82-09-28MOUND CITY COUNClL~
Regular Meeting
Tuesday, September 28, 1982
7:30 P.M. - City Hall
CITY OF MOUND
AGENDA
Mound, Minnesota
1. Minutes of Septem. ber 21~ 1982, Special Meeting
2. PUBLIC HEARINGS ON PROPOSED ADOPTION OF THE FOLLOWING:
A. Central Business District Maintenance Assessment
for 1982.
B. Unpaid Tree Removal Charges - Special Assessment
C. Unpaid Weedcutting Charges - Special Assessment
D. Delinquent Water & Sewer Bills
E. Delinquent Water & Sewer Bills - Special Assessment
3. Comments & Suggestions from Citizens Present
(please limit to 3 minutes)
4. Appointment to the Housing & Redevelopment Authority of
the City of Mound
Stop Sign at the Intersection of Shorewood Lane & Quail
Road - Bruce Wold
6. Acceptance of Bids for "Mound Bay Park"- Chris Bollis/
John Cameron (Handout at the meeting)
7o Set Date of October 12, 1982, for the Special Assessment
Hearing for the Cost-of Tree Removal
8o Proposed Lease of Lots 1,2,3, & 22, Block 5, Dreamwood,
for Use as a Garden in Exchange for Keeping the Lots
Clean and Maintained
Payment of Bills
INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS
A.
Article on Purple Loosestrife: Flowery Threat to the
Wetlands
B. Letter from the City ~of Orono - Re: L.M.C.D.
C. L.M.C.D. - Agenda & Minutes
D. Letter from McCombs-Knutson on 1981 Street Project
E. Letter from Suburban Public Health Nursing Service
F. Brief on Continental Phone - Jim Larson
G. Letter from Chris Bollis on Stairway at Avocet &
Bluebird
H. Westonka Chamber Waves
I. Hennepin County Transportation Program
Pg. 2207-2214
Pg. 2215-2222
Pg. 2223
Pg. 2223
Pg. 2224-2225
Pg. 2226
Pg. 2227-2228
Pg. 2229
pg. 2230-2232
pg. 2233
pg. 2234-2236
Pg. 2237
Pg 2238-2239
Pg 224'0-2243
Pg 2244-2248
Pg 2249
Pg 2250
Pg 2251-2264
Pg. 2265
Pg. 2266-2267
Pg. 2268-2272
Page 2206
J. Fact Sheet on Constitutional Amendment-for Highway
Bonds
,K. Metropolitan Council Review
L. Citizen League Memo
Pg. 2273-2274
pg. 2275-2276'
pg. 2277-2280
Page 2206-a
SPECIAL MEETING.
OF THE
CITY COUNCIL
192
September.21', 1982
PurSuant to due call and notice thereof, a special meeting, of the City Council'
of the City of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, was held at 5341MaywoOd Road
iO said Ci. ty on September 21, 1982, at 7:30 P.M.
~hose'present were: Mayor Rock Lindlan,.Councilmembers P~nky Charon, Gordon
Swenson, and Donald Ulrick.. Councilmember Robert Polston was absent and
· excused. Also present were: City Manager'Jon Elam, Ci.ty AttorneY Curt
Pearson,'City Engineer John Cameron & Skig McCombs, Finance Director Sharon
Legg, Police Chief Bruce Wold and City Clerk Fran Clark; and the following
interested persons: Helen Livingston,.Russ Falness,'William Kalal, William
Neison,..Patty.& Steve Turcotte, Jerry Longpre, Robert Lund, Norbert Ebert,.
Willard Hillier, Mr. ~ Mrs.'John Wagman, Mr. & Mrs. Bob Hansen and Ron Gehring,
Patzy D~Avi~a.
The Mayor opened the meeting ~nd ~elcomed the people attending.-
MINUTES
Ulrick moved and Swenson.seconded a.motlon to app~ove..the Minutes of the
September 7, 1982, Regular Meeting as'submitted. Charon moved and Swenson
seconded a motion to.amend the Minutes of the September 7, 1982, Regular
Meeting, striking paragraph 2 and 3 of page 187 from the Minutes. The vote
on the amendment was unanlmousl, y.in favor. Motion carried. The vote on
the original motion with the amendment was unanimously.in 'favor. Motion
carried.
PUBLIC HEARINGS - SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
A. "COUNTY ROAD 110 PROJECT"
The MaYor introduced the.persons present who are available to answer'
questions. .. ...
City Attorney Curt Pearson.explained the.legal procedures of these
improvements.and'the.assessment.'p.rocedure under'Minnesota Statutes,
Section 429. He also explained .the. appeal process.
City.Engineer John Cameron,-explained the construction work that was
completed and the final'costs.. This'assessment includes; curb & gutter,
concrete driveway.aprons, and storm sewer. The new 10'! watermaln that
was installed as a part of this project was paid out of City funds and
not assessed back. The total.amount to be assessed is $187,437.39.
The final assessment'on this.project is less than was anticipated.
Estimate Before PFoject.
Curb & Gutter $5.10/L.F.
Concrete Driveway Apron 3.58/Sq. Ft.
Storm Sewer .048/Sq. Ft.
The Mayor opened the. Public Hearing.
Final Cost
$3.45/L.'F.
1.53/Sq. Ft.
.O51/Sq. Ft.
September 21, 1982
Willia~ Nelson - asked how many times he can be assessed for storm
sewer?
John~Cameron responded that he was assessed ½ when Spruc~ was done and
" now ½ for Commerce Blvd.
Willard Hillier - commented that he felt the'new road was a great
improvement.
John Rosch - represent!ng the V.F.W. asked about the storm sewer being
based.on lot drainage or..street drainage.
John Cameron explained the procedure..
Norbert '~bert - asked why Peabody Road was ·being done now.
John Cameron explained that this is an extension of the original project
and that the County did not extend the .storm sewer far
.. enough.
Bill Kalal - asked he the people were given credit fo~ the sidewalk that
was done previously and.assessed .and torn up'during the
project and replaced.
John. Cameron explained that this was not,included in the assessment but
was paid for by the CountY.
The Mayor closed the Public Hearing.
Swenson moved and Ulrick seconded the following resolution.
RESOLUTION #82-247 .RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE ASSESSMENT ROLE AS
PROPOSED FOR THE COUNTY ROAD llO IMPROVEMENT
PROJECT ·
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
"COUNTY ROAD Ilo.sTREET LIGHT PROJECT"
City Engineer John Cameron~ explained, that this project was done in
conjunction with the County Road' 110 Improvement Project. The background
on the new street lights is'that originally the City was going to
refurbish the old street lights but found out it Would be too expensive
and that.they were extremely expenslve to,use'so new lights, were decided
upon,. The amount to be assessed, is $68,700.00.. The properties were
divided into two.categories, single family residential use as one and
all ot'her uses .as the second.category. The charge per foot for the other
uses was computed at 1-1/2 times the residential rate.
Residential Use - $4.38/L.F.
Other Use - $6.57/L.F.
The Mayor opened the Public Hearing.
Patzy D-Aviza asked why the bases were changed.
John Cameron explained.that the base was changed to accommodate the
new poles which are taller than the old ones.
The Mayor closed the Public Hearing.
194
September 21, 1982
Ulrick moved and Swenson seconded the f011owing resolution.
RESOLUTION #82-248. RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE ASSESSMENT ROLE AS
. .. PROPOSED FOR THE 1981 COUNTY ROAD 110 STREET
" LIGHT IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
The vote was unanimously in favor,
PLAN~iNG COMMISSION ITEMS
Motion carried.
PRELIMINARY SUBDIVI.SlON OF LAND - FRANK· H. LIVINGSTON-- 5249/5251
BARTLETT BLVD.· PID '#24-117-24 24 0014
The City Manager explained that .theapplicant.is..requesting to subdivide
Lots 17, 18 & 19 and the easterly'15 feet of Lot,32.into. two building
sites wi.th 26,700.-and 23,700 square feet of lot area:plus a parcel of
9,'OOO..square feet described as."C" to be·added to·Tract E of Registered
Land SurVey 813.. The division,'would allow:for proper setbacks on the
principal.structures and the'detached garage. Aft'er' the di~isi0n, the
owner of Tract. E of RLS.No. 813 would.have 20.89."feet (parcel C) fronting
On'Bartlett Blvd.; the front~ge..for. Parcel B would be 52.31 feet and for
Parcel=A 67 feet. Ten f.eet DE Lot 18 would be a-private'easement for
driveway and utili.ties.for the 5249. Bartlett structure, The Planni'ng
Commission'recommended approval.
Swenson'moved:and Ulrick seconded the foil. owing resolution.
RESOLUTION #82-249 RESOLUTION TO.CONCUR:]WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION
~ RECOMMENDATION AND APPROVE THE PRELIMINARY SUBDIVSION/
· ... LOT SP.LIT.'WITH. CERTAIN STIPULATIONS - PID #24-117-24 24
0014'. '
The-vote was unan.imp~sly in favor'.i. Motion ca'tried.
RECONSIDERATION ',vARIANCE TO.PLACE AN ATTACHED GARAGE 18 FEET TO 20.3
FEET'FROM ISLANDVIEW DRI.VE - KEVIN HETCHLER - 4913 ISLAND VIEW DRIVE -
LOT 14,' BLOCK 14, DEVON
The City Manage'r stated that the Planning.Commission has asked the Council
to reconsider thls.'.variance because.the Hetchlers'can build a detached
garage With entrance.on the .side&and the setback for this is only 8 feet
off Island View.Drive. ~~ '
UlriCk moved.and Charon seconded a motlon to reconsider this application
for a variance. The vote was·unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
Ulrick moved and Swenson'seconded the following resolution.
RESOLUTION #82-250
RESOLUTION TO CONCUR:WITH THE PLANNING ·COMMISSION
AND GRANT A VARIANCE TO PLACE AN ATTACHED GARAGE
18 FEET'TO 20.3 FEET FROM ISLAND VIEW DRIVE -
LOT 14, BLOCK 14, DEVON - PID #25-116-24 11 0043
The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
September 21; 1982
COMMENTS &'SUGGES'TIONS. FROM CITIZENS PRESENT
The Mayor asked is there were any comments or suggestions from the citizens
present. : Ther~ were none.
BID FOR ADMINISTRATIVE VEHICLES
The City Manager explained that we received 5 bids for 3 new or used
~dministrative vehicles. Police Chief BPuce Wold, was present and
recommended either the low bid from for~the used vehicles of National Car
Rental or the )ow bid for the new vehicles of Thurk Bros. Chevrolet.
The Council Jiscussed the difference in the two low bids.
Swenson moved and.Ulrick seconded the following resolution.
RESOLUTION #8~-251 RESOLUTION TO APPROVE THE LOW BID FROM THURK
BROS. CHEVROLET FOR 3 NEW ADMINISTRATIVE VEHICLES
IN AN AMOUNT NOT BE EXCEED $20,859.O0'
The Vote was unanimously~in favor. Motion carried..
PAINT ExTERIoR OF CITY HALL
The City Manager explained that he is .concerned about the condit;on of the
outside of the City Hall and has.obtained a quote from Minnetonka Painting
& Decorating in the amount of $1,720.OO to bleach out the water stains,
caulk all areas needing caulk, t'oenailing the boards, and~_t;~ the outside.
Swenson moved and Charon seconded a motion t'o approve the quotation.of ·
Minnetonka Painting & Decorating in the. amount of $1,720.OO for. the above
work on the exterior of the City Hall. The vote ~as unanimously in favor;
Motion carried.
The Council then dissussed.the City Hall roof leaking problem.
ISLAND PARK'WELL
-George Boyer was present and presented a letter to the Council concehning
Well No. 8'and the feasibility of developing a well on the island. It stated
that the site chosen is not suitable for groundwater development as originally
.thought. The Council then discussed the following possibilities:
1. Looking for another site on the island.and drilling new test holes.
2. Building only a storage facility on the island and pumping from
one of 'the other wells in town to fill this storage tank.
3. Continuing to drill at the present location.
George Boyer will do some calculating on water usage and capacity of the
lines and get back to the Council. No action was taken.
NEW POLICE VEHICLE '
Police Chief Bruce Wold has drawn up specif.ications for the purchase of
a 1983 squad car out of 1982 Revenue Sharing Funds. The City Attorney
suggested that these specifications be made up on a non-exclusive basis.
196
September 21, 1982
Ulrick movbd and Charon seconded a motion to authorize advertising for
bids for 1 (one) 1983'squad car; with bids to open on October 12, 1982,
at 10:OO A.M.. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
EXTENSION OF RESOLUTION.#81'-216
The City Manager stated that.a letter 'from'Eden Land Sale, Inc.. Has been
received, requesting a 1 year extension of Resolution #81-216, Langdon's
'Landing~
'Charon moved and. Swenson seconded the following resolution.
RESOLUTION #82-252 RESOLUTION GRANTING AND EXTENsIoN OF RESOLUTION
.. #81-216FOR ONE.YEAR, UNTIL JULY 7, 1983.
The vote'was unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
CENTRAL BUSiNESS'DISTRICT CHANGES - MAYOR ROCK LINDLAN'
The Mayor sUbmitted a Memo to. the Council and some suggested central
business.district changes'.' His suggestions,were-as follows:
1. Extending Auditor's Road in a straight line which would create
a 24 foot "travel.lane".
2. Several changes to the parking lot East oF Minnesota Federal.
3. Relocat. ion of the auto mailbox by the Post Office.
4. Widening ~he sidewalk on County Road 15.
5. OffiCially naming all.the parking lots in the CBD, using
'!directional name".
6.. Ask school-'~authorities to make t~eir corner lot at Community
Services a double wide parking lot.
7, Making .the crosswalks more visible
LAKE MINNEToNKA TASK.FORCE MEETING REPORT - MAYOR LINDLAN
The Mayor gave a brief report On the meeting that was held on september i4,
at the Water Patrol Office in Spring Park. He also submitted a 1982 Water
Patrol Report.
LETTER TO SPRING PARK
· The City Manager submit.ted a letter that he is considering sending to
Spring Park regarding their use of C.ity of MOund employees on.a base fee
basis. The Council discussed, several different ways to approach this
but left the f!nal 'decision to the City Manager's discretion.
EDGEWATER DRIVE PARKING
The City Manager explained that after Ordinance #438 was adopted a letter
was sent to all the residents of Edgewater DriYe asking for their opinion
of the parking restriction that was to be imposed. The feedback was all
negative.. This ordinance was never published in order to obtain the
resident's opinion before the ordinance became law.
197
September 21, 1~82
Charon moved and Ulrick seconded a motion directing the Staff not to
publish Ordinance #438 and repealing the same. The vote was unanimously
in favoro: Motion carried.
PAYMENT OF BILLS
s~enson moved and Ulrick secbnded.a motion to approve the payment of the
.bills as present on the pre-list in the amount of $85,519.40, when funds
are avai.lable. Roll call vote was .unanimously in favor. Motion carried.
LOT 1, BLOCK 38, wyCHWooD
The City Attorney has asked that'the following resolution be adopted and
become a supplement to an earlier resolution about Lot 1, Block 38,
Wychwood.
Swenson moved' and Ulrick s~conded the fol'lowing resolution.
RESOLUTION #82-253 RESOLUTION. RELATING TO.TAX FORFEITED LANDS~
· REQUESTING THE COUNTY BOARD TO SEL.~ SAID TAX
FORF'EITED LAND:TO THE CITY OF MOUND
The vote was unanimously in favor. 'Motion.carried.
INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS
Note of Thanks from Irene Jezorski - Thanking the Cou.ncil for their
continued support for funds for the "Westonka Counsel'ing for 01der
Adults". ;
B. Letter to HUD Regarding Downtdwn Imrproveme..Et Program - Letter
requesting the assistance of the Area Office in securing a waiver
from 570.302 (e) (1), to allow the City of Mound to implement the
Commercial Loan Interest Write Down element of its Downtown
Revitalization P~ogram,
C. Article from September 13, 1982~ Time Magazine - Dragging Cities into
Court.
D. Letter from City Attorney on Status pf Le~al Case'- Priscilla
Anderson case update.
Letter.from L.M.C.D.. Regarding Driftwood Shores'Association Dock Permit
Letter from'League Regarding Effect of New Tax Law on Municipal Bond'
Market - ~he City Attorney reported that the major change will be that
bonds will have to be registered, which means more paper, and more expense.
The I.R.S. is trying to have municipal bonds taxed. Thus they will
become more cumbersome and less attractive to investors.
Note from Metro Council Regarding New Transportation Development Guide/
Policy Plan for 2000 (TPP)
.198
" ~. September 21, 1982
H. Minnehaha Creek .Waters.hed DiStrict A.geqda - for September 16, 1982.
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Minutes - for August 19, 1982 &
.... August 30, 1982
I. Hold.Harmless 'Agreement with Minnetonka Portable-Dredging'- for removal
~f the tree that was blocking Lost Lake Channel.
Councj.lmember Ulrlck gave a brief report on the Senior Citizen support
groups and programs.
Swenson movedand Ulrick seconded'a motion to adjourn'. The vote was
unanimously'in favor. Motion carried. Time: 10:50 P.M. ·
Jon Elam, City Manager
Fran Clark, City Clerk
BILLS---SEPTEMBER 21, 1982
Air Comm
.Earl F. Andersen
Autocon Industries
Advance Ambulance
Holly Bostrom
· Bl'ackowiak & Son-
Bryan Rock-Prod
Brown' Photo
Berkeley Pump Co..
F.H. Bathke
Robert Cheney
Robert. Cheney
Biil Clark Standard
Coast to COast
Continental T~J&phone.
Craftsman Industries
Dyna Med, Inc.
Dept of Natucal Resources
Director of ProperKy Tax
'Election Judges (29)
ELMarketing
First Bank Mpls
Game.Tim~
General Safety Equip
Genuine Parts
Glenwood.lnglewood
Herbs Typewriter
Eugene Hickok & Assoc
Henn Coop Seed Exchange
Robert Johnson
Internat'l Assn Chiefs Police
Koehnens Standard
Koenig & Robin
Lampert Lbr
Lowells
LOGIS
The Laker
League of MN Cities
Doris Lepsch
Lutz Tree Serv
Lake Mtka Conserv Distr'
Mound Postmaster
· Metro Waste Control SAC
MN'MFOA
City of Mound
McCombs Knutson
Metro Waste Control'
Minnegasco
Minnesota Fire Inc
Mound Fire Dept
96.00
46.28
37.25
436.22
329.00.
94.00
839.O5
118.90
172.29
20.70
334.00
'1,000.00
5,838.27
116.11
1,12.!.29
36.00
203;70
15. O0
'56.80
1,596.71
313.25
20.00
12~.29
4,499.20
13.95
56.60
80.O0
288.91
99.95
23:10
35,00
]6.00
'258.O0
68.54
17.75
1,332.40
375.O1
960.00
60.00
3,535.00
1,998.50
300.00
841.5o
75.oo
35.16
9,162.oo
19,277.27
17.15
19o.88
'3,957.35
Mdund. Locksmi th
Wm Muel l er & Sons
Ronald Marschke
Mi nn Comm.
Mart ins Navarre 66
Maple Plain Diesel'
Navarre Hdwe · .'
NW Be.11
Nei tg.e Construction
N.S.P.'
Planning' & Deuelop..
Ritewa¥ Motor Parts
Rollins Oil Co.
Reo Raj Kennels
Regal Window Clean
Howard Simar
Nel s Schernau
Spring Park' Car' Wash
Don Str&icher Guns
· DelorJs Schwalbe
Suburb6n Tire
Thurk Bros Chev
Un i tog Rentals
Westonka Sewer 4; Water
Wi dmer Br.os.
John Eccles
Griggs, Cooper
Johnson Bros. Liquor
MN Distillers
Old Peoria
Ed Phillips
9.50
269.50
10. OO
28.50
76.60
17.02'
109.74 '
72.8O
227.50
8,193.12
724.50
130.65
)41.20
334.00
10.75
265.00
9.24
89.90
6.20
30.00
45.041
79.53
217.85
4,048.75
250.50
96.00
1,846.08.'
2,491~707't.
1,144.78
738.23
3,266.89
TOTAL BILLS
85,519.4O
CBD PARKING LOT MAINTENANCE
Project ASSESSMENT
AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING
IMPROVEMENT HEARING NOTICE
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
Francene C. Clare , being duly sworn, deposes
and says; I am a Un, ted States Citizen, over twenty-one (21) years of age, and the
City Clerk of the City of Mound, Minnesota.
On September 17, , 19 82 , acting on behalf of the clty, I deposited in
the United States postofflce at Mound, Minnesota, copies of the attached notice of
a hearing on proposed Improvement, enclosed in sealed envelopes, ~ith postage thereon
fully prepaid, addressed to the following persons at the addresses appearing opposite
their Yespectlve names. :
NAME ADDRESS
See Attached,List
There is delivery servlce by United States mail between the;place of mail'ing and
the places so addressed.
Subscribed and sworn to before me this 17th day of Sept.
, 1982
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
CITY OF MOUND
AFFIDAVIT OF DILIGENT SEARCH
Francene C. Clark . , being first duly sworn,
despo~es and says:
For the purposes of giving notice of the (assessment) (k~e~;e)t~) hearing
for Improvement CBD Parking Lot Maintenance Assessment set for Sept. 28,
.1~ 8.~, I have examined the followlng ~n order to ascertain the names and addresses
of each,person, firm, or corporation having an interest in each lot, tract or parcel
against which it is proposed to levy for a speclal (assessment) .(improvement).
1. Records of County Auditor.
2. Records of County Treasurer.
3.
6.
After making such search and inquiry, Ii am unable to find any.other persons,
firms or corporations who have interests other than those listed on the sheet,
attached.
Of those llsted, the addresses of the followlng could not be found:
I inquired about th,em from neighbors and the pollce and fire department.
I also examined directories cover, ing the city and telephone directories for the
area, but the addresses could not be found.
Subscribed and sworn to before me this
17t1~ day of Sept.
1982 Central Business District Assessment
Heaming. Notices
M E Mueller
2216 'Commerce Blvd.
Mound, MN 55364
13-117-24 33 0001
Conco Inc.
P.O. Box 1355
Vail, Colorado 81657
13-117-24 33 0064
MN Federal S & L Lesse~"
355 Minnesota St.
St. Paul, I.~N 55101
13-117-24 33 0066
Thrifty Drug Stores Inc.
8700 W 361h St.
St. Louis Park, MN 55426
.14-117-24 44 0001
State Bank' of Mound
2339 Comme'rc~,Blvd.
Mound, MN .5536~
14-117-24'4~' 0002
Charles V. Carlson
1072 Commerce Blvd.
Mound, MN 55364
14-117-24 44 0003
WM R. Koenig
2252 Commerce Blvd.
Mound, MNh 55364
14-117-24 44 0004
Charles V. Carlson
1072 Commerce Blvd.
Mound, MN 55364
14-117-24 44 0006
H.B.R. Larson
2548 Avon Dr.
Mound, MN 55364
13-117-24 33 0004
House of Moy
555 5 Shoreline 'Blvd.
Mound, MN 55364
13-117-24 33 0005
Harold B.R.,Larson
2548 Avon Dr.
Mound, HN 55364
13-117-24 33 0005
'Curtis L, Johnson
Box 246
Spring Park, MN 55391
.13-117-24 33 0006
Howard C. ~rn
6057 Lynwood Blvd.
Mound,.MN 55364
13-117-24 33 0007
Howard C. Orn
6057 Lynwood Blvd.
Mound, MN 55364
13-117-24 33 0008
Field Real Est &Bld Office
P.O. Box 69069
'St..Paul,'~IN 55169'
13-117-2'4 33 0011
Robert.A. Lauer
5575 Shoreline Blvd.
Mound, MN 55364 ..
13-117L24 33 0014
Dr. Robert Lauer
5585 Shoreline Blvd.
Mound, MN 55364
13-117-24 33 0015
Mound Dry Goods Co;, Inc.
2330 Commerce Blvd.
Mound, MN 55364
13-117-24 33 0016
Mound Dry Goods Co., Inc.
2330 Commerce Blvd.
Mound, MN 55364
13-117-24 33 0017
Robert E Johnson
5488 Tonkawood Rd. NE
~.~ound, MN 55364
14-117-24 44 0046
Eugene B. Bickmann
815 Cedar Ave. So.
~Ipls., MN 55404 '
13-117.24-33 0027'
William G. Clark
5549 Bartlett Blvd.
~lound, MN 55364
13-117-24-33 0039
~-lound. Builders Inc.
r~und, ~IN 55364 '
13-117-24 33 0040
Broicf~---~Ag~ncy
East ~afn St~.
Sl.eepy Eye, MN 56085
13-117-24 33 0042
Mound SuPer Value
2240 Commerce Blvd.
Mound, MN 55364
13-117-24 33 0043
Wm. N. JohnSon
P.O. Box 1355
Vail, Colorado 81657
13-117-24 33 0046
Hillier Properties~Inc.
1551Can. ary Lane
Mound, ~lN 55364'
14-117-24 44 0036
Mary R. Doffiff
2680 Pheasant Rd
Excelsior, I1N 55331
14-117-24'44 0037-
I'layzat. a' Bank & Trust Trus.teJ
417 E. Lake ·St.
Wazata, ~N 55391
14-117-24 44 0038
Jack W. Eugster
C/O George Eugster
5748 Lynwood ~lvd~
'~iound, ~!N 55364
14-117-24 44 0039
Koenig & Robin
2305 'Commerce Blvd.
~iound, ~!N 55364
14-117-24 44 0041
Goe. C. Shepherd Jr.
2218 Commerce Blvd.
Mound, MN 55364
13-117-24 33 0063
W. R. Netka
2313 Commerce BlVdo
~iound, MN 55364
14-117-24 44 0042
Harold. P, Borg
P.O. Box 5
Mound, MN 5~364
13-117-24 33 0047
'James W. Nolan
5200 Piper Rd
Mound,. MN 55364
13-117-24 33 0049
Lansing'Properties
1794 Jones Lane
Mound, MN 55364
1'3-117-24 33 0050
Mound Lodge 320
P.O. Box. 221
Hound,. MN 55364
13-117-24 33 O053..,~-
Mound Lodge 320
P.O.. Box 221
Mound, MN 55364
13-117-24..33. 0054
Medical Properties Inco
2208 Commerce-Blvd,
Mound., MNl55364
13-117-24 33 0058
Medical P~opeties Inc,
2208 Commerce Blvd.
Mound, MN 55364
13-117-24' 33 0059
M,E. Mueller'
2216 .Commerce BlVdo
Mound, MN 55364
13-117-24 33 0060
~.E. Mueller
2216..Commerce Blvd.
Mound, MN. 55364
13-117,24 33,0061
John R..Morrison
2218 Commerce Blvdo
Mound, MN 55364·
13-117~24 33 0062
CENTRAL BUSINESS
DISTRICT PARKING MAINTENANCE
COSTS
Rental of Burlington Northern Land for Parking Lots
Special Assessment on Parking Lot behind Moy's
1981-82 Snow Plowing Cost
Parking Lot Sweeping'
Engineering Costs (1981)
City Park Lot Leases
Christmas Lights
Laker (CBD Hearing Notice)
Misc. Clean-Up Supplies
SUB TOTAL
MINUS 25% City Share of Snow Plowing. Cost
SUB TOTAL
MINUS Credit for Leases
TOTAL ASSESSABLE
$ 6,399.96
323.79
12,012.50
1,490.90
382.00
1,554.49
24.OO
22.49
70.94
$ 22,281.07
- 3,.O03.12
$ 19,277.95
- 1,554.49
$ 17,723.46
Costs carried over until 1983'include: 1. Summer Maintenance Assistant
2. Striping & Painting of Lots
$1,000 (Est.)
$2,O00 (Est.)
CITY OF MOUND
Mound, Minnesota,
NOTICE OF HEARING ON. PROPOSED ASSESSMENT
CBD PARKING MAINTENANCE - 198~
TO WHO~ IT MAY CONCERN
September 13, 1982
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council w'ill meet at'7:30 o'clock p.m. on
September 28, 1982.at the Mound City Hall, 5341Maywood Road to pass upon the
proposed assessments. · The general nature of the improvements and the areas to
be assessed are as follows:
CENTRAL B.USINESS DISTRICT PARKING MAINTENANCE - 1982 - Area within the
following boundaries proposed to be assessed:'
;
Belmont 'Lane on the East
North of Lynwood Boulevard to Tonkawood ·Road
700 feet West of Commerce Boulevard ·
700 feet South of'Shoreline Boulevard
Total Cost to be Assessed $19,277.95 .
The proposed assessments foe the above are on file for public inspection at the
City Office. Written or oral objections will be considered~at, the hearing.
An owner may '" n
appea.~l,~a assessment to district Court pursuant to Minnesota
Statutes Section 429.08! by serving notice of the appeal upon the Mayor Or
City Clerk with'i~'30 days after the adoption of the assessment and filing such
notice with the district court within ten days after service upon the Mayor or
City Clerk.
No such appeal as to the amount of an assessment as to a specific parcel of
land may be made unless the owner has either filed a signed written objection
to that assessment with the City Clerk prior to the hearing or has presented
the w. ritten objection to the presiding officer at the heari.ng..
Francene C. Clark
City Clerk
Publish in The Laker September 13, 1982
PID #13-117-24 33 0045 Proposed Amount $418.54
Councilmember
RESOLUTION NO. 82-
RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE CENTRAL BUSINESS
DISTRICT ASSESSMENT ROLL AT $17,723.46 TO
BE CERTIFIED TO THE COUNTY-AND SPREAD OVER
1 YEAR AT ~ %
~HEREAS,
· pursuant to;proper, notice duly given as required by. Law, the
Council has met and heard and passed upon all objections to the
proposed assessment for the following improvement, to-wit:
"CBD Parking Maintenance from'June 1, 1981 to May 31, 1982.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED By THE CITY COUNCIL OF MOUND, MINNESOTA:
i~ Such proposed assessment, a copy of which is attached hereto
and made a part hereof, is hereby accepted and shall constitute
the special assessment agalnst the lands named therein, and each
tract of land therein'included is hereby found to be'benefited
by the.proposed improv~men~ in the amount of the assessment levied
against it.
2. Such assessment shall be payable in one annual installment, to
be payable on the.first'Monday of January, 1983. To the'installment
shall be added .interest at the rate of ~ percent per annum fr°m the-
date of the adOption of ~his assessment resolution until December.
31, 1983.
3.' The.owner of any.property, so assessed may, at any time. within
30.days, from the adoption °f this res°lution, pay the whole of the
as.sessment against any parcel, and no interest shall be charged; and
he may until. November 15, following the date of this resolution pay
the whole of the assessment with interest accrued to December 31,
of the year following the date of assessment.
4. The Clerk shall forthwlth..transmlt a certified.duplicate of' this
assessment to the County Auditor to.be extended on the proper tax
lists of the County, and such assessments shall be coollected and
paid over in the same manner as.other municipal taxes.
AUTOMATIC CO.
DIV. OF BAVCO, INC.
""........~ NG PARK, MINN. 5539 ,/
SCREW MACHINE PRODUCTS
September 28, 1982
MULTIPLE SPINDLE AUTOMATICS TO 2-1%"
COMPLETE SECOND OPERATION FACILITIES · METAL SPECIALTIES
Mayor of Mound and City Council Members
Mound City I-]all
Mound, MN. 55364
Re: Notice of hearing on Proposed Assessment, CBD Parking Maintenance 1982
Mr. Mayor,
This letter is in objection to the proposed assessments of $970.76 (nine
hundred seventy dollars and seventy six cents), against property identified
by PID#13-117-24 33 0027.
Unde~ section 23.30 subdivision lg. this property is required to provide
pne parking space"..."for each five workers based on peak employment, in
addition to the one loading space"..."completely enclosed within a building."
Since peak employment is 25 workers only five spaces are required by your
ordinance. As on site parking has been provided for as required and whereas
occupants of this building do not use or have a need to use parking provided
by the city, I do not feel it is just that we be forced to pay for establish-
ing or maintaining any such municipal parking lot(s).
It is instead the obligation of those property owners that have not met the
cities off street parking requirements that must bear the cost of such muni-
cipal parking. After all, it is these owners that have a use for, but have
not provided parking for their customers and employees. Since they have not
undergone the expense of providing land for their parking needs does not make
it correct to distribute their economic burden to property owners such as my-
self who have privately spent money to provide for the off street parking re-
quired by your ordinance.
Based on the above facts I am requesting that no assessment be made against
this property for parking lot maintenance, it is the responsibility of ben-
efiting property owners to bear this entire expense.
Sincerely,
Randy E. Bickmann
REB/bn
Councilmember
September 27, 1982
RESOLUTION NO. 82-
RESOLUTION LEVYING DEFERRED AND SUPPLEMENTAL
ASSESSMENTS UPON WAIVER OF FORMALITIES;
DIRECTING PREPARATION OF ABSTRACT; AND DIRECTING
CERTIFICATION TO THE.COUNTY AUDITOR
~HEREAS, .the City CQuncil,.pursuant.to Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429,
(Laws 1953, Chapter 398, as amended) has the power to levy supplemental
assessments and the power to levy deferred.assessments, and.
WHEREAS, th; following assessments were not initially levied in the projects
as indlcated,-'but waivers of formality for supplemental and deferred
assessments have been executed by the property owner and delivered to
the City:
NOW, .THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MOUND, MINNESOTA:
1. 'Pursuant to its authority under Chapter 429,. Minnesota Statutes
the City Council does hereby determine that each of the parcels
of land.hereinafter described have. benefited in an amount equal
· to the amount set opposite each of the sai'd parcels by virtue of
the project as.indicated and that they be, and'hereby are, assessed
in the amount set opposite each such described parcel, and each
such supplemental and deferred assessment shall be payable in
equal annual.installments over such period of years'as shown:
PID Levy No. Improvement Years Amount
24-117-24 12 0037 8664
Tree .Removal 5 $455.00
Such ins-tal"lments..~fiaii'be'":payable as followS: The'first of the
"installments to .be payable on or before the first Monday in'January,
'1983 and shall bear interest at the rate of 8% per. annum from the
date of the adoption of this mssessment resolution. To the first'
installment shall be added interest on the entire assessment fr°m
the date of-this resolution until December 31, 1983. To each
subsequent installment, when due, shall be added interest for
one year on al! Unpaid'installments.
:The owner of any property so assessed maY, at any time prior to
certification of the assessment to the County Auditor, pay the
whole of. the assessment.on such property, to the City Treasurer,
except.that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment
is paid within thirty (30) days from the adoption of this resolution;
and he may, at any time prior to November 15 of each year, pay to
the County Treasurer, the entire amount of the assessment remaining
unpaid, with interest accrued to December 31 of the year in which
such payment is made.
The Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this
assessment to the County Auditor to be extended on the proper tax
lists of the-County, and such assessments shall be collected and
paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes.
Councilmember
September 28, 1982
RESOLUTION NO. 82-
'RESOLUTION ADOPTING UNPAID WEEDCUTTING
ASSESSMENT ROLL IN THE AMOUNT OF $1OO.OO
TO BE CERTIFIED TO THE COUNTY AND SPREAD
OVER 1 YEAR AT 8% INTEREST
WHEREAS,
the City Council, pursuant to Chapter 60 of the City Code and
Minnesota Statutes, Section 429.101 has the power to levy
assessments for weedcutting, and
WH ER EAS,
pursuant to proper notice duly given as required bylaw, the Council
has met and heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed
assessment for the removal of weeds.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MOUND, MINNESOTA:
1o Such proposed assessments as listed below, are hereby accepted
and shall consitute the special assessment agains the lands named
therein, and each tract'of land therein included is hereby found
to be benefited by the removal of weeds in the amount of the
assessment levied against it.
PID
13-117-24 12 0032
AMOUNT LEVY #
$ 1OO.O0 8660
The weed cutting assessment shall be payable in one annual
installment, to be payable on the first Monday of January in 1983.
To the installment shall be added interest at the rate of 8 per cent
per annum from the date of the adoption Of this resolution until'
December 31, 1983.
The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time within 30 days
from the adoption of this resolution, pay the whole of the assessment
against any parcel, and no interest shall be charged; and may until
November 15 following the date of this resolution pay the whole of
the assessment with interest to December 31 of the year following the
date of assessment. After November 15 following the date of the
assessment, to the first installment shall be added interest on the
entire assessment from the date of this resolution until December 31
of the year in which the first installment is payable.
e
The Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this
assessment to the County Auditor to be extended on the proper tax
lists of the County, and such assessments shall be collected and
paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes.
CITY OF MOUND.
Mound, Minnesota
NOTICE'OF HEARING ON PROPOSED.ASSESSMENT
UNPAID TREE.REMOVAL CHARGES AND
--UNPAID WEEDCUTTING CHARGES
Propert'y. Identification
TO WHOM.IT MAY CONCERN:
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN thai' the City Council of the City of Mound will
meet at the City Hall, 5341Maywood Road~ Mound, Minnesota, at 7:30 P.M. on
September.28, 1982, to hear, consider and pass on all written and Oral objec-
tions,- if any, to the proposed assessment on the ~ollowing parcel,'of land
Unpaid' Tree Removal Charges: ..
# 24-117-24'12 0037 Hunter W. Lofgren $455.00
'. Unpald..Weedc~ting Charges
Property Identification # 13-117-24.1~ 00321
Dennis Herkal- $100.00
An owner'may appeal.an assessment to Dist~i~t Court.pursuant to Min6e-
sota Statutes 'Section 42~.081. by s'ervi.ng noti'ce of .the appeal· upon the Mayor
or Clerk of the .City within 30 days-after'the adoption .of the assessment and
filing such notic~ with the District C~urt within ten days after service.
upon'the Mayor or Clerk.'
No such appeal as to the amount.of.an assessment as to a specifi'c parcel
of land may. be made unl'e~s the owner.ha~ either-filed a-signed Written objec-
t'ion to that assessment with the City.Clerk pribr to.t~e hearing or has
presented the written objection to the·presiding officer at the hearing.
Fr~n~cene C. ~lark, City Clerk
Publish in The Laker September 13,1982
Delinquen~ Water and Sewer 9-21-82
22 232 2370 81
22 235 220911
22 238 4898 31
22 238 4933'81
22 238 5020 31
22 238 5035 11
22 253 2051 01
22 259 5501 81.
22 259 5505 91
22 259 5628 91
22 259 6070 31
22 262 2997 51
22 268 5909 41'
22 271 2925 71
22 274 2901 21
42 343 2650 41
42 3'43 2631 41
42 259 4801 91
22 286 5971 61
22 289 3017 41
22 292 6033 21
22 310 3120 01
22'310 3136 61
22 315 6390 5t
22 316 2882 31
$ 56.98
57.58
51'.94
48.66
61.98
77.61
90.00
101.40
104.22
87.89
89.87
56,90
56.40
121.90
32.96
227,95
508.70
236.26
135.50
66.42
79.50
95.70
149.60
100.30
89.51
Curb box.,bent
Delinquent Water and Sewer 9-21-82
22 232 2370 81
22 235 2209 11
22 238 4898 31
22 238 4933'81
22 238 5020 31
22 238 5035 11
22 253 2051 01
22 2~9 5501 81
22 259 5505 91
22 259 5628 91
22 259 6070 31
22 262 2997 51
Fay Cooper
Robert Brose
Terry Olson
Richard Bies
Elma Jensen
Thomas Pauley
Clifford Larson
Gary Nelson
Gary Nelson
Erwin Beise
Perry Ames
David Wogsland
22 268 5909 41 Dick Janke
22 271 2925 71 West Sub. Prop.
~ 274 29~! 21 Gerald Reimann
42 343 2650 41 Surfside
42 343 2631 41
42 259 4801 91
22 286 5971 61
22 289 3017 41
22 292 6033 21
22 310 3120 01
22 310 3136 61
22 315 6390 51
22 316 2882 31
Steve Hesse·
Water Care
Darrell Nolden
Steven Spencer
Todd Warner
Kenneth Paasch
Shirley Woytcke
Brent Thomton
Ed Rowley
($47.89)
($124.60)
$ 56.98
57.58
51.94
48.66
61.98
77.61
90.00
101.40
104.22
87.89
89.87
56,90
56.40
121.90
32.96
227.95
508.70
236.26
135.50
66.42
79.50
95.70
149.60
100.30
89.51
Signed contract
2209 Chateau
Curb box bent
~ade arrangements
5020 Ed§ewater
5035 Edgewater
Signed contract
5501 Bartlett
5505 Bartlett
Paid $40.00
6070 Bartlett
Signed contract
5909 Glenwood
2925 Holt Ln.
2901 ~leadow Ln.
2650 Commerce Blvd.
2631Signed~contract
4801 Bartlett Blvd.
5971 Hawthorne
3017 Longfellow
6033 Cherrywood
3120 Westedge Blvd.
Paid $25.00
6390 Otter Rd.
2882 Halstead Ln.
22 321 3005 01
22 331 6000 71 Robert Matson
22 332 2611 31 Conrad Ptacek
22 346 5667 21 Robert Brown
22 361 2346 51 Clarence Ferris
22 373 5028 11
Robert Burke ~~-m~''"-- 209.93
76.24
148.44
94.80
$3467.36
3005 Bluffs Dr.
Paid
2611 Granger Ln.
5667 Bush Rd.
2346 Cypress
Paid
321 3005 01
22 331 6000 71
22 332 2611 31
22 346 5667 21
22 361 2346 51
22 373 5028 11
209.93
68.88
76.24
148.44
94.80
83.34
$3467.36
CITY OP MOUND
Mound, Minnesota
. NOTICE OF HEARING ON PROPOSED ASSESS)~ENT
DELINQUENT WATER AND SEWER BILLS
TO ~HOM IT MAY CONCERN:
NOTICE IS HEREBY-GIVEN that, the City Council of the City of Mound will
meet. at the City Ha11,5341Maywood Road,Mound, Minnesota, at 7:30 p.m.
on SePtember 28,,1982,'to hear,consider and pass on all written and
oral objections,if anyj to'the proposed'assessment.on the following
parcels.of 'land for-:
Unpaid Water and Sewer Bills;
¥~oPerty. Identifaction
~13-117-24-43L0060
~14-117-24-14-0017
#19-117-23-34-0041
#22-i17-24-43-0007
#24-117-24'11-0012
~24-117-2~-44-0081
#25-117-24-12-0118
Thomas McKennon $ 102.14
Paul Wolf 161 91
Matt Parlak 95.70
Waller Russell etal-Dick Thompson I;567.50
John Hoogesteger 66.40
!~)~-5~,- Paid 9-21-82
Michael Gray 98.00
Charles D. Askov - John.K. Hiller 124.00
An owner may appeal .an assessment to dis~ri, ct court pursuant to Minnesota
Statutes~Section'429.081 byservi'ng notice'of the appeal.upon the Mayor or
clerk of the City within 30 days 'after the adoption of the assessment
and filing such notice With the district court within ten days after ser-.I
vice'upon the Mayor or Clerk,
'No such appeal as to the. amount of an assessment as to a specific.parcel'
of. land may be made unless' the owner has either filed a signed written
objection to that assessment with the City Clerk prior to the hearing or
has presented the written objections to the presiding officer at .the hear-
ing.
(publish
in the Laker September 13,1982)
Francene C. Clark
City Clerk
Councilmember
September 28, 1982
RESOLUTION NO82-
RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE DELINQUENT UTILITY
ASSESSMENT ROLE IN THE AMOUNT OF~,~/~,,~'"
TO BE CERTIFIED TO THE COUNTY AUDITOR AND
SPREAD OVER 1 YEAR AT 8%
WHEREAS, the following sewer and water service charges are unpaid and past due:
PI.D #
#13-117-24 43 0060
#14-117-24 14 OO17
#19-117-23 34 0041
#22-117-24 43 0007
#24-117-24 11 0012
#24-117-23 44 OO81
#25-117-24 12 Ol18
AMOUNT LEVY #
$ 102.14 8656
161.91 8656
95.70 8656
1,567.50 8656
66.40 8656
98.00 8656
124.O0 8656
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Section 444.075 permits unpai'd service charges
to be certified to the County Auditor for payment with the taxes.
NO~I, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MOUND, MINNESOTA:
1. That the foregoing charges be herewith certified to the Hennepin
County Auditor for collection with the 1982 taxes.
2. Charges shall bear interest at the rate of 8% per annum from the
date of adoption of this resolution.
Augus,t 19, 1982
CITY of 'MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364
(612) 472-1155
TO: CITY COUNCIL
FROM: CITY MANAGER
I would like to suggest either appointing someone new or tabling this
appointment.
The H.R.A. does nothing but oversee the 2020 Project. By State law, they
have a much greater responsibili{y to oversee the undertaking of a down-
town redevelopment program including Tax Increment Financing.
My long range thoughts are that the H.R.A. should be reorganized and
brought under closer contact/control with the City and the Council. One
way to do that would be to get them to appoint the City Manager as the
Executive Director of the H.R.A. and then have him appoint, say Mr. Richter
as the Director of the 2020 Project.
Along with that we need to broaden out the types of skills we have on the
H.R.A.Board to reflect the future requirements the H.R.A. Board faces.
This would be a golden opportunity to bring in some good solid business
types into the H.R.A.
It is'still important that Ed Richter have an Advisory Committee over
seeing the 2020 Project, but at least half of it should come from the
residents themselves.
In a nut-shell, one of the reasons the downtown hasn't done much over the
years, I think, is the H.R.A. It hasn't been agressive, it hasn't
utilized all the various tools and programs that are available, but has
just been a simple board overseeing 2020; unlike the Park and Planning
Commissions which are constantly pushing and promoting improvements
in Mound.
JE:fc
Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Mound
2020 COMMERCE BOULEVARD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364
August 12~ 1982
.MEMORANDUM
'To; Mayor and Mound City Council
'From: Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Mound
Subjectt Commissioner Helen Me Eugster
Helen Mo Eugster's term* as a-member of the Board of
Commissioners of the Housing and*Redevelopment AUthority
of Mound expires August 29e 1982e Mrs. Eugster would like
to be appointed for another term.
~-xecutive Director
Councilmember
RESOLUTION NO. 82-
RESOLUTION
September ~8, 1982
WHEREAS, ~Helen A. Eugster's term as Commissioner of the Mound Housing
and Redevelopment Authority expired on August 29, 1982, and
WHEREAS,
Councilmember
RESOLUTION NO. 82-
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE THE INSTALLATION
OF A STOP SIGN ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER
OF THE INTERSECTION OF SHOREWOOD LANE
AND QUAIL ROAD
WHEREAS, there is a potentially hazardous traffic condition at the
intersection of Shorewood Lane and Quail Road, and
WHEREAS, the traffic hazard can potentially be abaited by the installation
of a stop sign, and
WHEREASi. the residents in the neighborhood request that a stop sign be
installed.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MOUND, MINNESOTA:
That a stop sign shall be erected on the Northwest corner
of the intersection of Shorewood Lane and Quail Road in
accordance with the "Uniform Traffic Control Devices Code".
CITY of MOUND
5341 MAY'WOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364
(612) 472-1155
To: Jon Elam f~)
I'
From: Bruce Wold
Subj: Stop sign at the intersection of Shorewood Ln. and Quail Rd.
Jon:
As you know, I have been investigating alternatives that a potemtially
hazardous traffic situation could be relieved. The hazard exists because
of a retaining wall that was built after the road construction was
completed on the above intersection.. The retaining wall effectively
blocks the vision of all drivers attempting to enter Shorewood Ln. from
Quail Rd. I found it necessary to drive approximately ten feet into
the intersection in order to see oncoming traffic from the north. I
feel that the installation of a stop sign on the Northwest corner of
this intersection will help abaft a potentially hazardous situation.
This problem came to my attention.from Ms. Clara Merchant who re-
sided at 1791 Shorewood Ln. She has contacted a number of the neigh-
bors in this area, and they feel that the installation of a stop sign
is appropriate.
Please have-the council ~onsider the following resolution:
Whereas there is a potentially hazardous traffi, c cOndition at the
intersection of Shorewood Ln. and Quail Rd. and
Whereas the traffic hazard can potentially be abaited by the instal-
lation of a stop sign and
Whereas the residents in the neighborhood request that a stop sign
be installed
Then be it resolved that a stop sign should be erected on the north-
west corner of the intersection of Shorewood Ln. and Quail Rd. in
accordance with the "Uniform Traffic Control Devices Code"
PROJECT: 6SG4
C!TY OF MOUND
MOUND BAY PARK IMPROVEMENTS
BAY P~I~ IMPROUHENT~
PA~E ~
I TOT LOT
3 BEACH SAND
· 4 TOPSOIL
EA 1.0
TON 1, 35O. 0
C.Y 880.0
6 SEEDING ACR E.O
7 ~TER FO~TA~ .; EA
D PAPER BI~H (3 CLUS~R) ~ 3.0
10 PAPER BIRCH ER ~.0
ii 5iL~R ~ . EA i6.0
*~ ~IO~ ~I~g ~0~ ~ 4.0
13 ~Y~L~ C~B EA 10.0
l~ ~RViCc~RRY E~ 9.0
~ PAGODA DOG.OD EA 6.0
1G D~ AMUR MAPLE E~ 31.0
ENG. ESTIMATE MN ~LLEY LANDSCAPE
0.00 0.00 7323.00 7,3E3.00
0.00 0.00 5.E6 7,101.00
0.00 0.00 6.00 S,ESO. O0
0.00 0.00 800.00 1,600.00
0.00 0.00 10"/5.00 1,075.00
0.00 0.00 /25.00 375.00
0.00 0.00 100.00 BO0.O0
0.00 0.00 110.00 £,760.00
0.00. 0.00 L:90.O0 52.0.00
0.00 0.00 BS. O0 BSO.O0
0.00 0.00 i00.00 BO0. O0
0.00 0.00 100.00 600.00
0.00 0.00 1B. O0 558.00
0.00 0.00 ~0.00 460.00
DOC BLANCHARD ENI'P.
IUll'U.
7500.00 7,500.00
9000; C4 D; 000;. O0
5.95 8, 0~-~.50
6.10 5,368.00
800.00 1,600.00
1150.00 I, LSO. O0
170.00 510.00
149,00 1,/9E.00
%.00
1BO.O0 7'20.00
101,00 1,010.00
i5~.00 i,431.00
149.00 B94.00
~6.00 BO~.O0
~5.00 57S.00
0.00 ~9,4~?.00
McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC',
CONSULTING ENGINEERS · LAND SURVEYORS · PLANNERS
Reply To:
12800 Industrial Park Boulevard
Plymouth, Minnesota 55441
(612) 559-3700
September 27, 1982
Mr. Jon Elam
City Manager
City of Mound
5341Maywood Road
Mound, MN 55364
Subject: Mound Bay Park
File #6546
Dear Jon,
We have checked references and past projects completed by both contractors,
Perkins Landscape and Natural Green. From the information we have received it
appears that either contractor could complete this project satisfactorily for
the City. Perkins Landscape has also submitted a new bid bond which covers 10%
of their bid proposal.
If you need any additional information, please contact me.
Sincerely,
McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC.
Jo~hn Caro e ro~
JC:bb
printed on recycled paper
A. THOMAS WURST, P,A.
CURTIS A. PEARSON, P.A.
.JOSEPH E. HAMILTON, P.A.
THOMAS F. UNDERWOOD, P.A,
J,~MES D. [.ARSON. P.A.
JOHN J. BOWDEN
LAW OFFICES
WURST, PEARSON, HAMILTON, LAR$ON ~: UNDERWOOD
1 1OO FIRST BANK PLACE WEST
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 554.02
September 27, 1982
TELEPHONE
(612) 338-4200
City Manager and City CounCil
City of Mound, ~linnesota
Re: Mound Bay Park Contract
Gentlemen:
John Cameron of McCombs-Knutson has forwarded to me copies
of the specifications for Mound. Bay Park along with the.two low
bids. On the advertisement for bids, the City states as follows:
"Each bidder shall file With his bid an acceptable
certified check or bidders bond in an amount of
not less than 10% of the total amount of his bid.
No bid may be withdrawn within 60 day-s after the
bids are opened.
The City of Mound reserves the right to reject
any and all bids and to waive any informality
or irregularity therein."
On the first page of the instructions to bidders, it is
clear that it is required that they provide a bid bond and that
this will be forfeited as liquidated damages if the low bidder
does not enter into the contract.
Based on the foregoing facts, Mr. Elam and Mr. Cameron have
asked if the City is required to take the second low bid.
It is my opinion that the City can waive the mistake on the
part of the bidder if a 10% bond is on file prior to the time the
Council considers the bid. The City has the right to reject the low
bid on the grounds that they did not meet the specifications, but I
think they can waive that provision and accept the low bidder if he
provides the extra bid bond.
McQuillin's text on Municipal Corporations indicates that a
guarantee that bidders will meet the requirements of their bids
are valid requirements and states that "if not complied with, the
bid may be rejected". The text goes on to indicate there are a
substantial number of cases which have been tried on this particular
issue, and I believe that the City can go either way on this bid
Page 2
city Manager and City Council
September 27, 1982
award. I have also reviewed b~nnes.~ta cases and find none directly
in point, but I conferred with the Assistant Attorney General in
charge of municipal matters, and he stated that he also thought that
the option rests with the City Council.
If I can be of further assistance on this matter, please advise.
CAP: Ih
cc: Mr John Camreon
Curtis A. Pearson
City Attorney
Counci]member
WHEREAS,
WHEREAS,
WHEREAS,
September 28, 1982
RESOLUTION NO. 82-
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A BID FOR MOUND
BAY PARK IMPROVEMENTS
pursuant to advertising for bids for certain improvements
to Mound Bay Park, and
bids were opened publicly at 2:00 P.M. on September 21, 1982,
and
the following bids were received:
1. Perkins Landscape 5% Bid Bond
2. Natural Green, Inc. 10% Bid Bond
3. MN. Valley Landscape 10% Bid Bond
4. Doc Blanchard Entp; 10% Bid Bond
5. Noble Nursery, Inc. 10% Bid Bond
$37,648.00
38,820.00
39,487.OO
39,834.50
40,'O00.00
CounciImember
RESOLUTION NO. 82-
September 28, 1982
RESOLUTION SETTING OCTOBER 12, 1982, FOR THE
UNPAID TREE REMOVAL SPECIAL ASSESSMENT HEARING
'BE IT RESOLVED, BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MOUND MINNESOTA:
That the Council does hereby direct that a public hearing be
held on October 12, 1982, at 7:30 P.M. on Unpaid Tree Removal
Charges; said notice of hearing to be published in the official
newspaper; The Laker, at least two weeks prior to the hearing
and mailed notice also be sent to the owner of each parcel
listed as having unpaid tree removal charges° This is done in
accordance with Section 61.50 of the City Code and Minnesota
Statute 429.10].
~ound~ ~inneso~a
NOTICE OF HEARING ON PROPOSED ASSESSMENT
UNPAID TREE REMOVAL CHARGES
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCER-N:
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN That the City Council of the City of Mound will
meet at the City Hall, 5341Maywood Road, Mound, Minnesota, at 7:30 P.M. on
October 12, 1982, to hear, consider and pass on all written and oral objections,
if any, to the proposed assessment on the following parcels of land for:.
Unpaid Tree Removal Charges
Property Identification #24-117-24 23 0019
$1,500.O'O
An owner may appeal an assessment to District Court pursuant to
Minnesota Statutes Section 429.081 by serving notice of the appeal upon the
Mayor or Clerk of the City within 30 days after the adoption of the assessment
and filing such notice with the District Court within ten days after service
upon the Mayor or Clerk.
No such appeal as to the amount of an assessment as to a specific parcel
of land may be made unless the owner has either filed a signed written objec-
tion to that assessment with the City Clerk prior to the hearing or has
presented the written objection'to the presiding officer at the hearing.
Francene C. Clark, City Clerk
Publish in The Laker~ September 28, 1982
C[I'Y of MOUND
September. 16, 1982
~341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, M'INNESOTA'55364
(612) 472-1155
Mr. Curt Pearson
11OO First Bank Place West
Minneapolis, MN. 55402
Dear'Curt,
Do you see anything wrong with letting someone lease some of our tax
forfeit lots for use as a garden.site?
I would propose to lease these the same way we lease the area by the
water tower for a garden site at $1.OO per year.: The benefit to the City
is that these people will help keep the lots clean, prevent neighbors from
· using'them as a dumping ground and putting in a garden would help keep
the weeds"down. Any problems?
Sincerely,
Jon Elam
City Mana'ger·
JE:fc
September ~8, 1982
Councilmember
RESOLUTION NO. 82-
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE LEASING LOTS 1,2,3 & 22,
BLOCK 5, DREAMWOOD TO MR. & MRS. LEO WALLIS
WHEREAS,
Mr. & Mrs. Leo Wallis have asked if they can lease City land
described a's Lots 1,2,3 and 22, Block 5, Dreamwood, in order
to clean them up and improve the appearance of the area, and
WHEREAS, after the lots are cleaned up, they might want to place a
small garden-on the area, and
-WHEREAS,
the City Attorney has. advised that he sees no problem with
leasing'the land as long as it is not used as a commercial
garden plot, and
WHEREAS,
the City Manager is recommending that we lease this property
in the same manner as we do the property by Well #3 and
charge $1.00 per year.
September 28,.1982
Councilmember
RESOLUTION NO. 82-
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ADVERTISEMENT FOR
BIDS FOR INSTALLATION OF SKYLIGHTS AT MOUND
CITY HALL, TO BE OPENED AT 1:00 P.M. ON
.OCTOBER 12, 1982
WHEREAS,
WHEREAS,
the present roof of the City Hall at 5341Maywood Road leaks
an'd must be repaired, and
the reason for the leaking is the skylights were improperly
installed and before Sander and Co. will repair the roof under
warranty they would like the skylight problem resolved, and
WHEREAS, at this time it would be appropriate to install new smaller
commercially built skylights.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MOUND', MINNESOTA:
To authorize advertising for bids for the installation of
skylights with specifications available at City Hall. Bids
to open at 1:00 P.M. on October 12, 1982.
£? Sept
To: The City of Mound
From; i~chael F Smith
I would like to purchase the Anderson building. My plan would be
to utilize the back half of the building for storag~ and shop area
for my business. (Smith Heating and Air Conditioning Inc.) The front
half which is on commerce Blvd, would be remodeled to provide
space for at least 2 retail outlets.
To purchase the building I would like to put 5,000.00 down with
a contract for the ballance. The contract would be for interest at
10% plus 100.00/mo. toward the principal for 5 years. At the end of
5 years a balloon payment would be made for the ballance due°
P. Oo B°x 465
Mound, Mn. 55364
Nm. pho 476-0905
Wk. pho 472-1920
BILLS ..... SEPTEMBER 28, 1982
Acro Minnesota
AIbinson
Earl F. Andersen
Aero Asphalt
Gayle Burns
Holly Bostrom
Janet Bertrand
Baldwin Supply
Chap~n Publlsh~ng
Joan Conkey
Commissioner of Revenue
Crowley Fence
Dept of Motor Vehicles.
Flexible Pipe Tool
Nick Gronberg
Dennis Gronberg
Kromer Co.
Lathrop Paint Supply'
Doris Lepsch
Mtka Painting & Decor.
Mound Super Valu
Northrup King
Office Products of MN
Pitney Bowes Credit
MN Coroners &'Med
MN Academy Prosec
Mound Postmaster
MWCC Conference
DelorJs Schwalbe
Swenson Nursery
Thurk Bros. Chev
Western Tree. Service
Water Products
Mtka Portable Dredging
Xerox Corp
Chemlawn
Exam 'Assn
& Law Enf
30.16
22.50
283.80
9,526.21
19.87
138.00
30.20
346.14
30.78
600.00
3,230.46
875.00
17.25
495.00
2,667.46
1,125.00
8.65
806.72
15.0o
1,865.00
9.84
3i0.98
4O5.OO
26.00
6o~oo
35.oo
lO5.OO
15.o0
56.00
67.75
20,859.00
990.00
222.48
1,SO0.O0
82.72
1~664.00
TOTAL BILLS
48,541.97
Tom La~son of the Minnesota Valley Wild- other plants needed, by birds and animals
life Refuge said ioosestrife can be found in tha.t use the pond area.- -:
"any marsh,-in the-Twin Citie~ area, and' '
in some mi~rshes has completely'taken · .Omdahrs story could be that of the'sci,
: over.- That's .'.'the ultimate fate of most ence~fictional farmer at the start of this ar-
marshes it's_ in." unless Ioos~.stri-fe is- ticle, except that Omdahl hasn't tried to
,. somehow controlled, Larson said.; ~. ---'. - ::'eradicate the Ioosestrife. The main prob-
~. .... "' ~'-' ~;--~~' --.'~--.J..-~:.~.:- ::':. lem is what to do. Nothing has met .total
Loose~tHf~'h~ e'n'ter~l'only th~ n0dhem success in other places, and the efforts
part of the refuge, he said, but unless it is. that have met with some success are gert--
._ -checked the marsh areas could become a ' _er. ally too costly or impractical. _ .
~ "monocultum." without the diversitY need-- .:-- '-- ~ ~: '-~ .... ;.~-_ .
One farme_r-~d~o has learned a Iot'about; herbicides aIso kill other vegetation. Sim-
Ioosestife is Eldor Omdahl, who grows: ply pulling up' the plants'works only_when
'j grain on. his farm. isoutheast of' Warren, _ ~they are young and not n. umerous'; as.their'
-. Minn. The'purple loose, strife .was planted roots grow they become vidually impossi-
;.to beautify a pc)nd'on.his farm aboUt 18~,.-ble to pull, and with large amounts that
~..years ago, It didn't expand much unb3 a !.~: idea may be impra~ical anyhow.'. '.i:,~;'~
.~ over!he place, O~dahl said.~:~-;:-. - ,~ .~: Burning doesnt kdl the plants effecbvely,.
~Omdahl rear, zed th~ extent.of the problem.~. -: not. only do. they grow back, .but a new.~
~ after he decided.to give 640 ~res ir~_ ud-~;~ Plant. ~will;gr0w:from' each fragment~;-Using'.
[ lng the pond ~nd ~ icanals.tO the Auduboq ~!.'.'~eavy · machi~nery'-, in: .mar. shes~ probably
~ Society;Audubon-~nd bthe~ .wildlife offi-; v_ does mOre harm' than good. Planting com-
~.cials saw all .~t~at Ib~strife am:l pe[.ceived ~-peting vegetation has had so. me sacces~,
~.that'it 'was e~.~ering..t,.h~e~,xist~,.~e~ce.~ .. of ~ but .that_idea has limited application:~..'
Introducing the E6r°pean'ir~ects thai ar&-:':
. natural enemies of the plant and have com. :
__.troll~:l Ioosestrife in EurOPe may be the ''~
'best solution,. But this must be ap-
pr0ached ~arefully .lest the insects be-:_:
· come 'a greater problem thari the Ioose~._
-. strife. Studiesof such biological controls
Loosestrff~ is no{- Coasid~e~ ali bad. !-I~:~:.
eybees seem to Io~/e it,' and it has. a long .~-
bkx)ming .p~od:.ThompSon: reports 'that:
one Midwestern'agrioulture supplier offei, s ~-._
But, ~ sak~, alti~ugh.effarts to'"nat~ir~'''
ize" Ioosestrife for I'~ney production could ....
- 'aocount for some of its a~oread, beekepera -~
"have:not been-wholly-irresponsible"in :
use of ioosest~e, One lis of bcckeep~s'_
criteria for. prospective: honey plants,---
:Thompson noted, is that they not. be po-
· lentially offensive weeds: .... . .'": -
Purple Ioosestrife also is sold as an oma.
mental plant and makes for attractive dis-
plays, and that also seems to have cor~
tributed to its spread, although Thompson
said it is not a significant part of nursery
Loosestrif; als;3 was once highly recom-
mended as a herbal medicine for diarrhea,
dysentery, leukorrhea0 blood-spitting,
wounds, ulcers and sores, but apparently
not in modem times.
'- Pur~e kx~estrife ~ found :mosW i~ the.~.~-~
eastern United St~tesL. It ~y ~ve ~'
~ inih t~ ~d a~ grav~ d~ up in Eur~ f~-
:- ~i~' ~ast a~ ~t~ ~ by
,.~ ~i~ ~ ~~ ~st. L~e-:~'~
:.:: ~re ~ ~ to ~e~ ~ ~ . E~...
.~s, ~ f~.~e to lO.y~m; ~'
~e ~ ~ ~rds; ~i~ls,~wat~, ~
~ot~~..' ,' :"~:~- "'-'-" /';: ~ "~
: - E~n Way Tea~, ~ in-A~u~
~,.t~ of st~i~ in a ~ of ~'~
ov~ ~ ~d, ~ a stream at ~d,-
~. E was esfimat~ ~t.~ 1978~
- Yo~ ~d 1~,~ ~fest~ a=es of ~t-
~ ~at, ~i~ m~-~l~' ~- -
chu~ ~d ~,~ a~es. "'
~ ~t~e ~s'made Es way ~st,
a~ ~ ~e am ~W gro~ in
M~. E~t~ ~e inf~tat~
in Min~ta in 1978. ~ ~~.
wes ~.~ a=~ of ~t~s. (Inf~ta-
~ wes ~r~ es ~ture ~s ~ta~
li~ in ~ ~re mi~ of wefl~s
drainS.) ~e estimate f~ ~~-
was ~ 20,~ a~.
Gro~ in Min~ta ~s ~ rea~
~nt, ~~ ~, t~t "Miyata
in a ~ sta~ in Es s~le ~ ~
stye." ~ ~trd may ~ ~ u~
mate a~w~, ~ u~il. ~t ~ f~a~,
~ ~1 t~t ~n ~ d~ ~ to ~y
~ eff~ to ~k~ ~ ~e's
~d.
September 16, 1982
CITY of ORONO
Post Office Box 66. Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323. Municipal Offices
On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka
Lake Minnetonka Conservation District
400 East Lake Street
Wayzata, Minnesota 55391
Attention: Mr. Frank Mixa
Dear Frank,
The City of Orono Council and Staff have reviewed in detail the
L.M.C.D.'s position concerning enforcement of its ordinances by
either prosecution or injunction as outlined by your attorney
Mr. Charles L. LeFever in his letter dated August 2, 1982.
The City of Orono is supportive of the L.M.C.D.'s policies and
procedures and its continuing cooperation and support of the
individual member city's ordinances while enforcing its own
marina and dock regulations.
The City has taken steps to consolidate its own court appearances
and arraignments to prevent needless duplication with court scheduling,
and it is in all of our interest to extend these efforts to the
L.M.C.D. and other agencies to allow all of us full input into matters
of mutual concern.
The City Council in its official capacity has in the past, and will
continue to support the L.M.C.D.'s position to prosecute violations
of the L.M.C.D. code and ordinances enabling the district and cities
to regulate through programs, policies, and ordinances, a plan allowing
the general public use of Lake Minnetonka while preserving the lakes
ability to enhance the natural environmental values of the entire
watershed and area contiguous to it.
Please feel free to contact us through our representative if we can
be of further assistance to you concerning this matter.
~ enson
C~~~~a tor
WRB/msw
CC: LMCD Directors
Ail Member cities Bob Brown, Robert
Gen Olson, Mayor Minnetrista George Pillsbury
BUILDIN(; & ZONING- 473-7357 · ADMINISTRATION & FINANCE - 473-7358 ·
~qO ^ss~:ss,~;
Clayton L. LeFevere
Orono Council
Bruce Malkerson, City Attorney
Searles
PUBLIC WORKS - 473-7359
l.AW OFfiCES
CLAYTON L. LEF,EVER£
HERBERT P. LEF'LER
eJ. DENNIS O'BRIEN
JOHN ~, DEAN
GLENN [. PURDU~
RICHARD J. SCHIEFFER
H~RB[RT P. LEFLCR ~
HARY J. BJORKLUND
JOHN G. ~RESSEL
C I N DY L. LAVO~ATO
HICHA[L A. NA$H
LUK; R. KOMAR[~
JOAN N. [RICKSEN
ELIZABETH D. MORAN
LE:FEVERE, LEFLER, KENNEDY, O'BRIEN & DRAWZ
A PROF£$$1ONAL AS$OCIATIC)N
~000 F'IRST BANK PLACE WEST
HINNEAPOLIS~ MINNESOTA 5540~
TELEPHONE (~lZ) 333-0543
August 2, 1982
Mr. Walter R. Benson
Clerk-Administrator
City of Orono
Box 66
Crystal Bay, MN 55323
Dea~ Mayors, City Attorneys, 'and Administrative Offices:
I have been requested by the Chairman of the Board of the
Lake Minnetonka Conservation District to draft a letter to all
cities who appoint members to the Lake Minnetonka Conservation
District (LMCD) describing the policies and procedures on pros-
ecution of violations of the LMCD Code of Ordinances.
The LMCD is.a public corporation and a political subdivision
of the state which was created pursuant to Laws 1967, Chapter 907
as amended by Laws 1969, Chapter 272. It has the power to enact
regulations which have'the force and effect of ordinances and to
enforce its regulations by injunction or by prosecution as mis-
demeanors.
In most cases, we have found that it is most efficient and
in the best interest of the cities, the LMCD, and the public for
violation of the LMCD Code to be prosecuted by the prosecutors of
the municipalities bordering on the lake. However, in-some cases
we have determined that it is more appropriate that violations be
prosecuted by the LMCD attorney. The following explanation may
be helpful in understanding why the LMCD has chosen to prosecute
in certain cases.
Most misdemeanors occurring on the lake relate to boating
activities. These violations, which are usually enforced by the
county sheriff, involve such things as equipment violations,
moving violations of boats, violations relating to the use of
snowmobiles, fishhouses, and the like. These matters are well
suited for prosecution by the city prosecutor for a number of
reasons including the following:
1. The prosecutor is present at the courthouse as part of
his normal duties. Therefore, the cost to the public of prose-
cuting these violations is reduced.
Page 2
LAW OFFICES
L£FEVERE, LEFLER. KENNEDY, O'BRIEN & DRAWZ
2. Prosecution of these violations does not require an
understanding of the more complex provisions of the LMCD Code.
In fact, such violations often constitute violations of state law
as well.
3. Ordinarily any challenges to the ordinances or consti-
tutional challenges are those with which prosecutors have become
very familiar in the course of their other misdemeanor prosecu-
tions.
4. These violations are'usually one-time violations. In
the event prosecution is unsuccessful, they will not lead to a
failure to stop a continuing violation.
5.. It is unlikely that an unfavorable result will set a
precedent which will have a lake-wide impact in the future.
There are cases, however, which the LMCD has determined are
best prosecuted by the LMCD. These cases-are usually commenced
by issuance of a ticket by the LMCD dock inspector. The viola-
tions have to do with the operation of marinas, or the construction
or maintenance of docks on the lake....~
The reasons for a decision to prosecute these violations in
the name of the LMCD include the following:
1. The LMCD has the authority to enforce its ordinances by
injunction. Often if the violation is a continuing, violation or
involves complex legal issues which are of sufficient importance
to justify seeking a determination in District Court, the LMCD
may choose to seek an injunction rather than to prosecute the
violation as a misdemeanor.
2. A challenge to the ordinance or constitutional challenge
resulting in the invalidation of an ordinance can have an impact,
not only in that municipality, but over the entire lake.
3. In the event of a continuing violation, an unsuccessful
prosecution could result in an inability to bring about the dis-
continuance of the violation.
4. Settlement of these cases is not always a matter of
simple plea bargaining. It may involve additional licensing
consideration by the Board of Directors resulting in reduced or
altered configurations of docks.
5. The provisions of the LMCD Code dealing with marinas
and dock violations are, in many respects, similar to city zoning
codes. These ordinances have been adopted over a number of years
LAW 0 F'F'IC £$
L£FEVERE, LEFLER, KENNEDY, O'BRIEN & DRAWZ
page 3
and, in the process, have become fairly complex. Therefore,
pro,ecu%ion of ~h~e viola%ion~ can involve a ~u~%an~ial Droce~
of education for a prosecutor who is not familiar with these
aspects of the code-.
As a general rule, the procedures followed in the case of
the typical violation ticketed by the county sheriff is handled
in the same manner as other prosecutions in the city; and in
nearly all cases, the LMCD has'no knowledge of the prosecution or
the outcome. This procedure has apparently been very satis-
factory in the past and we do not propose any changes.
Other violations which are commenced by the LMCD dock
inspector are brought by the LMCD in the name of the LMCD by
the.LMCD prosecutor. Although we may not always have done so in
the past, we will attempt in all of these cases in the future to
give the local prosecutor advance notice of such prosecutions
which are being handled by the LMCD.
In the past, the number of violations prosecuted by the LMCD
Over the entire lake has been no m6r~'than approximately 6 cases
a year and many years there have been no such prosecutions.
A decision to prosecute a misdemeanor violation in the name
of the LMCD is made by the. LMCD attorney and the Executive
Director of the LMCD. ~If, upon receiving notice of a pending
prosecution, the city, for any reason, wishes to have the matter
handled by its local prosecutor, please contact me or the Exec-
utive Director as soon as possible. It may be that the District
will nevertheless decide to prosecute the case in the name of the
District. But any such request will be submitted to the Board of
Directors and given careful consideration.
Over the years the relationship between the cities bordering
on Lake Minnetonka and the LMCD in this regard has been an excel-
lent one in nearly all cases. We are hopeful that the spirit of
mutual respect and cooperation that has prevailed over the years
will continue.
If you have any questions on this matter, please feel free
to give me a call.
Very truly yours,
Charles L. LeFevere
CLL:kb
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVA'I ION DISTRICT
AGENDA
Regular Meeting, 8 p.m., Wednesday, September 22, 1982
TONKA BAY VILLAGE HALL
4901 Manitou Road (County Road 19)~ Tonka Bay
2.
3.
4.
Call to Order
Roll Call
Minutes: August 25, 1982
Treasurer's Report
A. Monthly Financial Report
B.. Bills
Committee Reports
A. LAKE USE COMMITTEE
(1) Committee Report
(a) Sp. Event Permit: Stonewings Boat Show
(b) 1982 Buoy Program
(c) North ArmNeck Slow Buoy
(d) Locke Point Buoy
(e) Black Lake Slow Buoy Placement
(f) Wayzata Causeway Slow Buoy
(g) 1983 Slow Buoy Recommendations
(h) Towing Amendment ~
(i) Shore Lighting
(j) Water Patrol Report
(k) Other
(2) Action Item: Sp. Event Permit- Stonewings
(3) Other
WATER STRUCTURES & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE
(1) Committee Report
(a) PH Report: Bruce Frederick
(b) " Lord Fletcher Apts.
(c) September Public Hearings
(d) 1982 Dock Licenses Status
(e) 1983 Dock License Applications
(f) Code Violations Status
(g) Residential vs 4 Boats
(h) Environment: Geese Population
(i) Spring Park RentatOrdinance
(j) Other
(2) Action Items
(3) Other
Code Amendments
A. Special Event Permit Fees (third reading)
B. Towing in QWAreas (second reading)
Other Business
A. Task Force Report
B. Report of Nominating Committee
C. Election of Officers
D. Other
8. Adjournment
9-17-82
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
REGULAR MEETING
TONKA BAY VILLAGE HALL
August 25, 1982
The regular meeting of the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District was
called to order by Chairman Brown at 8:05 p.m. on Wednesday, August 25,
1982 at the Tonka Bay Village Hall.
Members'present: Jerry Johnson (Excelsior), Robert Brown (Greenwood),
Robert Pillsbury (Minnetonka), Jo Ellen Hurr (Orono), Robert Rascop
(Shorewood), Frank Hunt (Spring Park), Ed Bauman (Tonka Bay), and Robert
Slocum (Woodland). Communities represented: Eight (8)°
Hunt Moved, Johnson Seconded that the minutes of the June 23, 1982 meeting
be approved. Motion, Ayes (8), Nays (0).
Hurr Moved, Johnson Seconded that the Treasurer's Report be approved and
the bills, including refund of a levy overpayment, be paid° Motion,
Ayes (8), Nays (0).
LAKE USE COMMITTEE: Pillsbury reported that the committee reviewed Special
Event Permit applications for MORC Station 40 and for Ski Hut, and recom-
mended approval. The committee reviewed a letter regarding inadequate
night lighting of sailboats and lack of proper display of boating regis-
trations, and recommended that a letter be directed for posting to the clubs
and marinas. The committee reviewed another letter which recommended Use
Permits; after noting that all such previous proposals have met with
resistance from the DNR in the legislature due to free fish stocking of the
Lake, the committee'recommended~that the letter be forwarded to the Task
Force. The committee reviewed the Area 4 Cedar Point channel buoy matter
and recommended that the near buoybe moved out into the Lake an additional
50 feet to approximately 150 feet. After discussion of the change of the
North Arm Neck buoys from.Quiet Waters buoys to channel markers, the com-
mittee requested a further review. The committee also requested the Water
Patrol to follow up on the missing buoys (WaYZata Bay Slow buoy as'well as
the point buoy off Locke Point), and to follow up on the alignment and
effectiveness of the Slow buoys in Black Lake. The committee reviewed the
towing amendment which the Board returned at the last meeting; it was noted
that the modification would have the effect of preventing any recreational
towing in currently restricted QW areas, and the committee recommended that
amendment for'first reading. The question of LMCD's approving a dredging
permit on-North Arm was reviewed; the District does not ordinarily object
to maintenance dredging permits, and makes recommendations to the DNR when
requested.
· The Water Patrol reported to the committee that activity was down the first
half of this year, primarily due to the heavy snow and to the late spring
opening; with the addition of Bill Chandler as deputy, the Water Patrol now
has three full time deputies, which include Doug Norberg and Acting Sergeant
Dave Rasmussen. Rasmussen noted that on busy Saturdays and Sundays ten
patrol boats could be used on the Lake.
CALL TO
ORDER
ATTENDANCE
MINUTES
TREASURER'S
REPORT
USE PERMITS
REQUEST
BUOYS:
NORTH ARM
NECK,
MISSING, &
BLACK LAKE
DREDGING
POLICY
W.Po
REPORT
LMCD Board Minutes
August 25, 1982
Page 2
Hurt Moved, Rascop Seconded that the committee report be accepted. Motion,
Ayes (8), Nays (0).
Johnson Moved, Rascop Seconded that the MORC Station 40 Special Event Permit
application be approved. Motion, Ayes (8), Nays (0) o
SP EVENT:
MORC &
Hurt Moved, Johnson Seconded that the Ski Hut Special Event Permit appli-
cation be approved. Motion, Ayes (8), Nays (0).
SKI HUT'
Pillsbury Moved, Bauman Seconded that a letter be directed to marina operators BOAT LIGHT~
and clubs encouraging them to advise their.patrons and members of required REGISTRATI£
night lighting on bo~ts, and the required display of boating registration.
Motion, Ayes (8), Nays (0).
No action was taken on the Berg letter proposing access permits by lottery.
Bauman Moved, Johnson Seconded that the Cedar Point'(Area 4) near channel
buoy be moved from 100 feet to 150 feet into the Lake on a temporary basis
for the remainder, of this season and for next summer, and that the matter
be reviewed at the end of next season. Motion, Ayes (8), Nays (0).
CEDAR POINt
BUOY
WATER STRUCTURES & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE: Rascop reported that public
hearing reports were reviewed for Frederick,'Park Hill II, Greenhouse Eatery,
City of Greenwood, and Lord Fletcher Apartments; recommendations were made
for Frederick to deny because of the use of dockage by non residents, and
that the city be contacted relative to any agreement for number of boats;
for Greenwood to approve; and for Lord Fletcher Apartments to deny because
of the WAU rental question. Variance orders were reviewed for Windward,
Wayzata Yacht Club, and Driftwood Shores Association; Wayzata Yacht Club and
Driftwood. Shores orders were forwarded to:the Board. Future public hearings
were reviewed as well as the statuS'of 1982 dock licenses, vioYations, and
several dock rental questions. After further discussion on the residential
dock rental matter, the committee continued the matter to consider reducing
the number o.f allowable boats'from 4 to 3 and/or to provide for some
limitation of horsepower.
4 BOATS
CONSIDERED
The committee reviewed the proposed modification to the Watershed District's
operating plan for Grays Bay dam, and recommended that a letter be sent to
MCWD recommending that Item 6 of Section II - Management Goals (to imProve
or maintain conditiQns on the lake and the creek, at a given lake level
elevation, over those which existed prior to construction of the control
structure) be advanced and. incorporated into'Section I - Management PoliCy,'
and that the management goals be prioritized with Item6, above, being, the
number one priority.
Hurt Moved, Johnson Seconded that the committee report be accepted. Motion,
Ayes (8), Nays (0).
Hunt Moved, Pillsbury Seconded that the Frederick application for transfer
of the Cady license and for an increase from 5 to 6 WAUs - no Special Density
permit being required inasmuch as the application meets the 1/50 rule - be ~
tabled to study the owner-but-not-resident matter. Motion, Ayes (4), Nays
(4), Bauman, Johnson, Rascop and Slocum voting Nay. Motion failed.
LMCD Board Minutes
August 25, 1982
Page 3
Slocum Moved, Rascop Seconded that the Frederick application for transfer
of the Cady license and for an increase from 5 to 6 WAUs be approved.
Motion, Ayes (4), Nays (4), Hunt, Hurr, Johnson and Pillsbury voting Nay.
Motion failed.
Bauman Moved, Johnson Seconded that the Frederick application for transfer
of the Cady license and for an increase from 5 to 6 WAUs be denied. Motion
Ayes (4), Nays (4), Bauman, Brown, Rascop and Slocum voting Nay. Motion
failed - returned to committee.
Hurt Moved, Johnson Seconded that the amendment application to the City
of Greenwood dock license be approved. Motion, Ayes (8), Nays (0).
Rascop Moved, Johnson-Seconded that the Special Density Permit, DMA~ and
license amendment applications for Lord Fletcher Apartments be laid over
a month to clarify the WAU rental matter. Motion, Ayes (8), Nays (0).
Bauman Moved, Johnson Seconded that'the variance Order for the Wayzata
Yacht Club be ordered. Motion, Ayes (8), Nays (0).
Johnson Moved, Bauman Seconded'that the variance Order for Driftwood
Shores Association be ordered. Motion, Ayes (8), Nays (0).
Hurr Moved, Rascop Seconded in order to reinforce'the LMCD position re-
garding the proposed modification to the Watershed's operating plan for
Grays Bay dam, that it be communicated to the MCWD to stress that the Lake
level is the number one priority of the control structure, and to recommend
adherence to specific levels of the Lake.as expressed in LMCD Resolution
No. 27 of January 25, 1978. Motion, Ayes (8), Nays (0).
CODE AMENDMENTS:. Johnson Moved, Pillsbury.Seconded'that the second
reading of the proposed Code amendment regarding Special Event Permit
application fees be accepted. Motion, Ayes (8), Nays (0).
The first reading was given of the proposed Code amendment which was
intended to bring water skiingrestrictions into compliance with other
sections of the Code, but which would prevent any recreational towing in
currently restricted QW areas.
SlocumMoved, Bauman Seconded that an amendment be drafted deleting this
section from the Code. Motion, Ayes (5), Nays (3), Hurr, Pillsbury and
Rascop voting Nay ....
OTHER BUSINESS: Brown Moved, Pillsbury Seconded that the Executive
Director's 1983 salary be'increased 5.8% to $32,760, and that the
· Secretary/Clerk's I983 salary be increased 7.8% to $6.85/hr. Motion,
Ayes (7), Nays (0), Abstains (1), Hunt abstaining.
Brown reported that the Governor's Task Force to study Lake access has
FREDERICK
DOCK
LICENSE
GREENWOOD
AMENDMENT
LORD FLET(
APTS.
AMENDMENT
VARIANCE
ORDERS:
W.Y.C. &
DRIFTWOOD
SHORES
DAM
OPERATING
PLAN
CODE
AMENDMENTS:
FEES FOR
SP EVENTS
TOWING IN
Q.w.
SALARIES
LMCD Board Minutes
August 25, 1982
Page 4
been directing its initial efforts to orient non-Lake-user members by
touring on the land and on the Lake. Their October meeting is expected
to be held at the ~MCD office.
Excelsior and Tonka Bay letters relative to LMCD prosecution of ordinance
violations were forwarded to the attorney for appropriate response under
LMCD policy.
ADJOURNMENT: Pillsbury Moved, Hunt Seconded at 10:10 p.m. that the
meeting be adjourned. Motion, Ayes (8), Nays (0).
TASK
FORCE
PROSECUTIOI
Submitted by:
Robert P. Rascop, Secretary
Approved by:
Robert Tipton Brown, Chairman
McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS ! LAND SURVEYORS :~ PLANNERS
September 17, 1982
Reply To:
12800 Industrial Park Boulevard
Plymouth, Minnesota 55441
(612) 559-3700
Mr. Tim Alber
Hardrives, Inc.
7200 Hemlock Lane No.
Maple Grove, MN 55369
Subject:
Mound, Minnesota
1981 Street Project
File #5387 & #5388
Dear Tim:
We are writing this letter to express our disappointment at your
unwillingness to complete the 1981M6und. Street Project. Several meetings have
been arranged, many phone calls have been made, promises have been given, but
still you have not done anything to finish the work.
On 3uly 2 this year, we had a meeting set up, at your convenience, to dis-
cuSs and schedule completion of the 1981 Street Project. You did not make it
to the meeting and in a call to your office a few days later, we set up another
meeting for 3uly 9.
On July 9, we did meet ano showed you the portions of the project which
were not satisfactory. .You told us they would be corrected almost
immediately. 5omc pathching was done relatively soon thereafter, but the
overlays, curb replacement, removal of stockpiles, tree replacement, and seal-
coating still remains to'be done.
The areas to be overlayed were marked up on August 3 and nothing has been
done to those areas as of this date. Also, sealcoating has to be done when
weather permits and it is getting late in the year for this. On Monday, August
30, in a phone conversation, you made a promise of THIS WEEK for the completion
of your work.
We remind you that your year of warranty begins on the day the project has
been officially accepted as completed. At this time, this project is not
acceptable.
Very truly yours,
McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC.
William H. McCombs, P.E.
WHM: bb
cc: 3on Elam/
Curt Pearson
5101' parkdale drive~'~
st. louis park, minnesotaI'
554161
telephone 546-2334 .
September 20, 1982
~r. Jon Elam, Mahager
City of Mound
5341 MaYwood Road
Mound, MN 55364
Dear Mr. Elam:
Phis is to keep you apprised of progress toward 'the impending merger
)f Suburban Public Health Nursing Service, Inc. and the Visiting
~urse Service.
~e have retained legal counsel to advise regarding the individual
~orporations' and the merged corporation's rights and responsibilities.
~e have developed a table of organization for phase implementation
over a period of three years) for clinical services which holds pro-
ise for maximizing direct service time.
?rom among many suggestions for a name for the new organization, we
~avored Metropolitan Visiting Nurse Association. This seems to pro-
;ide for possible new markets in an expanded geographic area and
)rings us into the fold of historically recognized and effective
%ursing associations, i.e. VNAs.
~e have signed an Agreement of Intent to merge and from here on in,
~ill be meeting jointly with the VNS Board of Directors. At such time
~s the decision to merge is finalized and implementation initiated,
~our SPHNS Board of Directors will continue its full membership as
~embers of the Board of the new agency. There is general agreement
:hat a member of the current SPHNS Board of Directors will serve as
:he first president of the new Metropolitan Visiting Nurse Service
Board of Directors.
~e will report again as progress indicates. May we ask you to share
this information with the Mayor and members of your city council.
Phank you.
Sincerely,
Josephine Nunn, President
SPHNS Board of DireCtors
supported by tax funds from municipalities of suburban henne~in county & the united way
THOMAE WURST. P.A.
CURTIS A. PEARSON. P.A.
JOSEPH E. HAMILTON, P.A.
THOMAS F. UNDERWOOD. P.A.
JAMES D. LARSON. P.A.
JOHN J. BOWDEN
LAW OFFICE5
WURST, PEARSON. HAMILTON, LARSON ~: UNDERWOOD
A I~AI~TNERSHIP INCLUDIN,~ PSOFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS
1 1OO FIRST BANK PLACE WEST
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 5E~O2
September 2, 1982
TELEPHONE
(612) 338..420O
Bruce D. Campbell, Hearing Examiner
State Office of Administrative Hearings
400 Summit Bank Building
310 South Fourth Avenue
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55415
Re: City of Mound- Continental Telephone
P407/GR-81-700
PUC-82-061-BC
Dear Mr. Campbell:
Enclosed please find the Initial Brief of the City of Mound.
served upon all parties of record.
Very truly yours,
Copies have been
JDL:enm
Enclosure
cc: All parties of record
James D. Larson
STATE OF MINNESOTA
OFFICE OF HEARING EXAMINERS
FOR THE MINNESOTA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
In the Matter of the Petition of
Continental Telephone Company
for Authority to' Change Certain
of its Telephone Rates for Retail
Customers in the State of Minnesota
MPUC Docket No. P-407/GR-81-700
HE Docket No. PUC-82-061-BC
~ BRIm~
OF
THE ClTY OF MOUI',ID;--
WURST, PEARSON, H_&Mll.TON
LAP, SON & UNDERWOOD
James D. Larson
Attorneys for The City of Mound
1100 First Bank Place West
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
(612) 338-4200
In its initial brief the City of Mound w/i/ addre four L ue ..
Whether the Company's proposed test year provides a proper
basis for setting rates.
Whether materials and supplies are properly includible in rate
base where ratepayer-supplied funds are used to finance
them,
Whether the 'Company should earn a return on committed
construction projects.
Whether payron expense should be adjusted for 1982 wage
increases where 1981 revenues are used to calculate the
revenue deficiency.
TEST mR
Mound witness Dahlen has challenged the Company's test year methodology. The
thrust of Mr. Dahlen's challenge is that the proposed test year does not provide a
proper basis for setting rates because it is not representative of the period for which
rates will be in effect. :
In analyzing Mr. Dahlen's position on this issue and the Company's methodology,
it is appropriate to first determine generally what a test year is supposed to accomplish
and how the Minnesota Commission has dealt with the appropriate test year issue.
Once the purpose of a test year is known, one can then look to see whether the
Company's test year methodology accomplishes that purpose.
The Purpose of a Test Year
· Mr. Dahlen explained the purpose of a test year when he described the objective
of a proper test year:
"The objective is to measure or estimate all elements of
revenue, expense and rate base to a uniform time period
which is representative of the period for which rates will
be in effect." (Mound Exhibit 36, at 5)
-2-
The Minnesota Commission has cited approvingly a New York case where the
New York Commission stated:
~Our goal in setting rates would be to ascertain, as
best we could what the utility's revenues, operating expenses
and conditions would be in the period for which we are
setting rates: the first twelve months after the new rates
become effective.~ Re Test Periods in Rate Cases (NY
1977) 22 PUR4th $11.
It seems clear from the foregoing that the test year should be a period which
is representative of the period for which new rates will be in effect, or the first
twelve months after the new rates become effective. Neither Mr. Dahlen nor the
New York Commission indicates specifically how to determine a proper test period.
They agree only that it must be representative of the period when. the rates become
effective. The purpose of the test year then is to provide a twelve month period
representative of the first twelve months after the rate increase becomes'effective.
Knowing the purpose of the test year, it is approp.riate to look at the Company's
test year to determine whether that purpose is met.
The Company Test Year is not Representative
of the First Twelve Months after the
'Effective Date of the Rate Increase
New rates became effective on March 19, 1982. -An appropriate test year would
develop revenues, operating expenses and conditions representative of the twelve month
period commencing March 19, 1982. The appropriate inquiry on the test year issue is
whether the Company test year yields revenues, operating expenses and conditions
representative of the twelve month period commencing March 19, 1982. Mr. Dahlen
has' reviewed the Company's 1981 test year and has concluded that it is not repre-
sentative.
-3-
The thrust of Mr. Dahlen's objections to Company test year methodology goes
to t-he fact that the Company's adjustments to its 1981 test year are selective and
result in a bias toward higher revenue requirements. Mr. Dahlen Captured this bias
in his surrebuttal testimony where he pointed out the inconsistency in including 1982
committed construction in. rate base, a so-called "known and measurable" rate base
change, while failing to consider 1982 depreciation. The Company included committed
construction which increases its revenue requirement while overlooking depreciation,
also a completely "known and measurable" 1982 rate base change, whose inclusion
would offset or reduce rate base.
Another example from the income statement relates to the Company's use of
1982 payroll expense while using year-end 1981 local service and toll revenues. Again,
~e 1982 payroll expense is greater than 1981 year end. Proper matching of expenses
with revenues would require the use of 1982 projections for local service and toll
revenues. Rather, the Company used year-end ~981 rev"enues with minor adjustments
for rategroup reclassifications, upgrades and toll adjustments. Further, the positive
revenue impact of a projected increase in main stations was entirely overlooked. Here
again the bias is toward an increased revenue requirement.
Clearly the Company's 1981 test year, updated with only its select-ed "known
and measurable" changes, is not representative of the period for which new rates are
effective. Rate base is overstated. Expenses are overstated. Income is understated.
As Mr. Dahlen testified, this overstatement or bias toward a higher revenue
requirement results from selective mismatching of selected revenue, expense and rate
base items. Mr. Dahlen emphasized the importance of measuring or estimating all
elements of revenue, expense and rate base for a uniform time period. Mr. Dahlen
noted: .
-4-
"To be done fairly and accurately all elements must be
adjusted to a single point in time or measured for a common
period.~ (Exhibit 36, at 5)
Mr. Dahlen suggested that the Commission might use either historical year 1981
or historical year 1981 adjusted to year-end revenue and expense levels, and year-end
rate base. Mr. Dahlen also suggested that the Company might refile using a future
test year using projected revenues, expenses and rate base. (Exhibit 36, at 5)
Commission Precedent
In the last Continental filing, GR-79-500, the Company filed a calendar year
1978 test year, adjusted to year end levels, and further adjusted for known and
measurable changes associated with exchange upgrades occurring in 1979. The PDS
filed and recommended the use of a test year ending August 31, 1979. The Company
updated its test year to be consistent with the PDS 8-31-79 test year and agreed with
the PDS that this would be an appropriate test year. Several issues remained in that
case relating to what was appropriate for inclusion in rate base.
With respect to plant in service the Company included committed construction
required to complete the Service Improvement Program (SIP), including construction
expenditures to be incurred beyond the 8-31-79 end of test year. The PDS opposed
the Company proposal for the same reasons Mound opposes a similar proposal in this
(~aseo
The Commission allowed inclusion of the SIP expenditures using the following
rationale:
"Since the Commission was in large measure respon-
sible for the inauguration of the Service Improvement
Program and the SIP Agreement, the Commission agrees with
the Examiner and Company that rate base recognition must
be given to the culmination of the vast construction program
undertaken under the terms of that Agreement. The extra-
ordinary amount of expenditures relating to these upgrades,
-5-
occurring within a reasonable time after the end of the test
period, should be recognized as a known change for the
purposes of this rate ease. The Commission, therefore,
includes as plant in service the expenditures associated with
the 15 exchanges that were upgraded prior to December 31,
1979, (at least as far as upgrades are concerned); the Commis-
sion will also extend Depreeiation Reserve to that same date
as will be explained in a subsequent section of the rate base
discussion.~ (79-500, at 11)
The current proceeding is easily distinguished from the last. The Company no
longer claims that its committed constrUction is related to completion of SIP. Moreover,
the Commission extended depreciation reserve in the last case to provide a matching
of depreciation reserve with plant in service. The Company has not addressed that
problem in this filing, and the mismatching which concerned the Commission in the
last case is again present in this filing.
The identical issue was raised by the South Dakota commission staff in Re
Minnesota Gas Company, 32 PUR4th 1 (1979). In that case Minnegasco used a 1978
average test year and adjusted it to year-end 1978 levels: using actual 1978 end-of-year
balances. Then Minnegasco made adjustments to reflect 1979 plant additions which
were ~known and measurable."- The Staff opposed the adjustments, pointing out that
each such adjustment for a known and measurable change must be accompanied by
corresponding adjustments to assure that costs and revenues continue to match. The
Commission observed that Minnegasco's use of adjustments related to projected 1979
plant in service amounted to the use of a future or projected test year, and that
Minnegasco's proposed adjustments violated the fundamental ratemaking principle of
matching.
Mr. Dahlen's objections parallel those raised by the South Dakota Staff and
recognized by the South Dakota Commission. Making only an increase to rate base
for post 'test year plant ddditions fails to eeeognize the changes in expenses and
-6-
revenues which must flow from that increase and results in a mismatch of revenues
and expenses~
The Minnesota Commission has indicated a clear preference for a historical test
year over a future test year. In the 1977 Bell ease, Docket P-421/GR-77-1509, 29
PUR4th 7, Bell filed a future test year. While recognizing that it could not force a
utility to file based on any particular test year, without regulations on the subject,
the Commission noted:
"First, we recognize that we cannot force the company to
· file based on any particular test year without adopting
regulations on this subject. However, the company's freedom
to choose the test year it deems appropriate does not mean
that we must accept the test year. The company has a
heavy burden of proof to show that the test year is appro-
priate. Where the company's proposed test year is based on
projections of projections such as is the case here, we become
even more dubious concerning its propriety. In most utility
cases for which we have accepted future test years, the
company has had a track record which enabled us to assess
the accuracy of its budgeting process. Here we are called
upon to adopt a future test year which was based on projec-
tions rather than a budget by which the company must live
or to which the company must conform. We also note that
the advent of rates under bond gives telephone companies
substantial additional protection against attrition not pre-
viously available.
All of these reasons seem to indicate that it would be more
appropriate to use an historical test year than a future test
year for telephone companies such as Northwestern Bell.
However, if the company decides to propose a future test
year in its next general rate increase filing, the projections
and assumptions used in developing the test year .should be
set forth in detail in its filing. In this connection, the
company might do well to follow the approach for developing
the assumptions recommended by the New York State Public
Service Commission in Re Test Periods in Rate Cases (NY
1977) 22 PUR4th 611." (29 PUR4th, at 12)
In the subsequent Bell case, in Re Northwestern Bell Telephone Company,
P421/GR-79-388, 37 PUR4th 1 (1980), Bell used calendar year 1979 as a test year and
put rates into effect in July, 1979. When Bell fried, it used actual January, 1979 data
-7-
and eleven months of projeeted data. Bell's rebuttal ineluded updated data eonsisting
of ? months actual, August preliminary, and 4 months projected data° The purpose
of the update was to Provide for actual changes that occurred since the filing;, and
during the period new rates are in effect. Such changes would always be present in
filings based upon a historic test year.
In the test year context, the Minnesota and South Dakota CommiSsions have
allowed ~known and measurable~ changes to test year data when necessary to reflect
changes resulting from actual data. In the Minnegasco case, supra, the Commission
allowed changes to reflect actual end-of-year figures when they became available.
And in the Bel~. case, the Commission allowed revisions to the filing to reflect actual
data. In the last Continental ease, 'the ~Commission allowed post test year plant
additions in rate base only because it had ordered that the investments be made and
had required an adjustment to depreciation to provide proper matching.
From the foregoing it is clear that neither Commission allows changes to test
period data for projected changes beyond the test period absent special circumstances.
Both Commissions equate projections beyond the test period with a future test period
methodology.
Recommendation
The problems voiced by the Minnesota and South Dakota Commissions are similar
to those identified by Mr. Dahlen. The Company did not present data from which a
complete projected or future test period could be developed. Accordingly, Mr. Dahlen
has recommended that-the Company use 1981 year-end normalized levels of revenue,
expenses and rate base. This would produce a matching at year-end 1981 of revenues
with expenses and rate base. A test year with revenues, expenses and rate base at
· 12-31-81 levels would be most representative of the period for which new rates are
-8-
effective. The City of Mound would urge the Hearing Examiner to adopt Mr. Dahlen's
recommendation and order the Company to use as a test year calendar year 1981
adjusted to year-end normalized levels of revenue, expenses and rate base.
MATERIALS AND SUPPLIES
Mr. Dahlen recommended that materials and supplies should be excluded from
rate base because the Company has not demonstrated that investor supplied funds are
required to finance materials and supplies. Mr. DahIen's recommendation is based upon
his analysis of the Company's cash working capital as the source of funds for materials
and supplies. The Company did not provide a lead-lag study. A lead-lag study is the
Commission's preferred method for determining working capital. Using a balance sheet
approach, Mr. Dahlen calculated the Company's cash working capital requirement over
the last three calendar years as follows:
12/31/79 12/31/80 12/31/80
(1) (1) (1)
Current assets $ 7,245,283 5,111,230 6,453,582
Less: Current liabilities 23,720,916 10,183,433 10,300,170
Plus: Notes payable 14~028t220 . 3~927t350 . 1~.126~500
Cash working capital $ (2~447~413). (1~144~843) _(2~720~088)
(Exhibit 37)
Mr. Dahlen explained why it is necessary to reduce rate base where required
cash working capital is actually negative:
"Negative cash working capital indicates an influx of non-
investor supplied funds because financing provided by current
liabilities exceeds uses to which these funds are put in the
form of current assets. The excess is a component of rate
base which is supplied by creditors and should not be used
as a basis for calculating investor returns." (Exhibit 23, at
10)
-9-
When his initial testimony was filed, Mr. Dahlen had not received sufficient
data from the Company to determine the 12-31-81 cash working capital balance.
Moreover, Mr. Dahlen recognized the limitations of the balance sheet approach in the
fact that year-end amounts do not recognize seasonal or daily changes in the account
balances that make up cash working capital. Accordingly, Mr. Dahlen recommended
that the Company be ordered to perform a lead-lag study before filing its next ease,
and he recommended that materials and supplies be removed from rate base since they
obviously were not acquired with investor supplied funds.
In his surrebuttal testimony, Mr. Dahlen was able to present the results of a
December 31, 1981 balance sheet analysis. This analysis was possible by using additional
information obtained through the discovery process which was not available when initial
testimony was filed. When the December 31, 1981 balance sheet produced a negative
$2,720,088 cash working capital, Mr. Dahlen recommended that this amount be deducted
from rate base. Mr. Dahlen testified:
~A balance sheet analysis of CTCIVPs cash working capital
shows a negative balance for the last three years. Because
CTCM is using a 12/31/81 rate base, the Company proposed
rate base should be reduced by $2,720,088 (adjusted for
jurisdictional allocation) to reflect negative cash working
_eap!tal as of' 12/31/81. This will protect ratepayers from
paying a return on a noninvestor-supplied source of funds."
(Exhibit 36, at 9)
Mr. Dahlen's recommendation is consistent with a long line of Commission eases
wherein the Commission has reduced rate base to reflect a non-investor source of
funds. In the last Continental ease, GR-?9-500, the Commission excluded materials
and supplies from rate base after finding that the Company had not proved that the
investment resulted from invested funds.
Moreover, the burden is on CTCM to establish the level of investor-supplied
· capital. Where the balance sheet shows negative cash working capital, and the Company
has failed to show otherwise, Mr. Dahlen's adjustments must be made.
The elimination of materials and supplies must be made to reflect the fact that
investorTsupplied funds were not required or used to make those purchases. This item
was erroneously added to rate base by CTCM in the amount of $538,651. This amount
must 'be subtracted from rate base to correct the error. Exhibit 24 (DOD-3) shows
that this adjustment reduces the revenue requirement by $108,953.
Once materials and supplies are eliminated from rate base, it is necessary to
reduce rate base by $2,720,088 to reflect the fact that the Company actually has $2.7
mKlion of its capital provided from non-investor funds.
Both adjustments are necessary. The first to eliminate an erroneous addition
to rate base, and the second to reflect the reality that $2.7 million of CTCM capital
actually came from non-investor sources.
COMMITTED CONSTRUCTION
CTCM has also included in 12/31/81 rate base an amount for eonstruetion projects
to be undertaken in 1982. Mr. Dahlen reeommended that eommitted construction
projects not be included in rate base for two reasons:
1)
the dollar amount on which the Company desires to earn a
return is not telephone plant during the test year; and
2)
if net telephone plant is increased for 1982 Committed
construction, the increase in committed construction must
be offset with decreases to rate base such as 1982 depreci-
ation on net telephone plant. (Exhibit 23, at 11)
Mr. Dahlen testified that adding 1982 committed construction, without regard
for 1982 depreciation, is highly distortive. A hypothetical used by Mr. Dahlen in his
surrebuttal testimony shows clearly how the Company has overstated or distorted rate
base:
"Using Mr. Maunder's analogy, the Company's proposal is like
having $1,000 on deposit in a ssyings account in 1981 (tele-
phone plant) planning on adding a total of $30 at various
times in 1982 (committed construction) while knowing that
a total of $100 will be removed from the account in equal
monthly amounts in 1982 (depreciation). The Company
requests a return not on $1,000 - the account balance in
1981, not 'on $930 - the balance at the end of 1982,. but
rather on $1,030, an amount greater than the account balance
will be at any time in 1982 or 1981. Like the owner of a
savings aeeount~ the Company should not be permitted to
earn a return on funds which are not invested." (Exhibit
36, at 7)
Mr. Dahlen's Exhibit 24, DOD-4, shows that including committed construction
without regard for depreciation distorts or overstates rate base by $10.9 million.
Mr. Dahlen recommends that 1982 committed construction be eliminated from
rate base. This recommendation is consistent with the statutory requirement that
investors not be allowed a return on investments that have not yet been made, and
eliminates the gross distortion present in the Company filing.
OPERATING EXPENSES
In the area of operating expenses, as with rate :base, the Company has made
selective post test year adjustments tending to increase expenses and increase the
revenue requirement, while overlooking equally "known and measurable~ increases .in
revenues. One example of overlooked revenues is main stations. On cross-examination
it was discovered that main stations will likely increase for 1982, thus increasing
revenues. This increase was not recognized and operating income was, therefor.e,
understated. In contrast, payroll expense was increased to reflect post test year wage
increases. Using 1982 wage rates without using 1982 revenues results in a mismatch
of revenues and the expense of producing those revenues. This is yet another example
of the mismatching which results from adjusting test year data for post test year
changes.
Mr. Dahlen recommended that the Company's payroll expense be changed to
eliminate 1982 wage increases. In Exhibit 24, DOD-6, Mr. Dahien calculated a $1,021,514
adjustment to revenue requirements was necessary to reflect the elimination of 1982
wage increases.
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION
In summary, the thrust of Mound's objections to the Company filing is centered
in the Company's selective changes to test year data for post test year changes, and
the bias toward a higher revenue requirement associated with those changes. Each of
the recommendations of Mr. Dahlen is directed towards the elimination of that bias
by removing, the post test year adjustment and returning the filing to an end-of-year
basis.
With respect to the issue of an appropriate test year, Mr. Dahlen recommended
the use of historic 1981 test year, adjusted to year-end 1981 levels, as done by CTCM
in its March 19, 1982 revised filing.
Mr. Dahlen further recommended that rate base be adjusted back to year-end
1981 levels, by eliminating 1982 committed construction from rate'base, by eliminating
materials and supplies as non-investor supplied, and by reducing rate base by $2.7
million to recognize a non-investor source of funds in that amount.
Similarly, Mr. Dahlen recommended that operating expenses and revenues be
adjusted to 12-31-81 levels. This would require the removal of 1982 wage increases.
For the reasons cited above, the City of Mound supports Mr. Dahlen's recom-
mendations in this proceeding and respectfully urges their adoption by the Examiner
and the Commission.
Respectfully submitted,
~LARSON & UNDI~RWOOD
1100 First Bank Place West
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55042
(612) 338-4200
Attorneys for The City of Mound
-13-
CITY of MOUND
5341 MAYWOOD ROAD
MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364
(6~2) 472-115~
September 3, 1982
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Park Commission
Park Director
Stairway Request Avocet and Bluebird (South)
As requested at the AuguSt meeting, I have examined the stair-
way situation at the south end at Avocet and Bluebird.
There are no.stairways at the end of either land, but approxi-
mately 100 feet.to.the east of each are wooden stairs. Access
to the stairs is unobstructed and the stairs are in good con-
dition.
Chris Bollis
Park Director
CB/ms
SEPTEMBER 1982
WESTONKA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
"CHAMBER WAVES"
The next Chamber of Commerce General Membership meeting will be Wednesday evening,
September 15, 1982 at Lord Fletcher's,. Spring Park. Social hour is 6:00 P.M. to 7:00
P.M. with dinner served at 7:00 P.M. Our guest speaker will be Howard Sundby. Plan
now to attend and make your reservation by calling t.he Chamber office, .472-6780, by
September 13, 1982. The cost is $8.50 per person.
PRESIDENT'S LETTER:
Your Chamber of Commerce moves along - mixing business with pleasure. We had the Sec-
ond Annual Westonka 'Chamber of Commerce Golf Tournament on August 26th. It wa§ a great
success, with commradire more than making up for the rain. Out of the golf itself-
lots of prizes, trophies and winners'. Special thanks to Jack Diesing, Ron Norstrem,
and Chip Grey, Red Oak Golf Course, for making Golf Day a success. Thanks too, for
everyone attending.
Our next meeting, September 15, is for your convenience - an evening meeting~
See YOU there~
Jerry Longpre, President
MANAGER' S CORN ER:
I expect the pace of Chamber activities to accelerate as we head into fall. We are
currently forming committees, for a number of upcoming events. It's fun to have people
coming to me to say, "What can I do to help?" or "How can I become involved?". As the
concept of a Westonka Area Chamber of Commerce becomes more familiar and accepted, we,
as merchants and residents, will have the benefit of a very strong rallying, point with-
in our four communities. However, the development of an effective Chamber of Commerce
.requires a large member base and a real committment to business and community needs.
~ithout clear communication, it's hard to meet the needs of the business community.
Therefore, attendance at meetings or involvement in committees is critical. In an
organization such as this, communication is essential. That is why the Board of Dir-
ectors has chosen to, for the present, to send this publication {Chamber Waves) to all
area businesses, non-members included.
By the way, half year memberships are'~va~l~ble~ If you are interested in what the
Chamber can do for you and what you can do for your business and community, please
take a moment to call me at the Chamber office - 472-6780.
Chic Remein, Chamber Manager
The following letter, from Gary Mayer, School Board Chairman, is of such importance,
it is being printed in its entirety.
Chic Remien, ExeCutive Director
Westonka Chamber of Commerce
Mound MN 55364
PLEASE READ THIS LETTER TO YOUR GENERAL ASSEMBLY MEMBERS --
Dear Members:
On August 16 the school board passed a revised smoking and tobacco use policy. This
Page 2.
policy, we believe, will put some teeth into our efforts to reduce smokihg and tobacco
use on school p perty.
OFor the first time Juvenile Court Judge Oleisky has agreed to take firm action regarding
smoking/tobacco use on school property. In addition the Minnetrista Police Force has
agreed to cite students after the third offence.· Judge Oleisky has made it clear that·
he intends to fine students for violating state law.
We believe this school policy will strengthen our hand for some disciplinary problems,
reduce tardiness, and definitely ease our maintenance problems at some school buildings.
Accordingly, the school board is asking the business community to increase your efforts
to reduce the availability of cigarettes and other tobacco products -- mainly snuff.
We are not convinced this program will·· reduce smoking. Our inten, however, is to
eliminate it as much as possible on school property. At the same time the school board
has authorized additional educational efforts to warm students at very young a'ges about
· the inherent dangers of smoking. , "
I'm sure all parents will appreciate your cooperation in these effort~... Thank you again
on behalf of the Westonka School Board.
Yours truly,
Gary K. Mayer
School~ Board Chairman
NEW MEMBERS:
We welcome as a new member to the Wes~onka Chamber of Commerce: Westonka Interiors,
Navarre ....
" CHAMBER RETREAT; WINTER SOCIAL:"
Plans are now in process for a second annual Chamber retreat. We are also planning a
winter social to be held in January. Anyone who desires input or would be willing to
work on either of these committees, pleas6 contact the Chamber office (472-6780) or
attend the general meeting, September 15th. ..
You are an important part of your Westonka Area Chamber of Commerce'."
"WORKING TOGETHER''·
Your Westonka Area Chamber
of Commerce Board of Directors
RW/sg
SIX MONTH PROGRAM HIGHLIGHTS
HENNEPIN COUNTY
TRANSPORTATION
MARCH - AUGUST 1982
Dear Friends:
3614 Bryant Av. S.
Minneapolis, MN 55409
827d
In September 1980, the Hennepin County Social Services Trans-
portation Task Force was formed to examine the transportation
system for elderly and elderly handicapped residents of Hennepin
County. Participants in the task force included representatives
of non-profit transportation providers, taxi companies, human
service councils, MTC, MNDOT, and other human service agencies.
The task force found resources to be unevenly distributed
geographically and marked in many cases by overlap among providers.
The task force sought a "lead" agency to coordinate transportation
services and recommended in October 1981, that Senior Citizen Centers
of Greater Minneapolis serve this coordinating function. Approved
by the Metropolitan Council, the Hennepin County Transportation
Coordination Program officially began on January 1, 1982.
By the middle of February, staff were "on board" and the program
was underway. This report reflects significant~activities during
the first six months of the program. The following activities are
listed under their respective program objectives.
/~~r~or~gram Manager ~otgh~a~mFa~stan~t'
OBJECTIVE 1: Establish a program advisory council
1. Two county wide task force meetings were held in 1982 to discuss
· program goals and objectiges. 'Planning also began to develop a
permanent program advisory council.
2. Advisory council and sUbc6mmit%ee job descriptions were developed.
3. A nominating committee was formed to develop representation.criteria,
in addition to a slate of candidates.
4. The last meeting of the Hennepin County Transportation Task Force
took place April 15, 1982. At this meeting the slate of candidates
nominated to the advisory council were voted into place. This
meeting also included a discussion of priority issues needing to.
be addressed by the advisory council.
5. The Hennepin County Transportation Coordination Program Advisory
Council met May 3, 1982. Since this time issues discussed and
Sponsored by
Senior Citizen Centers of Greater Minneapolis, Inc.
dealt with include:
- Needs/issues of drivers
- Purchase of service contracts
- Advisory Council goals
- Officer elections
- Metro Mobility
- Community,senior,senior handicapped needs
- Transportation provider needs
- Volunteer recruitment
OBJECTIVE 2:
Establishing regular contacts with transportation
providers, planning~or~anizations, elected officials,
administrators, and other .private and public agencies
to facilitate communication and gain a better under-
standing of community service needs and resources.
Since late February program staff have visited or met with a
minimum of 60 people representing senior prbgrams, transportation
providers, advocates, planners, and others having an effect on
senior programming or transportation services. At these meetings
staff:
-present an overview of the'program
- discuss how coordination can be effective in their community
- discuss the transportation needs of seniors in the community
- discuss the needs of their program
e
An important role of the program advisory council has been to
represent the community and give input.
Program staff have participated in cOmmunity meetings to discuss
the needs of area seniors and transportation providers.
Program staff have discuSsed Metro Mobility with seniors and
providers, in turn representing them at meetings with the MTC
and Metro Mobility.
o
Program staff have made presentations regarding the current
transportation system and related issues and needs to community
and professional groups and committees.
e
Staff continues on an ongoing basis to discuss transportation
and coordination issues with:.
- Bette Undis - Director of the Ramsey County Red Cross
Transportation Coordination Program.
- Metropolitan Council Aging Program staff
- Home delivered meals coordination staff
- Congregate Dining program staff
.OBJECTIVE 3:
Determining transportation needs of elderly persons in
Hennepin County.
Data collection and needs assessment has been extensive, involv-
ing the following resources:
-Hennepin County Aging Service Delivery Study
-Transit Service Plan for the Elderly & Handicapped, 1979
-Metropolitan Council Staff
-City of Minneapolis Planning Deprtment - Census data
-Transportation Services Listing ("Transportation Services for
Senior Citizens in Hennepin County)
-Suburban Hennepin County Energy Program
-Interviews with transportation providers
-Information from Senior Citizen groups
-Input from Advisory Council
hRecords from former Minneapolis Red Cross Transportation'
Coordination Project and its United Way Evaluation
-Ramsey County Coordinated Transportation Program - St. Paul
Red Cross Transportation Service
-Hennepin County Municipalities
-First Call for Help
-Information from Hennepin County Information & Referral Offices
--Request for need statement from Hennepin County Human Service
Councils
-Information on transportation needs from Congregate Dining Program
From the above listed resources came the following:
A listing of transportation services in Hennepin County which
includes those services which provide transportation from the
rider's home to a particular destination. Services are-cata-
gorized as a) General Transportation Services (demand/responsive
services not limited by purpose of trip as can accomodate), .
b) Specialized Transportation Services (limited by purpose of
trip), and c) Other Transportation Services (limited to an
organization's activities and/or regular group trips, i.e.
shopping bus, congregate dining runs).
2. Census data
a. Total 1980 populations for each municipality
b. Breakdowns of populations of each municipality by age group:
60-61, 62-64, 65-74, 75-84, 85+
c. Populations of each Minneapolis Planning District (Camden,
Calhoun-Isles, Central, Southwest, Powderhorn, Nokomis,
Northeast, Longfellow, Near North, Phillips, University)
d. Breakdowns of populations of each planning district by age
group: 60-61, 62-64, 65-74, 75-84, 85+
3. Maps (as developed from data gathered)
a. Geographic Distribution of Transportation Services in Hennepin
County
bo Geographic Distribution of Transportation Services in M~nneapolis
Co Geographic Representation of Metro Mobility Service Area in
Hennepin County
d. Percentage of Persons 60+ to Total Population per Municipa- lity - Hennepin County
e. Percentage of 60+ Persons in Each Minneapolis Planning District
per Total. Minneapolis 60+ Population
f. Percentage of 60+ Persons Within Each Minneapolis Planning
District
3o Charts
a. 1980 Census Data by Municipality - Hennepin County
b. 1980 Census Data by Minneapolis Planning District - Ranked
by percentage of' 60+ persons in planning district per total
Minneapolis 60+ population
c. 1980 Census Data by Minneapolis Planning District - Ranked ~
by percentage of 60+ persons within each planning district
d. Limitations of Specific Transportation Services in Minneapolis
Utilizing the data listed above and input from the community the
program was able to identify:
1. Gaps in service
2. Overlapping services
3. Limitations of service
4. Special needs of certain communities
OBJECTIVE 4: Entering~into purchase of service agreements with
private.and.public agencies for the provision of
transportation'services.
Program. staff work and coordinate with the Ramsey County Red
Cross Coordination Program. This successful program has been a
great model in developing all facets of the Purchase of Service
component°
m
A Purchase of Service subcommittee was developed. Since May,
the committee has spent up to 20 hours:
-Defining areas of need
-Setting criteria for Purchase of Service
-Assisting in the development of the request for proposals
-Evaluating proposals and recommending contract awards
0
A Purchase of Service contract was developed as well as other
recordkeeping in preparation for the award of contracts.
On August 26, the program Advisory Council voted to accept the
sucommittee recommendation awarding eight purchase of service
contracts totaling $61,960.00.
OBJECTIVE 5:
Increasing the participation of volunteer drivers
through encouraging expanded use of volunteer drivers
throuqh contracts for. volunteer mileage reimbursement
and assisting as requested in seeking sources for
recruitment and training of volunteer drivers.
Plans are being made to recruit volunteers for Hennepin County
providers, based on needs expressed by transportation providers.
Discussion with the Minneapolis Star/Tribune to develop an
article(s) on trahsportation which would include the need for
volunteers.
A subcommittee was developed to deal with problems encountered
by drivers when transporting seniors to hsopitals and medical
centers.
o
Follow up and monitoring of state rule changes for volunteer
drivers.
OBJECTIVE 6:
Improving the transportation referral system.
Program staff'work closely.with First Call for ~elp, updating
information monthly on the approximate 35 organizations providing
transportation services,
The ~isting, Transportation Services for Senior'CitizenS in
Hennepin County was developed and Sent to approximately.120
organizations. The listingj~'for which demand remains ~ighj,
is to be utilized as a referral guide and to educate existing
programs about other services,
The program newspage7 Express~'Not'es, "spotlights" a transportation
program each month.
4. When called upon, program staff make referrals.
OBJECTIVE
Informing private and public agencies of the.indtiation
of the Hennepin County Transportation Coordination
Program and of its future plans.
1. Letters of introduction were sent to approximately 300 persons.
Letters were sent to mayors and city administrators of 44 munici-
palities introducing the program and requesting data or other input.
3o The program newspage, Expre.~s Notes, is disseminated monthly.
OBJECTIVE 8:
Exploring options for securing group insurance for
volunteer drivers.
A workshop on volunteer transportation insurance is being sponsored
and developed by the program to take place September 7. This workshop
is aimed at transportation providers and interested individuals.
At time of writing 40 individuals are registered. The workshop will
include:
- Explanation of state laws regarding auto insurance
- Minimun guidlelih~s far volunteer driving programs
- volunteer liability under Minnesota law
OTHER ACTIVITIES
Program staff give input to the MTC and Metro Mobility. An application
.will be made to appoint a staff member to the Metro Mobility'
Advisory Committee.
The program has entered into an exciting joint venture with
the Volunteers of America Congregate Dining Program. The VOA
has available two maxi-vans which are not currently being
utilized. The two programs are working together to place both of
these vans in the community, cost free. One van is planned for
use beginning in early September.
3. Program staff meet with staff from the Coordinated Home Delivered
Meals program on a regular basis. Similarities in program allow
us to share experiences, give advice and enjoy support. Co-
~_~'), sponsoring future workshops has been discussed.
FACT SHEET
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT ON HIGHWAY BONDS-A~.END~ENT ~, 2
The amendment does two things:
- removes obsolete 5% interest limit (established in 1920)
- removes $150. million cap (established in 1956)
2. Passage of the amendment will:
- immediately remove an impediment to the sale of $19 million of
previously authorized bridge replacement bonds
- provide an additional highway funding option to future legis-
latures and administrations
3. The urgent need for transportation funding continu'es.
- road use is increasing
- ~ne dedicated highway fund is not sensitive to inflation and
continually falls behind the level of need
- tke current funding level, called "patch and repa~r level" is
really sub-marginal in meeting road user needs
- based on current funding roads are reconstructed once every
370 years
- almost 500 bridges on the Trunk Highway system are deficient
Passage of the amendment is a small step towards improving eco-
nomic vitality of ~innesota.
- will enable improvement bri~e replacements
- will provide jobs (53 jobs are c~eated either directly or
directly from every one million dollars spent on highway con-
struction)
The groups that have voiced support for passage are a good indi-
cation of the importance this change has for Minnesota.
Labor
Business
Agriculture
Highway Users: Cars & Trucks
Highway Action Groups
State Executives
Legislators and Candidates
6. There are no known organizations in opposition.
Question to appear on, November Ballot:
"Shall the Minnesota Constitution be amended to remove restric-
tions on the interest rates for and the amount of Trunk l{ighway
Bonds ?"
Yes
No
RESOLUTION NO. 82
RESOLUTION SUPPORTING CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT #2 AN AMENDMENT TO
THE MINNESOTA CONSTITUTION ON HIGHWAY BONDING, TO REMOVE RESTRICTIONS
ON THE INTEREST RATES FOR AND THE AMOUNT OF TRUNK HIGHWAY BONDS.
WHEREAS, the City Council of' the City of has
reviewed the facts concerning the need for a Minnesota Constitutional Amendment
removing Highway Bonding Restrictions in the Minnesota Constitution and
~7~EREAS, finds that a 5~ interest rate and $150 million maximum
borrowing amount a_~e obsolete in current economic times, and
WHEREAS, recognizes the urgent need to provide flexibility to the state
legislature and administration to be able to adequately fund necessary Truck
Highway and Bridge re_~airs and replacements, and
WHEP~AS, believes that'addi~nal capability to Support good highways
will also aid in improving the economic vitality of Minnesota and the City of
by providing more jobs and transportation facilities
for the moverment of goods and materials in the state.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of
· County of , State of Minnesota,
that Constitutional ;t.~endment #2, an amendment to the Minnesota Constitution
to remove restrictions on the interest rates for and the amount of Trunk Highway
Bonds, be supported, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council of the' City of
urges all residents of the city voting at the November 2,'1982 election, to cast
a 'yes' vote for Constitutional Amendment #2.
PASSED THIS DAY OF , 1982.
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
MAYOR OR COUNCIL PRESIDENT
t~ ~ ur t
ff,~ ~/00MetroSq aeBldg..S.Paul. MN55101
~/General Office Telephone (6 [2
eREVIEV
._::;:;; .:
:CITY OF~ MOUND
A Metropolitan Council Bulletin for Community Leaders ' '>),X': '~ '"~
.........
For more m{brmatmn on ztems mennoned tn thzs t)ubhcat~on, call ~ubhc I~j~nzano~J/Office at 291-6464.
~ptem~r 17t 198~ - RiP,eld; ~ch~d ~e~., Cottage O~ve~ Wil~ Hi~e,
~eCon~; J~es ~ut~, ~o~ P~; S~ce
RECENT COUNCJX, ACTIONS (Sept. 7-17)
HETltOPOLi'TA.N COUNC[4
Solid Waste --The Metropolitan Council approved
sanitary landfill altos in Hennepin County, one in
Greenfield, the other in Dayton. The Council had
disapproved three other proposed Hennepin Count7 sites
lut month. The sites will be added to a regional pool
of env!ronnen~all7 acceptable sites.
Health --The Metropolitan Council/Metropolitan
Health Planning Boa~ decided to Join a coallhion of
local groups making application for a grant to ~.he.
Robemt Wood Johnson Foundat~lon in Ch/cago. The grant
would help pay for a program to achieve more affordable
health care in the Metropolitan Area. The foundatAon
has set uide $16 million nationally to support up to 10
multi-year prog~ that help cont~ health care costs.
CON~ITTEE~ OF THE COUNCI~
The Physical Development Co~aittee recommended that
the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission (MWCC) prepare
preliminary engineering cost estimates for a new
sanitar7 sewer interceptor at Beaver Lake and another at
Phalen 4eke. The interceptors represent an option ~der .:
considerat.toa to solve a lake overflow proble~ involving
St. Paul and elght suburban cities.
The committee also reco-,,ended:
--A 1983 MW¢C capital budget appropriation of
approximately $376 million. Of that amount, $263
m/llion has already been spent or encumbered. The
co~zzittee also recommended $2.8 million be added to the
commission's 1982 capital budget for wastewater
treatment equ/p~ent a~ the Metro sewage treatment plant
in St. Paul and the Blue La~e 91ant near Shakopee.
--Approval of a proposed 198~ ~etropolitan Transit
ComsLission capital budget of $~1.9 million. A major new
project proposed is =he rehabilita~ion of 17~ buses
during =he nex~c ~wo years.
--An Anoka County candidate landfill site in Ramsey
as suitable for disposal of mixed municipal solid waste.
PUSLIC HEARINC~
Metropolitan Council~ Council offices.
Oct. 12, 7 p.m.--The Council will receive testimony
and comment on the draft Transportation Development
Guide Policy Plan. For a free ~opy of Che draft, call
~he Council's Pu'~fio Information Office at 291-6a6~.
Metropolitan Health Plannin~ Board~ Council
Chambers.
Sept. 22,'5 p.m.--Outreach Group Homes, Inc., St.
,Louis Park; certificate of need request to build an
intermediate cars facility ~or mix mentally retarded
adults in Plymouth, at an estimated cost of $193,500.
~EW APPOINTS
The Council ratified the follo~ring reappotntmants to
the Transoortation Advisory Board: Howard Bunco,
Nawro~ki, Columbia Heights; Barbara Savanick, Apple
Valley; Tony ~callon, M/mtneapolis; James Scheibel, St.
Paul; Jackle Slater, Minneapolis; and Willis WarkentAenl
Falcon Heights.
AP?~ICATION$ BEING TAKEN FOR FAHIL! REFI' ASSI~TA~C~
Families that may be eligible for Section 8 rent
assistance are aneoura~_ed ~ apply for certificates cf
eligibility with the MetropollLan Council Housing and
Redevelopment Authority (Metro ~AI. Applications will
be accepted from Sept,. 20 to Dec. 17.
Applications fr~a families whose head of household
is elderly, handicapped or disabled are not heing
accepted at this time. Under ~he Section 8 program,
families pay up to 30 percent of their inec~e for rent;
the rest is paid by the Metro HRA. Applicants selected
·ust locate housing in one of 55 participating Metro P~A
suburban or rural comm,~ities.
Mi~neapolia and St. Paul residents can apply at the
Metro ~A office, Room 25 (lower level) of the Metro
Square Bldg., 7th and Robert Sts., St. Paul, from
8 a.m. to ~ p.m. weekdays. For the address and phone
number of suburban community ERA offices, call 29~-
6300. This is an Equal Housing Oppo~unity program.
COUNCI4 CHAIRMAN TO RO~D ~ORMA4 BREA~A.ST HEETLNGS
Metropolitan Council Chairman Charles Weaver will
meet with local offlctal~ in a series of mine informal
breakfast meetings to discuss issues that concera local
communities and t, he Council. Regional commission
representatives will also he attending the sessions.
The meetings, all beginning at 7=30 a.m., ~11 he
held in each county and in Minneapolis and St. Paul. A
corrected and partial schedule is as follows:
--~ept. 23, Dakota County, Chee's Cafe, ~555 S.
Robert Trail, Rosemount;
--Sept. 2~, Ramsey County, Xo~!ak's Royal Oak
Restaurant, ~T$5 Hod&son Rd., ghoreview;
--Oct. 12, Carver County, Island View Country Club,
9150 Island View Rd., Waconia;
--Oct. la, Minneapolis, Grain Exchange Cafeteria,
301 ~th Ay. S., Minneapolis;
--Oct. 19, Washington County, Forest Inn, 816 S.
Lake St., Forest Lake.
The Scott and Hennepin County meetings were listed
incorrectly in the last Review. The meetings will he
on Oct. 26 and 28, respectively. These and two more
meetings will he listed in the nex~ R. ev.iew_ Oct. 8.
HOUSING CONFERENCE SET
ON PUbLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP
The Metropolitan Council and the Association of
Metropolitan Mm~ictpaltties will cosponsor a housing
conference, "Public-Private Partnerehip'. It's More Than
Just ~oney." The conference will explore how local
officials and private housing developers can work
together to produce new housing. It will be held on
Oct. 27, ~-9 p.a., at The Sheraton Midway, Interstate
Hwy. I-9~ and H~mline Ay. in St. Paul.
St. Paul ]~yor George ~A~lmer will deliver & ke~ote
address, rolls,ed by ~wo panel,s. The first will discuss
specific examples of b°~ partnerships ~ave provided
housing in ~et~',opoli~an Area c~ies. The second will
discuss c~m~umica~t~ needs in · public-pti, rate
partnership o
Reg!lstr'ation Ss $~3.~0 l.~clud~_~ dix~le~'. For
information or t~ register, call ~he Council's Public
HEMh'ZPXN CO~ APPLICATIONS SOUGHT FO~ WASTE AD. OR!
The Metr~polita~ Council is aacep.tlng applications
fmma Hennepin County resident~, fr~a either ~y~n or
Greenfield, interested ~n serv~ as a tem~rary member
of the Council's advisory committee on solid waste
smnagement. The Council will expand the 30-~ember
c~mittee to include 1~ representatives from ~o~xnuni~ies
where approved landfill sites are located. The ..
temporary members will help prepare a Council repor~
~he Leglslativ~ Ccam~i~sion on ~aste ~=--semont. The
reporV, will recovered wa~s ~o ease t~e burdea on
~ommunities that will eventually have ~ew landfills.
back~ro~! report, that exp~orss ~ario~s methods is now
available from the Council's Public Y~aformat~ Office
Persons interested in applying should call Resemarie
.~o~nson at 291-6391 by Oct. 8.
SEmi,OR (~-'NTER ~NFE~ENCE SET
The Metropolitan Council and the Minnesota ~oard o~
Aging will cosponsor a conference Oct. 19,.-20 at the
Earle Brown Center on ~he University of Minnesota
St. Paul. campus ~o train senior center s~affs in
pr~viding outreach services ~o older persons. The
conference will p~esent ideas on making services in the
centers more accessible ~o all older persons,
partic-larly minority, disabled, isolated and l~w-income
persons. It will ~e roll,ed by a free &f~ermoon forum
c~.arts, humanities and a~ing, sponsored .by the
Council's a~ and aging programs. For more
information, call the Council°s Program on' Aging at 291-
6~5.
REGIONAL T~ANSPORTATION FORUM SET FOR ~PT. 21
The Metropolitan Council, and. the Metr.?politan
Transit C~ssion will ~sponsor "Transportation.- The
Road Ahead?", a public for~nn on regional ~ighway asd
~ransportation planning, from 9 a.m. to ~ p.m. on
Sept. 21 at the Holiday Iron, 1313' Hicollet Ay.,
For reservations os more information, call .the
Council's Public Ymforma~ion Office at
C~N~N~ ~EET~C~ (~pt. 20 - Oct. 8)
Metropplita~ Pax-k~ and. Open Space Commission -
~onday, Sept. 20, 3 p.m., C~.erenee Rooms A and B. The
c~=n~LssiOn ~J.11 set a public hearing date on the revised
capital imprmvemen~ program fo~ the regional recreation
open space system.
~=~ Resources Committee -Monday, Sept. 20,
3:30 p.m., Council Chambers. The co.~.~ttes will act on
s~aff reoonznendatioms on ~he Netropolita~ ~ousing Fund,
a position statement on the future o~ health planning
and a public hearing report on proposed policies
reg~rding adding beds ~o the regional nursing hone
system.
Executiw Ccxmzittee - Tuesday, Sept. 21, 5 p..m.,
Conference Room A. The c~,-n~ttce will act on the
budg~ of ~he Metropollta~ Sports Facilities Commission,
the 1~83 ,~nneapolis liquor/lodging ~ax, and the
Council's 1~8~ wor~ program and ~udget. The comn~tttee
also will act on a resolution authorizing reduction
the Metropolitan ~ax lev7 for Per,cs amd o~ s~ ~ds
sewe~ ~ds.
~ts Advisory C~ttee ~s~y, ~pt. 21,
~rts on the Mc~ ~ce~ce in the A~s
Task Force ~ ~r~ Fl~tin~ ~d O~n S~ace
Wednesday, ~pt. 22, 9 a.m., ~nfe~ce R~ E. The
~s~ fore is e~ected ~ discuss the stat~ of the
b~ ~ee~ng study, ~ physi~ c~ctem~sti~ of
noise ·
~i~y Reinves~m~ F~d Por~ - ~nes~y,
discuss ~he ~n~i=t over ~he p~p~ ~
~versl~7 of ~eso~ Hospi~ ~d C~ca~
T~r~ion Su~o~ee - ~sday, ~ep~.
P~yai~l Develo~fl~ ~~ - ~ursday,
He~epin Co~7 P~k R~er~ Dia~ric~'a ~
for sys~de ~ln~en~ s~pa ~d ~he 198~ ~i~
Develo~en~ ~d ~ecu~ C~s.
O~sion ~sues ~d
Ad~sory C~tees on A~ng - F~y, ~p~.
~ p.m. Con~ereflce R~ E.
'Confe~nce R~ A.
Task Fomee on Regional Revenues - ~nesday, ~p~.
C~nal Jus~i~ Advisory C~i~ee - F~day,
Resou~e Recovery T~k ~orce - Tues~y, Oct.
~ a.m., Conference R~m ~.
Me~ro~li~ Rides~e ~a~emen~ ~oa~ - Tues~y,
~mer~nc7 Medial Se~ices Advises7 C~ee
Tuesday, Oc~. 5, a p.m., Co, oil
Executive C~i~ee - Tuesday, Oe~. ~., ~ p.m.,
Conference Ro~ A.
TecAni~l Advisory C~ee - (T~ns~r~a~ion)
W~nesday~ Oc~. 5t 9 ..a.m.~ Co, oil
~e~ro~ W~e ~agemen~ Advisory C~ee
Wednesday~ Oe~. 6~ 2 p.m.z Co~ci!
Physical Develo~en~ C~l~ee - Th~sday., Oc~.
CITIZENS LEAGUE
530 Syndicate Building
H~nneapol/~, MN ~02
TO:
SUBJECT:
August 17, 19BZ
MEMORANDUM
Members, Tax/Expenditure Committee
Community Information Committee
Issues, proposals and Participants' in state-'local finance
The most intensive discussions in 12 years are under way in several quarters'this
summer concerning Minnesota's state-local fiscal system. It still is .much too early
to tell whether this year's discussions will lead to change in 1983 of the same
magnitude as occurred in 1971. But some of the proposals being talked about would
produce -- if implemented -- perhaps even more dramatic change than occurred i'n
1971.
As will be remembered, the Legislature in 1971 made substantial changes in school
aids, municipal aids, property tax relief, the p~operty tax assessment system,.and
in the authority of local units of government to levy taxes.
In every biennium since 1971 the LegislatUre has continued to make further modifica-
tions in existing provisions and has added some new ones, such as the ci~uit-breaker.
Much of'the debate now is prompted by a realization that the next biennium will be
extremely tight financially. In mid-July 1982, Allan Rudell, state commissioner of
finance, i~sued biennial budget guideli.nes t0 state agencies', the first step in
preparation'for the two-uear state budget beginning July 1, 1983. Rudell projected
that, even if "temporary" tax increases enacted by the Legislature in 1981 and 1982
are continued into the next biennium, sufficient funds would not be available to pay
for even modest growth in expenditures over the current biennium.
At this time widely differing views of the problems to be solved are evident:
Some persons believe the major problem is that State government needs to
find a way to s)ow down or stop the growing commitments of state tax
dollars which are transferred to local governments to pay for local ser-
vices. Others are extremely fearful of major increases in property taxes
and, consequently, are trying to devise ways that state funds can be used
to keep such increases from occurring.
Some persons are distressed because various optional tax levies have re-
duced the amount of equalization in the school aid formula in recent years,
which means that higher-valuation school districts are able to spend more,
with lOWer taX rates, than poorer districts. Meanwhile, according to a
taxpayers' newsletter, others are complaining that the school aid formula
is.producing too heavy a property tax burden on the higher-valuation
school districts.
Some persons are seeking to enrich the state fund which provides aid to
cities and counties, perhaps by guaranteeing them a certain percentage of
the state general revenue fund or of a certain tax. Others are seeking to
remove cities and counties from receiving state aid, by transferring their
aid to school districts and giving cities and counties, in return, access
to the property tax which no longer would be needed by school districts
because of the growth in aid to school districts.
72
* Some persons are trying to assure adequate areawide revenue sources,
with equitable distribution of funds to local governments, to make sure
cities and counties never would be driven to seek the right to levy
their.own sales or income taxes, because of their widely-differing tax ,
bases. Meanwhile, others are looking to such lo~al option non-property
taxes as a way for legislators to (a) avoid having to increase state
.taxes, and (b) keep property taxes from increasing further, and (c) '
'assure a growing revenue source for some local governments (those with
the ability to raise dollars from a tax on sales or income collected
within their own borders'exclusively).
* Some pers9ns are saying 'that the state Should determine a uniform per-
pupil spending level for all.school districts, to assure equitable edu'
cational resources for pupils across the state. Others are urging that
the state deliberately allow spending levels to vary, to reflect the
preferences of individual school districts.
Many person~ nod their heads when critics talk of the complexity of the.present sys-
tem, and the fact that it is becoming increasingly difficult to accomplish policy
goals thrbugh fixing up the system here and there. Some critics are calli'ng for
: wholesale revisions. Others~ while uhderstanding the motivation behind such pro-
posals, fear that hard-fought principles 'of equity to 'taxpayers ~nd units of govern-
ment would b~ lost in the shuffle.
Virtually no one, however, is downplaying the urgency for the Governor'and the Le~
gislature to give the issues of the state-local fiscal system top priority. There
is some question, however, of what timetable is desirable, or Possible. One option
would be for the newly-elected officials.to~make major change'in the first five
months of 1983. Another opt. io9 would be for no action to betaken except commission-
ing of a major Study, perhaps along the lines of the 1954 J. Cameron Thomson effort.
In between there are. other possibilities. One would be that a compTehenslve overhaul
could be' adopted, in 1983, but with the law stipulating that changes would be phased
in over time, to reduce the likelihood of massive changes on Individual taxpayers,
either up or down in burden. Another possibility would be to adopt a.comprehensive
overhaul in 1983, but d~lay its effective date for 12-18 months, during which' time
major studies undoubtedly would occur and modifications could be made.
For perhaps the first time since 1970-71, groups involved in study and analysi~ are
making changes in school aids an integral part of the tota.l discussion. In 1971 the
Legislature's 'final local government aid/state tax package, included t'he school aid
formula. Since then, the school aid package always has been treated separately.
Following is a summary of the major studies and proposals of which we are aware at
this time:
Minnesota League of Wom~n Voters - A background report on school aids, including major
issues to be settled, now is being printed.and will be distributed to local chapters
for study this fall. An effort will be made to develop a statewide position on these
issues b~ 'next February.
Greater Minneapolis Chamber of Commerce - The Chamber Board of Direcrors is expected
to consider very soon a position paper prepared by John Bergford and Lloyd Brandt,
which has been circulated informaliy for the last few months. The' proposal would
change the methods granting property tax relief from the present system of homestead,
agricultural and renter credits and classifications to a new system in which total
property taxes would be limited to a certain percentage of market value. The percent-
age would vary for different types of property. Local government would be given a
-3-
guaranteed share of a state revenue source,"such as 80% of the 59 sales ~ax."
Schools would be allowed discretionary property tax authority, partia)ly equali-
zed for differences in tax base, to finance levels of spending above state aid.
Saint Paul Area Chamber of Commerce - The Chamber has pJbllshed a report, "200!,
Can We Get There From Here?'', which recommends reductions in corporate and per-
sonal income tax rates to help stimulate the state's economy. Earlier this sunnier
the Chamber submitted specific recommendations for reducing Saint Paul property
taxes by spending cuts and other methods.
Minnesota Business Partnership.- A committee of this group is looking at several
possibilities for change, including the proposals advanced by the Greater Minneapolis
Chamber of. Commerce.
Minnesota AFL-CIO - The AFL-CIO will continue its emphasis on relying on the state
income ' tax to finance state and local government, instead of increasing sales'taxes
or property taxes.
Minnesota Taxpayers Association - The Associatioh's July 1982 newsletter highlighted
the concerns high-valuation rUral school districts have with the present school aid
formula. A more thorough study will be printed in the ensuing weeks, according to
the newsletter.
Association of Minnesota'Counties - The Association is circulating a "concept paper"
that would provide that schools would be paid for mainly by state aids instead of
the property tax, perhaps shifting more property tax resources to counties and
cities as a result. Local government aid and property tax-related credits would be
combined .into a single aid package for.cities and counties. The number of property
tax classifications would be reduced "to'approximately '10."
~ea~gue o'f Minnesota Cities - Appropriations for local government aid should in-
crease at least at the same rate as state revenues, according to the League's posi-
tion paper.. The League also asks the Legislature and Governor to "place top prior-
ity on comprehensively re-working the state-local fiscal system in Minnesota and
clarifying the policy objectives of such a system." The League recommends that levy
limits be abolished and that the Legislature allow cities to impose local option
taxes on hotels, motels, admissions or amusements.
Metropolitan Council - The Council has formed a task force representing regional
operating agencies, local government and private citizens to develop' recommendations
to the 1983 Legislature on the possibility of regional sources of revenue for region-
al functions, including transit, waste control, airports, sports facilities, parks
and open space, mosquJte control, solid waste disposal, ride-sharing, highway right-
of-way acquisition, and surface water management.
Local Government Policy Task Force - The Governor's office, House, Senate and organi-
zations representing local governments, including school districts, formed a task
force early this summer to "develop alternative proposals for restructuring Minnesota's
state-local fiscal system." One idea the task force is exploring is to discontinue
financing Schools with the,local property tax, leaving that tax base for cities,
counties and townships. Under this idea, the state would not pay local government
aid or homestead credit, and there would be no levy limit. Another idea is to allow
cities to impose their own sales or income taxes. Some persons close to the task
force also are exploring a value-added tax.
Minnesota School Finance Conference - A coalition of educational groups representing
school boards, teachers, principals, and administrators is sponsoring a conference
-4-
on August 30 and 31 at Spring Hill, to consider a varietyof issues in ~chool
finance that are llkely to emerge'in 1~83. Separately, the Minnesota Association
of School Administrators has formed a task force to develop recommendations on
state, aids to school districts.
Center f.~..Urban a.nd Regional Affairs (CURA) - CURA, lo~ated at the University of
Minnesota, is planning to do a major study of school finance. It recentl.y has com-
pleted work on the impact of federal and state budget cuts'on local.units of' govern-
ment.
Hous~ Research - The House of Representatives Research Department has bullt a com-
puter 'model to analyze possible changes .in the state-local fiacal system. The model
is aval]able for use by any legislator.
State Legislative Auditor - The Legis]ative Auditor is conducting a study of state
property tax relief programs, including the homestead credit, agricultural credit,
renter credit and other circuit-breaker payments. The study is looking at the ad-
ministration of the programs. But alternative.ways to provide relief also may be
proposed. .
Minnesota Department of Revenue - The Department has just completed a repor~ which
outlines issues to be considered in d~ciding the fu.ture of the property tax. In a
separate effort, the Department is working on implementing recommendations from a
task force which urged simplification o~ state income' tax forms. The Department
also is .doing research on levy limits and local government aid formulas.
· Department of' Energy., Planning & Economic Developmen~ - A legislatively'mandated
study'of the differences in tax burdens among Hinnesota border cities and their.
neighbors in adjacent states Is scheduled.fp~ completion by January l, l~8~. The
Department also is providing staff suppoFt to.the Local Government Policy Task
Force in exploring options for non-property ~evenues for local government,- A back-
ground report on the state-local fiscal relationship, in Minnesota is being prepared.
State Department of Finance - The Department is'preparing a spec'ia1 budget supple-
men~ for..l~$3 that will pull together an itemized list of all state funds that go
to cities, counties, towns and other local government units, plus all transfer pay-
ments to individUa]s and private organizations. Preliminary information from the
Department indicates that, in the year endi. ng June 30, I~8l, aids to local units,
including all credit payments, totalled $l.9 billion; .aids to individuals, $575
million;aids to non-governmental organizations, $~6 million; and expenditures by
state agencies, $I billion.
iCitizens Leag.u~.- The League's Tax/Expenditure Committee, chaired by Earl F. Colborn,
Jr., is in the )ate stag~s of its work and may report to the League Board in Septem-
ber. The report is expected to outline principles which should be preserved.in any
comprehensive 'change'|n the state-Iota] fiscal system. The League also has a number
of positions adopted in previous years which wii) bear on the discussions in
including a proposa] for a metropo)itan.sales tax.
league of minnesota oities
September 23, 1982
TO: Concerned City Officials
FROM:
Don Slater, Executive Director
Peggy Flicker, Legislative Counsel
VITAL NEW INFORMATION cONCERNING 1983 LOCAL GOVERNMENT AID (LGA)
CITIES MISLED BY STATE FINANCE DEPARTMENT: LGA FREEZE AT 1982 LEVEL PLANNED
On July 16, State Finance Commissioner Allen Rudell sent a memo to all state agency heads which
stated, in part, "Total state expenditures for property tax relief and aids to local government
must be frozen at 1983 levels through 6/30/87 . . . Increases already legislated for F.Y. 1984
should be honored." (emphasis added)
Based on this memo and other statements by finance department officials, the League has been'
ad~ing cities that the current state budget.plans and assumptions being prepared for the'next
G~nor and Legislature are honoring the state LGA commitment to cities for 1983. We have
now
learned that this is untrue. The Finance Department is planning to freeze LGA at the 1982~
level° Cities would get no LGA increase for 1983,
(Note - The 1982 Legislature appropriated $270 million for LGA for calendar year 1983. (state
F.Yo 1984) The Legislature intended each city to receive an 11.3% increase in 1983 over actual
1982 payments. This amount is still nothing more'than the original amount cities planned for
and were promised in 1981 and again in 1982.)
REVENUE DEPARTMENT NOTICES CONTRADICT FINANCE DEPARTMENT BUDGET PLANS
The Revenue Department mailed notices to all cities in July (July 7 and 23)' notifying them of
the amount of 1983 LGA they should expect based on the $270 million funding level commitment°
In other words, the Revenue Department has told you that you will receive 11.3% more than the
Finance Department is planning to pay. Cities have been relying on the Revenue Department
information in their budget process.
WHOSE WORD SHOULD YOUR CITY BELIEVE? HOW SHOULD YOU PLAN YOUR 1983 BUDGET?
Our advice to you now is to continue to rely on the only official word you have received from
the state - the July Revenue DePartment letter certifying your 1983 LGA.
You should immediately write or c~ll Governor Quie, candidates Whitney and Perpich and your
legislative candidates and demand that the state honor its commitment to cities - $270 million
in LGA for 1983. The cavalier way in which a state department on its own decided to plan to
.e LGA below the level appropriated by the Legislature without even notice or hearing to
s is further evidence of the lack of understanding by state officials of local government
finance and the lack of concern for the financial integrity of cities. We will have to work
very hard to maintain the level of funding cities have been promised.
183univeesiCyavenueeasC, st. paul, m~nnesoCa55101 (612) 227-5600