The URL can be used to link to this page

80-11-12 CITV OF I~OUMI) Mound, Minnesota 80-377 80-375 80-373 80-374 80-378 80-381 M 80 384 M 80-376 M 80-379 M 80-383 M 80-380 M 80-372 M 80-382 Mound City Council Meeting Wednesday, November 12, 1980 City Hall 7:30 P.M. REVISED AGENDA 1. Minutes Pg. 2542-2543 2. Public Hearing Cavan Road from Tyrone Lane to Clare Lane 3. Softball Field Pg, 2537 4. Planning Commission Minutes /~A. B. C. D. E. F. 2538-2541 Pg. 2530-2536 Subdivision of Land - Lots 3 & 4, Block 3, Shadywood Point pg? 2528-2529 Subdivision of Land - Lots 1 & 2, Block 3, Avalon Pg~ 2526-2527 Street Front Variance - Lots 2,3 & P/4, Block 13, Devon pg, 2523-2525 Nonconforming Use - Lot 4, Block 19, Shadywood Point pg? 2519-2522 Rezoning - Lots 8, 9, 14 & 15, Block 2, Dreamwood Pg? 2517-2518 Street Front and Lot Size Variances - Lots 12 & 13, Block 20, Whipple Pg. 2514-2516 G. Subdivision of Land - Lots 20, 21 & P/17, 18 & 19, Block 6, Pembroke Pg. 2511-2513 5. Park Commission Minutes Pg. 2510 6. Street Assessments Pg. 2503-2509 7. Street Construction Pg. 2497-2502 8. Comments and Suggestions by Citizens Present (2 Minute Limit) 9. Bids - CBD Snow Plowing (Bid Opening Monday - November lOth) Pg. 2554-2555 10. Bass Tournaments 1981 Pg. 2495-2496 ll. Tax Forfeit Land - Lot 45, Block 3, A.L. Crockers 1st Division pg. 2492-2494 12, Deferred Assessments and HUD Grant Pg. 2549-2553 13. Police Un~on Contract Pg. 2473-2489 147 Payment of Bills 15, Levy L~mit Sncrease Pg. 2490-2491 16. 1981 Budget Pg. 2545-2548 17. Information Memorandums/Misc. Pg. 2468-2472 18. Committee Reports Page 2544 CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota November 12, 1980 INFORMATION MEMORANDUM NO. 80-87 SUBJECT: Arbitration Hearing Attached is a copy of Resolution 79-393 cancelling Thomas and SOns' Contract. This will be one of the main items to be.discussed at the Arbitration Hearing. Please be familiar with what it says. Leonard L. Kopp 422 September 11, 1979 Councilmember Swenson moved the following resolution, RESOLUTION NO. 79 - 393 RESOLUTION TERMINATING THE 1978 STREET CON- STRUCTION CONTRACT WITH THOMAS & SONS, INC. WHEREAS, the City of Mound did enter into a contract with Thomas and Sons, inc. in 1978 for the construction of a substantial amount of work in the City of Mound, and WHEREAS, during the summer of 1978 the City of Mound acting through its City Engineer notified Steven Thomas, President of Thomas and Sons, Inc. that there was unsatisfactory progress in concluding the work and sent such not- ices to Mr. Thomas on July 14, 1978, August 1, 1978, September 12, 1978, October 2, 1978, August 18, 1978, November 13, 1978, November 17, 1978, November 29, 1978, May 8, 1979, May 17, 1979 and June 18, 1979, and WHEREAS, the City Engineer was directed by the Council to consult with the City Attorney to pursue this work in June of 1979 and on June 29 the City Eng- ineer, City Manager, the Director of Public Works and the City Attorney met with Mr. Thomas and his attorney to discuss the status of the work and Mr. Thomas informed all present that all work would be completed with- in two weeks except for work in the Three Points area, and WHEREAS, City representatives made it very clear to Mr. Thomas that his company would have to complete this work because of the substantial number of complaints from residents of the City and representatives of the City and that if said work was not completed the contract would be terminated and someone else would be appointed to complete the work, and WHEREAS, despite all of these letters and numerou§ conversations, the City Engineer reports that there was no substantial increase in the number of laborers or machinery committed by the contractor to increase the progress rate or to finish the work, and that a substantial number of complaints were received many, many times and transmitted to the contractor without any results, and WHEREAS, Section 18.2 of the General Specifications of a Contract between the City and the contractor readd as follows: "18.2. If the CONTRACTOR"...or repeatedly fails to supply sufficient skilled workmen or suitable materials or equipment,...." "...or if he other- wise violates any provision of the CONTRACT DOCUMENTS, then the OWNER may without projudice to any other right or remedy and after giving the CON- TRACTOR and his surety a minimum of ten (10) days from receipt of a WRITTEN NOTICE, terminate the services of the CONTRACTOR and take possession of the PROJECT and of all materials, equipment, tools, construction equipment and machinery thereon owned by the CONTRACTOR, and finish the WORK by whatever method he may deem expedient. In such case, the CONTRACTOR shall not be entitled to receive any further payment until the WORK is finished. If the unpaid balance of the CONTRACT PRICE exceeds the direct and indirect costs of completing the PROJECT, including compensation for additional professional services, such excess SHALL BE PAID TO THE CONTRACTOR. If such costs exceed such unpaid balance, the CONTRACTOR will pay the differ- ence to the OWNER. Such costs incurred by the OWNER will be determined by the ENGINEER and incorporated in a CHANGE ORDER." and September 11, 1979 WHEREAS, the City Council on August 14 gave Thomas and Sons ten days to complete the work on the project but before the notice could be mailed and sup- porting data accumulated, the notice was not ~ent untll August 21 and the contractor was advised that he had until September 1, and WHEREAS, this Council was again requested by its staff at a meeting on August 28 to give the contractor additional days to September 7 because of rain and weather conditions and the staff knowing the urgency of this work extended the com- pletion date to September 11, and WHEREAS, this Council is now advised that in the opinion of the City Engineer the work will not be compelted for at least another two o~ three weeks and the City Council will be assessing this work on September 18, 1979 and will have to face property owners of this City and explain why it has taken so long to com- plete the work and why it has not been done properly, and WHEREAS, members of this Council have received a substantial number of telephone calls and complaints about work which has not been done or has been completed poorly and this Council believes that another contractor should be contacted to com- plete and finish the work. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND, MOUND, MINNE- SOTA: 1o Termination of the contract sent to the contractor, Thomas and Sons, by registered mail on August 21, 1979 is hereby affirmed and no further work shall be completed by the Contractor after this date. 2. The City Engineer is'directed to prepare a new contract and change order under Section 14.1 of the specifications agreeing that the City will pay the "actual cost for labor, direct overhead, materials, supplies, equip- ment and other services necessary to complete the work with Hardrives, Inc. In addition to said sums there shall be added 15 percent of the actual costs of the work to cover the cost of general overhead and profit. 3. The City Manager and the City Engineer are hereby authorized upon execution of the change order under the 1979 Street Contract to give to Hardrives, Inc. a Notice to Proceed letter. 4. The City Manager, City Engineer and City Attorney are hereby auth- orized and directed to take any and all action necessary to protect the in- terests of the City of Mound and to complete the work as set forth in the punchlist (on file in the City Clerkls Office). This punch list marked Ex- hibit A is a listing of the incomplete and deficient items which were to have been performed by Thomas and Sons, Inc. and which shall now be performed by Hardrives, Inc. A motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Council- member Lovaasen, and upon vote being taken thereon, the f. ollowing voteci in favor thereof; Lovaasen, Polston, Swenson, Ulrick and Withhart, the following voted against the same; none, whereupon said resolution was declared passed and adopted, signed by the Mayor and his signature attested by the City Clerk. Mayc~r MC City Clerk BILLS .... NOVEMBER 12, 1 AWWA Auto Sound Bury Carlson Buffalo Bituminous Ron Bos trom Bryan Rock Prod Bill Clark Oil Conway Fi re & Safety Continental Tele E & D Enterprises G 1 enwood Ing 1 ewood Gerry's Plumbing Dept. Public Safety Election Judges (65) Hardrives, Inc. Eugene Hickok & Assoc Inst.. of Govt Publ. Mound Fi re Dept Metro Waste Control Mound Postmaster M.F.O.A. Martins Navarre 66 Miracle Recreation Equip Mi nnegasco N.S.P. N.W. Bel 1 Nat'l Fire Protection Northland Elec. Supply Michael Pol ley Janet Rasmussen Spring Park Car Wash Uniforms Unlimited TOTAL BI LLS LIQUOR BILLS Continental Tele Mi nnegasco Mound Shopping Center N.W. Linen Nels Schernau Regal Window Cleaning Security Alarm Water Care Johnson Paper Drews Electric 43.00 3o. 00 67.80 253,537.~0 38.87 63.90 4,040.09 27.68 744.03 935.00 19.15 32.50 5.OO 3,154.14 462,303.95 16, O85.3O I, 859. O0 7.00 8,590.25 3,366.00 3OO.OO 22.50 36.75 4,855. O0 697.37 5,619.31 49.83 49. O2 67.36 38.87 5.98 lO8.00 48.5O 766,848.95 66.25 62.05 71.55 675. O0 21.80 9.50 10.75 344.85 2O.8O 297.43 45.32 Bob Wallin Heating A.J. Ogle, Inc. Butch's Bar Supply Coca Cola Day Distrib East Side Beverage Gold Medal Beverage' Home Ju|ce Jude Candy Leding Distrib Midwest Wine Pepsi Cola/7 Up Pogreba Distrib Rouillard Beverage Thorpe Dist. Eagle Wine Griggs Cooper Johnson Bros. Liquor MN Distillers Old Peoria Ed Phillips & Sons TOTAL LIQUOR BILLS GRAND TOTAL--ALL BILLS 117.64 1,403.45 214.10 32~.9o 2,810.45 4,364.35 123.35 20.36 207.90 2,698.35 1,363.57 316.95 4,723.86 94o.42 4,095.4o 519.78 1,487.7O 1,220.11 1 ,oo6.84 2,360.87 i,o03.28 3,634.23 736.50 1,006.00 478.18 842.56 1,114.59 94o. 47 1,032.88 1,367.14 44,1 O3.48 810,952.43 .M cCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. Reply To: 12800 Industrial Park Boulevard Plymouth, Minnesota 65441 (612) 559-3700 November 10, 1980 Mr. Don Rinowski Hardrives, Inc. 3030 Harbor Lane Suite 216 Plymouth, MN 55441 Subject: City of Mound 1980 Street Improvements Section 2 Cleanup 3ob #5248 Dear Mr. Rinowski: There is a great amount of black dirt laying on the streets as a result of sod installation. Please make arrangements to have this removed right away. Very truly yours, McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. nard Kopp Lyle Swanson, P.E. Minneapolis - Hutchinson - Alexandria - Granite Falls printed on recycled paper BILLS .... NOVEMBER 12, 1980 AWWA I Auto Sound Bury Carlson Buffalo Bituminous Ron Bostrom Bryan Rock Prod Bill Clark Oil Conway Fire & Safety Continental Tele E & D Enterprises Glenwood Inglewood Gerry's Plumbing Dept. Public Safety Election Judges (65) Hardrives, Inc. Eugene Hickok & Assoc Inst. of Govt Publ. Mound Fire Dept Metro Waste Control Mound Postmaster M.F.O.A. Martins Navarre 66 Miracle Recreation Equip Minnegasco N.S.P. N.W. Bell Nat'l Fire Protection Northland Elec. Supply Michael Polley Janet Rasmussen Spring Park Car Wash Uniforms Unlimited TOTAL BI LLS LIQUOR BILLS Continental Tele Minnegasco Mound Shopping Center II II II N.W. Linen Nels Schernau Regal Window Cleaning Security Alarm Water Care Johnson Paper Drews Electric 43.00 3o.oo 67.80 253,537.80 38.87 63.90 4,040.09 27.68 744.o3 935.00 19.15 32.50 5.OO 3,154.14 462,303.95 16,O85.30 1,859.00 7.OO 8,590.25 3,366.00 3OO.OO 22.50 36.75 4,855.OO 697.37 5,619.31 49.83 49.02 67.36 38.87 5.98 108.O0 48.5O 766,848.95 66.25 62.O5 71.55 675.00 21.80 9.5O 10.75 344.85 2O.8O 297.43 45.32 Bob Wallin I~eating A.J. Ogle, Inc. Butch's Bar Supply Coca Col a Day Distrib East Side Beverage Gold Medal Beverage Home Jui ce Jude Candy Ledi ng Distrib Midwest Wine Pepsi Cola/7 Up Pogreba Distrib Rouillard Beverage Thorpe Dist. Eagle Wine Griggs Cooper Johnson Bros. Liquor MN Distillers Old Peoria Ed Phillips & Sons TOTAL LIQUOR BILLS GRAND TOTAL--ALL BILLS 117.64 1,403.45 214.10 2,810.45 4,364.35 123.35 20.36 207.90 2,698.35 1,363.57 316.95 4,723.86 940.42 4 ,O95.4O 519.78 1,487.70 1.22O.ll 1.OO6.84 2.360.87 1.OO3.28 3.634.23 736.5O 1,o06.oo 478.18 842.56 1,114.59 94O.47 1,o32.88 1,367.14 44,103.48 810,952.43 11-12-80 CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota November 10, 1980 COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO. 80-384 SUBJECT: Snow Plowing Bids CBD Parking Attached is the breakdown of Snow Plowing Bids for 1980-1981. one bid was received from Illies and Son. The bid was: Front End Loader Trucks 5 Yard Box Trucks lO Yard Box Plow Trucks Road Grader $36.00 Per Hour 26.00 Per Hour 32.00 Per Hour 28.00 Per Hour 28.00 Per Hour Inflation really hit this year. Last year's bid was: Front End Loader 5 Yard Truck lO Yard Truck Plow Trucks Road Grader $27.50 Per Hour 18.00 Per Hour 26.50 Per Hour 23.50 Per Hour Not bid in 1979. Only Lednard L. Kopp ; 11-12-80 Hound, Minnesota November 10, 1980 COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO. 80-383 SUBJECT: Deferred Assessments and HUD Grant Attached is a copy of a memorandum from the City Clerk saying we have two problems with deferments. One from a person that is handicapped, not 65, but has an income of less than $7,500. The other one is from a person over 65 whose income last year was less than $10,000, but somehow this year is $10,800. and next year again, the income will be less than $10,000. Does the Council wish to act on these requested deferments? ~l~'~oo~ard L. Kopp Date: 11-10-80 From: City Clerk/Treasurer To: City Manager Subject: Deferred Assessments and HUD Grant The Council established a policy allowing a person over 65 with an income of less than SIO,O00.O0 to defer special assessments. The criteria set for eligibility for HUD grant is age 65 and a max- imum income of ~7,500.O0. Two applications have been received from persons not meeting the age requirement but being totally disabled. Also, an application has been received from an individual whose in- come exceeds the $10,000.00 requirement by $800.00 for this year only. Does Council wish to amend the policy to allow inclusion of "handicapped" to those eligible and shall any consi'deration be given to incomes ex- ceeding guide lines by a minimum amount? A resolution amending both policies will be necessary if Council wishes to consider either of these variations. MHM/dd Mary I~'. Marske 386 .. August 28, 1979 Councilmember Ulrick moved the following resolution, RESOLUTION NO. 79 - 361 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF $7,500 AS THE MAXIMUM INCOME FOR THOSE RECEIVING DISEASED TREE & SPECIAL ASSESSMENT GRANTS WHEREAS, Council has previously established by resolution that $7,500 be top income for persons receiving grants for home rehabilitation, and WHEREAS, at present $5,000 is the top income for persons who can receive HUD money for diseased trees or special assessment help, and WHEREAS, if top income were consistent, it would expedite the assistance to those needing aid from various grants NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND, MOUND, MINNESOTA: That Council does hereby approve the establishment of $7,500.00 as maximum income for those receiving diseased tree and special assessment grants. Be it further noted, that this top income is now consistent with that of persons receiving grants for home rehabilitation also. A motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember Withhart and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof; Lovaasen, Polston, Swenson, Ulrick and Withhart, the following voted against the same; none, whereupon said resolution was declared passed and adopted, signed by the Mayor and his signature attested by the City Clerk. ZMayor v ~ Attest: CMC City Clerk 77-~20' 9-1~-77 RESOLUTION 77-;~20 A RESOLUTION PROVIDING STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES FOR DEFERRAL OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS BECAUSE OF. HARDSHIP FOR SENIOR CITIZENS WHEREAS, the state legislature has enacted M.S.A. 435.193 to 435.195, which authorizes a city to defer the collection of special assessments for homestead property owned by a person 65 years of age or older for whom it would be a hardship to make payments, and WHEREAS, the dity douncil has determined that this law should be implemented by the City of Mound for all special assessments to be hereinafter levied by Mound, and that the City Attorney is authorized and directed to ask for an opinion of the Attorney General as to the legality of making this policy applicable for special assess- ments which have been previously levied; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mound: 1. Persons 65 years of age or older who reside on and own homestead property may apply to defer special assessments levied by the City of Mound. 2. Application for deferred assessments shall be on forms prescribed by the County Auditor and such other information as is determined necessary by the City Manager and City Clerk-Treasurer to make their certifications as set forth in paragraph 3. 3. The City Council will approve deferred assessments for property owners who reside in a household which has a gross income of less than $10,001. The City Manager and City Clerk-Treasurer are hereby authorized and directed to review income data and to certify to this council that the property owner qualifies as a hardship case under the aforementioned criteria. Income tax returns and other private data may be reviewed by said city officers to determine that the property qualifies for a deferred assessment but said income information shall not be kept.on file as a public record and said officials are directed to protect the privacy of applicant's personal financial affairs. 4. After City Council approval of the application for a deferral, the City Clerk-Treasurer shall file a notice with the County Auditor thereof setting forth the amount of special assessments being deferred. The County Auditor shall file a copy of said notice with the County Recorder pursuant to M.S.A. 435.194. All special assess- ments deferred under the provisions of M.S.A. 435.193 to 435.195 shall bear interest at the rate of 6% per annum on the unpaid balance. The notice to the County Auditor shall specify the interest rate and all such interest and principal shall be collected when the deferred assessment is payable under the provisions set forth hereafter in paragraph 5. 5. The option to defer the payment of special assessments shall terminate and all amounts accumulated plus interest shall become due upon the occurrence of any of the following events: a. The death of the owner, provided that the spouse is otherwise not eligible for the deferment. The surviving spouse shall file a new application with the City Manager and City Clerk-Treasurer. If the property is still eligible for deferment, they shall so note in the city records and the matter need not be referred to ~his council. b. The sale, transfer or subdivision of the property or any part thereof. c. The property for any reason loses its homestead status. d. The City Council shall determine that there is no hardship and shall require immediate or partial payment. Attest: Mayor City Clerk 77-~20 '~"~ ~ ~ 9-13-77 CITY OF HOUND Hound, HJnnesota 11-12-80 COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO. 80-382 SUBJECT: 1981 Budget A proposed budget is attached. will be supported by revenues generated or existing. ported by taxes and other income show as follows: November 10 1980 The self-supporting funds are listed and '"~ The departments sup- Estimated Expenditures Estimated Revenues Difference Plus funds not to be received from the State $1,778,666. 1,748,351. (30,315.) 24,267. $"' (54,588.) The estimated budget proposes a 10 man police force-~'sworn officers and an animal control officer. The Police Chief suggests an 11 man department be maintained--a copy of his report is attached. The difference in cost between 10 and(l~men is $25,016.00. Suggestions on ways to balance the budget are as follows: I. Levy the $24,267, the State is going to withhold 2. Reduce the office personnel by one 3. The balance of which should be available. There are some liquor funds available. $24,267. 15,000. 15,3!~5_. We have or will recommend that $10~//iquor funds be used to begin the fund for severance pay and $17,008.64 for Mound's 1981 share of the new fire truck. There should be $15,OO0 available to bring the budget into balance. Items to be decided: 1. What size Police Department do you want? 2. Should one office position be deleted? 3. Do you want to depend on a beginning balance or take money from liquor? Revenue Shar}ng has not been considered. It probably will pass and funds will be ava}lable from it. ~_e6nard L. Kopp IN EROFFICE 0-" ROM: UBJECT: Leonard Kopp - City Manager Chief Charles Johnson Police Department DATE November 7. I want to re-emphasize my recommendation of sworn officers on the department, including myself, does not go below eleven. The vast majority of the work load (approximately 65%) of the department, with all four cities, was within Mound. Additionally, the vast majority of time spent on patrol duties with the personnel we had to patrol the four cities, was spent within Mound. This work load is not expected to decrease in any manner when we patrol just Mound and, in fact, may increase due to the loss of contin- uity that we enjoyed while patrolling all four cities. It should be noted that by using the police consultant's study submitted in the spring of 1979, it recommended a bare minimum of 18 officers for the four cities. On the basis of calls for service alone, it would indicate that the absolute minimum need for just Mound would be twelve (65% of 18 = 17). Because of the increasing number of police calls requiring two officers, it is important that at least two officers be on duty as much as possible. With eleven officers, it will be impossible, and with twelve officers it will be difficult at best. This can be demonstrated in one way by understanding that it takes five officers to have one person on duty 24 hours each day, or ten officers for two to be on duty. With eleven officers and deducting myself and one investigative ser- geant, there are jus~ nine remaining or one short of the absolute minimum required to field two officers. A second fact that demonstrates the difficulty in maintaining.an adequate service level is to consider time lost fom just vacations and holidays. Collectively, with eleven personnel, the department loses 53 work weeks a year, or the equivalent of one full time employee. I have thoroughly evaluated the scheduling and deployment of all personnel to meet the needs of the city in light of the fact our jurisdiction is reduced considerably, our service population will be approximately 1/3 less, and our personnel will be reduced. I intend to establish the following operational adjustments: 1. Maintain two patrol sergeants but modify their schedule to the extent that they will work 10 hour days and be primarily on duty during the busiest evening hours, and when other police and city supervisory personnel are not available. 2. Discontinue the six/three patrol schedule in favor of a five/two schedule. This will allow for maximum utilization of officer's time during critical periods such as weekends and the busiest times and day~ of the week. 3. Retain Sgt. Hudson in investigation with continuing duties as department training officer and being second in command, filling in as chief in my absence. He is a highly skilled and professional investigator, having a solid reputation and track record in investigation. He is without question, the best and most logical choice to handle these duties. It is hoped that this short summary of the facts will be of assistance in arriving at a decision relative to the manpower allocation for 1981. Respectfully, Mound Police Dept. II TEROFFICE MEI O TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Leonard Kopp - City Manager Chief Charles Johnson Police Vehicles DATE November With the decrease in patrol officers and service area, it is my intention to make adjustments in the number and usage of police vehicles. Currently we have three unmarked vehicles of which I recommend we retain one and sell the other two to the highest bidder. At this time we have four regular marked squad cars which are 1981 Mailbus purchased new in June of this year. It is my recommenda- tion to retain three marked police vehicles in regular service and the fourth vehicle will be utilized by myself. We have no cars budgeted to be purchased in 1981, however, in all probability, they will have to be replaced in 1982. By my utilizing one of the P~libus will allow for at least one year of continued use of the cars that were purchased this year and the mileage I put on a car is far less than on regular patrol duty and, therefore, the car could be converted back to a regular marked squad in 1982 and be utilized for one additional year. For the purpose of saving gasoline, it is my ifitention to initiate some use of a new piece of equipment known as "Auto-therm." This is a device which recirculates warm air into the interior of the vehicle during cold weather without the engine running and will provide for the saving of gasoline normally used while the car is idling. I would conservatively estimate that the savings for all vehicles will amount to at least $2,000 in gasoline. By utilizing these items, I will direct the patrol officers that whenever possible, to turn their vehicles off at least ten minutes each hour for the purpose of either running stationary radar, surveilance of potential crime areas, or while doing necessary reports. Finally, I am investigating the possibility of specially tuning the squad cars to increase the probability of further gas savi. ngs. Respectfully, Chief Cha~es Johnson Mound Police Department CJ/sh Reply To: 12800 Industrial Park Boulevard Plymouth, Minnesota 55441 (612) 559-3700 November 10, 1980 Mr. Leonard Kopp City Manager City of Mound 5341Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Subject: City of Mound 1980 Street Improvements Section 2 Driveways Job #5248 Dear Mr. Kopp: The following information is in answer to questions raised regarding drive- ways at the last council meeting. Temperature Requirements The specifications for this project are those of the Minnesota Department of Transportation. For an asphalt cement mixture, which is what is being used in Mound, the State has no minimum temperature requirement. The Asphalt Pavers Association recommends a minimum temperature of 150°F. Temperature of ma- terial delivered today was 253°F. On this project we have only checked temperatures on those loads that have been on the job for over an hour before being laid. The lowest temperature measured has been 194°F. Driveway Repair We have gone over our lists of driveway repair on the 1979 project. We have two driveways remaining to repair. These are at 4560 and 4779 Manchester. Going over our list of complaints, we can only come up with two additional driveways where we have received complaints, but feel that no repair is necessary on the driveways. One is at 3036 Island View, where the homeowner has asked for a seal coat on the driveway because it does not match color with the rest of the driveway. The other is at 4651 Manchester. Minneapolis- Hutchinson - Alexandria - Granite Falls printed on recycled paper Mr. Leonard Kopp November 10, 1980 Page Two Thre are a number of driveways on the 1980 project which will require repair, however the contractor has his driveway crews working on installing driveways on the newly constructed streets. We believe this work should have higher priority than repair work in order to give everybody access to their driveways this fall. Very truly yours, McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. William H. McCombs, P.E. LS:WHM:sj printed on recycled paper CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota AGENDA 80-377 8O-375 8O-373 8O-374 80-378 80-381 80-376 80-379 80-372 8O-38O Mound City Council Meeting Wednesday, November 12, 1980 City Hall 7:30 P.M. 1. Minutes Pg. 2542-2543 2. Public Hearing Cavan Road from Tyrone Lane to Clare Lane 3. Softball Field Pg, 2537 4. Planning Commission Minutes 2538~2541 Pg. 2530-2536 A. Subdivision of Land - Lots 3 & 4, Block 3, Shadywood Point pg? 2528-2529 B. Subdivision of Land - Lots 1 & 2, Block 3, Avalon Pg? 2526~2527 C. Street Front Variance - Lots 2,3 & P/4, Block 13, Devon pg, 2523-2525 D. Nonconforming Use - Lot 4, Block 19, Shadywood Point pg, 2519-2522 E. Rezoning - Lots 8, 9, 14 & 15, Block 2, Dreamwood Pg? 2517-2518 F. Street Front and Lot Size Variances - Lots 12 & 13, Block 20, Whipple Pg. 2514-2516 G. Subdivision of Land - Lots 20, 21 & P/17, 18 & 19, Block 6, Pembroke Pg. 2511-2513 5. Park Commission Minutes Pg. 2510 6. Street Assessments Pg. 2503-2509 7. Street Construction pg. 2497~2502 8. Comments and Suggestions by Citizens Present (2 Minute Limit) 9. Bids - CBD Snow Plowing (Bid Opening Monday - November 10th) 10. Bass Tournaments 1981 Pg. 2495-2496 1.1. Tax Forfeit Land - Lot 45, Block 3, A.L. Crockers 1st Division pg, 2492-2494 12. Levy Limit Increase Pg. 2490-2491 13. Police Union Contract Pg. 2473-2489 14. Payment of Bills 15. Information Memorandums/Misc. 16. Committee Reports Pg. 2468-2472 Page 2544 131 ~. GULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL November 5, 1980 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota was held at 5341Maywood Road in said City on November 5, 1980 at 7:30 p.m. Those present were: Mayor Tim Lovaasen. Councilmembers Gordon Swenson, Benjamin Withhart and Robert Polston. Councilmember Ulrick was absent and excused. Also present were City Manager Leonard L. Kopp, City Engineer Wm. McCombs and City Clerk Mary H. Marske. ELECTION CANVASSING BOARD Polston moved and Withhart seconded a motion RESOLUTION 80-414 RESOLUTION CERTIFYING THE RESULTS OF THE MUNICIPAL ELECTION AS PRESENTED ON THE CANVAS OF VOTES OF NOVEMBER 4, 1980 ELECTION The vote was unanimously in favor. MINUTES' The minutes of the meeting of October 21, 1980 were presented for consideration. Withhart moved and Swenson seconded a motion to approve the minutes of the ~meeting of October 21, 1980 as submitted. The vote was unanimously in favor. TONKAMOBILE Judith McCourt, Special Services Planner representing the Metropolitan Transit Commission addressed the Council regarding the future of the Tonkamobile. PUBLIC HEARING - H.U.D. FUNDS The City Clerk presented an affidavit of publication in the official newspaper of the notice of public hearing on said H.U.D. Funds. ~Said affidavit was then examined, approved and ordered filed in the office of the City Clerk. The Mayor then opened the public hearing for input on said H.U.D. Funds and persons present to do so were afforded an opportunity to express their views thereon. The follow- ing persons offered comments or questions: Jim Bedell, 2625 Wilshire Blvd. asked for information on deferred assessments and if weatherization was available with the rehabilitation grants. The Mayor then closed the public hearing. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Side Yard Variance - Lot 5 & E. ½ of 6, Block 15, Devon Poiston moved and Withhart seconded a motion RESOLUTION 80-415 RESOLUTION TO CONCUR WITH THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION The vote was unanimously in favor. STREET CONSTRUCTION November 5, 1~80 Retaining Wall Policy Poiston moved and Withhart seconded a motion to adopt the policy regarding retaining walls a§ recommended by the engineer. The vote was unanimously in favor. Driveway Blacktopping Councilmember Swenson questioned the quality of blacktop on driveways. Council- member Withhart suggested a list of such problems be prepared for review by the engineer and Council. COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRESENT No comments or suggestions were presented at this time. BID OPENING - DUMP BODY, SNOW PLOW, ETC. Lovaasen moved and Swenson seconded a motion RESOLUTION 80-416 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE LOW AND ONLY BID FROM MAC QUEEN EQUIPMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $ 24,081.00 The vote was unanimously in favor. LEVY LIMIT INCREASE Swenson moved and Lovaasen seconded a motion to table this item. The vote was two in favor with Polston and Withhart voting nay, motion failed. Polston moved and Withhart seconded a motion that the Council not increase the levy limit to offset State aid cuts. The vote was three in favor with Swenson voting nay. PAYMENT OF BILLS Polston moved and Swenson seconded a motion to approve payment of the bills as presented on the prelist in the amount of $105,592.08 when funds are available. Roll call vote was unanimously in favor. FALL TRASH PICKUP' The Public Works Director advised the Council of a problem encountered during the fall trash pickup regarding Northwestern Preparatory School. ADJOURNMENT Polston moved and Withhart seconded a motion to adjourn to the next regular meet- ing on November 12, 1980 at 7:30 p.m. The vote was unanimously in favor, so adjourned. Leonard L. Kopp, City Manager Mary H. Marske CMC, City Clerk/Treasurer il-12-80 f, ;. CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota October 29, 1980 COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO. 80-377 SUBJECT: Street Vacation - Cavan Road - Tyrone Lane to Clare Lane A public hearing has been called to consider vacating Cavan Road from Tyrone Lane to Clare Lane (see map attached). The Planning Commission has recommended the vacation of this unopened street. Contact has been made with agencies that might have use of the street and they replied as follows: 10-3-80 Minnegasco --- "has no objection nor do we foresee a need for the area proposed to be vacated." 10-6-80 Police Dept. -- "foresees no problem in vacating the road." 10-6-80 Continental Telephone -- "has no objection to the vacation of Cavan Road." 10-7-80 Public Works Dept. -- "can foresee no future need of the portion of Cavan Road ..... we have no utilities located in this right-of-way." 10-2-80 Fire Chief -- No objection. 10-9-80 McCombs Knutson --- "...no objection .... to the vacation .... This right of way is not required for utility or drainage easements." Leon,~d L. Kopp~( ' ! ? / September 16, 1980 I~r. Larry ~eitz 2739 Clar~ Lane Mound, ~,~nnesota 55364 Dear Mr. Heit~, I am in full agreement with you and the other propert:, owners that Cavan Road between Clare Lane and Tyrone be vacated. Please proceed with steps necessary to accomplish this. Sincerely yours, Encl: Check RRTCI<~-?-R-OAD ' ,,.~ ...,Si ! .~ ,' 12;~ 9 GALWAY ROAD APPLICATION FOR STP~ET VACATION CITY Ct> MOUND APPLICANT LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY OWNED BY APPLICANT: FEE $ PLAT. 3Vq ~AR?EL_~_~O~ BLOCX~~ SUBD~VIS ION 6~~ STREET TO BE VACATED Cc~v'ar~ ~ileh% (~GNATU~ OF APPLICAN~Sr~ Applicant's Interest in Property ~esiflents and o~nezs of ~o[,ezty Suiting the st;eet to be vacatefl: :o=en~ed by Util:i~s: NSP ~ ; Minnegasco ~; Continental Tel. Recon~nended by City: Police Chief Public Works ~; Fire Chief ~ ; Engineer 11-12-80 CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota November 4, 1980 COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO. 80-375 SUBJECT: Softball Field Mrs. Rodney Pitsch has asked to be on the November 12th agenda to discuss softball fields with the City Council. 'Leonard L. cc: Mrs. R. Pitsch 7 11-12-80 CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota November 5, 1980 COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO. 80-373 SUBJECT: Planning Commission Minutes Attached is a copy of the Planning Commission minutes. require Council action: Item 1. Subdivision of Land Lots 3 and 4, Block 3, Shadywood Point Zoned A-2 6,000 Square Feet The following items The Planning Commission recommended division as requested. Subdivision of Land Lots 1 and 2, Block 3, Avalon Zoned A-2 6,000 Square Feet The Planning Commission on a 4/3 vote voted down a motion to deny the division. The division will result in 2 lots of 6,1OO square feet each. e Street Front Variance Lots 2, 3 and Part of 4, Block 13, Devon Zoned A-2 6,000 Square Feet The Planning Commission recommended a 3½ foot street front variance. Nonconforming Use Lot 4, Block 19, Shadywood Point Zoned A-1 10,OOO Square Feet The Planning Commission recommended that the undersized lot of 6,250 square feet be acknowledged as well as a nonconforming side yard and recommended approval of the variance. 5. Tabled. 6. Rezoning Lots 8, 9, 14 and 15, Block 2, Dreamwood Zoned A-2 The Planning Commission recommended rezoning the land to Commercial. A public hearing is required -- December 2nd or 9th is recommended as a hearing date. -5-3 C 11-12-80 Council Memorandum No. 80-373 Planning Commission Minutes Item 7. - Page 2 Street Front and Lot Size Variances Lots 12 and 13, Block 20, Whipple Zoned A-2 6,000 Square Feet The Planning Commission recommended a 4.9 foot street front variance and a 242.78 square foot lot size variance with the following stipu- lations: A. All deficient assessments be picked up. B. Tuckunder garage with doors facing south and a turnaround approach be mandatory. Subdivision of Land Lots 20, 21 and Parts of Lots 17, 18 and 19, Block 6, Pembroke Zoned A-1 10,000 Square Feet The Planning Commission recommended they be divided as follows: Parcel A 9,662 Square Feet Parcel B 8,840 Square Feet The Council approved this variance in 1977 as part of the stipulation for an easement for Tuxedo Boulevard. Dj~ MINUTES OF THE MOUND A ORY PLANNING COMMISSION October 27, 1980 MEETi~ Present: Chairman Russell Peterson, Commissioners Gary Paulsen, Margaret Hanson, George Stannard, Frank Weiland and Gerald Smith. Also present: Council Representa- tive Gordon Swenson, City Manager Leonard L. Kopp, City Inspector Henry Truelsen and Secretary Marjorie Stutsman. MINUTES The minutes of the October 16, 1980 Planning Commission meeting were presented for consideration. Hanson moved and Paulsen seconded a motion to accept the minutes of the October 16, 1980 meeting as presented. The vote was unanimously in favor. BOARD OF APPEALS 1. Subdivision of Land Lots 3 and 4, Block 3, Shadywood Point Mrs. Byrd and Frank Buysse were present. Stannard moved and Hanson seconded a motion to approve the subdivision as presented with the stipulation that the side yard between Parcels A and B be a minimum of 6 feet at any point between existing house. Discussed. Smith wanted it added to the motion to acknowledge that any structure on Parcel A be placed so as to meet all side yards and setbacks. Stannard and Hanson agreed to make that ~bove)part of motion. The vote on the motion was unanimously in favor. Subdivision of Land Lots 1 and 2, Block 3, Avalon Jacci Segner was present. Stannard moved and Hanson seconded a motion to deny subdivision of land. The vote was three in favor of the denial - Stannard, Smith and Weiland and four against: Hanson, Paulsen, Peterson and Swenson. Reasons for and against: Stannard - getting into something less than 40 feet wide makes it difficult to build on a lot and meet setbacks. Peterson - can't see any justification .for turning it down. New structure could meet setbacks. Hanson - do not see any reason for denial since new lot would meet square foot- age requirements; new structure would have to meet setbacks even though existing house is nonconforming. Paulsen gave same reasons. Street Front Variance Lots 2, 3 and Part of 4, Block 13, Devon Richard Lundeen was present. Discussed possibility of vacating portion of street. Hanson moved and Weiland seconded a motion to approve a 3½ foot street front variance. (Door of garage to be on side.) The vote was unanimously in favor. Nonconforming Use Lot 4, Block 19, Shadywood Point Don Geffre was present. Smith moved and Hanson seconded a motion to acknowledge the nonconforming side yard and undersized lot and recommend approval of variance. The vote was unanimously in favor. Planning Commission Mi ~tes October 27, 1980 - e 2 Street'Front Variance Lots 13 and 14, Block 20, Devon Ronald Burns was present. Paulsen moved and Stannard seconded a motion to table. The vote was unani- mously in favor. Discussed what is going to happen to Windsor? Hanson moved and Paulsen seconded a motion to put on the agenda for Novem- ber 10; meanwhile get reports and input from Engineer and Staff on what is planned for Windsor and also request input from neighbors; check out Council action of two years ago. The vote was unanimously in favor. Rezoning from A-2 Residential to Commercial (Correct application - shows A-l) Lots 8, 9, 14 and 15, Block 2, Dreamwood Roger Rager and Dolores Ponder were present. Hanson moved and Stannard seconded a motion to recommend the rezoning from A-2 to Commercial. The vote was unanimously in favor. o Street Front and Lot Size Variances Lots 12 and 13, Block 20, Whipple Daniel Hannan was present. Weiland moved and Hanson seconded a motion to recommend that variance be granted with the stipulation that all deficient assessments be picked up and further recognizing that this is an undersized lot---tuckunder garage with doors facing south and a turnaround approach be mandatory. The vote was: Stannard and Smith against. All others voted in favor. The reason Stannard and Smith gave for denial was they felt new structures should be required to meet all setbacks. Subdivision of Land Lots 20, 21 and Part of Lots 17, 18 and 19, Block 6, Pembroke Dan Crear was present. Hanson moved and Stannard seconded a motion to recommend reaffirming approval of the subdivision as granted in Resolution 77-232. The vote was unanimously in favor. December Meeting Schedule Smith moved and Hanson seconded a motion to have only one meeting in Decem- ber; meeting to be held on December 8th. The vote was unanimousl.y in favor. Smith moved and Weiland seconded a motion to adjourn. All in favor, so adjourned. Attest: CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota AGENDA PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, October 27, 1980 City Hall at 7:30 P.M. Minutes of October 16, 1980 Planning Commission Meeting. Board of Appeals 1. Wayne Byrd, 1766 Shorewood Lane Lots 3 & 4, Block 3, Shadywood Point - Map 2 Subdivision of Land Jacc~ Segner Lots 1 and 2, Block 3, Avalon Subdivision of Land - Map 7 Richard L. Lundeen, 4805 Island View Drive Lots 2,3 & Part of 4, Block 13, Devon Street Front Variance Donald Geffre, 5016 Crestview Road Lot 4, Block 19, Shadywood Point - Map 2 Nonconforming Use o Ronald Burns, 3245 Dexter Lane Lots 13 & 14, Block 20, Devon - Map 15 Street Front Variance Rager's Pub, 5098 Three Points Boulevard Lots 8,9,14 & 15, Block 2, Dreamwood Rezoning from A-1 Residential to Commercial Daniel Hannan, property at 3300 Tuxedo Blvd. Lots 12 & 13, Block 20, Whipple - Map 15 Street Front and Lot Size Variances Gordon H. Buhrer Lots 20, 21 & Part of 17, 18 & 19, Block 6~ Pembroke Subdivision of Land CITY OF MOUND Date: From: To: October 23, 19~O Building Inspector Planning Commission Subject: Board of Appeals - meeting of 10-27-80 Wayne Byrd - 1766 Shorewood Lane Subdivision of Land Northwest corner of structure, single family home, appears to be less than the required 6 ft. side yard, also there is an existing deck on this'struc- ture that is not shown. I believe it to be 6 ft. or greater from the side- yard; however, not being drawn in and shown, it is difficult to be correctly aware that the deck is probableencroachment on side yard set back. Should be drawn to scale or should have been shown by surveyor. Existing boathouse is of concrete block fabrication. However, I do feel that in granting the privilige of subdivision that the City undertake to stipulate for the removal of these existing non-conforming structures and uses. o Jacci Segner - Lots 1 & 2, Block 3, Avalon Subdivision of Land By plot, Lots 1 & 2 appear to have 6,1OO sq. ft. each, of which would meet the zoning requirements for that particular area. However, these lots are parallelagrams and the lot at the right angle width is less than 40 ft. wide. Also, due to the erratic topography of that particular area I feel it is not in the best interest of the City or in the proper~de~elopment of the land for structure location to allow a subdivision such as proposed. Structure loca- tion and drainage would be a very critical circumstance under the proposed subdivision. Richard L. Lundeen - 4805 Island V~ew Drive Street Front Variance 22 feet The enclosed survey information and proposed garage location are unique inas- much as the traveled roadway is not located as the roadway is plotted. I can see no problem in granting a variance of this sort as this portion of Island View Drive is of a permanent concrete fabrication and in all probability will not be changed in the future. I would like to request the Planning Commission consider that Council direct Staff and the City attorney to study the probable division of vacating that part of Island View Drive now not being used as a traveled right-of-way. I would much rather the City vacate those portions of that street not used for public tJ~orough fare or right-of-way so as to allow that property to be acquired and passed to permanent tax paying parcels which would result in being less restrictive to the citizenry of that area for the use of their property. Donald Geffre -'5016 Crestview Road Non-conformi'ng Use - undersized lot The property has an existing nonconformancy of being an undersized lot and structural sideyard. It is not probable to acquire adequate land so as to achieve the requirement of lot size for A-1 zoning (10,OOO sq. ft.). I would require the individual to have a survey locating the structures on the premises. All properties abutting this property have been surveyed and the monumentation is still in effect, as I know it to be and personally found it. However, the Board of Appeals continued: page two past ten years of experience, does not allow me to feel at ease with a kan~ drawn plat plan, as this does not illustrate the correct dimensions of any and all structures of the premises. I can see no problem acknowledging the undersized lot and the non-conformancy of the principal structure and also allow it to expand. I do feel it necessary that the applicant furnish the City with a current Certificate of Survey with all structure~ shown. Ronald Burns - 3245 Dexter Lane Street Front Variance - 18 feet Approximately 18 months ago the City Engineer and myself approached the City Planning Commission and Council to improve Windsor Place and Roxbury Lane. At that time the citizenry in Block 20 came forth to the City with objections with the proposed right-of-way improvement; therefore, those portions of those two right-of-ways were dropped from the right-of-way improvement program. I don't feel at this time that the City should vacate any portion of those two right-of-ways. Lots 13, 14 & 15, Block 26 and Lots 1, 2 & 3, Block 25, Devon are buildable sites and owned .by a private developer. The City Engr. and my- self are aware at this time, at the time we approached the City to improve those portions of the right-of-way we had been in contact with this developer as he now intends and would like to build on these two sites. It is our in- terpretation and impression that now if those lots are to be built upon, it would be that builder's responsibility to improve the right-of-way and to ex- tend the service availabilities at his expense and under the direction of the City Engineer's office. Regarding !~indsor Place; is it~o remain unopened but allow the citizenry to trespass or use that portion of unopened right-of-way to gain access to the rear lots, should the City require the same setbacks or should the City consider to grant variances for those setbacks and allow that unopened right-of-way to be used as an alleyway? Rager"s Pub - 5098 Three Points Blvd. Rezoning - Residential to Commercial No comment. Daniel Hannan- property address 3300 Tuxedo Blvd. Str. Frt. Variance 4.9'~ + undersized lot Proposed location is to be a tuckunder garage or so I am led to believe that ' would enter directly from the south or southerly end of the building. This would require a 4.9 ft variance off of traveled right-of-way, Tuxedo Blvd. In the past, in a lot 80 ft. in depth the required setback has been 24 ft. however, if this structure were located at 24 ft. it would create more pro- blems with setbacks than as shown. I feel this lot, which has legal des- cription as shown on Certi'ficate of Survey is not a lot benefitlal to muni- pal zoning. I feel the City should deny the structural location and deny this as a building site and require that either a smaller structure be loc- ated on property or acquire added lands so as to notcreate a non-conforming' use of a new structure. HT/dd Henry Truelsen APPLICATION FOR SUBDIVISION OF LAND Sec. 22.03-a VILLAGE OF MOUND FEE $ FEE OWNER PI D 1B-II'7_~q_lj_ooo~ Location and complete legal description of property to be divided: To be divided as follows: (attach survey or scale drawing showing adjacent streets, dimension of proposed building sites, square foot area of each new parcel designated by number) A WAIVER IN LOT SIZE IS REQUESTED FOR: New Lot No. From Reason: Square feet TO CITY OF MOUND Applicant's interest in the property: ../~ 0 '..] ~ ~_. ~ ~sFg~at'~re) ". ~ J4o E,~uc lhis application must be si§ned by all the OWNERS of the property, or an e×plan- ation given why this is not the case. TE'. NO. ViTk- To approve th.e subdivision as presented with the PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: stipulation" Chat the side yard between Parcels A ~nd B be a m.i'nimum of 6 feet at any point bel~W~en existing house and any house placed on paFcel A meet all s!de yards and setbackf, j~ DATE Oct, 27, 1980 1 ,/ i'Y Meet i APPLICATION 7:30 P M City Hall FOR SUBDIVISION OF Sec. 22.03-a Must LAND be present. VILLAGE OF MOUND FEE $ 25,00 PLAT 37850 PARCEL 0480 19--117-23 24 0012 Location and complete legal description of property to be divided: Lots 1 & 2 Block 3 Avalon ZONING A-2 T.p,~.e divided as follows: Lot I divided from Lot 2 Block. 3 Avalon (attach survey or scale drawing showing adjacent streets, dimension of proposed building sites, square foot area of each new parcel designated by number) A WAIVER IN LOT SIZE IS REQUESTED FOR: New Lot No. From Reason: Square feet TO Square feet ~.~erest in the property: ,ee Owner~ ~ '.[ *¢'~/~' ~OU~D~[ This application must be signed by .11 the OWNERS of the prope~, or .~ explan- ation given why this is not the case. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: vote. A motion to deny subdivision failed by a 4 to 3 DATE Oct, 27, 1980 APPLICATION FOR CITY OF MOUND INTEREST IN PROPERTY NCE Telephon~ Number _-[ -)Z- ~'/3~DDITI ON ~-~C,~r~ ;;1...¢ -//~- ~'./ 7,/ $ ZONING --,¢~, - ~., doc3 _ PROPERTY,,/ ADDRESS .. ~ o/~? FEE OWNER (if other than applicant) Address Telephone Number %0N~._ E REQUESTED: "~ [-'- i ACCESSORY SIDE YARD I FT:I YARD NOTE: 1. Attach a survey AND scale drawing showing location of proposed improvement FT.[ in relation to lot lines, other buildings ! on property and abutting streets. 2. Give ownership and dimensions of LOT SIZE FTJ adjoining property. Show approximate locations of all buildings, driveways, and streets pertinent to the application _. Attach letters from adjoining affected property owners showing attitude toward N. C. U. * or request. OTHER (describe) REASON FOR REQUEST: !~f..~....4~_~ J ~_. ~-'2.~/~4¢3 ~,;~~.'~. .. .... I / ~ - '- /'~t_ ~ ~ ~u~d~g per.it must be applied for within one year from the date of the - 'i ~LAN~NG COM~SSION RECOmmENDATION To approve a 3~ foot street front variance. DATE Oct, 27, 1980 COUNCIL ACTION: RESOLUTION NO., , DATE *non-conforming use OF PROPER~Y OF '- THE JOHN J. ~'YAH CO. CERTIFICATE OF LOCATION OF BUII.,DII~G l hereby certify that on //- ~' C_2 19 ?/ this ~u~g)', plan, or report was prepared by me or under .my dffect supervision and thai ! a~ a duly Registered LaudS;... ' my direct supervis}on and that I am a duly Registered Land, · Surveyor under, the laws of.ghe State of Minnesota~:.~~~,.l,~:' - Surveyor Under the laws of the State of Minnesota£~ ,;'~'. ' ~..~ ~ -~'.'~"l. "~.~-. ,~ --~--.,~.~.-, j,~... --'-t.'~ ~',~,.~' -' -~.-,. .' . -.~ -, t.. ~, ~..;~ ~..-~. ~. ,..,~ ,, -' .:. c:,,~'/-:---..,. · ~ --+ ~-..,..'". . ~-. '.,a,~.----,k ~-F-* .~·,~..'.: :.-..,,,-:~ .~.~,;.r'~'~.--~-~'?~-;;:-.~.z.·";~'.-. '~.a-~,~~ CERTIFICATE OF SURVET I herebv certify that on 19' ~ti~'~ - this survey, plan, or repo~ was prepared by me or und~ , ,i EGAL DESCRIPT!CN: LOTS 2, 3 AND THE [~ST 1/2 or LOT 4, .~,LOCK I~DEVONo 'E HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND COPRFCT REPRESENTATION OF A SURV[ ~F THC BOUNDARIES OF THE LAND ABOVE ~)E%CF..IBED AND OF THC LOCATION OF' ALL Meeting 10-27-80 7:30 City Hall APPLICATION FO~A~ANCE CITY OF MOUND NAME OF APPLICANT Donald Geffre 5016 Crestview Road ZONING PROPERTY ADDRESS PLAT 6] 980 $ 25.00 A-1 5016 Crestview ROad PARCEL 7740 Address Mound, MN ~5364 Te le phone Number ..... INTEREST IN PROPERTY LOT .4 B LOCK Shadywood Poi.t 472-2556 ADDITION PIDf 13-117-24 11 0063 19 FEE OWNER (if other than applicant) Addre s s Te le phone Number VARIANCE REQUESTED: NOTE: FRONT I ] ACCESSORY! ! YARD FT. BUILDING FT. YARD . _ 1. Attach a survey AND scale drawing showing location of proposed improvement in relation to lot lines, other buildings on property and abutting streets. Z. Give ownership and dimensions of ~djoinir/g property. Show approximate locations of all buildings, driveways, and streets pertinent to the application by extending survey or drawing. 3. Attach letters from adjoining affected property owners showing attitude toward N. C. U. * or OTHER (describe) REASON FOR · A!_~uiidi'n~., permit must be applied for within one year from the date of the council re~olution or variance granted becomes null and void. ~V~nce s tranJ~erabl~.~ ?~.~ ,~// ' / APPLICANTare not ~ ~*~L~"[/ '% '' ~v~ DATE /~.~.,'~d~ PLANING COM~SSION RECOMM¢NDATION Acknowledged the nonconforming side yard/ and undersized lot and recommend approv~] of variance. / DATE Oct. 27, 1980 / COUNCIL ACTION: RESOLUTION NO. DATE *non- conforming use Oerti£~cate o£ Curve,v for Donald ~. Oeffre Lot 4, ~kock 19, Sh~dywoo~ Point Hennepln County, Minnesota rect reore~=nta~n of a s'~ey cf tbs ~c,~daries wood ?tint, and the location thereon. It does not pur~rt to show other im~,.o~ ..... e..t~ or encroa c~nt s. Scale Date o 1- = 30' 11-4-60 Iron marker LarJ Surveyor and Planner Long Lake, ~Hnnesota · Nozlzo. a¥ A~OI~ O~I ¥ ONZaNVdX~ ~0 ~80d~Dd ~HI aO~ 'NNZN '~N~O~ '~ ~i~a 910~ iV P lO1 6l ~a01~ NO ~2NVIaV~ ~0~ NOlggZ~d A~ ~819 N0/XVB '[ azaya z I MARY AND ROGER WHITE GIVE OUR PER~ISSION FOR VARIANCE ON BLOCK 19 LOT 4 AT 5016 CRESTVIEW RD. MOUND, MINN. FOR THE PURPOSE OF EXPANDING A TWO STORY ADDITION. :0 I *. I ~ "~ · ~ '13 o D ZONII I APPLICATION Name Address Phone ' . Name Address - Phone ' ~quest:~,'~- ~ ' ~f~ Rezoning Special Use Permit ..... Other ~Variance~ Subdivisional Approval · n of Request: , r Request '~/-~ ~_ ~/~ .~tch of proposed property and o be drawn on back of this ttached. to be filled' in 'by Village ly Date .B-y -- ~mm. Agenda Action Postponement '.il Agenda ~stponement ction ' t. Notified Notified $ Date ' Rec~mmendati°ns of Village Officials ' Any official making any comments should sign and date. Use additional sheet for comments if necessary-attach hereto. ,w or attach a sketch .of proposed structure showing the following: : North n on lot nt Street names n set backs and use of adjacent existing buildings 6. Dimensions of proposed struCture 7. Proposed set back 8. State zoning in force in area concerned es between any purpose structure and structures on adjacent property PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS day of 19 J: ........ I the action requested in the foregoing petition was Map 15 APPLICATION FOR VOANCE CITY OF MOUND ZONING $ 25.OO A-2 (6,000 sq ft) lAME OF ~PPLICANT 1440 Randolph Ave. PROPERTY ADDRESS 33oo Tuxedo B1 vd. PID 25-117-24 21 0135 *~x~iMaxRia~a T~OT 12 & pt 13 BT,OCK 20 m ~ , 690-4856 55105 ~e~epno~e . Num~XX.~~x .A_D~D~T~. W_h~ pp l e OWl~er ddress St. Paul, MN NTEREST IN PROPERTY 'EE OWNER (if other than a. pplicant) ~ddress Telephone Number ~. ~J~ NC~E REQUESTED: ~o~T~! - ' ACCESSORY NOTE: FT.] ;IDE I .~ARD FT.] LOT SIZE'--' '~~' [EAR [ 'ARD FT )THER (des cribe)~. [EASON FOR REQUEST: 1. Attach a survey AND scale drawing showing location of proposed improvement in relation to lot lines, other buildings on property and abutting streets. 2. Give ownership and dimensions of adjoining property. Show approximate locations of all'buildings, driveways, and streets pertinent to the application LOT SQ. ~z~'-'/7 ,~,~ by extending survey or drawing. FOOTAGE~ 3_, Attach letters from adjoining affected property owners showing attitude toward re que s t. A building permit must be applied for within one year from the date of the council resolution or variance granted becomes null and void. Variances a4~-m~transferable. _,~,,~' APPLICANT~~ DATE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Variance be granted with stipulation that all deficient assessments be picked up and further recognizing that is is an undersized lot. Tuckunder garage with doors facing south and a turnaround approach be mandatory. ~~~a,~r~xt~~~l~l~~. DATE Oct. 27, 1980 ZOUNCIL ACTION: RESOLUTION NO.. DATE ~non-conforming use ~ ~'/~ .;auu~id pu~ .:'o~.~m3 pu~i ~Og = ,,I :elZ°S f/ Dear Council Members; We would like to apply for a five foot variance on lot 12pt. & l~ block 20 of Mound, !r~innesota 55~64. I will be graduating from Northwestern College of Chiropractic in August 1981. I'am planning to practice in the ~ound area, ~sking t'~ound our hone. This variance allowance for our 42 foot home would allow us adequate living space for our family. Your consideration on our request would be greatly appreciated. Thank You ~r.~'*~'.~rs~Dainel Jo Hannan APPLICATION FOR SUBDIVISION OF LAND Sec. 22.03-a VILLAGE OF MOUND FEE $ FEE OWNER PLAT PARCEL Location and complete legal description of property to be divided: - . ZONING (attach survey or scale drawing showing adjacent streets, dimension of proposed building sites, square foot area of each new parcel designated by number) A WAIVER IN LOT SIZE IS REQUESTED FOR: New Lot No. From Square feet TO Square feet ,,' '~' APPLICANT 2 7 ~0 (signature) / / ADDRESS Applicant's interest in the property: ~. This application must be signed by all the OWNERS of the property, or an explan- ation given why this is not the case. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Reaffirm approval of the subdivision as granted in Resolution 77-232, DATE October 27~ 1980 77-232 5-24-77 RESOLUTION NO. 77 - 232 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF PERMANENT EASEMENT FOR $2,300.00 PLUS A SLOPE EASEMENT ALONG TUXEDO BOULEVARD OF LOTS 20, 21 AND PART OF 17, 18 and 19 of BLOCK 6, PEMBROKE WHEREAS, it is necessary for the City of Mound to obtain permanent ease- ments' and slope easements for the completition of the proposed · Tuxedo Blvd. Street lrnp..rovement, and .. WHEREAS, WHEI{EAS, a permanent easement plus a slope easement can be obtained from the owners of Lots Z0, 21 and part of L~s 17, 18 and 19, ]Block 6, Pembroke for $2,300.00, and the sum of Sz, 300 will be used for: Sz, 000.00 for land $300.00 for trees and slope WHEREAS, the City is acquiring 4, 000 sq feet for permanent easement, and WHEREAS, a subdivision of lots will be allowed to make txvo building sites consisting of: Parcel A - 9,662 sq ft. (variance of 338 sq Parcel B - 8, 840 sq ft, (variance of 1160 s.q ft) .-- and allow Parcel A a 2 ft side yard variance for a proposed garage. The setnack should be 12 ft and the request would :bring the setback to 10 feet, and - al/ow a 12 foot curb 'cut for each building sit, the exact location to be determined at time of constructions, and all survey irons to replaced after construction. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MOUND, MOUND, MINNESOTA: .. - That the purchase of a permanent easement in the amount of $2,300.00 plus a slope easement, along Tuxedo Blvd. of Lots' Z0, .Z1 and part of Lots 17, 18 and 19 Block 6, Pembroke is authorized with the stipulations as listed above being alloxved the. property owner for this exchange of property' and to main- tain said property as buLldable sites after the easement foot- age' is absorbed by the. Cit)/and the remaining property divided into two building sites (as described above). Adopted by Council this 24th day of May, 1977. 77-232 .~-24-77 \ ! L~ 11-12-80 CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota November 3, 1980 COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO. 80-374 SUBJECT: Park Commission Minutes On October 8, the Park Commission recommended: "That snowmobiling be barred between 5044 (Furlong residence) and 5050 (Pride residence) Edgewater, by the use of restric- tive signs". In order to cut off the access, Council approval is required. Leonard L. Kopp f .2.-S'/o 11-12-80 CITY OF HOUND Mound, Minnesota October 30, 1980 COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO. 80-378 SUBJECT: Street Assessments Attached are copies of petitions received from the residents of Seahorse relative to the proposed street assessment. A copy of the estimated assessment is attached. This will be on the November 12th agenda. cc: Mr. C. J. Goucher McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING EN61NFER:~ ! LAND ,SURVEYORS · S~TE PLANNERS October 27, 1980 Reply To: 12800 Industrial Park Boulevard Plymouth, Minnesota 55441 (612) 559-3700 Mr. Leonard Kopp City Manager City of Mound 5341Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Subject: City of Mound 1980 Street Improvements Estimated Assessments Job #5462 Dear Mr. Kopp: As requested, we have calculated the amount of the pending assessments for the Seahorse Condominiums. Based on the cost figures available at the present time and using the present assessment policy as set by the City, the estimated assessment per apartment would be $2,024.00. The following is a breakdown showing how thls figure was arrived at. 3/4 unit ~ $2,000.O0/Unit 860 lin. ft. ~ $11.60/1in. ft. + 106 apt. 380,000 sq. ft. ~ $0.12/sq.ft. + 106 apt. Estimated Assessment per Apartment = $1,500.00 = 94.00 = 430.00 = $2,024.00 If you need any further information, please contact me. Very truly yours, McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. //John Cameron OC :sj Minneapolis - Hutchinson - Alexandria - Granite Falls printed on recycled paper the the seahorse- north of mound, east ~f Hwy. 10, three points blvd.- 472-3900/544-]513 OCTOBER ~, ].980 Dear Sirs: the undersigned, as owners and residents of the Seahorse Condominiums on Three Points Blvd. oppose the exorbitant and unfair assessment being levied against us for the road repair of Three Points Blvd. We feel that your method of determining our share is unfair and discriminatory. We petition that you seriously review your method of computing our share of the assessments, so that we will not have to take legal action to correct this. APARtmENT NO. the the seahorse- north of mound, east of Hwy. 10, three points blvd.- 472-3900/544-1513 OCTO~:R ~)], 3.980 Deur Sirs: ~.'e, the ~u~dersigned, as o~ers ~nd residents of the Seahorse Condo!:inlu~s on Three Points BlVd. oppose the exorbitant and unfair assessn~ent being levied against us for the road repair of Three Points .~ZLlvd. ~e feel that your nethod of determining our share is unfair and discriKinntory. ~e petition that you seriouslyreview y~ar nethod of cor~ting our share of the assessn, ents~ so tha%~ will not have to take legal action to correct this. 5~ '~ ,' T '~ " ~tgt-¢¢9/oO6~-M~ '~^lq s~u!od ~t~ 'Or '~"H to ~s~o 'puaocu to ttl]ou · os]ott~as ot]l oqa CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota November 7, 1980 C0UNC!L MEMOP~qNDUM NO, 80-381 SUBJECT; Street Construction Attached are copies of three letters from the Enginee~ with street construction. They are: 1. Right-of-way problems at Tuxedo and P! 2, Parking on Rosedale 3. Bi~d opening on M.S.A. streets of Thre~ Boulevard and Tuxedo Road ld The [ngineer wi'll be at the November 12th meetin9 to p nob 1 ems ' ~.onard L. Kopp McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATE: PIyI (61: November 6, 1980 Mr. Leonard Kopp City Manager City of Mound 5341Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota Subject: City of Mound 1980 Street Improvements - Section 2 Job #5248 Dear Mr. Kopp: When we obtained the street construction easements on Piper Road Tuxedo Boulevard and Warner Lane a number of items were brought to attention. 'ii 1) If the street is centered in the right-of-way at "Al and A~mals" curb line is within 2 feet of the corner of the building. 2) The existing retaining wall on Lot 25 combined with the cu~veiwe~ the wall restricts visibility. The driver of a car backing out of:the g~ Lot 25 presently cannot see oncoming traffic from the west until until well into the street. 3) The house on Lot 4 is within 5 feet of the right-of-way. The attached sketch shows one way of improving these three co~ curve by Lots 25 and 26 would be flattened somewhat by building 7 feet onto private property. This would also move the other side of away from the house on Lot 4. The existing concrete retaining wall on Lot 25 which is approximatel' high would be removed and a 2 foot high stone retaining wall would The yard behind the retaining wall would be sloped to increase the visiQ around the curve. Minneapolis - Hutchinson - Alexandria - Granite Falls printed on recycled paper Mr. Leonard Kopp November 6, 1~0 Rage Two To accomplish the above, permanent street easements would be needed on 24, 25, and 26. Lot 24 is the City beach. The owner of Lots 25 and 26 grant the easement without cost to the City. co~t~uo~ ~er ~o~ ~ O~sor~b~O ~r~ ~ ~ ~00 ~o ~ the street improvement project. We recommend that these changes be authorf~ for safety reasons. Yours very truly, McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, Inc. Lyle wanson, P.E. LS:J1 printed on recycled paper ======================== . ," I McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ~:NGINE[R~ · LAND gURVI:¥OR§ · §iTt: PLA.~[~r_R,~ Reply To: 128001ndustrialPark ~ Plymouth, Minnesota (612) 559-3700 November 6, 1980 Mr. Leonard Kopp City Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 Subject: City of Mound 1980 Street Improvements Section 2 Rosedale Road Parking Job #5248 Dear Mr. Kopp, The Council has asked for our recommendation on providing off street parking on Rosedale Road. The attached sketch shows a proposed parking layout. Five diagonal spaces would be provided in the park. The existing gravel parking area which is approximately 15 feet into the park and 5 feet onto the adjoining private property would be left as is. We would recommend that some of the existing wood posts be placed between the diagonal parking area and the existing gravel parking to differentiate the two areas. If the City wishes to convey title of the gravel parking area to the adjacent property owner the westerly 15 feet of the park is the area required to provide 2 off street parking places. The minimum area which would provide 2 off street parking spaces is an area 15 feet by 24 feet in the southwest corner of the park. Very truly yours, McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. Lyle~Sw n, P.E. LS:ch Enclosure Minneapolis - Hutchinson - Alexandria - Granite Falls printed on recycled paper ......... i McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. Reply To: 12800 Industrial Park Boulevard Plymouth, Minnesota 55441 (612) 559-3700 November 6, 1980 Mr. Leonard Kopp City Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota Subject: City of Mound Tuxedo Road and Three Points Boulevard Dear Mr. Kopp: In Resolution 80-272 and 80-273 the City Council approved the plans and specifications for submittal to the State. After the plans were approved by the State, the Councll authorized advertising for bids in November. If bids are received after January 1, 1981, one additional years MSA allotment may be used for the project. We propose to set the date for opening bids as January 9, 1981 for consideration by the City Council on January 13th. If this is satisfactory, we would advertise as soon as possible so that the contractors could look at the project before the heavy snowfalls. Yours very truly, McCO~3S-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, Inc. LS:J1 Lyle Swanson, P.E. Minneapolis - Hutchinson - Alexandria - Granite Falls printed on recycled paper 11-12-80 CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota October 31, 1980 COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO. 80-376 SUBJECT: Bass Tournaments 1981 Attached is a copy of a letter from the Minnetonka Bass Club request- int permission to hold bass tournaments on June 6, 1981 and on June 13, 1981. As I understand it, both tournaments will be started and finished at Surfside. This will be on the November 12, 1980 agenda. ~Lebnard-L. Kopp ~ cc: J. J. Jacobs October 29, 1980 Leonard L. Kopp City Manager 5341 Maywood Road Iiound, Minnesota 55364 Dear Leonard, The Minnetonka Bass Club would like to hold two (2) tournaments on Lake Minnetonka in 1981. The two tournaments are tentatively scheduled to be held from Surfside. The dates and approximate number of participants are: June 6, 1981 June 13, 1981 10 Boats (Local Club only) 75 Boats (Open Tournament) We are also requesting permission from the D.N.R. and Water Patrol. If you require any additional information please contact me at home, 448-3795 or business phone, 893-2153. Sincerely, dohn d. dacobs Representative Minnetonka Bass Club 833 Oriole Lane Chaska, Minnesota 55318 11 -12-80 CITY OF M0~N0 Mound, Minnesota October 24, 1980 COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO. 80-379 SUBJECT: Tax Forfeit Land - Lot 45, Block 3, A. L. Crockers 1st Division Attached is a copy of a letter from the owner of Lots 45 and 46, Block 3, A. L. Crocker's 1st Division. The owner of Lots 45 and 46 has found that in order to build a dwelling, he has to put in piling. In order to make it economical- ly feasible, he feels that he should build a duplex and the square footage of his two lots is not great enough; therefore, he is re- questing the City to purchase Lot 44. Last year, Lots 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 and Lots 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43 and 44, all in Block 3 went tax forfeit. The Staff recom- mended that these lots be put in building sites and sold as follows: Parcel 1 - Lot 25, 24 and 23 Parcel 2 - Lots 22 and 21 Parcel 3 - Lots 19 and 20 Parcel 4 - Lots 38 and 39 Parcel 5 - Lots 40 and 41 Parcel 6 - Lots 42, 43 and 44 The Council decided to keep the entire parcel off auction until a Housing Plan was developed and thought that possibly the City might be able to use the land - especially since it is wet. A copy of the map is attached. Under the above circumstances, does the Council wish to sell this lot? This will be on the November 12th agenda. ~Le6nard L. Kopp cc: Sheldon Meyers Speed Letter® 44-912 Subject -N~ Il& IOFOI. D MESSAGE Date ~.~_,~ .z~2-5'-- .19~ ~~ ~ /__~J ~ / - / REPLY Date 19 --NO Il& IOFOLD Signed ~N X ./ 11-5-80 CITY OF HOUND Hound, Hinnesota November 4, 1980 COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO. 80-372 SUBJECT: Levy Limit Increase Because of the reduction in Government Aids, the State has authorized an increase in the levy limit by $24,267.00 - the amount being lost in State aids (see copy attached). If the City wishes to take advantage of this, we would have to amend Resolution 80-368 by changing the General Fund and Total Levy as indi- cated in writing on the attached. September 16, 1980 Councilmember Lovaasen moved the following resolution. RESOLUTION 80-368 RESOLUTION TO DIRECT THE COUNTY AUDITOR TO LEVY CERTAIN TAXES BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUND, MOUND, MINNESOTA: That the County Auditor be directed to levy the following taxes for collection in 1981: General Fund Park & Recreation PERA-PFRA-OASI Fire Relief Diseased Trees Bonds of 1976 Bonds.of 1978 Bonds of 1979 Bonds of 1980 Within Authorized Levy Limits $487,313.~-//)~-~. 46,230. 58,309. 11,221. $1,965.86 20,621.00 10,905.OO 1,658.00 Special Assessments - City Owned Land 1981 Liability Insurance Abated Taxes $603,073.00 Total amount .to be levied $779,250.44. Authorized Over Levy Limits 1,688. 14,343. 53,170. 35,149.86 22,646.OO 45,261.O0 3,919.58 * $176,177.44 * The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember Withhart, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Polston, Withhart and Lovaasen, and the following voted against the same: Swenson and Ulrick, whereupon said resolution was declared passed and adopted, signed by the Mayor and his signature attested by the City Clerk. s/Tim Lovaasen Mayor Attest: City Clerk * See Resolution 80-370 on September 23, 1980 11-12-80 CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota November 7, 1980 COUNCIL MEMORANDUM NO. 80-380 SUBJECT: Police Union Contract Attached is a copy of a proposed 3 year Union Contract with the Police. The wage settlement is: 1981 - $1,945. Monthly 1982 - 2,090. Monthly 1983 - 2,276. Monthly The changes in fringe benefits are in hospitalization insurance, retire- ment benefits of severance pay and hospital insurance. A resolution authorizing the Mayor and Manager to enter into the con- tract is needed. LABOR AGREEMENT BF. TWI3EN THE CITY OF MOUND AND MINNESOTA TEAMSTERS PUBLIC AND LAW ENFORCEMENT EMPLOYEES UNION, LOCAL NO. 320 Police Officer, Investigator/Detective and Juvenile Officer Effective January 1, 1981 through December 31, 1983 ARTICLE I. ARTICLE II. ARTICLE III. ARTICLE IV. ARTICLE V. ARTICLE VI. ARTICLE VII.. ARTICLE VIII. ARTICLE IX. ARTICLE X. ARTICLE XI. ARTICLE XlI. ARTICLE XlII. ARTICLE XlV. ARTICLE ×V. ARTICLE XVI. ARTICLE XVII. ARTICLE XVIII. ARTICLE ×IX. ARTICLE XX. ARTICLE XXI. ARTICLE XXlI. ARTICLE XXlII. ARTICLE XXlV. ARTICLE XXV. ARTICLE XXVI. ARTICLE XXVII. ARTICLE XXVIII. ARTICLE XXIX. SCHEDULE A. INDEX Page PURPOSE OF AGREEMENT . ...................... 1 RECOGNITION ................................ 1 DEFINITIONS ................................ 1 EMPLOYER SECURITY .......................... 2 EMPLOYER AUTHORITY ......................... 2 UNION SECURITY ............................. 3 EMPLOYEE RIGHTS - GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE ...... 3 SAVINGS CLAUSE ............................. 6 SENIORITY .................................. 6 DISCIPLINE ................................. 7 CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTION .................. 8 WORK SCtlEDULE .............................. 8 OVERTIME ................................... 8 COURT TIME ................................. 9 CALL BACK TIME ............................. 9 WORKING OUT OF CLASSIFICATION .............. 9 INSURANCE .................................. 9 HOLIDAYS .................................... 10 VACATION SCHEDULE .......................... 10 SICK LEAVE ................................. 11 SEVERANCE PAY .............................. 11 FUNERAL LEAVE .............................. 11 EYE EXAMINATION ............................ 11 STANDBY PAY ................................ 11 EDUCATIONAL INCENTIVES ..................... 11 UNIFORM ALLOWANCE .......................... 12 WAGES ...................................... 12 WAIVER ..................................... 12 DURATION ................................... 12 WAGE SCIIEDULE .............................. 14 LABOR AGREEMENT BETWEEN TIlE CITY OF b~UND AND MINNESOTA TEAMSTERS PUBLIC AND LAIq ENFORCEMENT EMPLOYEES UNION, LOCAL NO. 520 ARTICLE I. PURPOSE OF AGREEMENT This Agreement is entered into as of January 1, 1981, between the City of Mound, hereinafter called the Employer, and the Minnesota Teamsters Public and Law Enforcement Employees Union, Local No. 320, hereinafter called the Union. It is the intent and purpose of this Agreement to: 1.1 Establish certain hours, wages and other conditions of employment; 1.2 Establish procedures for the resolution of disputes, concerning this Agreement's interpretation and/or application; 1.3 Specify the full and complete understanding of the parties; and 1.4 Place in written form, the parties' agreement upon terms and conditiions of employment, for the duration of this Agreement. The Employer and the Union, through this Agreement, continue their dedication to the highest quality of pub]ic service. Both parties recognize this Agree- ment as a pledge of this dedication. ARTICLE II. RECOGNITION 2.1 The Employer recognizes the Union as the exclusive representative, under Minnesota Statutes, Section 179.71, Subdivision 3, for all Police personnel in the following job classifications; Police Officer, Investigator/Detective and Juvenile Officer 2.2 In the event the Employer and the Union are unable to agree as to the inclusion or exclusion of a new or modified job class, the issue shall be submitted to the Bureau of Mediation Services for determination. ARTICLE III. DEFINITIONS. 3.1 UNION: The Minnesota Teamsters Public and Law Enforcement Employees Union, Local No. 320. 5.2 UNION MEMBER: ~ member of t~e Minnesota Teamsters Public an~ Law Enforcement Employees Union, Local No. 320 3.3 EMPLOYEE: A member of the exclusively recognized bargaining unit. 3.4 DEPARTMENT: The City of Mound Police Department. 3.5 EMPI,OYER: The City of Mound, Minnesota. 3.6 CHIEF: The Chief of the City of Mound Police Department. 3.7 UNION OFFICER: Officer elected or appointed by the Minnesota Teamsters Public and Law Enforcement Employees Union, Local No. 320. 3.8 INVESTIGATOR/DETECTIVE: An employee specifically assigned or classified by the Employer to the job classification and/or position of Investigator/ Detective. 3.9 OVERTIME: Work performed at the express authorization of the Employer in excess of the employee's scheduled shift. 3.10 SCHEDULED SHIFT: A consecutive work period including rest breaks and a lunch break. 3.11 REST BREAKS: Periods during the scheduled shift during which the employee remains on continual duty and is responsible for assigned duties. 3.12 LUNCII BREAK: A period during the scheculed shift during which the employee remains on continual duty and is responsible for assigned duties. 3.13 STRIKE: Concerted action in failing to report for dutT, the willful absence from one's position, the stoppage of work, slow-down, or abstinence in whole or in part from the full, faithful and proper performance of the duties of employment for the purpose of inducing, influencing or coercing a change in the conditions or compensation or the rights, privileges or obligations of emI) 1 oymen t. 3.14 PROBATIONARY PERIOD: A period of time not to exceed twelve (12) calendar months from the date of emploTment subject to the conditions of Article IX, Section 9.2. ARTICLE IV. EMPLOYER SECURITY The Union agrees that during the life of this Agreement that the Union will not cause, encourage, participate in or support any strike, slow-down or other inter- ruption of or interference with the normal functions of the Employer. ARTICLE V. EMPLOYER AUTHORITY 5.1 The Employer retains the full and unrestricted right to operate and manage all manpower, facilities, and equipment; to establish functi.ons and programs; 5.2 Any term and condition of employment not specifically established or modified by this Agreement shall remain solely within the dis- cretion of the Employer to modify, establish or eliminate. ARTICLE VI. UNION SECURITY 6.1 The Employer shall deduct from the wages of employees who authorizes such a deduction in writing an amount sufficient to provide the payment of dues established by the Union, or a "fair share" deduction, as provided in Minnesota State Statute 179.65, Subdivision 2, if the employee elects not to become a member of the Union. Such monies shall be remitted as directed by the Union. 6.2 The Union may designate employees from the bargaining unit to act as a steward and an alternate and shall inform the Employer in writing of such choice and changes in the position of steward and/or alternate. 6.3 The Employer shall make space available on the employee bulletin board for posting Union notice(s) and announcement(s). 6.4 The Union agrees to indemnify and hold the Employer harmless against any and all claims, suits, orders, or judgements brought or issued against the Employer as'a result of any action taken or not taken by the Employer under the provisions of this Article. ARTICLE VII. EMPLOYEE RIGHTS - GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE 7.1 7.2 Definition of a Grievance. A grievance is defined as a dispute or dis- agreement as to the interpretation or application of the specific terms and conditions of this Agreement. Union Representatives. The Employer will recognize representatives desig- nated by the Union, as the grievance representatives of the bargaining unit, having the duties and responsibilities established by this Article. The Union shall notify the Employer, in writing, of the names of such Union representatives and of their successors, when so designated. ?.3 Processing of a Grievance. It is recognized and accepted by the Union and the Employer that the processing of §ri£¥anCes, aS hereinafter 9r0 lOaO, is limited by the job duties and responsibilities of the employees and, therefore, shall be accomplished during normal working hours only when consistent with such employee duties and responsibilities. The aggrieved employee and the Union representative shall be allowed a reasonable amount of time without loss in pay when a grievance is investigated and presented to the Employer during normal working hours provided the employee and the Union representative have notified and received the approval of the desig- nated supervisor who has determined that such absence is reasonable and would not be detrimental to the work programs of the Employer. 7.4 Procedure. Grievances, as defined by Section 6.1, shall be resolved in conformance with the following procedure. Step 1. An Employee, claiming a violation concerning the interpretation or application of this Agreement, shall, within twenty-one (21) calendar days after such alleged violation has occurred, present such grievance to the employee's supervisor, as designated by the Employer. The Employer- designated representative will discuss and give an answer to such Step 1 grievance within ten (10) calendar days after receipt. A grievance not resolved in Step 1 and appealed to Step 2 shall be placed in writing, setting forth the nature of the 9rievance, the facts on which it is based, the provision or provisions of the Agreement alledgedly violated and the remedy requested and shall be appealed to Step 2 within ten (lO) calendar days after the Employer-designated representative's final answer in Step 1. Any grievance not appealed in writing to Step 2 by the Union, within ten (lO) calendar days, shall be considered waived. Step 2. If appealed, the written grievance shall be presented by the Union and discussed with the Employer-designated Step 2 representative. The Employer-designated representative shall give the Union the Employer's Step 2 answer, in writing, within ten (10) calendar days after receipt of such Step 2 grievance. A grievance not resolved in Step 2 may be appealed to Step 3 within ten (10) calendar days following the Employer-designated representative's final answer in Step 2. Any grievance not appealed in writing to Step 3 by the Union, within ten (10) calendar days, shall be considered waived. 7.5 Step .3.. If appealed, the written grievance shall be pr~scnC~d by ~h~ U~l~O~l and discussed with the Employer-designated Step 3 representative. The Employer-deisgnated representative shall give the Union the Employer's answer, in writing, within ten (10) calendar days after receipt of such Step 3 grievance. A grievance not resolved in Step 3 may be appealed to Step q within ten (10) calendar days following the Employer-designated representative's final answer in Step 3. Any grievance not appealed in writing to Step 4 by the Union within ten (10) calendar days shall be considered waived. Step 4. A grievance unresolved in Step 3 and appealed to Step 4 shall be submitted to arbitration, subject to the provisions of the Public Employ- ment Relations Act of 1971, as amended. The selection of an arbitrator shall be made in accordance with the 'Rules Governing the Arbitration of Grievances', as established by the Public Employment Relations Board. Arbitrator's Authority. A. The arbitrator shall have no right to amend, modify, nullify, ignore, add to or subtract from, the terms and conditions of this Agreement. The arbitrator shall consider and decide on the specific issue(s) sub- mitred in writing by the Employer and the Union and shall have no authority to make a decision on any other issue, not so submitted. B. The arbitrator shall be without power to made decision contrary to, or inconsistent with, or modifying or varying in any way, the appli- cation of laws, rules or regulations having the force and effect of law. The arbitrator's decision shall be submitted in writing within thirty (30) days, following close of the hearing or the submission of briefs by the parties, whichever be later, unless the parties agree to an extension. The decision shall be binding on both the Employer and the Union and shall be based solely on the arbi°trator's interpre- tation or application of the express terms of this Agreement and to the facts of the grievance presented. C. l'he fees and expenses for the arbitrator's services and the proceedings shall be borne equally by the Employer and the Union, provided that each party shall be responsible for compensating its own representatives and witnesses. If either party desires a verbatim record of the proceedings, it may cause such a record to be made, providing it pays for the record. If both parties desire a verbatim record of the proceedings, the cost shall be shared equally. 7.6 7.7 Waiver. If a grievance is not presented within the time limits set forth above, it shall be considered waived. If a grievance is not appealed to the next Step within the specified time limit or any agreed extension thereof, it shall be considered settled on the basis of the Employer's last answer. If the Employer does not answer a grievance or an appeal thereof, within the specified time limit, the Union may elect to treat the grievance as denied at that Step and immediately appeal the grievance to the next Step. The time limit in each Step may be extended by mutual agreement of the Employer and the Union. Choice of Remedy. If, as a result of the written Employer response in Step 3, the grievance remains unresolved, and if the grievance involves the sus- pension, demotion or discharge of an employee who has completed the required probationary period, the grievance may be appealed either to Step 4 of Article VI or a procedure such as: Civil Service, Veteran's Preference or Fair Employment. If appealed to any procedure other than Step 4 of Article Vi, the grievance is not subject to the arbitration procedure, as provided in Step 4 of Article VI. The aggrieved employee shall indicate, in writing, which procedure is to be utilized, Step 4 of Article VI or another appeal procedure and shall sign a statement to tile effect that the choice of any other hearing precludes the aggrieved employee from making a subsequent appeal through Step 4 of Article VI. ARTICLE VIII. SAVINGS CLAUSE This Agreement is subject to the laws of the United States, the State of Minnesota and the City of Mound. In the event any provision of this Agreement shall be held to be contrary to law by a court of competent jurisdiction form whose final judg,nent or decree no appeal has been taken within the time pro- vided, such provisions shall be voided. All other provisions of this Agreement shall continue in full force and effect. The voided provisions may be re- negotiated at the written request of either party. ARTICLE IX. SENIORITY 9.1 Seniority shall be determined by the employee's length of continuous emploTment with the Police Department and posted in an appropriate location. Seniority rosters may be maintained by the Chief on the basis of time in grade and time within specific classifications. 9.2 During the probationary period, a newly hired or rchired employee m3y be discharged at the sole discretion of thc Employer. During thc pro- bationary period, a promoted or reassigned employee may bc replaced in his previous position at thc sole discretion of the Employer. 9.3 A reduction of work force will be accomplished on thc basis of seniority. Employees shall be recalled from layoff on the basis of seniority. An employee on layoff shall have an opportunity to return to work within two years of the time of his layoff before any new employee is hired. 9.4 Senior employees will be given preference with regard to transfer, job classification assignments and promotions when the job relevant qualifi- cations of employees are equal. 9.5 Senior qualified employees shall be given shift assignment preference after eighteen (18) months of continuous full-time employment. 9.6 One continuous vacation period shall be selected on the basis of seniority until March 1S of each calendar year. ARTICLE X. DISCIPLINE. 10.1 The Employer will discipline employees for just cause only. will be in one or more of the following forms: a) b) c) d) e) oral reprimand; written reprimand; suspension; demotion; or discharge. Discipline 10.2 Suspensions, demotions and discharges will be in written form. 10.3 Written reprimands, notices of suspension, and notices of discharge which are to become part of an employee's personnel file shall be read and ack- nowledged by signature of the employee. Employees and the Union will receive a copy of such reprimands and/or notices. 10.4 Employees may examine their own individual personnel files at reasonable times under the direct supervision of the Employer. 10.5 Discharges will be preceded by a five (5) day suspension without pay. 10.6 Employees will not be questioned concerning an investigation of disciplinary action unless the employee has been given an opportunity to have a Union representative present at such questioning. 10.7 Grievances relating to this Article shall be initiated by the Union in Step 3 of the grievance procedure under Article VII. ARTICLE XI. CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTION Employees shall have the rights granted to all citizens by the United States and Minnesota State Constitutions. ARTICLE XII. WORK SCItEDULE 12.1 The normal work year is two thousand and eighty hours (2080) to be accounted for by each employee through: a) hours worked on assigned shifts; b) holidays; c) assigned training; d) authorized leave time. 12.2 Holidays and authorized leave time is to be calculated on the basis of the actual length of time of the assigned shifts. 12.3 Nothing contained in this or any other Article shall be interpreted to be a guarantee of a minimum or maximum number of hours the Employer may assign employees. ARTICLE XIII. OVERTIME L3.1 Employees will be compensated at one and one-half (1-1/2) ti. mos the employee's regular base pay rate for hours worked in excess of the employee's regularly scheduled shift. Changes of shifts do not qualify an employee for overtime under this Article, 13.2 Overtime will be distributed as equally as practicable. 13.3 Overtime refused by employees will for record purposes under Article 13.2 be considered as unpaid overtime worked. 13.4 For the purpose of computing overtime compensation, overtime hours worked shall not by pyramided, compounded or paid twice for the same hours worked. 13.5 Overtime will be calculated to the nearest fifteen (1S) minUtes. 13.6 Employees have the obligation to work overtime or call backs if requested by the Employer unless unusual circumstances prevent the employee from so working. ARTICLE XIV. COURT TIME An employee who is required to appear in Court during his scheduled off-duty time shall receive a minimum of two (2) hours' pay at one and one-half (1-1/2) times the employee's base pay rate. An extension or early report to a regularly scheduled shift for Court appearance does not qualify the employee for the two (2) hour minimum. ARTICLE XV. CALL BACK TIME An employee who is called to duty during his scheduled off-duty time shall receive a minimum of two (2) hours' pay at one and one-half (1-1/2) times the employee's base pay rate. An extension or early report to a regularly scheduled shift for duty does not qualify the employee for the two (2) hour minimum. ARTICLE XVI. WORKING OUT OF CLASSIFICATION Any employee assigned by the Employer to work at a higher job classification shall be paid at the higher rate of pay for the duration of the assignment. Upon completion of the assignment, the employee shall revert to his/her original or assigned pay rate. ARTICLE XVII. INSURANCE 17.1 The Employer agrees to provide each employee, after thirty (30) days of ,:continuous employment, with hospitalization/major medical insurance, in- cluding dependent coverage, a five thousand dollar ($5,000) life insurance policy and long term disability insurance and pay 77-1/2% of the premiums due. 17.2 Effective 1/1/82, the Employer agrees to pay 80% of the premiums due on the insurance coverages provided under Section 17.1 above. 17.3 Effective 1/1/83, the Employer agrees to pay 85% of the premiums due on the the insurance coverages provided under Section 17.1 above. 17.4 Effective 1/1/81, the Employer agrees to provide a Dental Insurance policy for each employee and dependents and pay up to a maximum of seventeen dollars and fifty cents ($17.50) per month of the premiums due. 17.5 Effective 1/1/82, the Employer agrees to pay nineteen dollars ($19.00) on the dental insurance coverage provided in Section 17.4 above. 17.6 Effective 1/1/83, the Employer agrees to pay twenty two dollars ($22.00) on the dental insurance coverage provided in Section 17.4 above. 17.7. Upon retirement, after 20 years of service and at age 55, employees who retire shall receive 50% of hi~/hcr hospitalization, major medlcal and dental insurance for retiree and spouse paid by the Employer. If the employee elects to be gainfully employed by another employer, either public or private, he/she shall lose any and ali rights to insurance benefits provided by the City o£ Hound. 17.8 Upon the employee's 62nd birthday, the Employer shall pay full premiums for hospitalization, major medical alld dental insurance for retiree and spouse. 17.9 Employees retiring during the term of this contract shall be entitled to the benefits as set forth in Sections 17.7 and 17.8. ARTICLE XVIII HOLIDAYS 18.1 The Employer agrees to provide the following paid holidays: New Years Day Presidents Day Memorial Day Independence Day Labor Day Columbus Day Veterans Day Thanksgiving Day Christmas Day Two (2) Floating Holidays 18.2 18.3 If employees elect to work 6-3 schedule, the 11 holidays would be inclusive. On 5-2 schedules, holidays shall be used each calendar quarter as earned. Unused days shall be paid at end of each retorter. Employees who work any of the above listed holidays shall receive a cash payment of one and one-half (1-1/2) times his/her base pay rate. ARTICLE XIX. 19.2 19.2 19.3 VACATION SCHEDULE Employees shall receive paid vacations based on the following schedule: 1 5 years of service 10 days per year 6 15 7ears of service 15 days per year 16 - 20 years of service 20 days per year 21 years and over 25 days per year On an employee's twenty fifth (25th) anniversary of service, he/she shall be granted five (5) additional working days of vacation with pay for that year. This vacation leave must be taken off during that year and cannot be waived to receive extra salary. Paid vacations shall be earned during the first year of employment but cannot be taken without the approval of the Employer. 7 10 ARTICLE XX. SICK LEAVE Sick leave shall be accumulated at the rate of one (1) day per month. ARTICLE XXI. SEVERANCE PAY 21.1 Employees who were employed prior to .January 1, 1981 shall upon honorable separation from the Employer's service, shall receive severance pay in an amount equal to 33-1/3% of the first ninety (90) days of unused sick leave. In no event shall the amount exceed thirty (50) days pay under this Section. No payment shall be made unless the employee has completed thirty-six (56) months of service. 21.2 The following is the severance pay schedule shall become effective for all employees upon reaching tenure of five (S) years: After S years service After 10 years service After 15 years service After 20 years service After 25 years service 30% to a maximum of 18 days 33% to a maximum of 40 days 40% to a maximum of 72 days 43% to a maximum of 108 days 50% to a maximum of 160 days 21.3 The Employer shall pay employee full amount of severance pay at time of termination, if requested. Employee may elect to receive equal amounts over a period of five (S) years. ARTICLE XXlI. FUNERAL LEAVE Funeral leave not to exceed three (3) days will be allowed by the City Manager. If more than three (3) days are required, the employee may choose to deduct the extra days over three (3) from either vacation leave or accumulated sick leave. ARTICLE XXlII. EYE EXAMINATION The Eml)loyer agrees to pay in each twenty-four (24) month per]od of employ- ment, up to thirty dollars ($30.00) toward an eye examination for each employee. ARTICLE ×XIV. STANDBY PAY Any employee placed on standby duty by the Employer shall receive one-half (1/2) hours pay for each one (1) hour required to standby for duty. ARTICLE XXV. EDUCATIONAL INCENTIVES If funds are not provided by any other Governmental Agency, the Employer shall pay cost of tuition equal to that charged by State Institutions after the employee has successfully completed a course with a grade of "C" or better. Thc course 11 must be approved in advance by the City Manager. Upon completion of the course, the Employer will pay the employee a one (1) time payment of five ($S.00) dollars for each credit hour the employee earned. ARTICLE XXVI. UNIFORm] ALLOWANCE 26.1 Each employee shall be entitled to an annual uniform allowance. 1981 - $280.00; 1982 - $300.00; 1983 - $320.00. The uniform allowance to be paid by voucher for uniforms actually purchased. 26.2 The Employer agrees to replace all clothing damaged in the line of duty at no cost to the Employee. ARTICLE XXVII. WAGES See Schedule A attached. ARTICLE XXVIII. WAIVER 28.1 Any and all prior agreements, resolutions, practices, policies, rules and regulations, regarding terms and conditions of employment, to the extent inconsistent with the provisions of this Agreement, are hereby superceded. 28.2 The parties mutually acknowledge that during the negotiations which resulted in this Agreement, each had the unlimited right and opportunity to make demands and proposals, with respect to any term or conditions of employment not removed by law, from bargaining, All Agreements and understandings arrived at by the parties are set forth in writing in this Agreement for the stipulated duration of this Agreement. The Employer and the union, each voluntarily and unqualifiedly waives the right to meet and negotiate, regarding any and all terms and conditions of employment referred to or covered in this Agreement or with respect to any term or conditions of employment not specifically referred to or covered by this Agreement, even though such terms or conditions may not have been within the knowledge or contemplation of either or both the parties at the time this Agreement was negotiated or executed. ARTICLE XXIX. DURATION This Agreement shall be effective as of January 1, 1981 and shall remain in full force and effect until December 31, 1983. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Lhe parties hereto have executed this Agreement on th±s day of , 1980. FOR THE CITY OF MOUND FOR TEAblSTERS LOCAL NO. 320 Patrol Rate Investigator/ Detective, Juvenile Officer WAGES Months of Service Start After 6 months After 12 months After 24 months After 36 months 0 - 6 months After 6 months 1981 1982 1983 1394 1539 I~ 1725 1504 1649 1835 1639 1784 1970 1793 1938 2124 $62.50 per month over base rate $125.00 per month over base rate American Legion Post 398 DATE OCTOBER 31, 1980 GAMBLING REPOR~~ CURRENT MONTH YEAR TO DATE ~21,0~0.00 GROSS: ~2720.00 EXPENSES: SALES TAX ~10/4 . 60 SUPPLIES ~0~.00 PAYOUT AS PRIZES: 208.60 1500. O0 PROFIT: t~lOll .~0 ~260~.25_ ~11.8OO.00 ~663a.69 DISTRIBUTION OF PROFITS: ~100.00 CHECKING ACCT. ~A37.80 ~3082.68 29'72, CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota Monthly Activ{ty Report of Street Month of Department & Shop October !~80 This 'LaSt This'Ye~'r' 'io Date ! Work Units .. Month .., Month . to Date Last Year ~o,,~o,,~ . ~,~ ,, 0 .... 6 ~44' ~~! I Street Bladin9, ~83 ~x ..... , )t~ I Street Se,l Costed r, ,~8~ ~" i,' O ~ x> I I .I CITY OF Mound, l'~inn~sota Month of Monthly Activity Rzport Sewer Dep~rtmcnt :': ?..-.. October 19gO" This Last, Thi~' ¥¢'a'r Laat. ¥~ Work Units Month Month to Date to Dar ~i ni str_=tion #600 CITY OF MOUND MOUND, MINNESOTA Monthly Activity Report of Water Depsrtment This Last This Year Last Year Work Units Month Month to Date %o Date o. o~ Turn Ons ~o. o~ ,.~ ~.~ ....... CITY OF MOUND MOUND, MINNESOTA P~ge '~ Work Units Monthly Month of October ctivity Report of Water Department This Last This Year L~st Year J Month Month to Date to Date No, Tines Checked Pumo #1 No. Times Checked Pumo #P No, Times Checked Pumo No, Times Checked Pumo No. Times Checked Pumo ff~ No. Times Checked Pumo #6 No, Times Checked Pumo ~7 Shod #9 99