPROVEMENT PROJECT.
In February, 1978, the managers held the final hearings
in connection with the petition of the Cities of Minneapolis,
Edina, St. Louis Park, Hopkins and Minnetonka, and the Minneapolis
Park and Recreation Board, for a Basic Water and Land Management
Improvement Project for Minnehaha Creek. At the same time, the
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources also held a joint
hearing With the district on the district's application for the
necessary DNR permits to construct the new control structure at
the site of Grays Bay Dam.
In April, 1978, the managers authorized and ordered
the Basic Water and Land Management Improvement Project for
Minnehaha Creek. The managers directed the engineer to prepare
the necessary final plans and specifications for the project
and authorized that an agreement be executed with Hennepin
County regarding construction, operation and maintenance of the
structure.
As of year end, the managers had adopted a timetable
for final engineering and construction of the individual projects,
with construction planned to commence late in 1979 and to continue
through 1980.
RELATIONSHIPS WITH LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL UNITS.
The managers continued a policy of cooperation' a~d
exchange of information with other governmental units affected
by the programs and policies of the watershed district. In
addition to the permit application procedure previously describ-
ed, they also continued to honor requests to attend meetings of
municipal and state officials as well as meetings of interested
citizens and environmental groups.
STORM WATER RESEARCH PROJECT.
During 1978, final reports were printed by the U. S.
Environmental Protection Agency reflecting tlie results of the
storm water research project undertaken by the District under
a U. S. EPA grant. Copies of the final report are available
from the district engineer, Eugene A. Hickok & Associates.
WATERWAYS MAINTENANCE A~D REPAIR FUND
In 1978, the Board of Managers continued its practice
of requesting from the municipalities within the district
suggestions for maintenance projects to be paid for from the
Waterways Maintenance and Repair Fund. From the numerous
requests received, the managers approved projects with munici-
palities of the district. Included among the projects were
shoreline erosion control, streambed maintenance, sediment
removal and shoreline cleanup.
In all cases, the grants were conditioned upon the
work being arranged for and supervised by the city involved,
either through city employees or by a contractor, and upon
payment by the watershed district only after inspection and
approval by the engineer for the district.
The availability of matching funds with which to
complete the projects was one of the factors considered by
the managers in making the grants.
UPPER WATERSHED STORAGE AND RETENTION PROJECT.
During 1978, the managers revie%~ed the status of the
petition of the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District for the
Upper Watershed Storage and Retention Project. Following review,
the managers concluded that additional engineering studies and
public hearings would be required prior to a determination by
the managers on the project. The managers also noted that such
studies and hearings could not_~e undertaken during 1978 because
of the work required on the Creek Improvement Project.
Accordingly, the managers deferred making findings with respect
to the petition of the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District
until June 1, 1980.
LITIGATION WITH THE UNITED STATES ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS.
On April 29, 1976, the Minnehaha Creek Watershed
District, along with the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District,
the Lake Minnetonka Association and two individuals, commenced
an action against the United States Army Corps of Engineers,
challenging the assertion by the Corps of Engineers that it has
under law jurisdiction over Lake Minnetonka and Minnehaha Creek
as far downstream as Minnetonka Mills. After the commencement
of this lawsuit, the State of Minnesota intervened as a plaintiff.
On April 18, 1978, the Federal District Court for the
District of Minnesota issued Findings of Fact.and an Order
ruling that the Corps of Engineers lacked jurisdiction to
regulate activities of the District on Lake Minnetonka and that
portion of Minnehaha Creek above Minnetonka Mills under the
Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899, and declaring certain regulations
promulgated by the Corps of Engineers to he invalid insofar as
they purported to regulate the placement of rip-rap and the con-
struction of dams.
Thereafter, the Corps of Engineers made motions for
reconsideration, which %~ere denied. On June 16, 1978, the Corps
of Engineers appealed the decision of the Federal District Court
to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals. Oral argument %;as pre-
sented by attorneys for the District to the Eighth Circuit Court
of Appeals sitting in St. Louis, ~]issouri on Decen~ber 13, 1978.
A decision was pending at year-end.
7
FOR WORK IN PUBLIC WATERS. .
During 1978, the Minnesota Department of Natural
Resources adopted final rules governing permits for work in
public waters which incorporated some of the suggested modifi-
cations recommended by the managers in the rule-making hearing.
FLOODPLAIN ZONING ON MIN~EHAHA CREEK.
During 1978, pursuant to requirements of the Federal
Insurance Administration, a redelineation of the floodplain of
Minnehaha Creek was undertaken. As a result of this redeline-
ation, the municipalities on the creek are in the process of
adopting revised floodplain management ordinances. The managers
and the district's engineer have worked cooperatively with the
municipalities regarding this matter of common concern to all
municipalities on the creek and have urged the municipalities
to adopt floodplain delineations that wil.1 preserve maximum
flood storage capacity along the Minnehaha Creek.
NATURAL ORDINARY HIGUWATER LEVEL - LAKE MINNETONKA.
On January 24, 1978, the Comn]issioner of the Department
of Natural Resources issued his Findings, Conclusions and Order
establishing the ordinary highwater level of Lake Minnetonka at
elevation 929.4 National Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD) 1929.
The investigation by the DNR was made in response to the joint
petition of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed DiStrict and the
Lake Minnetonka Conservation District.
8
MINNESOTA WATER 'PLANNII~G BOARD WATER MANAGEMENT SURVEY.
During 1978, the managers participated in the survey
conducted by the State Water Planning Board to secure data to
assist the Water Planning Board in making its reports and
recommendations to the legislature in 1979 regarding water
resource management.
WETLANDS INVENTORY.
During 1976, the watershed district entered into an
agreement %~ith the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
to prepare an aerial survey of wetlands in the Twin Cities
metropolitan area. Final reports and maps were received in
1978. The reports describe the processes used in determining
wetland types. The survey results are presented through the
use of transparent overlays of the standard U.S.G.S. quadrangle
maps of the watershed district area. They have already proven
useful in review of permit applications and should be of value
for a wide range of future uses.
FINANCIAL RECORDS.
The financial records-of the District are kept by a
certified public accountant. All financial transactions are
recorded in the minutes of its meetings.
The treasurer of the District maintains separate
records for each of three funds: (1) its administrative fund;
(2) the storm water research fund; and (3) the waterways
9
maintenance and repair fund. These records include the dates
and amounts of all expenditures, the names of individuals
receiving payment and the purposes for which payment is made.
The official depository for the District is the Wayzata
State Bank, Wayzata, Minnesota.
The books of the District were audited for the year
1978 and a copy of the audit was forwarded to the State Auditor
for the State of Minnesota.
Respectfully submitted,
'David H. Cochran, presideht' '
Board of Managers of the
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District
10