Loading...
82-10-12iMOUND CITY COUNCIL ~Regular Meeting Tuesday, October 12, 1982 '7:30' P.M. - City Hall CITY OF MOUND AGENDA Mound, Mi nnesota~ 1. 'Minutes of October 5, 1982, Regular Meeting 2. PUBLIC HEARING A. Proposed Assessment of Unpaid Tree Removal Charges 3. L.M.C.D. Expiration of Terms of Board Members 4. Letter from John R. McNaughton - Regarding Lots 4,5, & Block 5, Seton Addition 5. Parking on Lynwood Blvd. - Bruce Wold 6. Game of Skill License - Mound V.F.W. Post 5113 7. Public Works Building Discussion - Verbal Report 8o Comments & Suggestions from Citizens Present (please limit to 3 minutes) 9. Payment of Bills 10. INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS Letter from Watershed District to DNR Minutes of Lake Minnetonka Mayor's Association Housing Conference Flyer - Any Interest? Letter from the City of Orono Westonka Chamber of Commerce "Waves" Copy of David Hozza Agreement HRA Memo from the City Attorney A B C D E f G Pg. 2331-2335 Pgo 2336-2337 Pgo 2338-2341 Pg. 2342-2344 Pg. 2345 Pg. 2346-2347 Pg. 2348 Pg. 2349-2351 Pg 2352-2357 Pg 2358-2359 Pg 2360-2361 Pg 2362-2363 Pg 2364 Pg 2365-2369 Page ~330 205 October 5, 1982 REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, was held at 5341Maywood Road in said City on October 5, 1982, at 7:30 P.M. Those present were: Mayor Rock Lindlan, Councilmembers 'Pinky Charon, Robert Polston, Gordon Swenson. Councilmember Donald Ulrlck ~as late and arrived at 7:40 P.M. Also pres'ent were: City Manager Jon Elam, City Clerk Fran Clark; and the following ~interested citizens: Ed Behmler, Randy Bickmann, Dr. Robert Lauer, Margaret Hanson; Bob Hansom; Mr. & Mrs. John Wagman, Ron Gehring. M I NUTES The Mi'nutes of the September 28, 1982, Regular Meeting were presented for consideration. .Swenson moved and Polston seconded a.motion to approve the Minutes of the September 28, 1982, Regular Meeting as submitted. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. PUBL lC .HEARINGS A. CONTINUTATION 'oF C.B.D. MAINTENANCE ASSESSMENT ROLE PUBLIC~:HEARING The Mayor reopened the Public Hearing on the C.B.D. Maintenance Assessment Role that was continued from the September 28th Meeting. Councilmember Ulrlck arrived. Dr. Robert'Lauer - explained'that he has submitted'a letter to the City. objecting to the amount that is credited against the assessment for parcel #13-117-24 33 0014. He feels this credit is too low and represents a figure that was agreed upon 12 years ago.which does not accurately reflect the property value now.. The lease expired two (2) years'ago and he would like to negotiate a · new lease with a larger credit. Randy Bickmann - He had ~submltted a written objection to the assessment at the meeting on September 28, 1982, and still objects to being a member of the Central Business District Parking Maintenance Plan because he provides plenty of parking on his own property for his employees. The Mayor closed the Public Hearing. Swenson moved and Ulrick seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION #82-263- RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT ASSESSMENT ROLL AT $17,905.25 TO BE CERTIFIED TO TO THE cOUNTy AUDITOR AND SPREAD OVER 1 YEAR AT 8% INTEREST The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. 206 October 5, 1982 The Mayor stated that the C.B.D. Committee will be meeting in December, January or February and suggested that Mr. Bickmann contact them about being eliminated from the C.B.D. Counci.lmember Ulrick stated that the advantages far outweight the disadvantages of a program like the C.B.D. Maintenance Program. B. REVENUE SHARING PROPOSED USES FOR 1983 The City Manager explained what has been done in 1982 with Revenue Sharing funds and that the following items are being proposed for 1983: 1. Police Car $ 7,500 2. Spring & Fall Clean-Up 10,OOO 3. Dump Truce (1/2 Cost) 30,000 4. Civil Defense Siren 2,000 5. Codification of Ordinances 15,O00 6. Radio (Police) 500 TOTAL $ 65,000 With these expenditures in·1983, there will be a balance in the Revenue Sharing Fund at the end of 1983 of approximately $42,493. The Mayor opened the-Public Hearing and asked for input from the citizens present. Ed Behmler - Stated'that he hoped the City was adequately funded to maintain the new ·streets. The Mayor expla|'ned that the City has adopted a mai]ntenance plan for the new streets. The.City Manager went on and furth.er explained the Five-Year Seal Coating Plan. The Mayor closed the Publi'c Hearing. Swenson moved and Ulrick seconded the followlng resoluti, on. RESOLUTION #82-264 RESOLUTION TO SET OCTOBER 26, 1982, AS TB.E DATE FOR'FINAL ADOPTION OF THE KEVENUE S~AKI;NG BUDGET Council:member Po]ston .stated that he would lilke to see some money earmarked for Commons maintenance. The Ci'ty Manager explatned that there would probably be money available from.the 1982 Revenue Sharing Budget because some i'tems may be less expensive that pro~ected,or some items may not be done. The Council agreed to add #7 Commons Maintenance - $10,OOO to .the above li'st that has been proposed for 1983. The vote·on the r'esolution was unanimously i.n favor, POLICY ON WATER & SEWER CONNECTION FEES Mot i]on carr i]ed. The Finance Director had asked that water and sewer supplemental assessments be dropped and considered replaced by the connection fees, Tb.e C~t¥ Attorney has advised that Section 20.10 of the City Code states that all costs for water and sewer must be assessed, No action was taken on th~s item, 207 October 5, 1982 RESOLUTIONS LEVYING DEFERRED AND SUPPLEMENTAL ASSESSMENTS UPON WAIVER OF FORMALITIES A. SUPP. #2879 - THREE POINTS WATER Charon moved and Ulrick seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION #82-265 RESOLUTION LEVYING DEFERRED AND SUPPLEMENTAL ASSESSMENTS UPON WAIVER OF FORMALITIES; DIRECTING " PREPARATION OF ABSTRACT; AND DIRECTING CERTIFICATION " TO THE COUNTY AUDITOR The vote was unanimously in favor, Motion carried, B, SUPP, #3]80 - SANITARY SEWER Polston moved and Ulrick seconded the following resolution, RESOLUTION.#82-266 RESOLUTION LEVYING DEFERRED AND SUPPLEMENTAL ASSESSMENTS UPON WAIVER OF FORMALITIES; DIRECTING PREPARATION OF ABSTRACT; AND DIRECTING CERTIFICATION TO THE-COUNTY AUDITOR The vote was unanimously in favor, Motion carried, C. SUPP. #7928 - 1979 STREETS Ulrick moved and Polston seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION #82-267 RESOLUTION LEVYING DEFERRED AND SUPPLEMENTAL ASSESSMENTS UPON WAIVER OF FORMALITIES: DIRECTING PREPARATION OF ABSTRACT; AND DIRECTING CERTIFICATION TO THE COUNTY AUDITOR The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. D. SUPP.#7514 - 1978 STREETS Swenson moved and Polston seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION #82-268 RESOLUTION LEVYING DEFERRED AND SUPPLEMENTAL ASSESSMENTS UPON WAIVER OF FORMALITIES; DIRECTING PREPARATION OF ABSTRACT; AND DIRECTING CERTIFICATION TO THE COUNTY AUDITOR The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. E. SUPP. #8297 - 1980 STREETS Swenson moved and Charon seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION #~2-269 RESOLUTION LEVYING DEFERRED AND SUPPLEMENTAL ASSESSMENTS UPON WAIVER OF FORMALITIES; DIRECTING PREPARATION OF ABSTRACT; AND DIRECTING CERTIFICATION TO THE COUNTY AUDITOR The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. FINCH LANE PARKING PROBLEM The City Manager recommended no action on this item until further information is obtained. The Council agreed. 2333 2O8 October 5, 1982 COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRESENT The Mayor asked for any comments or suggestions from citizens present. There were none. TAX LEVY The City Manager explained in the 1982-1983 Tax Levy we have reduced the-amount needed for bonded indebtedness .by $1,565.(Line E). This consists of: 1. Replacing the estimated $15,000 for the G.O. Improvement Bonds of 1982 with $11,400, the actual amount needed per the bond resolution. 2. Revising the City's share of special assessments from $56,692 to $58,727 in include the Central Business District Assessment and additiOnal County Road 110 assessments. We have also reduced the amount of the special levy for liability insurance by $8,644 for the 1970-1971 Levy as required. Instead, we are levying this amount for the Matching Funds Program, Logis. Ulrick moved and Charon seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION #82-270 RESOLUTION TO DIRECT THE COUNTY AUDITOR TO LEVY CERTAIN TAXES; APPROVING THE BUDGET REVISION INCREASING THE GENERAL FUND TAX LEVY TO $903,359 AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ON CITY PROPERTY TO $58,727 The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. APPOINT ELECTION JUDGES FOR NOVEMBER 2, 1982, GENERAL ELECTION Polston moved and Charon seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION'#82-271 .RESOLUTION APPOINTING THE ELECTION JUDGES AS RECOMMENDED FOR THE GENERAL ELECTION NOVEMBER 2, 1982 The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. ADVERTISE FOR BIDS - CBD SNOW REMOVAL Charon moved and Ulrick seconded the following resolution. RESOLUTION #82-272 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS FOR SNOW REMOVAL IN THE CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT TO OPEN OCTOBER 25, 1982, AT 10:O0 A.M. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. INFORMATION/MISCELLANEOUS AA. Letter from Fuel Recover.y Company - Informing the City that at the MPCA request, they will be inspecting our Interceptor Ventillating Syste? quarterly for explosive levels at a charge to the City of $50.00 per visit. The MPCA will also be requiring us to properly grout these holes upon abandonment which will cost from $1,500 to $2,000. A. Letter of Resignation from the Planning Commission by Gary Paulson 2O9 October 5, 1982 Swens0n moved and Ulrick seconded a motion to accept the resignation of Gary Paulsen from the Planning Commission and directed the City Manager to write a thank you letter to Mr. Paulsen. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. B. Letter from Citizens Advisory Committee for Area 4 - commending the Ee City for its actions to close out program Years IV and V. Action .Alert -...L~ague of Minnesota Cities Letter from Mrs. LaVonne Blackwell - Concerns she has about the Union Cemetery. Letter from Mr. Richard Bialon and Answer from City Attorney - regarding Sul. grove Road F. Letter from Dept. of Transportation on C.S.A.H. 110 - Regarding setting speed limits. G. Artlcle "Our Changing Society" H. The Mayor reminded the Council of the Mayor's Meeting on October 7. I. .Development Challenges - The City Manager brought the Council uptodate on several possible developments that would affect the downtown area and would llke the Council to give him some direction at a later date as things progress. He is already getting legal and planning advice, Swenson moved and Charon seconded a motion to adjourn at 9:30 P.M. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. Jon Elam, City Manager Fran Clark, City Clerk AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING IMPROVEMENT HEARING NOTICE STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ~ SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN Project SPECIAL ASSESSMENT - UNPAID TREE REMOVAL CHARGES Francene C. Clark , being duly sworn, deposes and says; I am a United States Citizen, over twenty-one (21) years of age, and the City Clerk of the City of Mound, Minnesota. On Sept, 2~, , 1982 , acting on behalf of the city, I deposited in the United States postoffice at Mound, Minnesota, copies of the attached notice of a hearing on proposed improvement, enclosed in seale~ envelopes, With postage thereon fully prepaid, addressed to the following persons at the addresses appearing opposite their Yespective names. NAME John E. ~agman PID #24-117-24 23 0019 ADDRESS 5469 Bartlett Blvd. Mound, ~N. 55364 There is delivery service by United States mail between the;place of mailing and the places so addressed. Subscribed and sworn to before me this 29th day of Sept. , 19 82 NOTARY PUaLIC MINNESOTA HENNEPIN COUNTY My Comml~on Exo~re~ Aug t8 1988 ;i STATE OF N~NNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN D~STR]CT COURT FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT John E. Wagman and Ellen M. Wagman, husband and wife, Plaintiffs, -vs- SUMMONS The City of Mound and County of Hennepin, Defendants. ~THE STATE OF MINNESOTA TO l~HE ABOVE NAMED DEFENDANTS: YOU ARE )~EREBY SUMMO'NED and required te serve upon plaintiffs' attorney an answer to the complaint which is herewith il served upon you within twenty (20) days after service of this 1! summons upon you, exclusive of the day of such service. If you ',1 'i fail to do so, judgment by default will be taken against you for 'i the relief demanded in the complaint. Robert W. Reuti~/n. ~[. Attorney for Plaintiffs 305 East Rice Street P.O. Box 367 Wayzata, MN 55391 473-7328 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN DISTRICT COURT FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT John E. Wagman and Ellen M. Wagman, husband and wi.re,' Plalnti~f~s.,: The City of Mound and County. of Hennepin,~' Defendants, COMPLAINT Plaint'iff.s above named, as and for their claims for relief, state and allege as follows: COUNT ONE This is in part an action for declaratory relief pursuant the provisions of.Chapter 555, Minnesota Statutes. II. At all times pertinent, from anJ after September 23, i~76, aintif~s were and aret the f'ee owners of Certain real property i!located in.the City ~f Mound and County of Hennepin, commonly Lot 16, The Bartlett Place Upper Lake Minnetonka, acc~rding the duly rec~rd:ed plat thereof~ T~ere e~iited a~d Still exists at all times pertir~ent hereL? the aboVe d~scribed property :a channel which connects !iBay, Lake :,i!,,~'i~onka, ~o,~n area commonly d~signated as ))Lake". This channel .b~sectg 'pla(~tiffs' property in the ~!). reF'lected on Exhibit'A attacH'ed hereto. IX. The falling of said tree was not the result of any deliberate action on the part of plaintiffs, nor was it the result of insect infestation, disease, or unsoundness in said tree, but rather resulted from the erosion due to lack of maintenance of said channel and its consequent effect on said tree's root system. X. On September 7, 1982, defendant City of MOund by a letter ordered plaintiffs to remove said tree at their personal expense. A true and correct copy of said letter is attached hereto as Ex- hibit B. Subsequent to. said letter defendant City of Mound discovered it did not have an ordinance allowing removal by the city, and at a council meeting held during the 'evening of Septmeber 7, 1982, said defendnt City of.Mound adopted Ordinance No. 441, which ordinance was published' in the legal newspaper of.the City of Mound on Septemb.er 14, 1982. On the morning of.September 14, 1982, by 1 tter dated e :~September 13, 1982, defendant City of Mound serve,~ upon plaintiffs a d~mand that plaintiffs indicai.=' their intention to remove said tree b~'4:30 p.m. on 'september..1.~.,-~.~982. A true of the same:-<~s'..atta~'hed'hereto as Exhibit C. XIIi~ P,alnt,f~$ (ndicated ~.i lack of intention to rumove ,=said tree absent agreement to maintain the channel, and on Sep- ~'tember 15, 1982, defenJant City of Mound '.through an agent .iioperations to ~emove the same at'an alleged cost througk ,~F $1500.00. Preliminary arrangements to remove the tree hao .,been made by d~fendant Cit ..... '~'~ tn t~? eF~ect~,'~ ~t~ ,'-~ ' IV. Said channel is navigable, and defendants have a duty to maintain the banks of .the same at.their expense since it is a ~ublic waterway.. V. In approximately 1949 the defendant County of Hennepin per- formed some maintenance on the channel by erecting the existing steel piling, and.has performed no such maintenance since, although defendant County of Hennepin maintains other channels on Lake Minnetonka at public expense. VI. Since plaintiffs too-k fee title to said premises they have made numerous requests to both parties defendant that defendants maintain said channel since the same provides public access by boat to and from Lost Lake. In spite of said requests defendants have failed to provide said maintenance with the result that the banks of said channel have eroded and deteriorated, Causing tructural damage to plaintiffs' dwelling house on said premises nd diminution.of value of their property, all to their damage n the sum of One Hundred Thous~'~'d ~.($10O,OOO.O0) Dollars. .:~.'"~ , ;;...:.-~-i!~;?COUNT~'(-..TWO :.~ 'i .';.,. ::.,.:,: ':"- i,::. ,- · '? '"::'~ .' ~ ~ Plaintiffs': restate the:allegations of the foregoing para- lraphs as. if the::~me were hefei:n fully set forth, : VII~. On or ab~ut;'Septem,ber 1, 1982, a large tree located cn the plaintiffs.' property on the easterly edge of the channel fell a'cress the channel, the practical effect o= which was to block ~cat ingres~ ~,nd egress through the same. -2- XIV. Defendant City of Mound intends to specially assess the cost of removal against plaintiffs' property pursuant to the pro- visions of Minnesota Statute Section 429.101. XV. As to plaintiffs, Ordinance #411 is special legislation prohibited by the Constitution of the State of Minnesota and its application as to plaintiffs deprives plaintiffs of equal protection of the law within the meaning of the Constitution of the United States and of the State of Minnesota. WHEREFORE, plaintiff~ pray for judgment and decree of this ) · Court as' follows: 1) Declaring that maintenance of the above described channell is, and at all times pertinent has been, the responsibility of defendants. 2) Requiring defendants to restore the channel banks to their pre-existing .loca.tion and provide adequate maintenande of the same. 3) Declaring Mound Ordi. nance #411 null and void as to )laintiffs, and ~njotning.~'.fur.lthe~.efforts on the part of defendant City of Mound to co,llect~"t'ree'removal costs from plaintiffs, in- clu~ing the assessment o~.' ~.'a~'J"'~$1~S pursuant 'to Minnesota Statute Section 429.101 · i 4) For damages in'favor ~f.plaintiffs an~ as against de- fendants,' jointl:Y and'.is~¢'er'a'lij,"'iA .the sum of One Huna'red Thousand Dollars ($100,000.00). 5) For such othJr and 'further relief as the' Court deems just and equitable under the cincumstances. /~ '., Robert W._Reu~ma~.~/jr. " ' "Attorney for Plaintiffs 305 Ea'st Ricu Stroe[ P.O, Box 367 Wayzata, MN 55391 " 473-732~ .> CITY of MOUND September 7, 1982 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 Mr. John Wagman 5469 Bartlett Blvd. Mound, MN. 55364 Dear Mr. Wagman: This letter is written, to put. you on official notice that a tree fr°m your property has blown across a public, waterway thus preventing public access. A week has now gone by since the tree. blew down and there appears to be little effort to have it removed. The City considers the Lost Lake Channel the same as any public street as .such, when private property blocks it, the City will contract' to have the obstacle removed:and bill the total cost of · the removal back to the responsible property owner. If the tree i.s not removed by Friday, September lO., 1982, we will initiate removal proceedings. There.are alot of people who .have called about this situation. For some reason alot. of.people thi'nk you want to close off.access'to the channel. 'I have tried to explain to them that. surely you understand that just because you own land-on both sides of the boat channel that you don't own the water and as such wouldn't think of trying to block the channel.' Your cooperation to clean-up' this.problem; as quickly as possible, will be appreciated. Sincerely, lam City Manager JE:fc CITY of MOUND September 13, 1982 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 Mr. John Wagman 5469 Bartlett Blvd. Mound, MN. 55364 Dear Mr. Wagman: . This letter is to again officially request that you remove the tree that has fallen from your property across the Lost Lake Channel and is blocking the public waterway. If you wish to remove the tree, you have until September 14, 1982, at 4:30 P.M. to officially notify the City of your intent to do so.. If you do not intend to remove the'tree, 'the City will initiate tree removal proceedings on September 15, 1982, under Chapter 27, Section 27.10 of the City Code, which became effective on September~13, 1982, and Minnesota Statutes Section 429.]0]. The City ~is prepared to order, the removal of this tree and to have the .cost (estimated at $1,500..O0) special assessed against your property. This notice is being.set to notify.You of our intent to act in order to clear this public waterway as soon as possible. Sincerely, Jon Elam City Manager JE: fc CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota NOTICE OF HEARING ON PROPOSED ASSESSMENT UNPAID TREE REMOVAL CHARGE~ TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: 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 O019 $1,5OO.OO An owner may appeal an assessment to District Court pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 429.081 by serving notice of the appeal upon the Mayor or Clerk of the City within 30 days after the adoption of the assessment and filing such notice with the District Court within ten days after service upon the Mayor or Clerk. No such appeal as to the amount of an assessment as to a specific parcel of land may be made unless the owner has either filed a signed written objec- tion to that assessment with the City ~lerk prior to the hearing or has presented the written objection'to the presiding officer at the hearing. Francene C. Clark, City Clerk Publish in The Laker September 28, 1982 ?,3.3 7 LAKE BOARDMEMBER$ MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT 402 EAST LAKE STREET WAYZATA, MINNESOTA 55391 TELEPHONE 6121473-7033 FRANK MIXA, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Robert Tipton Brown, Chairman Greenwoocl Frank R. Hunt, Jr., Vice Chairman Spring Park Robert P. Rascop, Secretary Shorewood Edward G. Bauman, Treasurer Tonka Bay Alan Fasching Minnet~sta Orval R. Fenstad Mound Richard J. Gar,wood Deephaven Jo Ellen Hurt Orono Lois C. Johnson Minnetonke Beach M. Jerry Johnson Excelsior Robert S. MacNamera Wayzata Robert K. Pillsbury Mlnnetonka Robert E. Slocum Woodland Richard J. Soclerberg Victoria TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJ: LMCD MEMBER MUNICIPALITIES Robert Tipton Brown October 6, 1982 Expiration of Terms of Board Members The term of office of your.appointed representative to the 'LMCD Board'expired in September, 1982. Under state statutes governing the District, please pass a resolution appointingyour representative to the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Board of Directors through September, 1985. At'tached are summary reports of the attendance of LMCD represeDtatives at official District activities from October, 1979 through September, 1982. Questions should be directed to the District office at 473-7033 or to myself. The first meeting of attendance of the Board member will be-October 27, 1982 at 8 p.m. at the Tonka Bay · Enc%'--~ cc: LMCD Member'Mayors ~CD Board ~ambers Charles L. LeFevara LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT ATTENDANCE RECORD SUMMARY - BOARD & COMMITTEE M~ETINGS October, 1981 through September, 1982 City and Board Member Water Structures and Environment Board Committee Lake Use Meetings Meetings Hearings Committee Deephaven Thomas Maple 6:12 5:8 3:6 3:9 Excelsior Jerry Johnson 11:12 5:8 2:6 Greenwood Robert Brown 12:12 4:8 3:6 1:9 Laketown Township David Nixon 1:2 Minnetonka Robert Pillsbury 10:12 7:8 1:6 9:9 Minnetonka Beach Lois Johnson 9:12 4:8 0:6 6:9 Minnetrista Alan Fasching 5:12 0:9 Mound Orval Fenstad 5:12 1:8 1:6 2:9 Orono Jo Ellen Hurr 9:12 6:8 3:6 5:8 Shorewood Robert Rascop 12:12 7:8 6:6 6:9 Spring Park Frank Hunt 10:12 8:8 1:6 1:9 Tonka Bay Ed Bauman 9:12 1 8:9 Victoria Richard Soderberg 3:12 0:8 0:6 0:9 Wayzata Robert MacNamara 6:12 2 5:9 Woodland Robert Slocum 9:12 0:8 0:6 Attorney Charles LeFevere 11:1~ 4 NOTE: The first digit denotes the~number of meerings attended, the second digit denotes the total number of meetings° In addition, members attended special, ad hoc and/or regular Executive Committee meetings. 10-1-82 LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT ATTENDANCE RECORD SUMMARY - BOARD & COMMITTEE ~-[EET~NGS October, 1980 through September, 1981 City and Board Member Water Structures and Environmenf Board Committee Lake Use Committee Meetings Meetings Hearings Meetings Hearings Deephaven Richard Garwood 9:12 8:11 7:9 6:10 2:2 Excelsior Jerry Johnson 5:12 6:11 3:9 Greenwood Robert Brown 11:12 10:11 8:9 1 1 Laketown Township David Nixon 6:12 3:11 2:9 0:10 0:2 Minnetonka Robert Pillsbury 8:12 7:11 4:9 10:10 2:2 Minnetonka Beach Boies/Johnson 7:12 1:8 0:9 0;7 0:2 Minnetrista Clevenger/Fasching 4:12 0:9 0:2 Mound Ulrick/Fenstad 5:12 2:7 2:6 2:10 0:2 Orono Norman Paurus 12:12 11:11 9:9 7:10 0:2 Shorewood Naegele/Rascop 11:12 5:10 3:9 4:10 0:2 Spring Park Frank Hunt 8:12 8:11 1:9 0:10 1:2 Tonka Bay Ed Bauman 10:12 2 3 8:10 2:2 Victoria Richard Soderberg 7:12 0:11 0:9 0:10 0:2 Wayzata Robert MacNamara 5:12 0:11 0:9 4:10 0:2 Woodland Robert Slocum 6:12 0:11 0:9 Attorney Charles LeFevere 10:12 1 7 NOTE: The first'digit denotes the number of meetings attended, the second digit denotes the total number of meetings held. In addition, members attended special, ad hoc and/or regular .Executive Committee meetings. 10-1-82 LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT ATTENDANCE RECORD SUMMARY - BOARD & COmmITTEE MEETINGS October, 1979 through September, 1980 Water Structures and Environment Board Committee Lake Use Committee City and Board Member Meetings Meetings Hearings Meetings Hearings Deephaven Richard Garwood 11:13 5:10 6:7 5:9 1:1 Excelsior Jerry Johnson 11:13 6:10 3:7 1 Greenwood Robert' Brown 12:13 10:10 6:7 1 Laketown Township . David Nixon 7:13 4:10 2:7 0:9 0:1 Minnetonka Robert Pillsbury 11:13 6:10 6:7 7:9 1:1 ~tinnetonka Beach David Boles 9:13 5:10 1:7 1:9 0:1 Minnetrista Walt Clevenger 1:13 0:9 0:1 Mound Polston/Ulrick 1:13 0:5 0:1 Orono Norman Paurus 10:13 6:10 4:7 7:9 ,0:1 Shorewood Robert Naegele 9:13 3:10 1:7 0:9 0:1 Spring Park Frank Hunt 11:13 7:10 2:7 2:9 ~:1 Tonka Bay Ed Bauman 11:13 4 3 8:9 0:1 Victoria Richard Soderberg 6:13 1:10 1:7 2:9 0:1 Wayzata Robert MacNamara 6:13 0:10 3:7 4:9 0:1 Woodland Robert Slocum 8:13 0:10 2:7 1 Attorney Charles LeFevere 12:12 3 NOTE: The first digit denotes the number of meetings attended, the second digit denotes the total number of meetings held. In addition, members attended special, ad hoc and/or regular Executive Committee meetings. 10-1-82 McNAUGHTON MOTOR SERVICE 2513 East 33rd Street MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55406 724-4538 Oct. 2, 1982 Jon E].a~ City of Mound Mound, Mn. 55364 Re: Lota 4,5,&6 Block 5 Seton Addition Property I.D. No. 24-117-24 il 0008 Dear Jon: As per omr conversation yesterday these lots are owned by my father William R. ~cMaughton. It is him intention ~hould he be unable to conwert them to some practical use before Nov. 1, 1982 to donate them to the City of Mound via a quit claim deed. Ne would like to include in the transfer! the covenant that the property be m~ed only a~ a wildlife refuge. Please determine for me if this would be acceptable to the city council. Sincerely; John R. ~cNaughton ~ ¢ i X ]3. 0 ~J XX .<,,< l--t=. X n n tO =.J n~ Z U~ INTEROFFICE MEMO T FROM: SUBJECT: Jon Elam, City Manager Bruce ~,~;old, Chief of Police Parking on Lynwood Blvd. DATE September 30, On Tuesday, September 28, 1982, I met with Howard Hodges, Kathy Bailey, and Don Ulrick, to discuss parking in the area of the new Westonka Senior Center. Concern was voiced that adequate parking within a short distance of the center, was at a premium. To aid with this problem, the group suggested that the north side of Lynwood Blvd., west of Commerce, adjacent to the pod con- taining the center, might be a potential site. I looked at the site and made the following observations: 1. The area is currently zoned no parking except Saturday, Sunday, and Holidays. This was probably to facilitate school bus loading. 2. Some of the roadway immediately west of Commerce should remain a no parking zone because of congestion at Super America. 3. Winter snoWs could ~arrmv the roadway to a point where traffic flow could be restricted. ~ince the site allows parking on designated days, I would think ~xtending the usage would not create a problem.' The group felt a two hour parking zone would allow ample time for use of the center and allow the cars to turn over. The problem of snow accumulation can probably be taken care of by timely use of the City's snowblowers. I would recommend the City council take the follmving action to create the ~vo hour parking zone, Ammend or repeal section '46.29, sub (c) sub. 2 of chapter 46. The section should allow a ~o hour parking zone from 90 feet west of Commerce Blvd. to 350 feet west of Commerce Blvd. on the north side of Lynwood Blvd. This section of road should be signed as follows: 1) A sign 90 feet west of Commerce Blvd., on the north side of Lynwood Blvd, with the legend; "No Parking Here to Corner." 2) ~vo signs between the above mentioned sign and the 'no Parking Anytime" zone, 350 feet west of Commerce Blvd., with the legend~ "~vo Hour Parking." I can meet with Hennepin County or Bob Johnson to discuss sign placement. CITY OF MOUND Mound, Minnesota TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Jon .Elam, City Manager ~' Licensing Department October 7, 1982 License Application - Game of Skill The Twin City Novelty Company has made application for a Game of Skill license for a "Cocktail Table-Frogger" for the Mound V.F.W. Post 5113. The license, if granted by the Council, would expire April 30, 1983. Marge Stutsman .. CiTY OF EOUND . Eound, 1.:innes ot~ CITY OF MOUND. ~ame o£ O.'ner of Bus±ness LICENSE APPLICATION · Amumement De~ices:' TWIN 'CITY NOVELTY COMPANY Address 9549 Penn Avenue South, Bloomington, Minn'esota ' 55431 Phone No.887~5353 Stre et. - ' City State Does anyone other tb~n above have financial .~nterest in the business? no Looati'on of g. mus'ement Device Mound V~J- 2544 C. ommerce Blvd., Mound, 'MinnesOta Phone )~'o. Zip Application is' hereby'requested for: Number Item Juke Boz ' Other (l~- scribe) VIDEO GAME (Cocktail Fable-FROGGER) $25.00 : /~~~~ '~~' '~ ' Ceneral HanaRer Licenses expire April' 30 Of each year. Hours of Operation: 10:00 a.m.'to 12:00 nidnight. * If the ans'~er to Item 3 is "Yes," please list others having a financial interest in the business on the back of this.application, giving name, address and telephone BILLS ..... OCTOBER 12, 1982. · Ben Frankl in Blackowiak & Son Holly Bostrom Burlington Northern Buds Radiator & Body Bryan Rock Prod Bowman Barnes Janet Bertrand Gregg Bergquist Rober't Cheney Bill Clark Standard Coast to Coast Continental Telephone Robert Cheney Dependable Services Dray Publications Jon Elam Jack Farness Finley Bros. Enterprises ~ 1 enwood Ing 1 ewood Eugene Hickok & Assoc Henn Co. Treas Hawkins Chemical Henn Coop Seed Exchange' Henn Co. Sheriffs Dept Robert Johnson The Laker Doris Lepsch Marina Auto Supply Miller Davis Mound Fi re Dept Mound Hdwe Wm Mueller & Sons Martins Navarre 66 City of Mound MN Academy Prosec & Lw Enforc No. Star Chapt. ICBO Navarre Hdwe N.S.P. Popham, Haik, Schnobrich Riteway Motor Parts Brad Roy E.H. Renner & Sons Greg Skinner State Bank of Mound 'Shepherds Rental Rugs Spring Park Car Wash Stern, Levine, Schwartz State Bank of Mound Tri State Drilling Tulberg ~ Brakke Tonka Tools Inc 191.03 56.00 263..00 533.33 18.O0 196.O2 153.88 37.97 166. O5 275.00 2,082.15 121.19 1,124.84 334'.00 33.00' 483.31 5.95 275.00 9,940.00 ~3.80 110.00 2,957.46 281.17 49.50 831.30 34.32 192.30 15.OO 376.35 341.25 4,479.40 16.20 881.55 37.00 69.91 33.70 168.00 llO.OO 255.32 4,330.30 5,222.79 96.00 15.OO 10,668.O0 175.85 101,159.50 320.05 58.OO 2,740.28 10.30 78.7O 55O.OO 144.00 Tweeds Service Garage Village Chevrolet Vanwaters & R~gers Water Products Winner Industries Admiral Chemical Auto Con Industries Applebaums Anthony's Floral Acro Minnesota Albinson TOTAL BILLS LIQUOR BILLS Bradley Exterminating Butch's Bar Supply Cash Register Sales city Club Distrib Coca Cola' Bottling Day Distrib EaSt Side-Beverage Gold Medal Beverage Home Juice Kool Kube Ice Mark VII Sales Midwest Wine A.J. Ogle. Pepsi Cola/7 Up Pogreba Distrib Real One Acquisition Regal Window Clean Thorpe Distrib Griggs Cooper Johnson.Bros. Liquor MN Distillers Old Peoria Ed Phillips TOTAL LIQUOR BILLS GRAND TOTAL--ALL BILLS 54. O0 43.46 358.2r 124.9~ 1.6.1 162.35 157.22 10.20 25.OO 129.91 24.30 154,233.22 19.OO 461.59 67.19 2,989.80 275.27 2,742.02 4,20O.36 180.O0 54.74 215.30 284.00 963.50 2,206.8 183.5o 3,533.15 675.OO 10.75 4,750.70 3,492.92 6,599.53 1,894.00 2,314.55 2,379.71 40,493.45 194,726.67 To: Jon Elam From: B~uce Wold Subj: CITY of MOUND Bids for Police Car 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 (612) 472-1155 Jon: As you know, we opened bids for the police vehicle at 10:00 AM on October 12, 1982. Present at the-bid opening were City Clerk, Fran Clark; City Manager, Jon Elam and Police Chief, Bruce Wold. A total of eight bids were received and b~oke down as follows: FORD BIDDERS: 1. Superior Ford - 9700 56th Ave. No. 1983 Crown Victoria S - $9631.O0 2. Freeway Ford - 9700 Lyndale Ave. So. 1:983 Crown Victoria S - $9984.00 3. Brookdale Ford - 2500 Cty. Rd. 10 1983 Crown Victori. a S - $9994.00 4. Bob Ryan Ford - 13400 Wayzata Blvd. 1983 Crown Victoria S - $10.087.00 5. Jerry Palmer's Ford - 4801 W 80th St. 1983 Crown Victoria S - $$10,120.00 6. St. Boni Ford 1983 CroWn Victoria S - $10,282.00 CHEVROLET BIDDERS: Star West Che~-Olds - Delano 1983 Malibu 4dr Seda~ - $10,738.89 2. Thurk Bros. Chevrolet- St. Boni No Bid - asked for an extention to get current 1983 prices. Based on the bids received, and my conversation with Mr. Bill Stuart of Superior Ford, I would recommedd acceptance of the bid from Superior Ford. The bid from Superior Ford as well as all of the bidders meet the specifications that were advertised. The bid of Superior Ford is attached to this memo for your information. The Superior Ford bid seems to overlook the requirement for bucket seats. However, in my conversation with Mr. Stuart, he stated that the bid did include bucket seats and that he had inadvertantly left them out. I would further recommen8 that we accept the bi8 with the 302 CU IN. engine. This engine is a proven engine that should meet our needs and provide some greate~fuel economy. 1983 New Police Vehicle BID PROPOSAL The under$iEned hereby proposes to furn~'$h ~nd deliver, F.O.B. City of Mound, the following new 1983 police vehicle her~in specified: FLEET QUOTATION Super{or Ford, Inc. 9700 · 56th Avenue North County Road 18 & Bass Lake Road Minneapolis. Minnesota 55442 Phone (612) 559-9111 Date /~) Phone /,/) Trade Allowance - Unit~ Serial# Year ~-Safes R~presentative TOTAL Make Mileage TOTAL NET PRICE $ Roomy and Practical for Police and Emergency Needs The LTD Crown Victoria S 4-Door Sedan offers fleet buyers full-size and comfort plus many basic quality features--but at a lower price. Standard features such as halogen headlamps, · 5.0 liter CFI (302 CID) V-8 engine, automatic overdrive transmission, power steering and power front disc/rear drum brakes all add up to make the LTD Crown Victoria S a very attractive buy. Police Package 1983 Ford Police Packages are offered on the LTD Crown Victoria S 4-Door Sedan with either the 5.0 liter CFI (302 CID) or 5.8 liter HO VV (351 CID) V-8 engines and includes the following equipment: · Automatic Overdrive Transmission with Integral First Gear Lock-Out (PRN (~) D2) · External Auxiliary Transmission Oil Cooler · Police Level Heavy-Duty Cooling Package, including Viscous Fan, Coolant Recovery System and High-Capacity Water Pump · Heavy-Duty Frame · Police Maximum Handling Package-- includes: -- Extra-he, avy-clu~,, high-rate front and rear spr,ngs · --Heavy-duty upsized front and rear shock absorbers --Heavy-duty front and rear police stabilizer bars --Steel upper control arm bushings and. upper ball joints and special lower control arm bushings · Power Steering with Forward Mounted Oil Cooler · Heavy-Duty Power Front Disc/Rear Drum Brakes (semi-metallic front disc pads, flared and grooved 11 inch rear drums - for efficient cooling with organic linings) · Automatic Parking Brake Release · 60-Amp Alternator (100-AMP with 5.8L HO engine) · Heavy-Duty Flight Bench Front Seat · Calibrated Speedometer (0-t40 MPH in 2 MPH increments; 0-220 KM/Hr in 5 KM increments) · 71-Amp/Hour (CCA 475 amps) Heavy-Duty Battery (maintenance-free) · Battery Heat Shield · Remote-Control Electric Decklid Release in Glove Box · AM Radio · Single-Key Locking System · Dual Beam Map Light · Heavy-Duty 15 x 6.5" SafetyRim Wheels · P225/70R15 BSW Police Special Fabric Radial Tires with Conventional Spare Tire · Bright Hubcaps Standard Features in addition to those items specified for the Police Packages, the 1983 LTD Crown Victoria S has many features that contribute to comfort and/or convenience during the time spent on the road, Solid Roomy Body The body. on-frame construction provides a solid plat-form for mounting chassis components that combine to deliver a quiet ride. The LTD Crown Victoria S can provide plenty of rC'omy comfort reside for si× ~(tu[ts Responsive Suspension A computer-tuned suspension system is a major reason for the smooth ride of a Crown Victoria S. Up front is a long- and short-arm design with Iow friction ball joints. At the rear ~s a compact 4-bar link clesign with rear shocks mounted forward of the rear axle for an efficient suspension. Sound Insulation Sound insulation surrounds the LTD Crown Victoria S passenger compartment-setting up effective barriers against road and traffic noise that can affect working efficiency on Advanced Front Seat Design The standard front seat for 1983 is a flight bench design with a fold-down center armrest. The heavy-duty front seat design helps assure working comfort the whole shift. Molded- foam padding for comfort combines with a steel "Flex-O-Lator" spring mat for firm support--especially under the thighs. The LTD Crown Victoria S driver-center provides an instrument cluster that reads at a glance...expansive glass areas...and five prime operating controls at fingertip convenience on twin column-mounted control stalks. DuraSpark Ignition System Ford's DuraSpark Solid State Ignition System provides a high-voltage spark. eliminates the conventional points and condenser and extends sparkplug life. The electronic voltage regulator has no moving Additional Standard Features Include... o Anti-Theft Door Lock Buttons · ~l~[-Keyed Cut-Pile Carpeting · ~-Well Trunk [22.4 cu. ft.) with iow li?E~,e r height ' · Deluxe Color;Keyed 4-Spoke Soft-Rim S~e~ring Wheel · Dual Note Horn · Front Bumper Guards · Glove Box, Ashtray and Trunk Lights · Horizontal Front Door Lock Plungers in Arm Rests · Illuminated Bin-Type Locking Glove Box · Inside Hood Release · LH Remote-Control Mirror · Power Ventilation System · Quad Rectangular Halogen Headlamps with Wraparound Parking Lamps · Seat Belts with C0m10rt Regulator Feature · Steering Column Multi-Function Levers with Controls tor Turn Signals. Horn, Headlight Dimmer and Windshield Wiper/ Washer · "Tiltaway" Door Hinges (easy entry and exit} · Wheellip and Rocker Panel'Moldings 5.8L HO Engine Package The 5.8L High Output Package includes a dual exhaust system, revised camshaft for improved high speed performance, engine oil cooler, spark knock sensor, heavy-duty water pump, premium bearings, special valves and valve springs for added durability. Powertrain Availability Trans- Axle Ratio' Engine mission 49-State California High Altitude 5.0L CFI A4 3.08 3.08 3.42 5.8L W* ~ A4 .2.73 2.73 2.73i The following .are deleted from the Ford LTD Crown Victoria Standard Equipment when the Police Package is ordere~: · AM/FM Stereo Radio (replaced by AM) · Bright Window Frames · DeckEd Applique · Electric Clock · Front Door Scuff Plates · Hood, Bodyside and Decklid Stripes · Hood Ornament and Bright Rear Molding · Luxury Sound Insulation · Underhood Insulation · Vinyl Insert Bodyside Moldings · Vinyl Roof and Wrapover Molding · Wide Door Lower Moldings Optional Equipment In addition to the many standard features provided on 1983 Ford LTD Crown Victoria S police vehicles, there are al~o many options available to suit the individual requirements of law-enforcement agencies. Regular Production Options (RPO) · Air Conditioner, (SelectAire with Automatic or Manual Temperature Control) - Axle. Tractlon-Lok · Bodyside Protection, Lower · Bumper Guards. Rear · Bumper Rub Strips (front and rear} · Clock, Electronic Digital CTime/Date/ Elapsed Time} · Clock. 0uartz Electric (Sweephand} · Lamps. F[ont Electric Rear Window · Engine, 5.8L VV · Glass, Tinted (Complete} · Illuminated Entry System · Interval Windshield Wipers · Light Group: includes "headlamps-on" warning buzzer, engine compartment light, front courtesy lights, rear-door courtesy light switches (4-doors only) · Mirror. RH Remote-Control · Protection Group: includes bright door- edge guards, front & rear color-keyed carpet mats, license plate trame(s} · Radio, AM with Dual Rear Speakers · Radio, AM/FM Monaural · Radio, AM/FM Monaural with Dual Rear Speakers · Radio, AM/FM Stereo (includes dual front and rear speakers) · Radio Credit Option · Seat, Six-Way Power · Seat Trim, Ali-Vinyl · Seats, Split Bench with Dual Recliners (not heavy-duty) · Speed Control, Fingertip · Steering Wheel. Tilt · Tripminder· Computer: Provides Time of Day, Elapsed Time, Date, Elapsed Trip Distance, Trip Average Speed, Instantaneous Distance/Gallon. Trip Average Distance/Gallon, Fuel Used, English/Metric Conversion (miles/ kilometers and gallons/liters) · Vent Windows, Pivoting Front · Windows. Power Side (includes driver- only control switch on 4-cioor models) Limited Production Options (LPO} · Alternator. lO0-Amp (standard with 5.8L HO engine) · Floor Mats. Color-Keyed Front Carpeted · Floor Mats. Heavy-Duty Black Rubber (replace standard carpeling) · Glass. Tinted (windshield only} · Locks, Power Door · Organic Brake Linings, Front Disc · Wheel.Covers, Full (15") · Windshield Wipers, Interval Domestic Special Orders [DSO) Ford's Special Order Department has available a wide assortment o! pre- assembled equipment packages to fit specialized fleet needs. Specially engineered individual equipment packages are also developed for small and large fleets. All vehicles are delivered from the factory with all modifications and selected equipment installed, ready tot dealer prel~ and immediate use. - Battery, 80 Amp · Gauges; Oil Pressure. Water Temperature, Voltmeter (mounted in radio opening or, with Gauge Package, on left side of instrument panel crash pad} · Lamp, Directional Map- Header-Mounted · Seats. Bucket (Not Heavy-Duty) · Seat, Split Bench (Heavy-Duty) · Spotlights (RH and LH) Pillar-Mounted · Radio Noise Suppression · Radio Wiring Conduit · Roof Reinforcement Dealer-Installed Accessories In addition to tactory-installed options available to police fleets, your Ford Dealer has many adcJJtional accessories available for local installation. For instance: · Compass · Fire Extinguishers October 8, 1982 Mound City Council Mound, Minnesota Dear Council Members, I would like this letter to serve as my request for an extension of my operating hours at the Mound Youth Center Ar- cade, located at 5458 Auditors Road, Mound, Mn. Operating hours at this time are set up for a 2:30 opening on weekdays and 11:00 a.m. on Saturdays. Closing time is set up for 9:00 p.m. weekdays and 10:00 on Saturdays. My request for longer hours effects only the closing time. I would like my closing time moved to 11:00 p.m. on weekdays and 12:00 midnight Satur- days. I feel this would reduce the problem of all the kids leaving at one time in large groups and ending up at either the S.A. Station or Tom Thumb due to the early closing instead of going directly home. Longer hours will allow them to leave in smaller group-. Younger kids will not be allowed to stay after 9:00 weekdays and 10:00 Saturdays. I'm also at this time requesting the City Council Members to permit me to expand the Youth Center. A rough plan is att- ached with this letter. Thank you for your cooperation and consideration in my above request. Respectfully, TW/sla Tom Watson Owner/Properi tor Enclosure PRESENT ARCADE 'PROPOSED EXPANSION McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS · LAND SURVEYORS · PLANNERS October 8, 1982 Reply To: 12800 Industrial Park Boulevard Plymouth, Minnesota 55441 (612) 559-3700 Mr. Jon Elam City Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Subject: City of Mound Sulgrove Road Street Vacation Bialon Property File ~2113 - General Dear Jon: The enclosed sketch shows our proposal for the subject street vacation. You will note that we have also shown an easement over a corner of the Bialon property. This should be a perpetual easement for street and utility purposes and I assume it will have to be granted to the City of Minnetrista. The street vacation should only be approved on the condition that the Bialons grant the easement. I have discussed everything with Mr. Bialon and he is satisfied with our proposal. He understands that once the vacation is finalized, he will have to acquire the five foot strip of vacated Sulgrove from the Henrys and the City of Mound. Enclosed is a description for both the street vacation and the easement. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me. Very truly yours, McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. Joh~nCame~ JC:sj Enclosure cc: Curtis A. Pearson, City Attorney Richard Bialon, 3495 East Shore Dr., Mound printed on recycled paper F- i ..J -0 .J I I I INNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT P.O. Box 387, Wayzata, Minnesota 55391 BOARD OF MANAGERS: David H. Cochran, Pres. * Albert L. Lehman · John E. Thomas · Barb~ra R. Gudmundf, on · Michael B. Carroll September 28, 1982 LkK£ MINNETO#K~ WATERSHED NOUNDARY /- ,OTA RIVER Mr. Kent Lokkesmoe, Regional Hydrologist Metro Region Waters Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 1200 Warner Road St. Paul, Minnesota 55106 Re: Headwaters Control Structure Management Policy and Operating Procedures Dear Mr. Lokkesmoe: In accordance with Special Provision No. X of Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Permit No. 76-6240, the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District hereby submits its proposed operational plan for the Headwaters Control Structure for the operating period of March 1, 1983 through March l, 1986. ?he attached proposed plan entitled, "Headwaters Control Structure Management Policy and Operating Procedures", was approved by the Board of Managers resolution dated September 16, 1982. The Manager's resolution is attached for your information. The "Headwaters Control Structure Management Policy and Operating Procedures" also incorporates the following into one document. Management Policy and Objectives Mlnnehaha Creek Headwaters Control Structure Gray's Bay, Lake Minnetonka Adopted November 17, 1977 Be Gray's Bay Dam Operational Plan as defined by Special Provision No. X of DNR Permit No. 76-6240 1980 Operational Plan Headwaters Control Structure Gray's Bay, Lake. Minnetonka Adopted March, 1980 Mr. Kent Lokkesmoe Page Two September 28, 1982 This will eliminate some of the confusion that has resulted from the existence of three separate documents that affect operation of the structure· The proposed document as you will note was distributed in draft form to all municipalities and interested persons within the District for review and comment on February 24, 1982. After reviewing the comments received, the Managers amended the draft on July 15, 1982 and redistributed the amended draft for further review and comment. Comments received after July 15, 1982 were also reviewed and incorporated to the extent feasible into the proposed document as stated in the September 16, 1982 resolution. The Managers believe the proposed document accommodates, to the greatest extent possible within the intent of the Management Policy, all comments received by the District on or before September 16, 1982. The Managers also believe that the necessary public review of the proposed document as required by DNR Permit No. 76-6240, has been fulfilled. For your'convenience in reviewinE this document, enclosed you will find copies of all written correspondence received or transmitted by the District in regard to this matter since February 24, 1982. Please be aware that many other verbal comments were considered by the Managers during numerous occasions. These verbal comments were, however, similar to the~written comments enclosed· On behalf of the Board of Managers, the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District-hereby requests the Minnesota DNR to act upon the following: It is requested that the DNR approve Section Nos. I, II and III.A of the proposed document entitled "Headwaters Control Structure Management Policy and Operating Procedures", for the operating period through March l, 1986. It is further requested that in conjunction with this approval, Special Provision No. X of DNR Permit No. ?6-6240 be replaced with the DNR approved document to eliminate confusion and to create one document containing all management requirements for the control structure· It is requested that the DNR delete Special Provision No. IX of DNR Permit No. 76-6240 on the basis that the District does not intend to manipulate the subject stop logs. The District Mr. Kent Lokkesmoe Page Three September 28, 1982 was not a party to installation of this structure and manipu- lation or maintenance of the stop logs represents an expense · with no apparent benefit. Should you have any questions regarding the proposed document and the requests made herein, I suggest we meet at your earliest convenience. Very truly yours, EUGENE A. HICKOK AND ASSOCIATES Engineers for the D~strict Michael A. Panzer, P.E. bt Enclosures: 1. Headwaters Control Structure Management Policy and Operating Procedures - September 16, 1982. Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Resolution dated September 16, 1982. cc: Board G. Macomber Ai~ Municipalities with the District and Interested Persons LAKE MINNETONKA AREA MAYORS August 5, 1982 Record of the proceedings of a meeting of the Lake Minnetonka Area Mayors held on Thursday, August 5, 1982 in the Wayzata City Hall Council Chambers. Mayors present were Ed Quest of Deephaven, Dick Kuapp of Excelsior, Gen Olson of Minnetrista, Rock Lindlan of Mound, Brad Van Nest of Orono, Glenn Froberg of Tonka Bay, and Bill Humphrey of Wayzata. Also present were Robert Brown, Chairman of the Lake Minnetonka Conser- vation District, Frank Kelly, Excelsior City Attorney, Dave Cochran and Mike Ps~.er of the Minnebsba Creek Watershed District, and Jo Ellen Hurr, Orono Council Membeh. Dave Cochran and Mike Panzer were present to discuss Watershed District plans for water level control of Lake Minnetonka. Mr. Cochran explained that about one year ~t'a hearing on another subject it became apparent there were some concerns from downstream comm~mf ties about low flows of water in dry periods and the upshot was that they felt the new control structure built in 1979 was restricting flow in the creek. Somehow a controversy got started between Lake area cities and downstream groups, but he thl~k~ they have put' the matter to rest. Mr. Ps~er, District Engineer, explained that last year the District held a hearing to alter the operating plan which would have eliminated the necessity of discharge over the winter months. The original plan did not include that capability, but they found it was not a good idea and that it aggravated the situation. He went on to say that the impetus for the current change being reviewed now by the Watershed District is that the existing operational plan is restrictive in terms of discharge to the Creek at the lower level lake elevations, as it does not receive the same amount of water as it did before the new control was built. The District has gone through several draft proposals, gathered comments, revised the proposal and redis- tributed it for review. He then distributed copies to the Mayors. He went on to say that the proposal has been approved by the District in concept and 'has been distributed for m~icipal review for the second~time. Mr. Panzer then displayed a graphic showing how the discharge would be regulated under the proposed plan. The Watershed has established goals they will strive to achieve, and discharge out of the Lake will be governed by seven zones of control. Management goals are st med at reduction of flooding both on the Lake and the Creek. Zone i covers 929.6 up to 9B0 and whenever that level is in that zone as much water will be discharged down the creek as possible without causing flooding. However, this is variable due to certain conditions. In response to a question from Mr. Brown: concerning where the creek typically floods, Mr. Cochran replied that Mount Olivet Church is one of the top critical areas, also upstream on County Road 73 and he thinks at some point they will have to get after the County to do something. Mayor Van Nest noted that a lake level over 930 with substantial wave action could cause danger to the environment. He feels this proposal is better than the previous proposal, but the maximum discharge rate in Zone I is not defined and it bothers him that it could be below 250 cfs. Mr. Panzer explained that if we continue to operate under the existing plan there is a greater potential for high water. Even though there are some concerns about Zone 1, changes are being made in other areas to com- pensate. Zone 2 covers 928.7 to 929.6 and the operational plan allows maximum dis- charge if it can be demonstrated that high water is imm~uent. Zone 2 is an extensio~ of Zones 4 and 5. Mayor Van Nest said he is more concerned with Zones I and ~. In response to a question from Mayor Lindlan regarding the definition of maximum discharge, Mr. Panzer replied that they would discharge up to whatever the chs~el can take during high water conditions on the Lake. Mr. Cochran replied that there 'Mayors Meeting -2- 8/5/82 is an element of protection in the concerns. The management policy is to reduce flood, but it c~ot be eliminated. Mr. P~er explained that Zone 4 has been designed to cover the ~nticipated normal lake level and all six management goals will be followed. The lake level right now is 928.9. Mayor Van Nest said that under the original plan, once water got below 9~9.6 dis- charge 'was allowed at 50 down through the middle of May, June, July and August~ but we will be d~mping out three times the rate we all agreed to and if we get into a drout we will find the lake level real low. It seems to him that if the lake is increasing in elevation there should be a higher discharge rate and once it starts to recede there should be another discharge rate. He would like further guidelines in Zone 4. Mayor Lindlan said that discharge is covered from 0 to 150 cfs. If the water line is at the lower part of the scale there is probably very little discharging and if there .were more water the discharge could be increased. Mr. Panzer said that 929.4 is a good level for the lake in the s~mer months. Mayor Van Nest said he is disturbed that 929.4 is the ideal level and yet it could be discharged down to 929.1. Mr. Cochran said he thi~ it would be ideal to have the lake at a constant level at all times, but he doesn't think that is possible. There are people downstream who want water in the creek. Mayor Quest stated that there is no way we can live up to the expectations of the people downstream. With the flexible dam you could maintain the level that was the objective of the whole dam and all of a sudden you are asking to serve the recreational needs downstream; you have changed boats. Mr. Cochran replied that this plan does not satisfy that element downstream and the Board is not satisfied with the plan either. There will be many simmers there will be no water in the creek by this plan. Mayor Quest said he thi~ the Watershed District has two diametrically opposed objectives. Mr. Cochran said there are two ~choices - either pour concrete in the dam and go back to the ~revious control or try to improve it. · Mayor Van Nest said he does think something can be done with flood control and he fully supports Zone 2. He is bothered by Zone 4 and does not understand how we can let water go at 150 cfs. Mr. Cochran noted that 150 cfs is a maximum and there may be circumstances when that flexibility is needed. In response to a question from Mayor Lindlan, Mr. Cochran explained that the Board feels they have something that comes closer to meeting the low discharges than occurred historically and that they have made some improvements in their ability to control the level of the lake from a flooding standpoint. The District is trying~ to emphasize that the chart doesn't govern and that the management policy defines how the control will operate. The Board wants flexibility, but there is a basic obligation to reduce flooding on the lake and downstream. The Watershed came into existence as a result of downstream flooding. The rest of the goals are more aes- thetic. Mayor Lindlan asked how much input the LMCD has had in the proposal and arriving at some of the policies. Mr. Cochran replied that they have listened quite care- fully to the LMCD concerns.~ Mr. Brown added that the LMCD has tried to keep their criticism as constructive as possible. They recognize that the Watershed is walking a compromise road here and they recognize some of the efforts made by the Watershed in the past few months to avoid polarization. He thi~ the Watershed did'a good job politically and he feels it is a reasonable compromise. This is a very complicated issue - everything is connected to everything - weather, ground water conditions, Mayors Meeting -3- 8/5/82 physical aspects of the system - and they have to have some flexibility while they are in that process. He has trusted in the Watershed and if that trust doesn't exist we might as well go home. Mayor Van Nest said we are tal~ ng about a narrow band of management and maybe he is overlY concerned. He sees a potential shift away from the historical purpose of the dam. He suggested t~ere be a preamble to the goals stating that the under- lying and paramount management criteria is to maintain as nearly as practical the established high water mark of 929.4 and to the extent possible to meet the goals. We have to go back to when the dam was authorized and why. The sole purpose was to establish and maintain the ordinary high water level mark. Up until 1979 when the dam was built it created a 929.4 high water level mark and improvements on the lake were built around that mark. Mayor Olson said she recalls hearing that people· are more f~m~ liar with the ten-year average lake levels and not the 30-year average and asked to what extent the Water- shed is considering this in Zone 4. Mr. P~er replied that if the lake level did follow the 30-year average, under the old controls between the middle of May and middle of September approximately 3½" of water would have. been discharged from the lake. The current proposal is designed to provide similar f~ows for similar lake level conditions. He added that the proposed 12 cfs in Zone 5 is intended to reduce stagnation. Mayor Van Nest said the dam was put in to maintain the high water level mark, and Mr. Cochran disagreed, stating the old dam was constructed at 928.6~, 1929 datum. Mayor Van Nest said the dam clearly from the 1800's to 1979 had one purpose only and that was to maintain the ora~ary high water on the lake. Mr. Cochran disagreed and said the old dam caUSed the ordinary high. Conversely the ordinary low also exists. Mayor Van Nest stated that~ we may be losing our rights right now and he wants everyone to be aware of it. Mayor Quest agreed. He then asked about current discharge and Mr. Ps~zer replied that no water has been discharged since the 16th of July when the lake dropped to 929.3. At that point the existing operational plan required the gates to be shut. He added that the old structure would have discharged water until elevation 928.6. Mayor Lindlan asked where the District is going from here~ and where do things get locked in. Mr. Cochran replied that the thi~ug at this time is to either approve or modify or change this particular proposal; it is in the cities' hands until September 2nd. He doesn't anticipate ~ much change except for clarification and if the Board approves it, it will be sent to the DNR in September. Mr. Brown said that the LMCD has not yet reviewed and acted on the plan as a group. He would suspect that he would suggest the Board give it cautious approval. He thinks Mayor Van Nest makes an excellent point. The problem is one of simply reasonableness. If this turns into a lakeside vs. creekside dwellers dispute he knows what will happen. What .we have now is slightly different and it has some important differences particularly with regard to the low flow~ whereas the original proposal didn't do that. Mayor Quest said he doesn't Mant to see a confrontation either. One of the reasons we call the Mayors together is ~because we are fragmented-enough that people do not think of us as a comm~i ty, but through this group if we see an issue we agree upon, we come together as a 30,000 some group and somebody to reckon with. He would like Mayors Meeting -4- 8/5/82 to see a motion come out of this group that the primary management goal should be the objective of maintaining the ordinary high water and if they meet the .other six objectives, fine. Mayor Olson said she thinks the cities should respond to the District's proposal. Mayor Knapp said Excelsior ~ould ~o ~ith the IMCD recommendation. Mayor Lindlan said they are in agreement that the lake level should be-kept up. He would like a chance to go back and ask his Council to vote on something along the lines of main- taining the ordinary high water of 929.4. Mr. Cochran said he believes it can' t be achieved. There are extreme arguments on both ends and he wouldn't want this group termed as totally irrational. Mr. Quest said they respect the job the Watershed has been doing, but they would like some balance. Mr. Lindlan' said he'would think the Watershed would look on it as a primary guideline. Concerning an upcoming seminar addressing recent legislation, Mr. Cochran advised the group that a new law requires that candidates for appointment to the Watershed District be names submitted by the m~f cipa]_ities. There are 90 m~i cipalities wholly or totally within the District, three of which are townships and the rest are cities; five are in Carver County and the rest in Hennepin County. Those common, f- ties can be subdivided into upper lake commonalties, lower lake commonalties, those with lakeshore, those with creekside properties and those with tributary properties. The other side of the coin is a bill that calls for total metro area saturation of some kind of watershed management. He asked if anyone can imagine a joint powers agree- ment in the watershed district with 30 communities involved. Requirements for the size of the board are that it must have five, but it can have nine. He went on to say that any group, organization or management function is only as good as the manage- ment. He is comfortable with a five-member Board, provided that they are capable and understand the District and participate in the meetings, adding that the present members' terms are up in March. Mayor Van Nest said he is trying to let everybody know what is going on and he does feel strongly. He thi~.~ it is terrible that on this great lake you have to call up Hickok and Associates to find out the level. Mr. P~F. er said that some gauges will be installed this year, at the dam and the narrows for sure, plus some other locations. Mayor Quest said he feels the level should be published with the vital statistics, like the weather. Mr. Cochran further reported that the law requires watersheds to have an overall plan and it now requires each municipality to have a plan. Once that is in place the only way the Watershed plan can be modified is by the Water Resources Board, and the cities' plans can only be approved or disapproved by the Watershed. He feels it has to be a joint effort. Mayor Humphrey then ths~Wed the Watershed representatives for their comments, stating that he feels everyone should go to their Councils with this information. Robert' Brown was present to discuss IMCD m~4 cipality status and to provide current information on the Lake Minnetonka Task Force. Mr. Brown explained that the DNR in conjunction with the Met Council Department of Energy and Planning developed a metro access program and as a part of that they are charged with developing and creating access to lakes in the state. The DNR opted to pursue an access in Halstead's Bay, which through a rapid process, became incredibly political. Needless to say the upshot was that the DNR in conjunction with the Met Council, because of such strong Mayors Meeting -5- 8/5/82 feeling and confusion and misunderstanding, felt that perhaps a way to deal with that would be to generate a citizen task force. On March 5, 1982 endorsement was given to establish such a force to develop a complete recreation end management plan for the lake, including public access. The task force nmnbers 19, and includes Bob Searles as Chairman, and Dave Cochran and Brad Van Nest. The charges by the DNR address (1) adequacy of existing access to the Lake, including private and public; (2) evaluation of present re creational management programs, inclu81 ~g law enforcement; and (B) evaluation of water use patterns on the Lake. He thi~.~ the second and third charges ultimately will be an examination of the activities of management that the IMCD has at the cnrrent time. He feels the issue will deal with the recreational aspects of the Lake and assessment of public access with recommendations. He thf~ it is a very positive assessment that could result in definite good things for the Lake and the people who use the Lake and the comm~4 ties as well. There is a very serious effort to get all the people on the Task Force who don't know the Lake to get to know both the Lake and the shoreliue as well. The LMCD has been and will continue to be strongly in favor of public access on Lake Minnetonka. Mr. Brown went on to say that the Task Force has had only one official meeting, but he heard no political overtones and thinks it will be relatively ap..oli~icalL Mayor Van Nest said he is working on boat tours and Bob Searles is working on land tours so that the Task Force is seeing the same thing from land and on the lake. The feeling he i-s getting is that the DNR standards for public access do not apply to this Lake. There is going to be a feeling that if anything is done for additional boating access it should be a size that can be controlled and possibly even consider purchasing private marinas. Mayor Quest explained that Deephaven allows anybody to launch at their facili'ty, but there is l~mited parking, although people still can park in the school lotso He added that a non-resident parking permit is $60. Mayor Van Nest said another thing they are showing the Task Force is how close people can park to a launch ramp. Mr. Cochran added that fishermen are out of the parking spaces before the water skiers or other users come in. Mayor Van Nest said another interesting thing is that the DNR feels anybody who wants to get on the Lake should, and when it gets overcrowded they will control it by zoning. Mayor Olson said she thi~ the Task Force will be good, as well as interesting to watch. Mayor Quest asked if there is anything new on Highway lO1. Mayor Humphrey replied that hearings will be held within the next few months. The area just south of Gray's Bay will be changed, and at this point there are two tentative p2s~.~. Mayor Froberg noted that all of the comm~ities received a letter from the LMCD attorneys concerning their options as to whether or not to prosecute within a particular city and whether or not to use the city prosecutors or the LMCD prose- cutor. He discussed the letber with their city attorney and they feel it is totally ~.~atisfactory. He thi~ it is a typical example where individual municipalities could lose a very important power, which is to prosecute any violations that occur within their city. The LMOD does have the power to prosecute, but it is very impor- tant that a distinction be 'made. Statutes provide that the city attorney of a m~i cipality shall prosecute all violations within the m~ cipality unless the County Attorney specifically designates otherwise. He feels when the LMCD brings in their own special prosecutors and the m~ cipalities let this power sli-p through their fingers, they will lose it. The LMCD is saying they are a municipality, and yet it is not made up of elected officials, it does not have boundaries, and he does not think their argument is valid. Mayors Meeting -6- 81,5182 Mayor Van Nest noted that one of the goals of the LMCD Was consistent treatment of the Lake. Mayor Lindlan said we are talking about prosecuting - if this is a law that has been set down in a way that is comfortable with all the cities, it is a broad law. He suggested that the municipality enforce it first and if they don' t the LMCD can proceed. Mayor Froberg said if the city prosecutor refuses to prosecute the LMCD can move the court £or a special prosecutor. In most cases the city prose- cutor Will b~dle the case. The other alternative the LMGD has is to sign a civil action and obtain an injunction to prevent any future violations. Mr. Brown said each person should review the letter and take it to their own Councils and get an opinion. He thinks there is still a great deal of confusion on this. Every effort is made to cooperate with the cities, but those laws dealing with structures are very complex and they do not feel a local prosecutor can represent the LMCD's best interests. If they feel strongly about a case'they will prosecute and if the municipality doesn't want it done, it will be done through district court. They are absolutely willing to cooperate in any way they can on these issues. They have been successful in every Litigation and they don't want to risk foolish litiga- tion which would have a negative impact. Mr. Froberg said if the LMCD feels it should have the power to prosecute, it should bring the matter to the attention of the Legis- lature so they would have the power to do so. Frank Kelly, Excelsior City Attorney, said he agrees with Mayor Froberg's comments. There are fourteen municipalities on the Lake who have less power thau other common,i- ties if the position of the LMCD is correct. He thinks it would be better to go back to the IMCD and have it restructured. Mayor Humphrey said he does not think Wayzata has had any information on this' matter, but he thi~ it is something each city will have to look at very carefully. Mr. Cochran noted that the Watershed is in essentially the same position as the LMCD - they almost always use a city prosecutor, and on occasion they have used a special prosecutor, but it has been agreed on beforehand. He agrees with Mr. Brown's comments that if the m~ cipalities enforce a law you get varying degrees of enforce- ment. Mayor Knapp stated that in this case the LMCD went right over the city' s head and it was an unfortunate thing. Mr. Cochran advised the group that prior to existence of the LMCD there was a League of Minnetonka Municipalities. Approximately $380 in funds is left from that group and he feels the m~i cipalities should have some say in closing the account. He would suggest turning it over to the LMCD for whatever appropriate purpose. The consensus of the Mayors was that the funds should go to the .LMCD as suggested. Following discussion, Mayor Lindlan moved, Mayor Quest seconded, a motion establishing the next meeting at ?:30 P.M. on October 7, 1982. The motion passed unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 10:25 P.M. 91 ~50 ('~ENTI:::IA/AVENUE N.E., BLAINE, MINI~JEgOTA 55,434, (912) ?94-9?00 City Managers and Administrators: Enclosed is an announcement of an Association of Metropolitan Municipalities/Metropolitan Council follow-up Conference on Housing, October.27, 1982. I trust you recall our September '81 Conference, "Where Will Our Children Live?" The metro- politan area participation was fantastic and rewarding. We want to repeat it. Our theme, "Public/Private Partnership & Housing" reaches into a core issue, respective local government/developer roles in the _~erican.housing delivery system. Housing industry literature and practitioners are talking alot about the~necessity of a "public/private partnership" to the future of housing. But what is it, does it exist, is it more than money, where does it exist? How do you put the partnership together? Can local government decision makers be comfortable in a partnership? The AM24 Housing Committee believes a common consciousness, de- rived through metropolitan exchange, most contributes to the continued balanced production of housing ~hroughout the metro- politan area. The Conference will emphasize AMM/Metre Council's housing concern, and discuss some partnership projects which are occurring. There will be.a mock Council meeting highlighting partnership issues and subsequently discussion. Last year I volunteered your considerabla communications powers to bring out your community officials, Councilmembers, Planning Commissioners, etc. You're credited with the success of the Conference and I'm asking you to build on success. Please again use your respective communications devices, channels, and ta!- ents--repetitively to the date of the conference--tO bring out your community officials and developers. Remember the device of covering conference costs for Council and Planning Commis- sion members. Your reward, if you attend, will be Jerry Splinter revealing what he's up to now! LMJ: gh Program PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP: IT'S MORE THAN JUST MONEY A Housing Conference for Local Officials October 27, 1982 Sheraton Midway Interstate Hwy. 94 at Hamline Ay. St. Paul, Minnesota 4:30 4:40 5:10 6:10 6:40 7:50 8:30 8:45 Registration Welcome: Charles Weaver, chairman, Metropolitan Council Keynote Address: George Latimer, mayor, St. Paul Panel: Partnerships in Action: Examples of Tools and Techniques Moderator: Leslie Johnson, city manager, Blaine, and AMM Housing Committee member The City as an Equity Partner. David Sellergren, attorney, Bloomington HRA; vice president, Larkin, Hoffman, Daly and Lindgren Rollover Housing: How New Homes for Elderly People Can Help Young Families. Gerald Splinter, city manager, Brooklyn Center Using Land Write-down for Scattered Sites. Bruce Nordquist, housing specialist, Richfield Negotiating Affordable Housing Prices. Lee Starr, director of planning, Coon Rapids Social Dinner Skit: The scene is a city council meeting. City officials and developers show public-private partnership in action. Panel: Clearing the Air About Partnership: How City Officials, Staff and Developers Can . Work Together Moderator: Mary Anderson, council member, Golden Valley; AMM president Lyn Burton, assistant vice-president; Northland Mortgage Co. Donald Jacobson, director of development, Bor-son Companies Jeff Sweet, city manager, Golden Valley Questions and Discussion Wrap-up: Mary Anderson, AMM president Registration A Housing Conference for Local Officials Name Address City [] Check enclosed (make payable to Metropolitan Council) [] Bill my city City Zip To register, mail this form or call the Council at 291-6464 by Oct. 21. (Metropolitan Council, 300 Metro Square Bldg., 7th and Robert Sts., St. Paul, Minn. 55101. Conference fee, including dinner, is $13.50 a person. Cancellations after noon, Oct. 25, will be billed to your city or to you directly. CITY of ORONO Post Office Box 66- Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323- Municipal Offices On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka September 30, 1982 Mr. Jon R. Elam 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Mn. 55364 Dear Jon On May 22, 1980, the Mayors of Orono, Minnetonka Beach, Long Lake and Wayzata were instrumental in-hosting a town meeting at the Art Center. Those participating in reports to the public on issues before us were, Representative Robert Searles, Senator George Pillsbury, and Commissioner Bud Robb. The meeting allowed public participation in matters of interest to all of us at the local, legislative and state level. Mayor Brad Van Nest chaired the meeting.since Orono was the host city and total participation was very enthusiatic. In June 1980, I followed up with.a letter and telephone calls to each mayor and other government agencies requesting their support for future town meetings including representatives of School Districts, County Assessors, and additional City participation from Mound, Minnetrista, and Spring Park. The response was overwhelming, and all involved indicated their commit- ment to continue the meetings since we all have questions that concern us at the local, school district, county, and state level. We have made arrangements to have another town meeting on Wednesday, October 20, 1982 at 7:30 P.M. at the Orono Middle School District Auditorium located at Highway 12 and the Old Crystal Bay Road in the City of Orono. The middle school is the first building complex on your left on the Crystal Bay Road north of Highway 12. Many favorable comments and continued interest has been indicated in continuing the Town Meeting concept to increase the knowledge and input from all of our citizens in local, county, and state governments. BUILDING & ZONING - 473-7357 ASSESSING ADMINISTRATION & FINANCE - 473-7358 PUBLIC WORKS - 473-7359 I wish to extend to you, your colleagues, and citizens an invitation to join us and assist in this joint town meeting concept on October 20, 1982 at 7:30 P.M. I will be in contact with each of you the week of October 4th to discuss your participation on October 20%h. Thanking you in advance, Wa~'l~son C~ Administrator WRB/msw 3hl OCTOBER 1982 WESTONKA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE .~. ~.L.] "CHAMBER WAVES" ........ - ' ' ;',~ ~ ''"'~ .... i'~' .' '~F""','-' The next Ch~m~r o~ ~me¢~ G~n~'~'a¥'-~O~'~r~i'~'~eeting ,Wili..b~.W~¢ne~ay, Octo6er 20, twelve noon at Minnetonka Mist. Plan now to attend PRESI DENT'S LETTER:. ..~ .... . . _ . · ..: '~ , .-q' .',' . .,' .;' : '~'~ '~ .... ~' ~ ~'~ ..",:" .... -~' ~'" ..':~.- ]-, . ~- '. ' ~, .,;. ~, [, ' . ..c T.. · Can ~ ~ou ~eel the app~ach3ng fall. and w~8te~? -- Along. w~h,.~a3~ and.:w3nte~ ~our'.' .-. Chambe~ 'ha~' lots' 6~f 'ac[iV~ti~s .Plann'ed~. 'Diane' .Their, ~u~i~'s~~ }.~ge~ .'f~'¢ ~o~nd ~ . :~ .... '~. Medical . Cli ni c, 'has. Offe.Eed to"chai r ~the' :Wi~ter "Bal 1' .L,. '.~he '~i'-6s~ '6 f' an a~nual Sod~l.'~'.[' '. event. ~" we: are al so '~orking .'~n ~. Cro'~,.c~n this'comittee-and.Chii ~eme.in will ,a~t"as"c~'-chai~'.'~"~ , '":'" ' ' "~' ; ;'*' ~' ' '0 has.proVen to,.be ~od'uc~i. ve ~ ............ Your fruit'ful'~ ' ' ........ ~ ............. "'*': .... ' ..... :' rI'' z~: Be active in your Chamber. Plan on 6ei~g~:a part of Westonka';~, devel.opm~t and growth... WORKING TOGETHER is ho~ !~._~,~l:.l :~e,}: accomplished!! ' ' ' J~r[g Lo~gpre~ President q.,~ '~?.'q.;~ ..... ~.'*r-. ~ -. · --~ - - ~NAGER'S CORNER: .,.~:< .~_.....,~.. z. September was a very busy month. You may'have, noticed w,e h.ay,e made .some definite improvements in the appearance of'the Chamber waves and in'.the mailing P~ocedu,re. Because we are now using a bulk mailing system, it is 6riti~al'that any article, s or information for the newsletter be delivered to Ruth Wyman, the editor, or myself no later than the 15th of the preceding month. Ruth may be reached at Quality Child Care, Inc., 472-2566, if'you have any input or questions. We will be experimenting with further ideas, material content and composi- tion as we continue to develop' the future issues. For now, I really appreciate-those of you who take the time to read the Chamber Waves and give us your comments. The Chamber membership continues to grow every month. We welcome as new members: Don English, owner of Mound Coast to Coast; Linda McKinney and Vicki George,-owners of Ms. Print; Don Ulrich of Westonka Community Services; and Ruby Steckel of the Sailor NewsPapers. Last month on behalf of the Westonka Chamber, President Jerry Longpre present, ed the Modnd'Reta~l Council with a check for $350.00. These funds to be used by the Council' as needed in i'ts planning and executing of local promotions. Hopefully, by next Year~' 'we wilfl have more active members in Spring Park and Navarre so that they will. also be able to benefit from this program. .'. There are two other projects that the Board. of Directors has been spending a great deal of thought on, and I would like to share each of them with you now. First, the Chamber. calendar calls for a Winter Social event of some sort. The Board has chosen the theme of Winter Ball, to be held probably in January, as the best way to celebrate t.he success an'd growth of this last year and the potential of the new year. This event will be open-to the general public with hopefully, part of the ticket price being donated to local arts and service organizations. This will be an evening to look forward to and enjoy, a night of fun and comraderie. Diane Theis, Business Manager, Mound Medical Page 2. inic, has kindly offered to chair this fi'rst annual' Ball. Diane is fairly new this area and needs volunteers for her committee. Please contact her at the Clinic, 472-1144, if you can help. The first organizational meeting will be at the Mound Clinic,September'27th, at 7 p..m.. ' The second winter event will, hopefully, be the .Chamber event, of the year..from .the standpoint-of increasing outside awareness of l~he Westonka area. The Chamber will be sponsoring a day of cross-country ski-racing, probably jn Mid-February. Howard Sundby, has valiantly agreed to ~hair 'this program'with meI, Obviously .something of · this magnitude cannot be pulled, off without lots of local support both from inside and outside the Chamber. The first' orgahizational meeting will be Thursday, Septem' bet 30, 7:30 p.m. ~n Chamber of Commerce Off~ce, .Community Services Bldg., Mound. ~ If you or anyone you know is interested' please be at that meeting or call Howard Sundby..472-3197 orr myself, 472,6780,_ 47.1~729Y._ This ..event. will also. hopefully. ........ have as one of i{s goals a donation ~O'one or mor, e of our lOcal -Sporting or natura-.~' ~-'' list projects. " See you Octobe~r 20, 'at th6 Mist. ~-" ~'" - Chic Remein, Chamber Manager Congratulations to Bill Netka, september Chamber Member of the Month. WORKING TOGETHER we gain in strength. Come join us on October 20. You6 Westonka Area Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYW00D RD MOUND MN 55364 ULK' A'FE _ LI, $ .-rb S1-AQ AID October 4, 1982 Mr. 2on Elam City Manager City of Mound City Hail 5341Maywood Drive Mound, Minnesota 55364 Dear 3on: Thank you for the opportunity to chat .with you last few week. Per our conversation, it is proposed that the City of Mound, Minnesota, retain David Hozza of The Hozza Associates on the foIlowing basis: 1. Services: I woul'd agree to act as a general advisor and consultant to you on various issues of concern to you regarding the proposed downtown redevelopment, possible marina, support facilities and other related areas/issues, such issues to be determined by yourself and/or your designee. 2. Authority: I wouId act soieiy as an independent consuItant, with no authorit~ to bind or obligate you without your exPressed consent. 3. 'Compensation: You wouId agree to compensate The Hozza Associates at the foIIowing rates, in' no ease to exceed a totai of $2,000 pIus expenses. David H. Hozza: $60/hour 3oan Poritsky: S30/hour EiIeen McMahon: S30/hour 4. Expenses: I wiII be reimbursed for aIi reguiar expenses incurred which are directiy attributabie to my work for you, such as Iong distance phone caIIs, travei (approved in advance), printing, word processing time, secretariai expense~ etc. 5. BiiIing: You wiII be bilIed monthIy at the end of each month. 1.5% interest per month wiI1 be charged on aIi biIIs thirty (30) days past due. 6. Terms: You and I agree that this agreement continues on a month-to-month basis, and may be terminated at any time by either party, with thirty (30) days notice. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to call. Thank you. Sincerely yours, Approved and accepted by City of Mound, Minnesota this __day of , 1982 David H. Hozza President 3on Elam, City ttanager · City of Hound, 14innesot. a A. THOMAS 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 OFFICES WURST, PEARSON, HAMILTON, LARSON & UNDERWOOD A PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS 1100 FIRST BANK PLACE WEST MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA 55402 October 5, 1982 TELEPHONE (612) :338-4200 Mr. Jon Elam, City Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 Re: Housing and Redevelopment Authority Dear Jon: This will acknowledge that at our meeting on October 1, 1982, you asked me for some information concerning the HRA and its authority, etc. The questions were very broad, but I will try to respond to the questions you raised and also to give you some general information. First of all, the choice of an Executive Director for the HRA rests with the HRA since it is an independent body. Secondly, the rules, by-laws, etc. as to how the HRA conducts its business is adopted by the HRA as an individual body. Third, the City Council does have authority to appoint its members to the HRA and initiallyi~the Council could have been the HRA except for the fact that we now have an independent body appointed and their terms run for five years. Unless they were to voluntarily quit so that the council could appoint itself to be the HRA, this would pose a problem at this time. The HRA was established in Mound based on the statutory findings that there was in the City any of the following: 1. A need for urban renewal or redevelopment. 2. A need for additional veteran's housing accoum~odations. A shortage of adequate:~housing for people in low income brackets. The HRA consisted of the 5 members appointed by the Council at that time. Since Mound's creation of a HRA, officers and employees of the City can now serve whereas at the time our HRA was founded they could not. Members of the HRAmay be removed by the Council after a public hearing for ineligibility, neglect of duty, or misconduct in office. The HRA is a public corporation with all the usual corporate powers and duties, and it is supposed to make an annual Page 2 Mr. Jon Elam, City Manager October 5, 1982 report of its activities to the City Council. -The Council also must approve any low housing rental projects proposed by the HRA or any area redevelopment plans of the HRA including any modification of the redevelopment plan. To aid and assist the Council to understand an HRA, its powers, etc., I am enclosing herewith copies of the outlined structure contained on pages 269, 270 and 271 of the Handbook for Minnesota Cities as published by the League of Minnesota Cities. I believe if you will copy this and transmit it on to the Council, they will get a better idea of what the HRA can do. The HRA is a very complex organization with statutory powers as outlined in Minnesota Statutes 462.411 through 462.585. This covers roughly 38 pages in the Minnesota Statutes and therefore it would be impossible for me to write any meaningful s~ary of the HRA and its powers. I think the main thing to understand is that it is an independent governmental unit and that it can proceed to do certain things without the Council's approval and in some cases it requires the Council's approval. The HRA is in existence and cannot be changed except over a period of time as the Commissioner's terms come up for renewal. Commissioners are appointed by the Mayor with the approval of the Council. The procedure is outlined in Minnesota Statutes 462.25, Subds. 5, 6, and 7. Schedules of their appointments are required to be filed with the State Housing Commission and whenever a new member is appointed, a certified copy of their Certificate of Appointment should be promptly filed with the State Housing Commission. Jon, I concerns of the Council. CAP:Ih Enclosure h ope this answers the questions raised and the / Ver. truly yo~, / City Attorney agency, which may be established by a city, is the housing and redevelopment authority. There are over 230 housing and redevelopment authorities in the State of Minnesota. authority may not undertake any project within the boundaries of a city which has not adopted a resolution authorizing the county or multi- county HRA to exercise its powers within that municipality. Elements of an HRA An HR public corporation empowered by ~isa state law to undertake certain types of housing and redevelopment or renewal activities. While the state enabling legislation "creates" a housing and redevelopment authority in each city it is up to the city council to undertake the legal procedures to formally establish a housing and redevelopment authority before it can transact business and use any of its assigned powers. Once an HRA is legally established, it may undertake certain types of planning and community development activities on its own following approval by the city council. The legal procedures to establish an HRA differ slightly according to the type of HRA being organized. A city HRA is established by the city.council and may undertalfq programs within the corporate limits of the city." in order to create a housing and redevelopment authority, the city council must, by resolution, find that there exists within the city: Once established, a county or multi-county HRA precludes the formation of city HRAs without the explicit concurrence of the county or multi-county HRA and the state housing com- mission. Membership. The H RA consists of five com- missioners who are residents of the city and who serve for five-year staggered terms. The initial appointments are for 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 year terms. Subsequent appointments are 5-year terms. City council members often serve on the HRA, and the entire membershi~ of an HRA may consist of council members.13 The certificate of appointment for each com- missioner to a city HRA must be filed with the state housing commissioner. State law provides for the adoption of by-laws for the HRA and permits commissioners to accept compensation of up to $25 for each meeting attended not to exceed $1,500 per year.' (See Chapter 6, Section D for more details about membership.) Substandard or deteriorated areas which cannot be redeveloped without govern- mental assistance; and/or A shortage of safe, sanitary and decent dwelling accommodations available to persons of Iow income at rentals or prices they can afford. 3. Adequate housing accommodations are not available for veterans. This resolution must be passed by the city council after a public hearing has been held. A copy of this resolution must be filed with the state housing commissioner. Powers An HRA is primarily responsible for the_ plan- ning and implementation of redevelopment and/or Iow rent housing assistance programs within its area of operation. The law provides that an HRA shall have all the powers necessary or convenient to carry out the purposes of the State HRA Act (but not the power to levy and collect taxes or special assessments except as provided in certain sections with respect to redevelopment projects only) including but not limited to the following powers: 1. To sue and be sued. 2. To employ staff and an executive director. Area of Operation. The area of operation of a city HRA is conterminous with the corporate limits of the city itself. The area of operation of a county HRA or a multi-county HRA includes all of the political subdivisions within the county or counties, pro- vided, however, that the county or multi-county - 269 - . 3. To undertake projects within its area of operation and to provide for the con- struction, reconstruction, improvement, extension, alteration, or repair of any project or part of a project. To sell, buy, own, and lease property by any means necessary including the power of eminent domain. o To cooperate with and utilize state and federal financial assistance programs. To develop methods of rehabilitation and code enforcement techniques. To issue bonds for any of its corporate purposes backed by the pledge of revenues, grants, or other contributions. Resolution of NeedTM Certificates of Appointment or Reappoint~.ent of HRA Commissioners Project Reports/ o Applications for Federal Assistance Contracts with Federal Agencies Redevelopment Plans Low Rent Public Housing Project and Management Plan To implement renewal or redevelopment programs utilizing the tax increment financing method. Own, hold, improve, lease, sell, or dispose of real or personal property. 10. To designate substandard, slum, or deteri- orating areas needing redevelopment and unsafe, unsanitary, and over-crowded hous- ing. While HRAs have the legal authority to "do whatever is necessary and convenient" in order to implement its projects, any redevelopment plan, federal assistance grant application, or other housing and redevelopment related activity must be approved by the city council before the housing and redevelopment authority may begin imple- mentation. The language giving the housing and redevelopment authority "all powers necessary and convenient" to implement projects is intended to be subject to the formal approval of a project by the city council. Financing. Operating funds, capital improve- ments, and the debt retirement expenses for HRA projects may be financed by any one or any combination of the following methods: Federal grants. Revenue bonds sold by the HRA or local governing body. General obligation bonds sold by the local governing body. Tax increments from redevelopment projects. A limited mill levy for redevelopment projects and planning activities. A limited mill levy for informational and relocation services. Certifications to State. The state Act requires that these documents relating to the establishment and activities of local HRAs be submitted to the state housing commissioner: In addition, annual financia,j reports must be submitted to the state auditor.'- Federal Certification. In order for a local HRA to utilize HUD assistance programs, a transcript of organizational documents must be submitted to the HUD area office. Pros and Cons of the HRA While the HRAs have demonstrated competence and professional expertise in many areas, the establishment ot any special purpose agency such as an HRA may pose some pros and cons. /~05 Fiscal self-sufficiency. Due to the nature of the programs a HRA deals with, it can fund projects generally outside the general government budget, with minimal direct impact on the city budget. The enabling legislation also allows for a one-third mill levy and the use of revenue bonds. Greater efficiency. Because of the specialized functions of an HRA, it can organize its operations in a certain area better than general government, focusing resources on the delivery of a specific program, rather than on a wide range of con- ventional services. It is more flexible. It can act swiftly to meet a problem and has the flexibiliy to be more in- novative in developing new approaches. Further, it has the ability to coordinate public and private resources in solving problems. Cons Operating too independently. Because it is somewhat free of political pressure, an HRA can administer programs with only a minimal amount of accountability for its actions. Fragmentation of the local government func- tion. It can run the risk of operating at cross - 270 - purposes or in contradiction to city policies which can result in conflict and duplication of efforts. Responsireness to public opinion. HRA opera- tions, insulated from the electoral process, can risk being not sufficiently responsive to public opinion or community thinking. jurisdictions, but the $2,500 tax increment would be committed to a special bond redemption fund until the bonds are retired. After the bonds were repaid, the entire $3,000 property taxes ($2,500 tax increment plus $500 original taxes) would go to all local taxing jurisdictions, assuming the mill rate remains constant. F. TAX INCREMENT FINANCING The authority to use tax increment financing, i~s found in the Housing and Redevelopment Act,/~ for housing and ~o~ther redevelopment; in the Port Authorities Act,'~ for the improvement of de- caying housing, commercial and industrial areas through the formation of development districts; in the industrial development act,20 to provide financial incentives to private industry through the relocation of commercial or industrial facilities; and in the development districts act,21 for many types of projects located in a development district created by a city. The complex procedures for using tax increment financing are the same no matter which act is followed.22 When using tax increment financing, a plan is mandatory and the number of years the tax increment may be used to repay the general obligation bonds issued to finance a project is limited. To understand how tax increment financing works, an example may be useful. By definition, tax increment financing deals only with the increased property taxes that are generated from within the redevelopment area. It does not pre-empt the amount of property taxes currently derived from the redevelopment area, nor does it directly affect the amount or rate of general ad valorem taxes levied in the municipality. The result of a tax increment financing project is an increased tax base that will benefit all local taxing jurisdictions. This method of financing various community development projects should not be undertaken without the advice of an attorney who is familiar with all its aspects. G. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANTS The Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program, under the aegis of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), provides cities with funding for the initia- tion and continuation of a diverse array of housing and community development projects. (See "Community Development Block Grants: Pro- spects for the 80's," Minnesota Cities, March, 1980, pp. 7-8, 16.) Allocation of CDBG Funds Community Development Block Grants are allocated by virtue of a formula allocating 80% of the funds to Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas (SMSAs), and 20% to non-metropolitan areas. Of the 80% of the money distributed to SMSAs, most of the grant money takes the form of entitlement grantd. A city eligible to receive an entitlement grant aut6matically receives the grant by submitting an application containing eligible uses for the money. Jurisdictions eligible for entitlement grants include cities with population over 50,000 which are central cities of an SMSA, urban counties (counties having a population of at least 200,000 not including the population of the central city), and central cities of an SMSA, with population under 50,000. For example, consider a property with a dilapi- dated building that is now producing $500 per year in property taxes. If this property were acquired by the local housing and redevelopment authority, cleared and resold for private development so as to produce $3000 property taxes per year, there would be a tax increment of $2,500. The funds to acquire the property and remove the dilapidated building could be obtained through the sale of general obligation bonds by the municipality. After redevelopment, the original $500 property taxes would continue to go to the local taxing The remaining cities compete for discretionary grants. Discretionary grants are awarded by HUD to cities in two competitive funding areas, metro- politan and non-metropolitan. The metropolitan funding area includes eligible municipalities located within any of the SMSAs in the state, and the non-metropolitan funding area includes all eligible applicants which are not located within any SMSA. Applicants may include cities, applying individual- ly or jointly, or counties, applying in behalf of themselves or in behalf of other units of govern- merit. - 271 - McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINE[RS · LAND SURVEYORS · PLANNERS October 8, 1982 Reply To: 12800 Industrial Park Boulevard Plymouth, Minnesota 55441 (612} 559-3700 Mr. Jon Elam City Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Subject: City of Mound Sulgrove Road Street Vacation Bialon Property File #2113 - General Dear Jon: The enclosed sketch shows our proposal for the subject street vacation. You will note that we have also shown an easement over a corner of the Bialon property. This should be a perpetual easement for street and utility purposes and I assume it will have to be granted to the City of Minnetrista. The street vacation should only be approved on the condition that the Bialons grant the easement. I have discussed everything with Mr. Bialon and he is satisfied with our proposal. He understands that once the vacation is finalized, he will have to acquire th~ five foot strip of vacated Sulgrove from the Henrys and the City of Mound. Enclosed is a description for both the street vacation and the easement. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me. Very truly yours, McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. Joh~nCame~~-'~- JC: sj Enclosure cc: Curtis A. Pearson, City Attorney Richard Bialon, 3495 East Shore Dr., Mound printed on recycled paper